President Obama should follow Kyrsten Sinema's example: Swear on the Constitution, not the Bible

On January 20th, President Obama will be sworn in to his second term in office on a stack of Bibles -- using Michelle's family Bible, the Bible Abraham Lincoln used in his first inaugural, and Martin Luther King's Bible.

Which, of course, is triply ridiculous.

As Lawrence O'Donnell so rightly said in his January 10th "Rewrite",

The president, following one of our most absurd traditions in the government that invented the separation of church and state, will put his hand on this book filled with things he does not believe, filled with things that no one in the United States of America believes, and with his hand on this book he will recite the oath of office. And his hand on this book is actually supposed to make you believe that he really believes what he is saying in the oath of office even though the book is filled with things that you and he do not believe.

Wouldn't it be better for the president to be sworn with his hand on the same document that he swears to preserve, protect, and defend in his inaugural oath -- the U.S. Constitution?

That's what the newly-elected Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) did when she took her oath of office.



President Obama should go and do likewise.

Achieving a Celestial Marriage: What Mitt and Ann Romney believe about God, marriage, and working moms

What does Mitt Romney believe about working mothers?

Well, as with most things Mitt Romney says, it depends on when you ask. Lately he says  that "all moms are working moms"; a few months ago he said that "even if you have a child two years of age, you need to go to work." But the apparent inconsistency is easily resolved: the first statement referred to wealthy moms (like his wife, Ann) and the latter statement to everyone else.

So what does Mitt Romney really believe about working moms? To find out, we need to see what the Mormon church teaches about God, marriage, and working mothers.

Fortunately, it's all laid out in Achieving a Celestial Marriage, the LDS Church's official manual for instructing  young Mormons about marriage.

Here are some excerpts. (Emphasis in the original)

First, about God.

GOD WAS ONCE A MORTAL MAN

(1-2) He Lived on an Earth Like Our Own

"God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!" Joseph Smith, Teachings, p. 345 

(1-3) He Experienced Conditions Similar to Our Own and Advanced Step by Step

GOD IS NOW AN EXALTED MAN WITH POWERS OF ETERNAL INCREASE

(1-4) Our Father in Heaven Lives in an Exalted Marriage Relationship

(1-5) We are Literal Children of God, Part of His Family Unit

(1-6) We Lived with Our Heavenly Parents Prior to Coming to Earth

WE ARE GODS IN EMBRYO

(1-7) We Have the Potential to Become like Our Heavenly Parents

About Marriage

 EXALTATION IS ATTAINABLE ONLY IN FAMILY UNITS

ONLY THROUGH CELESTIAL MARRIAGE CAN A PERSON BECOME LIKE GOD

(1-12) The Lord Commands Marriage

(1-13) Exaltation is Based on Celestial Marriage

 "No man shall receive the fulness of eternity, of exaltation, alone, no woman shall receive that blessing alone; but man and wife, when they receive the sealing power in the temple of the Lord, if they thereafter keep all the commandments, shall pass on to exaltation, and shall continue and become like the Lord." ( Joseph Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 2:43-44)

(1-14) "Then Shall They Be Gods, Because They Have No End"

(1-15) Only Resurrected and Glorified Geings May Become Parents of Spirit Offspring

 (1-19) Celestial Marriage Makes it Possible for Us to Claim Our Mortal Children in Eternity As Well As to Propagate Ourselves Throughout Eternity

"We will become gods and have jurisdiction over worlds, and they worlds will be peopled by our own offspring." (Joseph Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 2:43-44, 48)

About Contraception and Birth Control

BIRTH CONTROL -- THE CHURCH'S STAND

(16-6) Those Who Practice Birth Control Will Reap Disappointment

(16-8) The Root Reasons for Birth Control

"... in most cases the desire not to have children has its birth in vanity, passion, and selfishness."

(16-10) Unwillingness to Have Children -- an Onslaught Against the Home 

GOSPEL ANSWERS TO THE POPULATION EXPLOSION PROBLEM

 "The precepts of men would have you believe that by limiting the population of the world, we can have peace and plenty. That is the doctrine of the devil." (Ezra Taft Benson in CR, Apr. 1969, p. 12

And, finally, about working moms

THE WOMAN: WIFE, HELPMEET, AND MOTHER

(14-8) Present-Day Allurements Versus the True Responsibilities and Influence of Women

"It is of great concern to all who understand this glorious concept that Satan and his cohorts are using scientific arguments and nefarious propaganda to lure women away from their primary responsibilities as wives, mothers, and homemakers. We hear so much about emancipatioon, independence, sexuual liberation, birth control, abortion, and other insidious propaganda belittling the role of motherhood, all of which is Satan's way of destroying woman, the hom, and the famliy -- the basic unit of society. . . ."

(14-14) It is Seldom Justifiable for Mothers to Work

"How can mothers justify their abandonmnet of home when they are needed so much by their offspring? Rationalization must take over as they justfy themselves in leaving home and children." Spencer W. Kimball, Faith Precedes the Miracle, pp. 116-17.)

So there you have it. That is what Mitt and Ann Romney believe about working moms. They believe that there shouldn't be any (Except for "working moms" like Ann Romney).

New SAB Category: Politics

Since it's an election year, I thought I'd start a new SAB category: Politics.

Here's the first verse, used by Senator James Inhofe to prove that human-caused climate change does not exist.

While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease. Genesis 8:22

I'll be adding more verses as I come across them, so you'll start to see them now and then in the SAB. Just look for this icon.



And if you notice any that you think should be included, you tell me about it in the comments.

What the Book of Mormon says about the poor (and why Mitt Romney should be concerned about them)

The morning after winning the Florida primary, Mitt Romney said "he wasn't concerned about the very poor" in an interview with Soledad O'Brien of CNN.

The next day at the National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama expressed just the opposite point of view. Here are some excepts, along with the corresponding bible verses.

... the biblical call [is] to care for the least of these –- for the poor; for those at the margins of our society. To answer the responsibility we’re given in Proverbs to “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute.” (Proverbs 31:8-10)

...

John tells us that, “If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth.” (1 John 3:17)

There were, of course, some misapplied biblical references to "Am I my brother's keeper" (Genesis 4:9) and "For unto whom much is given, much shall be required." (Luke 12:48). But Obama made his point: he's a better Christian than Romney.

Still if I were writing Obama's speech, I'd have thrown in Proverbs 29:17, just for Mitt "I'm not concerned about the poor" Romney.

The righteous considereth the cause of the poor: but the wicked regardeth not to know it.

So we've pretty well established that Mitt isn't much of a Christian. But we already knew that. He's a Mormon.

And what the does Book of Mormon say about poor people?

Plenty, as it turns out. Here are some excerpts.

Ye will administer of your substance unto him that standeth in need; and ye will not suffer that the beggar putteth up his petition to you in vain, and turn him out to perish. (Mosiah 4:16)

Ye ought to impart of the substance that ye have one to another. (Mosiah 4:21)

Impart of your substance to the poor, every man according to that which he hath. (Mosiah 4:26)

They did impart of their substance, every man according to that which he had, to the poor, and the needy, and the sick, and the afflicted; and ... they were liberal to all. (Alma 1:27-30)

Yea, he saw great inequality among the people ... turning their backs upon the needy and the naked and those who were hungry, and those who were athirst, and those who were sick and afflicted. (Alma 4:12)

Will you persist in turning your backs upon the poor, and the needy, and in withholding your substance from them? (Alma 5:55)

So I guess Mitt Romney isn't a very good Mormon either.

Mitt Romney: The luckiest motherfudger on earth

Ron Paul's health care plan: Let uninsured sick people die and unlicensed "doctors" practice medicine

Conan Factoids: Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry

Those who agree with Michele Bachmann shouldn't vote for her.

Here's why.

It all has to do with the question that Byron York asked Michele Bachmann at the debate last Thursday night.

In 2006, when you were running for Congress, you described a moment in your life when your husband said you should study for a degree in tax law. You said you hated the idea, and then you explained: "But the Lord said, be submissive. Wives, you are to be submissive to your husband." As president, would you be submissive to your husband?

It was a surprisingly fair and balanced question for a debate sponsored by Fox News.

Ms. Bachmann didn't answer the question, of course. Instead she said that she respected her husband and was proud of their 28 kids.

And yet she believes she should be submissive to her husband in everything, as though he were God himself. She believes this because she believes in the Bible and the Bible says exactly that.

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Ephesians 5:22-24

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord. Colossians 3:18

Wives, be in subjection to your own husbands. 1 Peter 3:1

Teach the young women to be ... obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed. Titus 2:4-5

So a vote for Michelle Bachmann is not a vote for her; it's a vote for her husband, Marcus.

And that might be OK with Bachmann's supporters. Marcus is, by all accounts, as bat-shit crazy as his wife. He loves Jesus just as much as she does (maybe even more).

But to vote for Marcus you must vote for Michele, which is something the Bible does not permit.

I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 1 Timothy 2:12-14

A woman president would have authority over men, and thereby cause the word of God to be blasphemed. (If, as Doug Wilson says, Titus 2:5 means anything.)

So those who agree with Michele Bachmann shouldn't vote for her.
(Neither, of course, should anyone else.)

The Exodus 30:15 debt limit "compromise"

The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less than half a shekel. Exodus 30:15

OK, it might take more than half a shekel (~ $10) from each US taxpayer, but you get the idea. Each of us pays the same, whether rich or poor.

Take the military, for example. Each of the 100.6 million full-time employees chips in $6810 this year and we've got the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya paid for. No sweat.

Then to pay off the debt (caused by unfunded wars and tax cuts for the wealthy), we each throw in another $142,000 or so. A piece of cake.

It might be a bit rough for for the average worker making $39,000 a year, but Oh well. We must protect our "Job Creators" (wealthy people).

The Bible tells us so.

The Bible's solution to the debt crisis: First Timothy 5 - 6

Republicans and Democrats just can't seem to find a solution to the debt crisis. That's because they are ignoring what the Bible has to say about it. Because the perfect compromise can be found in 1 Timothy 5 and 6.

Chapter 5 should please the Republicans.

The author (I'll call him "Paul" since that's who he claimed to be, though he probably wasn't) explains precisely who should, and who should not, be helped. His focus was on widows, but the same principles could be applied to all.

The first thing Paul does is distinguish between "widows indeed" and other types of widows. Widows indeed (true widows) should be honored (given public assistance).

Honour widows that are widows indeed. 1 Timothy 5:3

But which widows are "widows indeed?"

Paul has a list of ten requirements. A widow is a widow indeed if she:

1. Has no living children or nephews. (If the widow has any living children or nephews, it is their responsibility to take care of her.)

   But if any widow have children or nephews, let them learn first to shew piety at home, and to requite their parents. 1 Timothy 5:4

2. Is desolate, trusts in God, and prays all the time.

   Now she that is a widow indeed, and desolate, trusteth in God, and continueth in supplications and prayers night and day. 1 Timothy 5:5

3. Is not living in pleasure.
   (A widow living in pleasure is the living dead.)

   But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth. 1 Timothy 5:6

4. Is over 60 years old.

   Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old. 1 Timothy 5:9a

5. Had only one husband.
   (A woman who has buried two husbands wouldn't qualify.)

   Having been the wife of one man. 1 Timothy 5:9b

6. Has raised children.
   (No barren or selfish, childless women need apply.)

   If she have brought up children. 1 Timothy 5:10

7. Has lodged strangers.

   If she have lodged strangers. 1 Timothy 5:10

8. Has washed the saints' feet.

   If she have washed the saints' feet. 1 Timothy 5:10

9. Has relieved the afflicted.

   If she have relieved the afflicted. 1 Timothy 5:10

10. Has diligently followed every good work.

    If she have diligently followed every good work. 1 Timothy 5:10

Applying Paul's rules for widows would greatly reduce the number of widows that would qualify for public assistance. The same approach when extended to all seniors would result in the 1 Timothy 5 plan for Medicare -- which is the Paul Ryan plan. (No medicare at all.)

The money that is saved from the 1 Timothy 5/Paul (the Apostle) Ryan Medicare Plan could be applied to reducing the deficit -- or (more likely) giving tax cuts to wealthy individuals and corporations ("the job creators"). The "public assistance for job creators" plan should easily pass the House. I think it already has.

And now for the Democratic Plan.

It can stated in just two verses from 1 Timothy 6.

Charge them that are rich ... that they be ... ready to distribute. 1 Timothy 6:17-18

OK, never mind. Screw the compromise. Let's just go with 1 Timothy 6 plan. (If we can stay away from the first two verses, that is.)

What the Bible says about the Republican Primary

It should be easy for Republicans to select a candidate for president.

Just let God do it for them.

The only problem with that is this: God has already endorsed several, if not all, of the candidates.

Fortunately, the Bible has a foolproof procedure guaranteed to work even when God can't make up his own mind. It's called a lottery.

That's how God selected the first king of Israel. Here's how it worked.

God told the people to present themselves to him by tribe and clan ("thousands").

Samuel called the people together unto the LORD ... And said unto the children of Israel, Thus saith the LORD ... present yourselves before the LORD by your tribes, and by your thousands. 1 Samuel 10:17-19

Then a tribe was selected by lot. (Benjamin had the lucky number.)

And when Samuel had caused all the tribes of Israel to come near, the tribe of Benjamin was taken. 1 Samuel 10:20

Next, a clan was selected. (Matri)

When he had caused the tribe of Benjamin to come near by their families, the family of Matri was taken. 1 Samuel 10:21a

And the king was selected from the clan. (Saul)

And Saul the son of Kish was taken. 1 Samuel 10:21b

But Shucks! When they looked, they couldn't find him.

When they sought him, he could not be found. 1 Samuel 10:21c

So they asked God what to do and God said that Saul was hiding in the stuff.

Therefore they enquired of the LORD further, if the man should yet come thither. And the LORD answered, Behold he hath hid himself among the stuff. 1 Samuel 10:22

And sure enough, they found Saul hiding in the stuff. He was hard to miss since he stood head and shoulders above everyone in Israel. (He was also the best-looking.)

And they ran and fetched him thence: and when he stood among the people, he was higher than any of the people from his shoulders and upward. 1 Samuel 10:23

It all worked out great in the end. God chose the best (tallest, best-looking) candidate and all the people shouted, "God save the king."

And Samuel said to all the people, See ye him whom the LORD hath chosen, that there is none like him among all the people? And all the people shouted, and said, God save the king. 1 Samuel 10:24

Well, except for a few "children of Belial" (RINOs) who complained about it a bit.

But the children of Belial said, How shall this man save us? And they despised him. 1 Samuel 10:27

So there you have it. No need for expensive campaigns, debates, caucuses, straw polls, primaries, or nominating conventions. God's party should select its candidate God's way: by lottery. (Either that or just choose the tallest, best looking candidate. It should work out the same.)

(By the way, this isn't the only time a lottery was used in the Bible to select an important candidate. Matthias was selected by lottery to replace Judas, who died by spilling his guts out and hanging himself.)

What the Bible says about Liberals (and why Todd Akin should become one)

Congressmen Todd Akin (R-MO) recently said this about liberals:

At the heart of liberalism really is a hatred for God.

So I thought I'd check to see what the Bible says about them. Here's what I found.

1. God makes liberals fat.

   The liberal soul shall be made fat. -- Proverbs 11:25

2. And since being fat is is sure sign of righteousness in the eyes of God, liberals are righteous people.

   The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree ... they shall be fat and flourishing. -- Psalm 92:12-14

3. Liberals are not lying, churlish, vile, villainous hypocrites that steal from the poor and hungry. (Guess who that would be.)

   The vile person shall be no more called liberal ... For the vile person will speak villany, and his heart will work iniquity, to practise hypocrisy ... to make empty the soul of the hungry, and he will cause the drink of the thirsty to fail. The instruments also of the churl are evil: he deviseth wicked devices to destroy the poor with lying words. -- Isaiah 32:5-7

4. Liberals distribute wealth from the rich to the poor.

   For your liberal distribution ... unto all men ... Thanks be unto God. -- 2 Corinthians 9:13-15

5. And lastly, liberals devise and stand for liberal things.

   The liberal deviseth liberal things; and by liberal things shall he stand. -- Isaiah 32:8

God loves liberals. Todd Akin should become one. Then God would love him, too.

Michael Moore: America is not broke

Today just 400 Americans have more wealth than half of all Americans combined.

WTF: Does Palin think the Soviet Union won the space race?

That was another one of those WTF moments, when he so often repeated this Sputnik moment that he would aspire Americans to celebrate. And he needs to remember that what happened back then with the former communist USSR and their victory in that race to space, yes, they won, but they also incurred so much debt at the time that it resulted in the inevitable collapse of the Soviet Union.

OK. Maybe Palin meant the "race to space" instead of the "space race." That is what she said, after all. But the launch of Sputnik resulted in the an American response (a "Sputnik moment") that produced the scientific and technological advances that allowed us to go to the moon in less than twelve years. Does she really think that was a bad thing?

Dabbling with Christianity: Christine O'Donnell is both Catholic and Protestant

We all know that Christine O'Donnell "dabbled into witchcraft" back in the 90s. But her religious views have matured since then; now she is a Catholic and an Evangelical Protestant.

Someone should ask her how that is possible.

What Obama should have said last night

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Except for the "God bless you and God bless America" bullshit at the end.

Psalm 109ers: The new face of the Republican Party

You've heard of the birthers, the teabaggers, the 9/12ers.

Now we have the Psalm 109ers.

It's the new face of the Republican Party. Praying for people to die, starting with Barack Obama.

The Republican Party is embracing the hatred in the Bible.

Have you got your Bible holster yet?

It's the new Republican uniform!

Why is it that religious nuts are almost always gun nuts too?

What to do with the C Street Republicans (1 Corinthians 5:1-5)

It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles [Democrats]...
In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ...
deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved... 1 Corinthians 5:1-5

It almost sounds like Paul was talking about the C Street Republicans [Sen. John Ensign (R-NV), Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC), and former Rep. Chip Pickering (R-MS)]. (Of course he wasn't really. He was talking about a believer that had sex with his father's wife. But close enough.)

Still, the passage isn't entirely clear to me.

Let's say we try to apply Paul's instructions to the C Street adulterers. How would be go about it?

• How do we deliver them to Satan in the name of Jesus? I'm not even sure where Satan lives these days. And even if we can find him, how can we be sure that it's really him?

• After Satan gets them how will he destroy their flesh? Will he burn them to death like God often does? Or will he bury them alive or give them a disease that causes their bowels to fall out?

• And when Satan destroys their flesh, how will that cause their spirits to be saved? If Satan causes their spirits to be saved, does that mean that Satan is their savior?

It's a bit confusing to me. But I think it's worth a try.

Did Stephen Harper put Jesus in his pocket?

This is too funny.

Stephen Harper (the fundamentalist protestant Canadian prime minister) apparently pocketed a communion host while attended a funeral mass for Romeo LeBlanc. The poor guy probably wound up in line for communion (by mistake) and didn't know what the heck to do with the wafer that the priest gave him. So he stuck it in his pocket when he thought no one was looking.

But someone was looking and videotaped it. Now it's on Youtube for God and everyone to see. (Harper receives the sacred cracker at about the 30 second mark.)

It's not clear to me what happened to the holy host. Did he put it in his pocket to save for later?

Poor Harper was in deep shit once he got in communion line. Catholics think it is sacrilegious for a non-catholic to receive communion. So what's he going to do when the priest hands him a cracker? He can either eat it or pocket it. He's damned either way.