Here in the great state of Minnesota

PZ,
Thank you for observing for us the growth of this contagious meme in your area. The dedication of some political activists to the Dominionist program is amazing!
The Jews were quite lucky when the Romans wiped out the heredity priesthood & the temple. A small minority (Haredim) are trying to use DNA to "discover" the hereditary line of Kahanim in their restoration project.

Oh yaaa fer sure, da Bible's da best fer legislatin all right doncha know...specially dat part about da snow, oh my yes.

Like snow in summer and like rain in harvest,
So honor is not fitting for a fool.
(Prov. 26:1)

Is "coagulation" the accepted collective noun for Republicans, or your own coinage? I like it! :)

The good book is important and we need to lead our lives according to the teachings of the good book. OK, we'll say it. The Bible...It's our job, I believe, to legislate by the teachings. The teachings are really all we have in terms of guiding our legislative life and certainly our personal life.

Everybody have their stones ready?

If it's any comfort They're pretty dumb in Utah, too.

But you knew that.

Skeptic8,

It's a bad idea to ever say that a massacre was a good idea.

PZ. I share all of your views also. Just one word of advice. Do not ever get near these people or physically touch them. Since they are the "anti-you" we all know what happens when particles and antiparticles meet! We still need you around to defend science, rationality and evolution.

jb

Who needs thoughtful, reasoned positions when you can think what your preacher tells you to think?

I wonder if they also oppose medical heroin, aka morphine.

Awww, shit.

I grew up in Moorhead. Boring town, but I never thought this crap would happen much there.

That's just depressing.

Since Yecke and Bachmann, all bets are off. Michelle Goldberg was in the Twin Cities last week promoting her excellent anti-theocracy book, "Kingdom Coming," and one of the audience members asked Goldberg about theocracy in Minnesota, and before the audience member got the question all the way out, Goldberg started talking about Bachmann. It is crucial to remember that these people are evil in a way similar to Cho Seung-Hui, in that they have allowed their personal delusions to overwhelm any vestige of human concern, compassion, or decency. Thank you, PZ, for being vigilant about tracking and targeting their perversity. Most Minnesotans are essentially humane; it is difficult to imagine that if they stopped to think what such policies would really mean that a majority could support them.

Not all people who use the Bible as their moral base are Republicans. Many find that the teachings of Jesus tell them to care for the poor, for example, above hogging money for themselves. It's just these right-wing nut jobs that are making the news these days. Criticize them for their idiotic ideas, but don't over generalize. That's just dumb, too.

The Bible cannot be used as a "moral base." It would have to be morally consistent to serve in that capacity. The fact that people are able to pick out a humanistic message from among the noise and garbage of the Bible is a tribute to human reason, not ancient mythology. I never needed Jesus to tell me to be empathetic, altruistic, or caring. That's part of my human heritage. The fact that some people think that a long-dead rabbi's words are needed to compell them to behave decently is pathetic, not laudable.

This:

Leviticus 20:13: "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

Plus this:

Senate Minority Leader Republican David Senjem: "The teachings [of the Bible] are really all we have in terms of guiding our legislative life and certainly our personal life."

Equals this: "a concussion, a separated shoulder, a broken wrist, and possible spleen damage."

Wow, that's some Holy Book they got there.

Don't forget to kill the Jebusites. PZ gave 'em a pass last time but this time they've gone too far!
I think the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, and Hivites are taken care of.
Now we can get back to being god fearing and peace loving.

It's one thing when a legislator has silly ideas like that (I blame his constituents who voted for him as much as him). But many people don't know that the state is paying for a Chaplain in the Senate who has said things like "We must pray that they would know God's heart and have the courage to vote as Jesus would." That sort of rhetoric gives cover and permission to others to use it. My city council has started having invocations before all city meetings, which are more like prayers and only seem to be given by the same couple very protestant preachers. It trickles down.

dune: Is "coagulation" the accepted collective noun for Republicans, or your own coinage? I like it! :)

And we should be the tissue plasminogen activator, urokinase, streptokinase, reteplase etc. for emergencies.

And don't forget a daily dose of aspirin [education].

NickM wrote:

Leviticus 20:13: "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

Plus this:

Senate Minority Leader Republican David Senjem: "The teachings [of the Bible] are really all we have in terms of guiding our legislative life and certainly our personal life."

Equals this: "a concussion, a separated shoulder, a broken wrist, and possible spleen damage."

Wow, that's some Holy Book they got there.

Leviticus 28:1: "Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon."

I, for one, am NOT a fan of taxes or of government spending. Roads, schools, and the rest of your hand-waving is fine, but these are all *local* tax expenditures, not federal ones. A significant amount of our federal spending goes towards war and death, which I simply can't be a fan of. In addition a large portion of our massive federal outlays are simply used to fill the trough with swill for corporate America to feed from - do-nothing defense contracts, multi-billion dollar boondoggles like the "missile defense" system, endless waste on homeland security crap that doesn't actually improve security - all of this does NOT need to happen. Ironically, I bet this is exactly the kind of spending these people WOULD salivate over. But we shouldn't. Government spending sucks.

Legalizing marijuana seems an excellent example of "less government." Too bad the goose-steppers don't see it that way.

Saurabh might want to look at the flow of federal tax moneys between states. A lot of the funding for roads, education etc. in the net receiver states comes from federal money. The "But that's LOCAL taxation" is a libertarianism variant I haven't met before, but it's clearly a bit reality-challenged.

re: #15

"I think the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, and Hivites are taken care of.
Now we can get back to being god fearing and peace loving."

And let us not forget the Ammonites, Trilobites, Vegemites, Catamites, and Bakelites. They have yet to be smited.. smote... smitten... ah, hell, let 'em go.

-- CV

"Coagulation of Republicans" = "Rich and thick and full of clots"

The bible contains massive amounts of genocide, infanticide, mass rapes, slavery, cannibalism, and just about every kind of barbarism you can think of, and fundamentalists kooks refer to it as "the good book". It makes me wonder if the nitwits have ever read the damn thing.

@saurabh:

Oh, so "local" tax expenditures are fine. Glad you cleared that up. I'm still a little unclear on some things, though. Maybe a short essay question could help:

a) define "local" in a consistent, objective, purpose-neutral way that does not refer to arbitrary governmental heirarchies (bonus points if you can work in a differential geometry joke)
b) explain the moral distinction between this local taxation and federal taxation

True or false section:

a) have you ever sent or received mail through the US Postal Service?
b) have you ever driven on an interstate or US highway?
c) have you ever flown on a commercial plane?
d) have you ever taken a medication that was tested for safety and purity?
e) have you ever checked the weather forecast before going outside?
f) have you ever used the internet?

Bonus follow-up:

If you answered "true" to any of the above, explain why you aren't as hypocritical as the pro-government-intrusion right-wingers who whine about "big gubmint".

In all seriousness, both you and PZ are off your rockers. Government is a tool, a method of organization. It can be used for good, or for ill. But it's a tool, the morality of which depends entirely on its application.

Since we are speaking of 'rethuglicans' maybe the collective term is 'a Levenworth' of rethuglicans. Hmmm, this could be a unit of measure to determine bad governance.

And while we're smitting, let's not leave out the Ammonites, Meteorites, Basipodites and of course the Carpolites, but spare the Malachites- they're such an exquisite shade of green.

But smite thou not the republicans, who are henseforth known as the the coprolites.

Little apology to make here. I had completely underestimate the level of insanity in Scotland. There's a party, The Scottish Christian Party ("Proclaiming Christ's Lordship") which posted a leaflet through the letter box t'other day. It was thrown out in disgust the next minute after the was received that it advocated teaching the bible as THE moral authority in schools and the slogan "It's not about homophobia, it's about free speech" was read. The apology is this - I have chortled at the idea that the USA had somehow brought these people upon themselves and we had not, now I know that whilst we are not in as bad a position, we're heading that way. They're aiming for 5%+ of the vote!

Oh, and for the record, IT IS HOMOPHOBIA!

Government is a tool, a method of organization. It can be used for good, or for ill. But it's a tool, the morality of which depends entirely on its application.

Government is a master. It may be a good, kindly master, or a cruel, vicious one, but either way you inevitably become its slave.

I've never understood why people on the Left are always so afraid of corporations yet so enthusiastically embrace governmental power as a solution to the things they don't like. Governments are exactly like corporations, except they have powers that would never be granted to any corporation, and they have the ability to compell us to grant them our business. Governments are far harder to abolish, too, and they have fewer methods of control.

...and keep them out of government, and if we could do a better job of making "faith" a term of opprobrium.

For some reason, I was just now hit over the head with the inanity of complimenting people by saying: "You're so irrational."

OK, I already knew that "faith" is the Oldspeak word for doublethink, and I knew intellectually that people consider irrationality to be a virtue, but I still didn't quite grasp the hilarity of complimenting people by telling them they're irrational.

Could I just point out that their slogan is grammatically incorrect?

"less government, less taxes and less government spending"

It should of, of course, be "less government, less tax and less government spending" or "less government, fewer taxes and less government spending"

I really do fear for the state of your public school system if this lot get their way. They have problems speaking the Queen's English already - god knows what will happen when there are "less taxes"!!

I grew up in Minnesota... yes it does tend to be liberal and progressive. But that's economically, not socially. They support social security, not affirmative action. WIC vouchers, not domestic partnerships. Raising minimum wage, not establishing an abortion clinic in the state.

These people want less government and less taxes, but they want the government to restrict the use of certain (naturally-occurring, can be cultivated in your backyard) drugs, to dictate what kinds of social relationships are acceptable, to prevent certain kinds of scientific research, and to control what is taught in sex education classes? These people not understand basic capitalism? You want something, you pay for it!

Caledonian,

I'm always mystified by "libertarians" who not only fail to understand that governments lack agency (just like corporations, governments don't do things or make choices, the people in them do*), and who not only fail to understand the difference between "government can be on balance good or evil" vs. "government is the best thing EVAR!!!!ONE!" (this is why I said PZ was off his rocker too), but who are completely oblivious to the fact that corporations don't exist at all without government coersion. I wonder: do you also fail to recognize that nothing resmbling a "free market" exists without government interference (you know, those pesky externalities, monopolies, trusts -- boring stuff). And just what are those methods of control of corporations? Yeah, mostly that evil government stuff. Contracts, suits, laws against corporate coersion or deception -- none of those exist without something (let's call it a "government") to enforce them. Governments do some fucked up shit, and in an ideal world they wouldn't exist. But we don't live in ideal world; we live in the real world.

However, I somehow doubt you are arguing for the abolishment of all government. As I wrote above, that would be my ideal, so my argument there would simply be about how much social change (if any) is necessary before that ideal is possible. Instead, I'll go out on a limb and propose that maybe, just maybe, you think government is peachy when it's shielding people from the consequences of their dumb business descisions (also known as a "corporation," a fiction created by governments), and it's only a problem when it's being used to try to equalize people's starting points with things like public education or healthcare for children (which even Robert Nozick lists as a prerequisite for a free market resulting in a just outcome).

Also, I wasn't aware I was "on the Left" -- is there some drunken night in Austin in my past that I don't remember?

* as an aside, this is why I think members of a corporation should go to jail for ordering or carrying out violations of the law, as opposed to "the corporation" being fined or even, horrors, being required to actually follow the law (cf.).

qubit,
while I concur 100% with your criticism of Caledoniand and PZ, I don't quite understand what you see as an alternative. I believe in Democracy a bit like Winston Churchhill "it's the worst system apart from all the others". But we need to work to keep it vital and healthy. Government is not government.

Technically corporations are what all companies would be without government. The only difference between corporations and other companies is the amount of liability. Basically, if a corporation goes bankrupt creditors can only take the assets of the corporation. If any other sort of business goes bankrupt the creditors can take that as well as the personal assets of the owners. This issue was created by bankruptcy laws. In the absence of those, or if they were formulated in a different manner, creditors would have no way of taking personal assets. The distinction would therefor be irrelevant since there would be no difference between corporations and other companies.

Why not start the First Global Church of Rationalism? All we need is a book of rational doctrine, parables like the 'spinal cord injury and the helpful stem cell' or 'the rich man and the tax break', and an application to be declared a religion. Take the fight to them. I mean if we don't fight them in their churches won't we just end up fighting them in our bedrooms, courtrooms, pharmacies, oval offices, etc.?

To paraphrase Grover Norquist: We need to starve organized religion until it is small enough that we can take it into the bathroom and drown it in the toilet.

reason:

That's pretty damn close to my view of democracy. As for an alternative, well... if I had a good one, I'd be shamelessly promoting it. But I don't. :-/ Mostly I'm cynical and dissastisfied with the state of the world -- cynical enough to think that because of social norms and non-govenmental power heirarchies, some forms of govenment are capable of reducing the net amount of 'badness' in the world by counter-balancing these other power structures. Of course, when government reinforces these power structures instead of counterbalancing them (*cough* USA *cough*), the question becomes which does the most good / least harm: try to redirect govenment, or tear down the whole lot of them.

In all honesty, my biggest beef with the original comment I was responding to was the whole local/federal distinction. I really don't understand how taxation is perfectly moral until you get to some arbitrary cutoff of people or distance, at which point it becomes pure evil. If there's any sort of cutoff like that, I figure, it has to happen once we get to a large enough group of people that it's impossible for everyone to have meaningful interpersonal relations with everyone else ( < 200, I figure).

TheBlackCat:

Good point. I actually feel kinda dumb not realizing before that all companies would be "zero-liability" instead of "limited-liability" without government enforcement. Hmm... gonna have to think on that one.

Hmmm.

While I think a perfect government is impossible, a "good enough" government is well within our reach. We just need to incorporate more libertarian ideas into our concept of personal liberty and maintain or increase the regulatory power of the federal government. Simply, stop legislating morality and continue to monitor and shape the effects of corporations. Or, OSHA, FDA, EPA and such = "good" (in theory, if not always in practice) Save Marriage Amendments, War On Drugs, PMRC = "bad"

As long as there are people in the government there will always be some corruption.

GMH

PS: Even notice how people who want "small government" usually want to legislate who I can screw, what I can smoke or drink, and what I can read?