SHARE

Like Gamera, Baphomet is the friend of children everywhere

The merry Establishment Clause tricksters of the Satanic Temple held a big unveiling of their 1-ton statue of Baphomet over the weekend. Because they’re still waiting on a permit to place it next to the Ten Commandments monument at Oklahoma’s Capitol building — a monument that may be coming down anyway — the unveiling was held at the Satanic Temple’s chapter in Detroit. Not surprisingly, American Family Association radio guy Bryan Fischer is plenty angry about it, and would like you all to know that if we followed the REAL Constitution of the United States, none of this would be allowed, because the Founders only meant the First Amendment to apply to Christians.

Writing at Bradlee Dean’s Web Aggregation Of Stuff That’s Too Stupid For WND, Fischer describes the unholy spectacle, which he read about on Fox’s website:

Seven hundred worshippers of the prince of darkness gathered Saturday night in Detroit to unveil a 9-foot, 2000-pound bronze statue of Satan. “Dark punk” bands played on stage underneath a lighted, upside-down crucifix.

Sure, it was actually a cross, without the Jesus Action figure, but whatevs. Fischer is pretty darned outraged by the whole thing, even if, to judge from the pics from the unveiling party, most of the Satanic bacchanal looked an awful like a Rocky Horror Picture Show screening. And he’s even more upset by the Temple’s plan to place it next to a state-sanctioned Ten Commandments statue — if not in Oklahoma, then maybe in Arkansas. And he is hopping mad about the spurious reasoning at work here:

Their argument is quite simple: the First Amendment guarantees freedom of religion, so if you allow a Christian symbol, you must allow a satanic one, on the grounds of fairness and multiculturalism and diversity and all.

Acolytes will unveil more and more of these statues, and aim to put them on government grounds and in government buildings. If this process is not stopped, Satan-worship will be enshrined in the halls of government from sea to shining sea.

Now, as the Satanic Temple is eager to point out — after all, it’s their whole reason for existing — one really easy way to prevent that would be to not put up any official shrines to religion in the first place. No Ten Commandments, no demand for an equal-time Baphomet.

But Fischer has a better idea: enforce the real Constitution, which, as he’s said several times before, only applies to Christians. (In previous efforts to make this point, Fischer’s argued that since the Constitution uses the “A.D.” dating system, it recognizes the birth of Jesus as the starting point of time.)

This time out, Fischer doesn’t really add anything new, but he has some lovely substitutions for logic, like this:

The Constitution is like the Bible. It either means what its authors intended it to mean, or it can mean anything the fevered imaginations of activist judges can dream up.

Judges routinely undermine the plain meaning of the Constitution and use linguistic sleight of hand to conceal their subterfuge.

To Fischer, it’s obvious that when the Constitution speaks of “religion,” it only means Christianity, because it just does, shut up:

When the Founders used the word “religion,” they were referring to the various denominations of Christianity. The population of the United States at the time of the founding was 99.8% Christian and 0.2% Jewish. There were simply no other religious traditions for the Founders even to deal with […]

The Founders did not either “countenance” or “advance” religious alternatives to Christianity in the First Amendment. They were not even considering Islam or Judaism or Buddhism or Hinduism or atheism. They were dealing exclusively with Christianity and its various denominations.

Strangely, though, he’s perfectly comfortable insisting that the Second Amendment gives people the right to own any weapons they want, with no regulation whatsoever, despite the fact that the only arms the Founders had were muzzle-loaded rifles and flintlocks. That’s different, obviously.

Fischer also doesn’t think much of the Fourteenth Amendment, either, since he insists that the First Amendment only prevents Congress from choosing one sect of Christianity, while it gives states the freedom to regulate religion however they want. Which is why he also thinks it would be perfectly legal to ban the construction of mosques. And therefore, states are under no obligation to allow any darn Devil statues, and they can also stop pretending that their Ten Commandments statues are “historical monuments” to the foundation of our laws.

Bryan Fischer lives in a very interesting version of America, but we’re pretty sure we wouldn’t want to visit it.

[Sons Of Liberty Media / Time]

$
Donate with CCDonate with CC
  • memzilla

    Not just Meta… it’s Bapho Meta.

  • Nounverb911

    Bryan Fischer, unlike Bill O’Reilly, wasn’t there when Jeebus was born, so how does Bryan know that Jeebus doesn’t look like that?

    • Toomush_Infer

      Bill, on the other hand, at the time was using the alias, Judas, as a funding source…

      • SnarkTank

        Oh, so THAT’S why “Killing Jeebus” cost me 30 pieces of silver!

        • willi0000000

          you were there? . . . you should have waved, we coulda had lunch.

  • artem1s

    The population of the United States at the time of the founding was 99.8% Christian and 0.2% Jewish.

    That’s not counting the members of the 500 Nations that our good Founding Fathers had so far failed to kill off with plague blankets, of course.

  • goonemeritus

    Apparently the Constitution enshrines my right to get gay
    married while wearing a wool-cotton blend and eating shellfish so I wouldn’t
    call it to very Old Testament literate.

  • Toomush_Infer

    So….Aqua Bhuddha statues are out, then?..

  • elviouslyqueer

    The Constitution is like the Bible. It either means what its authors
    intended it to mean, or it can mean anything the fevered imaginations of
    activist judges can dream up.

    Help me out here, Bryan. Could you point me to the book, chapter, and verse where God said “Let there be Hobby Lobby, for my people require a craft emporium that will deny healthcare to its employees while selling cheap trinkets manufactured in Chinese sweatshops”?

    Don’t worry, I’ll wait.

    • Villago Delenda Est

      Still waiting. Will still be waiting five millennia from now….

    • Villago Delenda Est

      There is an advantage to the Constitution. We have a pretty good idea who the authors were. The Bible? Not so much.

    • Brazilian Fart Porn

      Which biblical authors? The ones who wrote in Greek? Arabic? Hebrew? Latin? And which bible? The one Constantine created? The Catholic bible? King James? Mormon?

      • Villago Delenda Est

        There are fundies out there who believe that the King James Version is the ONLY authentic, troo-wurd-of-GAWD version of the Bible, and anything besides that cannot be trusted to be authentic. That the mistranslations in the KJV are in fact the revealed wurd of GAWD and are corrections to the troo wurd in the poor transcriptions of all those Greeks, Hebrews, whatevers.

        • darnyoudarnyoutoheck

          Never mind that the KJ bibble is a translation of those heretic papists’ Latin bibble. Plus typos.

          • Thaumaturgist

            No a thousand times. The KJV is the End Time’s Bible, written in the dominant End Times Language, which Jesus personally supervised the KJV translation, which Jesus didn’t even bother to do with earlier Bibles because they weren’t all that important. http://www.stufffundieslike.com/2015/05/english/

          • Celtic_Gnome

            “Celebrate! The word was celebrate!”

          • mtn_philosoph

            “Dance to the music!”

    • The Bible is like the Constitution, in that it has been repeatedly modified to suit the times, and is left open to interpretation by individuals and groups of varying authority and competence.

      • willi0000000

        unfortunately for The Constitution authority and competence don’t always meet in the same room.

  • Seven hundred worshippers? Surely it was six hundred sixty-six, right? Unless he’s counting the catering staff.

  • Lizzietish81

    Sure the founding father’s didn’t actually mention Christianity in the constitution, and more than one said “oh hells no this is not a Christian nation” and Thomas Jefferson had nice things to say about Muslims and even had his own copy of the Koran, but OBVIOUSLY they meant for the bill of rights to only apply to Christians.

    • Villago Delenda Est

      This is the point where I reach for my LART…my Luser Attitude Readjustment Tool. Usually a big piece of communications cable.

      • eddi

        Opening communication with closed minds takes effort.

    • darnyoudarnyoutoheck

      I believe Mr Paine had some strong views on the matter as well.

  • marxalot

    Anybody asked Bryan what color the sky is in his world lately?

    • Nounverb911

      Rainbow?

      • eddi

        Only if he’s been eating the Play-Doh again.

    • elviouslyqueer

      The same color as his ass, where his head is conveniently lodged.

      • willi0000000

        . . . and it never changes.

  • memzilla

    C’mon, Pastafarians, get on the stick here!
    .

    • Nounverb911

      ..

      • Alan

        I see Jeebus in a pan of spaghetti! It’s a miracle!!!!1111111!!222!11

    • MrBlobfish

      Mmm. Hey! It’s lunchtime!

    • SterWonk

      RAMEN!

    • artem1s

      full scale bronze pirate ship to go with every Jeebus and Satanist statue or GTFO!

    • dslindc

      Ahh yes, praise be unto those touched by his noodley appendage!

  • Tallmutha

    So true, so true. The Founders barely even realized there were any religions besides Christianity and Juda– Wait. What’s that you say, Christopher Hitchens?

    As to the invocation of Jefferson, we know that when he and James Madison first proposed the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom (the frame and basis of the later First Amendment to the Constitution) in 1779, the preamble began, “Well aware that Almighty God hath created the
    mind free.” Patrick Henry and other devout Christians attempted to substitute the words “Jesus Christ” for “Almighty God” in this opening passage and were overwhelmingly voted down. This vote was interpreted by Jefferson to mean that Virginia’s representatives wanted the law “to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahomedan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination.” Quite right, too, and so far so good, even if the term Mahomedan would not be used today, and even if Jefferson’s own private sympathies were with the last named in that list.

    • SuspectedDemocrat

      And certain denominations of infidel might take exception to the term “Almighty God” anyway.

    • Antimassacree

      Therer you go again, clouding a perfectly good issue with facts.

    • eddi

      If Bryan’s type had their way, the truth would get you 20 years in solitary.

  • Angry_Cop

    What is with the ferns?

    You wanna make the Jesus freaks shit their pants, great, I approve, and most of it looks like a bad metal band album cover…and then there’s ferns. WTF?

    • SuspectedDemocrat

      Well, that’s no ordinary fern. It’s the most foul, cruel, and bad tempered vascular plant you’ve ever laid eyes on!

      • Villago Delenda Est

        Look at the fronds!

      • bozilingus

        “Feed Me, Seymour!!”

      • Usedtobeyellerdawg

        Get the holy hand grenade of Antioch!

    • NanBullenshede

      t’is Symbolical of Life.

    • darnyoudarnyoutoheck

      Ferns are very satanic. They reproduce via spores, unlike good christian seeds. Seeds good. Spores wicked

  • marxalot

    The United Church of Satan and Baseball is putting together an official statement of support for our co-religionists and fellow pranksters in Detroit, which we’ll publish after the Sox/Sox game is over tonight.

  • cleanfront

    Dark Punk is playing at my house, my house!

  • MrBlobfish

    Open the door and let Satan in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tlv_vFjPCoE

    • chicken thief

      I thought that was Brizdull until I noticed that she had a ring on her finger.

  • Msgr_Moment

    All right. It is now official:

    • willi0000000

      somebody rescue that car! . . . it’s got great ‘lead sled’ potential . . . chop it, channel it, install a great big honkin V8, de-chrome it, add some black glossy paint and you’re there.

      [ just don’t fall for the 20″ wheel shit ]

      • Msgr_Moment

        It should seek asylum in Cuba.

    • mtn_philosoph

      I can think of worse places. I can think of much worse places. Mostly they are a couple day’s drive due south of the MC.

      I am not sure that anything can be more hellish than northern Florida and the Panhandle.

  • JohnR

    The Satanists need to make smaller commemorative bronze sculptures available for purchase.

  • Villago Delenda Est

    It’s always projection with these vile motherfuckers. Always.

  • lesterthegiantape

    Overlooked in all the Bezelhubbub here is the fact that it’s an unusually well-executed sculpture. I mean look at those shitty bronze lawn children that have scoliosis and fused joints — the girl on a swing, the boys playing tag, etc. with which the wealthy adorn their gardens. Terrible. The recent monument to MLK as a Chinese guy, stiff and awful.
    Meanwhile, here’s Baphomet looking quite good — the delicately crossed ankles is a nice touch — and especially flanked by a couple of naturally posed, lifelike children. Just from an artistic standpoint the Satanists have reversed a long trend of kitschy sculpture.

    • MrBlobfish

      I guess. But a cloven hoof resting on the severed head of Bryan Fischer would have been a nice touch.

      • Villago Delenda Est

        Yes, that would have been very appropriate indeed.

      • lesterthegiantape

        That will be a tableau vivant. [MUSIC: stinger SFX: thunder]

    • SterWonk

      Any list of terrible sculptures must include the awful Fred Rogers memorial, and the horrible Lucille Ball statue.

      • Lizzietish81
        • Villago Delenda Est

          Needs more Endora.

        • marxalot

          No wonder she’s smiling…

        • HobbesEvilTwin

          oh my god, Lizzie. That’s in Salem, isn’t it? wow, that’s ugly.

        • drbloor

          Probably not a bad likeness of her at this point.

        • eddi

          Can’t these sculptors do faces that look human?

          • NanBullenshede

            Or Teats.

      • lesterthegiantape

        Don’t get me started. Mary Tyler Moore in carbonite… The Four Marilyns on Hollywood Boulevard… But Lucille Ball’s is probably the worst. Insane nurse attempts to administer medicine to the undead.

        • Msgr_Moment

          Nathan Bedford Forrest libel!

          • SterWonk

            FFS, Nathan Bedford Forrest’s life is Nathan Bedford Forrest libel!

          • I think that one is pretty close. A little more craziness in the eyes, a little more cruelty in the mouth and it might be dead on. Either that, or it will look like Michele Bachmann.

          • Villago Delenda Est

            So, Michele Bachmann was the model for that?

          • Angry_Cop

            This one’s my favorite, as he doesn’t even look human. More like a giant killer robot.

          • drbloor

            Oh, you had to go there, didn’t you.

          • eddi

            I love that statue. It is the Real South.

          • lesterthegiantape

            Can’t see the Forrest for the cheese

        • Msgr_Moment

          • Villago Delenda Est

            AIEEE! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!

          • eddi

            Poor Lucy.

      • Mehmeisterjr

        OTOH, the Rocky and Bullwinkle statue on the Sunset Strip was everything public sculpture should be:

        http://www.roadsideamerica.com/story/21577

    • Joel Abrams

      The streaks of reddish bronze on the hem of the girl’s skirt, the gather of the boy’s sleeve and Baphomet’s hoof (I’ve searched multiple images and they appear to be real, not a photographic artifact) are EVERYTHING.

      • eddi

        This is what happens when you take real pride in making evil people’s heads burst into flames. Instead of just grabbing a hunk of money and returning the least effort like any business deal.

      • lesterthegiantape

        Thanks for this. I love the slightly “Demon Seed” expression on the girl’s face.

    • Angry_Cop

      Odd you should mention this, it was the first thing I noticed. I haven’t seen a GOOD sculpture since I had that class on Roman art back in college. The person/people who did this were real professionals.

      • lesterthegiantape

        It’s almost as if some inhuman force possessed the artist’s hands.

    • Kitsapian

      The erect caduceus is also a nice touch–long, strong, and curative.

      • Gleem-McShinez

        Is that a caduceus in your pocket…?

    • bozilingus

      I just met with Baphomet the other day; this sculpture is a very good likeness.

    • Alan

      Eliphas Levi would be proud.

  • chicken thief

    I kinda like that statue.

    ~ Josh, looking at the little girl
    ~ Jerry Sandusky, looking at the little boy

    • Joel Abrams

      Add the terribly thirsty Nash Jenkins over at TIME for Baphomet:
      “He has the jarring horns of a virile ram but the biceps of a guy who lifts four or five times a week.”

      • Jen_Baker_VA

        He actually wrote “virile ram” ?
        Do these people not stop and re-read before hitting enter? Ever?

        • Joel Abrams
          • Jen_Baker_VA

            Oh my XD Uhhhmm Nash, dear. Nah never mind, you will find out eventually.

            That bit about how anger at the lion killing dentist was a bit off as well. He really has a thing for the, uh, virile type no?

        • Villago Delenda Est

          No. They do not. Even I sometimes do bother to read my comment before I post. And I’m a SERIOUS slacker.

          • Jen_Baker_VA

            I almost never do. Explains much. But I don’t get paid for it either so there is that
            ^5 fellow serious slacker (do the kids use the ^5 still?)

        • Mehmeisterjr

          Maybe that was meant to exclude rams that are conflicted about their sexual identity.

    • eddi

      ewww.

  • Msgr_Moment

    In previous efforts to make this point, Fischer’s argued that since the Constitution uses the “A.D.” dating system, it recognizes the birth of Jesus as the starting point of time.

    I wish these people could finally join the 58th Century.

    • marxalot

      Ab Urbae Condita 2768!

      • Msgr_Moment

        Ab Urbae Condita 2768! 2767!

        • Malaclypse

          Year of Our Lady of Discord 3181, thanks…

      • jmk

        Bikram Sambat 2072!! Woot!!

    • Thatsitfor Theotherwon

      Sure was a lot of shit going on those previous four thousand years!

    • Latverian Diplomat

      It sounds Fischer is arguing that all government documents should use the BCE/CE convention from now on, to avoid running afoul of the 1st Amendment.

      Do I have that right?

      • marxalot

        The problem with the Bullshit Common Era is that is uses exactly the same numeration as AD, it just calls itself something else. Establish Common Era Year 1 as something else- Marco Polo reaches the court of the Khan, Magellan circumnavigates the globe, the Boston Red Sox are founded- but don’t just use the same system and call it something more “neutral.” That’s sissy.

        • Jen_Baker_VA

          could do present and before present like them archamologists do

          • marxalot

            I like Atomic Era personally. It sounds cool.

          • Villago Delenda Est

            Date everything from Neil Armstrong setting foot on the Moon.

            And weep that soon there will be no men alive who walked on the Moon.

          • eddi

            More in keeping with the modern zeitgeist, date it from the A bombing of Hiroshima.

          • Villago Delenda Est

            It’s only fitting that the first “debate” of Rethuglican clowns will be on August 6th.

        • Villago Delenda Est

          The problem is one of inertia; we’ve got this CE/AD thing going, and it’s really a tremendous pain to alter it. It literally takes a revolution to do so; the French tried it in the 18th century, and the Russians actually did move the entire friggin’ calendar forward in 1917 to get Gregorian, but they didn’t alter the dating of the era. It was a major PITA to get Gregorian in English-speaking lands in the 18th Century as well, and that’s with the relatively simple information technology they had at the time.

          • Mehmeisterjr

            Coincidentally, I happened to be researching the French Revolutionary calendar recently. Now there was a complete mess. In an attempt to construct a calendar on the metric system that avoided any names based on religion and that honored the nation’s farmers, the minor poet Fabre d’Eglantine managed to cobble together a calendar that was, inevitably, not really metric, that imposed a ton of fanciful, hard-to-remember names on days and months, and totally pissed off the farmers. Its inventor was guillotined (though not specifically for creating this monstrosity) on 16 Germinal Year 2 (April 5, 1794 to you.) One consequence of making 36 weeks of 10 days plus extra days was that people got fewer days of rest. This was a huge hit with laborers, as you can well imagine. In addition, a number of questions about leap years were overlooked and created arguments about how the calendar would work over the long run.

            The calendar continued to be widely resented until Napoleon finally said, “That’s enough of this shit” and brought back the old calendar for 1806. It then had a brief recurrence in Paris during the Communard uprising in 1871 before disappearing (you gotta hope) for good.

            The Russians went full-Gregorian after the revolution but somewhere along the line somebody convinced Stalin that it would be a good for efficiency and a strike against lingering religion to randomly divide the population into 7 groups whose days of rest would be taken on different days. The result was such immense chaos that even a healthy dose of purges couldn’t make people accept it and they had to junk the whole idea.

            Yep, you tinker with calendars at your peril.

        • Latverian Diplomat

          Well, I think BCE/CE has a lot of advantages, in that it solves the problem of non-Christians who are uncomfortable with BC/AD without requiring a lot of mental arithmetic from people who read from a variety of sources that include both conventions.

          The two most logical “new zeroes” are 1950, which is the zero for radiocarbon dating and the BP (before present) convention, and 1970, which is the zero for Unix, Windows, and IOS time stamps. But both of those are still two recent, every day uses would have a lot of “negative” dates. Maybe in a century or two calendars based on those will be adopted broadly.

          But for now, I think BCE/CE is the best that can be done, and for many people, it does make a difference that matters.

          • PubOption

            Pol Pot also had a year zero. 1975?

        • Mehmeisterjr

          Maybe we could have a calendar based on BHP and AHP – Before Harry Potter and After Harry Potter. The addition of DHP, During Harry Potter, would give us a year zero in what we call 1997. The downside is that proponents of Star Wars, The Twilight Zone, Fast and Furious and The Colbert Report would all want calendars based on those phenomena. A I don’t even want to think about the Elrons.

      • tomamitai

        As a Saganist, I favor Before Carl, During Carl, and After Carl. Hail Sagan!

    • arglebargle

      Or maybe 13.0.2.11.10

    • Objectifer

      I use the Star Date calendar.

  • 24601
  • I once had an encounter with the prints of darkness. Stupid me…I left the lens cap on.

  • Me not sure

    We Pastafarians support the separation of church and plate.

    • marxalot

      So they don’t expect you to give bread?

      • Me not sure

        We only take and eat.

    • SuspectedDemocrat

      Saucy!

  • AngryBlakGuy

    …errrrrr yeah, that’s not exactly “correct”! The TREATY OF TRIPOLI that was signed 8 years after the ratification of the constitution made it pretty clear that the “founding fathers” were not only aware of such exotic religions as “Islam” but also believed in protecting them! As a matter of fact President John Adams said the following:

    “The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”

    • Villago Delenda Est

      Facts, schmacts. You can use them to prove anything!

    • Bigby

      Duh, John Adams was *lying* to those stupid, heathen Ottomans of 1800’s Tripoli. It was like he was saying “psych!” (LOL!), but for a good cause! Which is ok when *we* do it! Which is totes not the same as Taqiyya, which is what They do, which is very, very bad!

  • Metadude

    The Founders did not either “countenance” or “advance” religious alternatives to Christianity in the First Amendment. They were not even considering Islam or Judaism or Buddhism or Hinduism or atheism.
    Thomas Jefferson’s Koran libel!

  • HobbesEvilTwin

    aren’t there some hungry people to feed, sick people to comfort, poor people to clothe?

    • Villago Delenda Est

      Not when Mammon is your true deity.

    • Angry_Cop

      Nope, all the poor people are fat and we have Obamacare. Time to shove the ol’ head firmly up the asshole and see what we can find!

      • tomamitai

        Time to shove the ol’ head firmly up the asshole and see what we can find!

        That’s where I keep my Obamaphone™.

    • eddi

      What are you some kinda atheist hippie?

  • Kitsapian

    A basic principle of democracy: all gods are created equal.

    • Antimassacree

      Well stated!

    • eddi

      And equally irrelevant to running a government properly.

      • Kitsapian

        Government? They cannot do their own religions well.

        • Mehmeisterjr

          Well they work pretty well for grifters like Bryan Fischer.

          • Wee Mousie

            Well, if you keep demanding money to fund your efforts on another’s behalf, and never have to produce positive results, only kvetching and inflammatory rhetoric, it’s hard to go bankrupt.

  • Joshua Norton

    Poor Bryan. He’s obviously unaware that there were actual fundie-type people around when the Constitution was being written who demanded all the same shit he’s trying to come up with. They were basically told to FOAD by the very “founders” he now claims put in all this super-secret Jesus language that only he understands but we all must obey.

    They never seem to learn.

    • CriticalDragon1177

      If Fischer went back in time to when the founding fathers were alive, and said the same things about the constitution mandating a Christian nation and the first amendment only applying to Christians, the founders would probably think he was insane.

      • Treg Brown

        And they’d be right.

        • CriticalDragon1177

          Or he doesn’t like reality, because it doesn’t conform to his anti freedom theocratic worldview.

      • willi0000000

        fischer would have spied for the British.

        • CriticalDragon1177

          You think that’s because he would be angry when he realized that the founding fathers were secularists, and many of them weren’t particularly fond of Christianity?

  • Toomush_Infer

    Pleased to meet you, hope you guessed my name is Bryan…

    • Msgr_Moment

      He’s a very naughty boy.

  • Dee Andee

    The Founding Fathers were also sick to death of the Church of England meddling in colonial government, giving their priests the right to sue parishioners who didn’t pay up their 10% tithe. Colonial America was weird that way–if you were C of E and didn’t pay, the government could make you. If you were any other denomination, oh well, whatever. One denomination was being given governmental back-up over all the rest, which really pissed them the fuck off.

    • Celtic_Gnome

      The reason churches are tax exempt is that the founding fathers thought that the government, made up of members of the majority Christian sects, would use the power of taxation to prevent other religions from establishing a foothold in the new country. Another concept that should be addressed now that it’s no longer applicable.

      • tomamitai

        Yeah, the power to decide what is or isn’t a religious institution for tax purposes sounds to me like a violation of both the establishment and free exercise clauses of the first amendment. I think tax free status should only be given to charitable organizations that do tangible good in the communities they serve without regard to the religious beliefs of those they serve.

  • JustPixelz

    “the United States at the time of the founding was 99.8% Christian and 0.2% Jewish

    He left out African (slave) religious traditions. Also Native American religions. Also deists.

    • Dee Andee

      But it doesn’t fit the narrative!

    • CriticalDragon1177

      Off course as Fischer would be concerned all those people practicing those other faiths where just heathens, except for the founding fathers, who were really super fundamentalists Christians like him, despite their own writings.

      • Ryan Denniston

        But I thought Saint Reagan was a Presbyterian. And Jesus. Well, we can assume he was a Christian at the end. So there you go, the beliefs of the Founders.

        • Wee Mousie

          For Jesus to be a Christian, a follower of Christ, he would have to take on aspects of Ouroboros,

          Only fundamentalist Christians and Republicans are that ethically flexible.

    • Zippy

      ask him to explain Thomas Jefferson’s Qur’an

      • Latverian Diplomat

        Or Benjamin Franklin’s autobiography, which goes into his Deist beliefs in detail.

    • Ryan Denniston

      Those only count 3/5 of the time, so they’re underestimated, but not excluded.

      • sw19womble

        and fuck those peyote-smoking and coca-leaf-chewing dudes, they don’t even count.

    • jmk

      Well, David Barton didn’t mention any of those…

    • Celtic_Gnome

      We were actually doing the slaves a favor by converting them to Christianity so they could go to heaven after we killed them (but not White heaven, because if the slave owners had to spend eternity with their slaves, it wouldn’t be heaven for the owners).

    • Derrik Pates

      By that time a lot of the natives had already been converted to Christianity of one form or another.

  • Ryan Denniston

    “if we followed the REAL Constitution of the United States, none of this would be allowed, because the Founders only meant the First Amendment to apply to Christians.”

    But but but… what about the Jews? After all, isn’t the only reason we’re even here is to protect the Israelis from Iran, irrespective of their feelings on the topic?

    • eddi

      The Rebs can do that and still be anti-Semites in their (alleged) hearts. All it takes is a shallow mind that thinks in slogans.

  • Treg Brown

    It’s unfortunate that they didn’t go with original statue concept.

    • Villago Delenda Est

      I thought Ralph Fiennes did a pretty good Cheney for the Harry Potter movies.

    • No, see, they want a symbol–one representing anti-Christian, anti-establishment, pro-individual ideals–they don’t want an actual embodiment of pure evil.

  • Logic of Color

    “Satanist trolls” can mean a couple different things I guess

  • ManchuCandidate

    https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3018/2848463373_df80ea53f6_z.jpg?zz=1

    Yang word for yangs only. No Komms or Satanists speak yang word!

    • CriticalDragon1177

      I remember that episode of the Original Star Trek. They seemed to come across a lot of planets with societies that were just replicas of past societies on Earth, or how some of our societies might have evolved if one or two things happened differently.

      • Mahousu

        In other words, how societies might have evolved if all they had access to were props already existing at Paramount Studios.

      • Ryan Denniston

        One of the better knockoffs of past Earth. A planet occupied by Chicago.

        http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708412/

      • Latverian Diplomat

        In addition to making the metaphors a shorter walk for ’60s audiences, it really helps the old budget situation if you can just raid the company closet for historical costumes.

        • Villago Delenda Est

          There are very few multi-tentacled members of the Screen Actors Guild.

          • Latverian Diplomat

            That we know of.

          • Zippy

            I do remember Ray Walston’s short lived TV series, My Favorite Cephalopod

          • sw19womble

            reptilian shapeshifting illuminati member libels!!!!!!!!

  • “Whaaaa…?”

  • Zippy

    I love Christmas season, when parents take their children to the mall to sit on Baphomet’s lap and tell him what presents they want

  • Latverian Diplomat

    The Constitution is like the Bible. It either means what its authors intended it to mean, or it can mean anything the fevered imaginations of activist judges can dream up.

    I submit that “activist” judges theologians have given us the Rapture, prohibitions against abortion, and anti-miscegenation laws, all of which, strictly speaking, are not in the bible, but you won’t hear Fischer complaining about those. Because “activist” as an adjective, just means “opposed to my opinions”.

    • Zippy

      activist=things I don’t like

  • JustPixelz

    “If this process is not stopped, Satan-worship will be enshrined in the halls of government from sea to shining sea.”

    Jefferson, Madison and the other Founding Fathers saw this coming from 200 years away. That’s why they added the First Amendment.

    • cynmac

      Actually, they had already lived it. In England. With Cromwell.

      • Villago Delenda Est

        DING DING DING DING DING

        The Founders were much closer to the religious strife of the 17th century than we are…it was fresh in their minds, and they wanted THIS country to avoid all that shit.

        Unfortunately, they imagined that the rest of the populace would share their wisdom. They were of course, wrong, as all sorts of things that would be called heresies anywhere else were allowed to grow and thrive like weeds in a country that formally adopted the “don’t interfere with religion” doctrine. In Europe, such silliness would be stamped out as competing for market share with the formal approved flavors of religion. No such thing here…any crazy notion (to include Scientology and it’s 19th Century counterpart, LDS) is allowed to plant roots and grow.

        As a result, we’ve got griftapalooza all over the fucking place.

        • NanBullenshede

          The Founders of Plymouth Colony and Massachusetts Bay Colony sought Freedom of Conscience only for Themselves and could not Abide even the Tolerance of the Netherlands. They drove out and on Occasion even Executed those Colonials Who Disagreed on the Merest Dogmaticks. God-Bothering Beest a Universal Grifft.

          • jmk

            The Massachusetts Bay Colony’s intolerance for religious-political dissent caused them to exile Roger Williams, who went on to found Providence Plantation as a haven for religious minorities, as well as the first Baptist church in America. He was also the originator of the phrase Jefferson used in the Danbury Letter when he said that the First Amendment builds “a wall of separation between Church & State.”

      • sw19womble

        … and before that Bloody Mary, and then under Elizabeth I, and then….

  • CriticalDragon1177

    Look out Bryan Fischer, FOX is worshiping Satan now. We’ll have to use our magical non existent Jesus endorsing constitution to stop them!

    http://ib1.huluim.com/show/16556?region=US&size=952×536

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golan_the_Insatiable

  • Who him?

    Hate to say it, but Fischer is probably right. However we are wise and right to move away from the intentions of racist, slave-owning, misogynist dickbags. ‘Eff the founding fathers.

    • arglebargle

      I don’t hate to say it; Fischer is an hateful, narrow-minded imbecile.

      “Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every
      person’s life, freedom of religion affects every individual. Religious
      institutions that use government power in support of themselves and
      force their views on persons of other faiths, or of no faith, undermine
      all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of an established religion
      tends to make the clergy unresponsive to their own people, and leads to
      corruption within religion itself. Erecting the “wall of separation
      between church and state,” therefore, is absolutely essential in a free
      society.”

      Thomas Jefferson, to the Virginia Baptists

      • Villago Delenda Est

        Baptists are infidels. Stone them!

        • arglebargle

          With votes, of course.

        • eddi

          Only in Colorado and Washington. At least legally.

          • Villago Delenda Est

            Hey, legal in Oregon now too. Of course, they haven’t worked out the details of how you’re supposed to buy the stuff…

          • Celtic_Gnome

            Oregon’s supposed to start selling legal weed earlier than expected, so don’t forget to put them on the list. Also, too, the District of Columbia.

          • eddi

            As an Oregonian, I blush that I missed the news about early sales. Of course, I’m not a smoker. I just like other people not to be hassled for non-crimes.

          • tomamitai

            Unless you think state law trumps federal, which the constitution clearly says isn’t the case, marijuana is still illegal everywhere in the United States. Recent comments on the subject by Cris Christie and Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley show why it is important to legalize marijuana at the federal level, and not depend on a president or a justice department that will look the other way and choose not to enforce the controlled substances act in states that have legalized marijuana.

          • eddi

            A Federal law is not gonna happen in a Reb dominated Congress. That means at least eight more years of batting the issue around with periodic enforcement efforts and lawsuits.

      • James Christopher Owen

        Thanks for that quote; I’ve been hinting to some of my more conservative coreligionists that church/state separation is good for the church. Churches long ago had temporal power and it went pretty badly. That, I think, is why Jesus rejected political revolution as a part of religious reform.

        • Joel Abrams

          “John tells us that the chief priests and the Pharisees were gathered together. These were the two leading groups within Judaism at the time of Jesus, and on many points they were opposed to one another. But their common fear was this: “The Romans will come and destroy both our holy place [that is, the Temple, the holy place for divine worship] and our nation” (11:48). One is tempted to say that the motive for acting against Jesus was a political concern shared by the priestly aristocracy and the Pharisees, though they arrived at it from different starting points; yet this political interpretation of the figure of Jesus and his ministry caused them to miss completely what was most characteristic and new about him. Through the message he proclaimed, Jesus had actually achieved a separation of the religious from the political, thereby changing the world: this is what truly marks the essence of his new path.” – Pope Benedict XVI, “Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week: From the Entrance Into Jerusalem To The Resurrection”, p. 169

      • tomamitai

        Unfortunately, that is not a quote from Jefferson, but a summary from “Eyler Robert Coates’ very excellent collection of Jefferson quotes on politics and government, hosted by UVA”, as you can see here: https://www.monticello.org/site/blog-and-community/posts/how-bogus-quotes-are-born

    • Jen_Baker_VA

      Thing is, he is not right, except in his political bent and even that I sort of doubt (most these guys are more interested in the dollars than a true political ideology). Those FF’s had plenty of faults, but trying to throat cram religion down their new country’s throat was not one of em

    • Axomamma
      • Who him?

        ..

    • Some if not all of them were aware of “Musselmen”…

  • Lance Thrustwell

    Bryan Fischer reveals his idiocy most glaringly here:

    “The Constitution is like the Bible. It either means what its authors intended it to mean, or it can mean
    anything the fevered imaginations of activist judges can dream up.”

    He uses the word “authors”, plural, which is a partial admission that the Bible is a compilation of multiple books by authors who never met each other, but the clincher is that he also admits that the authorial agency in each case is individual human intent, not divine guidance. Every now and then, these fundamentalist assholes make sense in spite of themselves. But if confronted with this, Bryan would just spin some typical web of obfuscation. I wish I could debate that guy. I honestly think I could wipe the floor with him.

    Detroit born and bred here, btw. Proud of my city, proud of this temple. And I love that statue! And that looked like a really fun party. Would have gone if I still lived there.

    • Jen_Baker_VA

      I find it sort of ironic, and I am very sure it was intended, that whenever there is a statue of Christ he is dead, or with gaping horrendous holes in his body and he is always, always, always looking so sad….
      and then they make a statue like this where everyone is alive and fine and not suffering

      • sw19womble

        It’s okay to be sick and dark and twisted if it’s in the Bible.

        Incest, murder, masturbation, infanticide, genocide, decapitation, rape… and we haven’t even gotten to the jolly old crucifixion yet!

        They even make small children read that shit, yet ensure movies about much the same thing are “restricted viewing”.

        People are weird.

      • James Christopher Owen

        Here ya go… :)

    • It’s also revealing that he doesn’t understand that no one can go back in time and talk to the founders about what they meant by ‘religion’ or ‘well-regulated militia’ or ‘general welfare’ and the reason we have judges is to settle disputes between two or more groups of people on what the author of the Constitution meant when they wrote the damn thing.

      The guy is a giant tool.

      • Lance Thrustwell

        And honestly, Fischer’s – and every fundamentalist’s – version of “conservatism” is really kind of poignant, when you think about it. They want something that a) exists forever and doesn’t change, and b) that they don’t have to work to understand or take responsibility for. In a sense, they want to remain children. They want a parent – God – that will always love them and will never die.

        I don’t blame them for that. Me too. But this all-too-human impulse cannot be indulged in fantasies that bleed into the body politic. It is poison.

  • OneYieldRegular

    The sculptors of that statue totally blew an opportunity when they didn’t put Bryan Fischer’s face on it.

    • Anarchy Pony

      They did, he’s just sitting on it.

      • jmk

        I seriously just laughed so loud my coworkers wanted to know what was going on.

        • Anarchy Pony

          You’re welcome.

      • James Christopher Owen

  • “The Constitution is like the Bible. It either means what its authors intended it to mean, or it can mean anything the fevered imaginations of activist judges can dream up.”

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    They used the word ‘religion’. Not “Christian religion”, not “Jesus worship”, just ‘religion’.

    Seems pretty clear to me they were trying to stop douchenozzles like Fischer from inserting his religion into the government at the expense of everyone else.

    • eddi

      That’s just your activist opinion man.

    • Axomamma

      Given that people like Fischer pick and choose which parts of the bible are important and must be adhered to, it makes sense that they would do the same with the US Constitution. I haven’t seen any campaign against divorce or picketing of lobstermen or clam shacks.

    • James Christopher Owen

      Amazing that a bunch of smart guys like the Founders wanted Christianity to be America’s religion, yet managed to fail to make that clear in the Conztitooshin. Epic fail.

      • willi0000000

        the founders made one mention of religion in the Constitution . . . Article VI, last paragraph.

        [ and the pugs keep on using that piece of outlaw litmus every chance they get ]

  • Notreelyhelping

    Then again, I suppose there’s an outside chance that he’s just a lying sack of shit who cherrypicks whichever facts bolster his worldview…and keep those dollars rolling in.

    • Villago Delenda Est

      As I always assert..these people do not worship the God of Abraham, or his only begotten Son…they worship Mammon. Mammon is their true deity.

    • Wee Mousie

      Either that, or he’s a sack of cherries who picks facts to bolster his worldview out of his shit.

  • Relativicus

    “Acolytes will unveil more and more of these statues, and aim to put them on government grounds and in government buildings. If this process is not stopped, Satan-worship will be enshrined in the halls of government from sea to shining sea.”

    Presumably, enshrining Evangelical Christianity in the halls of government is a feature, not a bug.

    • eddi

      Well, it bugs me.

    • sw19womble

      Parasitic larvae libels!!!!!!nom!!!!!!!!

    • In response to guys like Fischer putting their own religious monuments on public ground. But, of course, simply not doing that isn’t an option!

  • BearGHAZI

    ??

  • VandeGraf

    I’m still not following the twisted logic that says freedom of religion only refers to Christianity because that’s what they meant despite not writing it at all. Yet, many of these people rail over “interpretation” of Biblical stuff, saying it means what it says. It’s like when well regulated militia doesn’t mean regulation. They can’t have it both ways. Oh, they can, of course, but we all get to call them horse’s patoots when they do.

    • eddi

      “A word means what I say it means.” The Caterpillar.

      • James Christopher Owen

        Humpty Dumpty, actually, but it’s all good, yo. :)

        • eddi

          My oops.

  • Callyson

    Um, ShyPixel? When I click on the Donald Trump climate change story I get this message:

    Error establishing a database connection

    Help!

    • Joel Abrams

      [Redacted] Nevermind, I’m getting it too now. Pardon the false lead.

    • eddi

      Things are running slow due to the load of commentors. Patience.

    • Joshua Norton

      You’re lucky. Unfortunately, I can still see it.

    • doktorzoom

      Wonkette’s server is on the roof…

    • I’ve been been getting errors like that on and off since last evening.

  • Axomamma

    Actually, in the debates leading up to the finalization of the Constitution and its initial amendments, the Founding Fathers very deliberately and directly discussed whether “religion” meant all religions, including specifically Islam, or just Protestant Christians.

    “As they set about creating a new government in the United States, the American Founders, Protestants all, frequently referred to the adherents of Islam as they contemplated the proper scope of religious freedom and individual rights among the nation’s present and potential inhabitants. The founding generation debated whether the United States should be exclusively Protestant or a religiously plural polity. And if the latter, whether political equality—the full rights of citizenship, including access to the highest office—should extend to non-Protestants. The mention, then, of Muslims as potential citizens of the United States forced the Protestant majority to imagine the parameters of their new society beyond toleration. It obliged them to interrogate the nature of religious freedom: the issue of a “religious test” in the Constitution, like the ones that would exist at the state level into the nineteenth century; the question of “an establishment of religion,” potentially of Protestant Christianity; and the meaning and extent of a separation of religion from government.

    Resistance to the idea of Muslim citizenship was predictable in the eighteenth century. Americans had inherited from Europe almost a millennium of negative distortions of the faith’s theological and political character. Given the dominance and popularity of these anti-Islamic representations, it was startling that a few notable Americans not only refused to exclude Muslims, but even imagined a day when they would be citizens of the United States, with full and equal rights. This surprising, uniquely American egalitarian defense of Muslim rights was the logical extension of European precedents already mentioned. Still, on both sides of the Atlantic, such ideas were marginal at best.”

    http://www.salon.com/2013/10/05/our_founding_fathers_included_islam/

    • Villago Delenda Est

      Madison was asked SPECIFICALLY if the “no religious test” phrase applied to “Mohamedans” or “Musselmen” and he said, categorically and with no need to go into long explanations, YES.

      Stick that in your fucking pipe, Fischer. You piece of intolerant shit.

      • OrdinaryJoe

        “You ignorant and stupid piece of intolerant shit.”

        fixed

        • Villago Delenda Est

          Fix cheerfully accepted!

          • OrdinaryJoe

            “The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” John Adams

    • willi0000000

      . . . and, with any luck, Muslims and other ‘folks of a dusky hue’ will someday have those full and equal rights.

  • unveil a 9-foot, 2000-pound bronze statue of Satan.

    It’s Baphomet, actually, but I suppose I shouldn’t expect a deeply religious man like Bryan Fischer to sweat the details like distinguishing the mythological figures of his own faith. It’s not important, like keeping track of all the named Green Lanterns, or remembering which one is Bele and which one is Lokai.

  • By the way, congratulations to the Satanic Temple for not giving Baphomet women’s breasts, to avoid offending people.

  • Malmborg Implano

    I’m proud that Detroit, the city of my birth, has given a home to Baphomet. If I believed in God I would also be a Satanist.

    • PRIME79

      Batman, my God would be Batman!

  • MOG253

    Yes, but is he really neat and turtle
    meat?

    • Tansy Geek

      I think that’s Gamera, but I would be very happy with a statue of him next to the Ten Commandments too.

  • Thaumaturgist

    If they start chopping off heads whenever there’s a drought, when do they start chopping heads in California’s? And will it be Mexcans? Who do the chopping?

  • Thom

    That “well-regulated militia” part of the second amendment must be the most annoying thing since the second amendment’s lack of any mention of unrestricted access to a private army of your choosing.

    • Wee Mousie

      Pity the Founding Fathers didn’t amend it to not abridging the establishment of any well regulated religion.

      It would have saved a lot of ugliness later on.

  • wallydog

    I guess fish breath doesn’t recognize Native American religions that were here before the European invasion. Why am I not surprised.

    • Villago Delenda Est

      They, like Islam and Hinduism, are not “real” religions. From Fischer’s point of view, Scalia is a heathen, I might add.

      • Wee Mousie

        Scalia is a heathen. Just not from Fischer’s, or religion’s point of view.

      • willi0000000

        scalia and the rest of The Five Supremes™ are the sucking chest wound on the body politic.

    • trog69

      He’s on record as saying that the Natives should be extremely grateful for the actions by settlers and the US gov’t., because salvation!

      /”Then why did you tell us?”

  • YayConspiracy

    Oh, the penetrating and razor-sharp logic of great American minds, such as Mrs Palin (2), the Donald and Mr. Fischer… I admit I am thirsty for knowledge, but you didn’t have to give me an ocean to drink.

  • m3bosha

    So he’s given up on kvetching about the gheys? What is the world coming to?

    • Wee Mousie

      He’s not given up on Obamacare, he’s not given up on Roe vs. Wade, so what makes you think he’s given up on teh Gheys?

  • Paperless Tiger

    Hardly a prank. Someone spent some serious money on that hideous thing. Prolly the Illuminati trying to get rid of Christian influence so they can ramp up their usury racket.

  • Usedtobeyellerdawg

    For someone who doesn’t believe the text of the constitution should be examined and interpreted, he sure is doing a lot of interpretation there.

  • dshwa

    “In no instances have the churches been the guardians of Liberty.”

    – James Madison

    “During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.”

    -James Madison

    Yeah, I don’t think the guy who wrote the constitution thought much of enshrining Christianity therein.

  • A Bashful Nobody

    Quite the constitutional scholar is Mr. Fischer!

    • Wee Mousie

      I, for one, believe Mr. Fischer’s scholarship is flawed, but what do I know. My fundamentalist parents pushed me through conformation before I was old enough to decide what I believed.

      When I turned eighteen, I decided to worship Hypnos, and since then have religiously spent every Sunday morning asleep in bed.

  • TheBidenator

    if this guy’s reality got anymore bizarre he’d befriend a talking pink elephant named Jiminy that no one else can see, what a freak. He needs to either get off the meds he’s on now, or get on some meds…

    • trog69

      His freakish reality is well-compensated by a huge number of older people, in lots of countries besides the US, who wish they could be raptured into Mr. Fischer’s reality.

  • Mr Corrections

    That “dark punk” bit reminds me of an anti-Life of Brian speech* where the guy kept referring to “Monty Snake”.

    * back when that was the threat that was going to Destroy America

  • ganmerlad

    Well, the first amendment is pretty clear:

    “Christian Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of Christian religion, or prohibiting Christians the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of Christian speech, or of the Christian press; or the right of the Christian people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Christian Government for a redress of Christian grievances. Amen”

    • trog69

      They would have had to insert “…respecting an establishment of ‘any but the’ Christian religion,”

  • Celtic_Gnome

    Um, Bryan, the Ten Commandments were created well before they started using that A.D. thing, so it wouldn’t be protected by the Constitution either.

    • Alan

      Apparently, Bryan doesn’t realize that much of the Mosaic Law, including the infamous Lex Talionis, was pretty much lifted from the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi.

  • Ulricii

    Is it just a coincidence that Sons Of Liberty media has the same acronym as Shit Out of Luck. I think not.

  • RoyalUglyDude

    “The population of the United States at the time of the founding was 99.8% Christian and 0.2% Jewish.”

    Funny thing about that: In colonial times, up to one fifth of the population of African descent was Muslim. But hey, no one forced them to move here right?

    • SillyBilly

      dont forget the Native Americans

  • folderol

    “Writing at Bradlee Dean’s Web Aggregation Of Stuff That’s Too Stupid For WND,…”

    Whoa, whoa, whoa! I have read a lot of WND, and I can assure you that NOTHING is too stupid for WND. I expect a retraction, a la NY Times style!

  • Bob Harrow

    The devil made me do it… i did it for the devil.. works for me..

  • bargal20

    “Fischer’s argued that since the Constitution uses the “A.D.” dating system, it recognizes the birth of Jesus as the starting point of time.)”
    Since the constitution uses the latin “Anno Domini” or “A.D.”, then America’s official language is Latin, and Bryan Fischer’s real name is Biggus Dickus.

    • OneDemin EOr

      Dickus Minimus.
      FIFY.

  • SillyBilly

    hahaha that’s some funny stuff

  • JayGoldenBeach

    Fischer is a discount store, low end version of religious-political con-artist.

  • Belasaurius

    there were Muslims living in America when the Constitution went into effect.

    • LiterallyTheGayAgenda

      He also manages to ignore the spiritual traditions of the Natives living here.

  • LesBontemps

    Check the photos, they’re drinking Miller Lite! Truly the work of Satan.

  • Last Hussar

    And this is the problem with the US constitution. People will insist on the SPIRIT. Sorry. If your legal system relies on the spirit of the law, not purely on what is written, then it is a shit legal system. Bryan – either get an amendment to the law introduced, of stick to the law.

    • DutchS

      Well, actually he is. The first word in the First Amendment is “Congress.” So strictly, it applies only to Congress. It’s only SCOTUS interpreting the “spirit” of the law that extends it to the States.

  • John Norris

    Before Mr Fischer goes all constitutional and all, he needs to explain two things: first, why doesn’t he know the difference between a cross and a crucifix? Second, why all the TruChristion (TM) prayers to Jesus in Jesus’ name didn’t destroy the statue?

  • Fly

    Apparently Jesus found a way to holocaust Wonkette.

  • kfreed

    You’ll be pleased to know that every single Tea Party GOPer in office believes exactly the same thing Fischer’s pie-hole is spouting, as do their candidates for president (except possibly Trump):
    http://www.salon.com/2015/07/31/secrets_of_the_extreme_religious_right_inside_the_frightening_world_of_christian_reconstructionism/

    “The So-Called ‘Libertarian Moment’ Is Engineered By The Christian Right”
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/libertarian-christian-right

    We’ve only been trying to impart this to the left for several years now.

    “Waiting for the Day When We Can Say We’re All Austrians: Ron Paul’s Brand of Libertarianism” (The Theocratic Kind): http://www.talk2action.org/story/2012/1/4/234938/0298 < Researchers for Political Research Associates

    (Only three links. That shouldn't be too much of a strain.)

    • J.d. Norton

      I am always suspicious of libertarians. They are usually just republicans, or they might as well be. Now there is this new “skeptic” element to libertarianism. You know, where they are “skeptical” of Global Warming. I have heard some of them on Alex Jones. So, they don’t believe in something that has 99% scientific consensus, but they go onto a show where the host believes that satanists are running the world!

      • DutchS

        Conservatives suck on social and environmental responsibility. Liberals suck on personal responsibility. Libertarians combine the worst of both.

  • Bren

    I really can’t wait until Fischer is found ball deep in a rent boy. You know it’s going to happen one day.

  • J.d. Norton

    “Crucifixion Party?”

  • DutchS

    “the First Amendment only prevents Congress from choosing one sect of Christianity, while it gives states the freedom to regulate religion however they want.” Until 1947, it did. It wasn’t until the 20th century that the Supreme Court started interpreting the Bill of Rights as applying in the States. That’s called the Incorporation Doctrine.

    We all know about big versus small states, slavery, proportional versus indirect representation, etc., but one compromise in the Constitution has been little noted. It was probably not explicitly thought out, but the Constitution created a very enlightened government structure at the national level, while leaving states and local governments free to be repressive and reactionary. “Banned in Boston” meant exactly that. It was at one time perfectly legal for local government to practice censorship. And although the Supreme Court has extended almost the whole Bill of Rights to the States (it happens piecemeal as actual cases arise) it’s obvious that people like Fischer reject it. The Bill of Rights was first proposed by opponents of the Constitution as a list of things the Federal government was forbidden to do. The Anti-Federalists are still very much alive and well.

  • E.A. Blair

    I guess Fischer doesn’t realize that the crucifix he describes is a Cross of Saint Peter.

Previous articleOh No, Barack Obama Is Going To Do The Puppy Holocaust Now, For Allah!
Next articleDonald Trump Knows Climate Change Is Just Classy, Luxurious Version Of Weather