Usually the selection of a state bird or state song is not particularly divisive or even notable. The same goes for a state book (though it seems a bit odd to select a single book for a state unless it is written by a native son or daughter). Louisiana however could find itself in court as it moves to make the Bible the state book. Rep. Thomas Carmody, R-Shreveport, proposed the official adoption but insisted that it should not be viewed as any type of state endorsement. It is simply the selection of one faith’s religious book as the official book for the entire state. Who could possibly view that as a state endorsement?
It does seem at times that religious legislators look for any opportunity to entangle government with religion. This seems particularly gratuitous. Indeed, the best defense for the state may be that the selection is really quite meaningless. However, there are presumably some government action — and clearly endorsement — associated with the selection.
A House committee has approved the selection by an 8-5 vote so it will now go to the full House for debate. The concern is that few members want to be seen voting against the Bible. In the meantime, a state that has long been denounced for its lack of funding of key programs, particularly educational programs, would be triggering another costly court fight in its effort to endorse a religious faith.
Carmody insisted that the adoption of the religious book for one faith is “not to the exclusion of anyone else’s sacred literature.” Of course, their books would be excluded from the list of official state books but that is not exclusion from . . . well its just not exclusion.
He received bipartisan support for his measure with favorable votes from Reps. Taylor Barras, R-New Iberia; Johnny Berthelot, R-Gonzales; Robert Billiot, D-Westwego; Terry Brown, I-Colfax; Mike Danahay, D-Sulphur; Dalton Honore, D-Baton Rouge; Stephen Ortego, D-Carencro; and Tom Willmott, R-Kenner.
The greatest irony is that some opposition has come not in the adoption of the Bible but what version of the Bible would be adopted — potentially triggering an intra-sectarian fight. Will it be the King James version or some other version?
If the Bible is the official state book, there may be demands that it be featured more prominently in Louisiana schools, incorporated into lessons, and even promoted on state sites or campaigns. Then citizens can be exalted to read such passages as John 14:6: “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”
Carmody in the meantime has continued to express disbelief that anyone would see a constitutional issue or be insulted in any way. After all, he insisted “It’s not meant to be offensive. There’s no requirement that they would have to follow this particular text.” Of course note, he is not seeking to bar you from reading other books. However, if he is successful, there can be only one state book and that is the Bible.
Carmody is a real estate broker and a founding member of the Louisiana Legislative Conservative Coalition.
By the way, if the state were to honor a great Louisiana book (one of my favorites), an obvious choice would be A Confederacy of Dunces by American novelist John Kennedy Toole. It seems as relevant today as in 1980. After all, Carmody may find the views of the main character, Ignatius, rather attractive. Ignatius insisted that “with the breakdown of the medieval system, the gods of chaos, lunacy, and bad taste gained ascendancy.” and warned that “[a] firm rule must be imposed upon our nation before it destroys itself. The United States needs some theology and geometry, some taste and decency. I suspect that we are teetering on the edge of the abyss.”
Source: NOLA
They want their Bible State Book before Texas grabs it first.
Lrobby99 – you know that both states can have the same book? It is not mutually exclusive, although they could claim first adoption rights. 🙂
Paul that’s a joke right…… Something about adoption of a religion or some goofy stuff like that…..
AY – they select the book, not force anyone to read it. For example, the bolo tie is the state tie of Arizona, I have never worn one since I lived here and do not own one. Rarely see them, as a matter of fact.
If this does go to court, the arguments are going to be interesting.
Just awful. Gonna be a big waste of taxpayer money and judicial resources just to be told that the First Amendment has not been repealed.
Since it really does not affect anyone, I am not sure the courts will intervene. 🙂
Waldo wrote: “Gonna be a big waste of taxpayer money and judicial resources just to be told that the First Amendment has not been repealed.”
I don’t see much problem with the First Amendment at all. At the time the First Amendment was passed, several States had State sanctioned religions. The First Amendment’s purpose was written to prevent Congress from favoring one religious establishment over another. Massachusetts actually required every citizen to belong to a church and permitted the church to tax its members.
The problem is with the Fourteenth Amendment, mainly because of the course of modern jurisprudence since 1940 (Cantwell v. Connecticut), 1963 (Abington School District v. Schempp), 1971 (Lemon v. Kurtzman) and others which have established precedence of reinterpreting the First Amendment to apply to all the States. The controversial Lemon Test forces all civil governments to be neutral in regards to all religion, which is an impossibility as cases like this current one keep illustrating. The precedence results from a sloppy reading of the First Amendment establishment clause which specifically refers to no law respecting AN ESTABLISHMENT of religion. Modern readers gloss over this phrase and read it as having respect toward establishing religion rather than having respect toward a particular establishment of religion.
“The greatest irony is that some opposition has come not in the adoption of the Bible but what version of the Bible would be adopted …. Will it be the King James version or some other version?”
This is the point when some people actually start understanding the problems with sectarian pushes for a presence in government. They don’t understand the problem with promoting Christianity over other religions, but they do understand the promotion of one sect over another.
Which book will appear next to the brown pelican?
http://www.statesymbolsusa.org/Louisiana/Louisianastatesymbols.html
Paulette:
ACOD is pure gold. Too bad the author died so young.
The act of choosing the Bible vs A Confederacy of Dunces would require a reading of “A Confereracy…” which could cause at least 8 state representatives’ head’s to explode.
BTW, Toole’s turn of phase throughout ACOD is masterful.
I am a huge fan of ACOD. Recommend it all the time. My stupid local library only has one copy in the system so we cannot use it for a book club discussion.
If it helps, it took Arizona 5 years to select the official state tie. That tie is…wait for it….wait for it…The Bolo Tie.
Help Help Help I have been eaten by the spam monster.
King James I authorized an English version of the Bible and so it is named after him. This is the version taught in literature classes since major English writers, including Shakespeare, were involved. It is the first authorized Protestant version in English.
However, Louisiana is Roman Catholic country so they are probably using the Douay-Rheims which is the first Catholic version in English. This is a word-for-word translation of the Latin vulgate version which was used by the clergy.
Per the dikes, they were built mostly by the Army Corps of Engineers and are each separately run and controlled. Depending on the corruption in the dike organization depended on the security of the dam. Dike building and repair is a local problem, not a state problem.
Which version again….http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible
Oh, good…. the next time ‘Katrina’ shows up, they can all float out to sea on their ‘buy-bulls’
Charlton S. Stanley, PhD, ABPP
Speaking of which version. One evening I was listening to All Things Considered on public radio. One of the guests was a professor of theology from a university in North Carolina. He told of an incident where he was invited to preach a sermon at a local church. The welcoming committee told him when he was first contacted, they were a church that believed in the bible as it was originally written, and wanted him to preach from that. He said fine, he could do that.
He appeared at the church at the appointed time and began his sermon. After just a couple of minutes, the chief deacon came to the pulpit and interrupted him. Whispering in his ear, the deacon wanted to know what in the world he was preaching. The professor said he was preaching in a combination of Greek and Aramaic, the languages the bible was written in originally, because that is what he was asked to do.
“No, no, no,” came the reply, “We meant the King James version.”
===================
That also begs the question “which Bible, the Christian or the Hebrew Bible.”
The Hebrew Bible (a.k.a. old testament) is mostly written in Hebrew, with some Aramaic.
The Christian Bible (a.k.a. new testament) is Greek.
The King James is a kings version.
Kings grab things that are not their own sometimes, so he grabbed the Hebrew Bible as his own.
But kings are closer to God (“God save the King”) so they can do no wrong (“with God on their side”).
The empire of the king’s bible now wants to destroy those who use the Mohammad Bible (a.k.a. koran).
This Louisiana nut government is on to something or on something.
Without repealing the Fourteenth Amendment, I don’t see what chance he has. The Fourteenth Amendment ended States rights to be sovereign in their administration. Laws that previously applied only to the Federal Government now apply to all States. The Beast that is Federal Government rules the States, and there is nothing anyone can do about it without changing the Constitution.
All The King’s Men should be the state movie. The Broderick Crawford original, not the Sean Penn travesty.
Gays, guns and God are the three fall back positions when certain Politicians have nothing to offer except hate and fear.
Speaking of which version. One evening I was listening to All Things Considered on public radio. One of the guests was a professor of theology from a university in North Carolina. He told of an incident where he was invited to preach a sermon at a local church. The welcoming committee told him when he was first contacted, they were a church that believed in the bible as it was originally written, and wanted him to preach from that. He said fine, he could do that.
He appeared at the church at the appointed time and began his sermon. After just a couple of minutes, the chief deacon came to the pulpit and interrupted him. Whispering in his ear, the deacon wanted to know what in the world he was preaching. The professor said he was preaching in a combination of Greek and Aramaic, the languages the bible was written in originally, because that is what he was asked to do.
“No, no, no,” came the reply, “We meant the King James version.”
And I always thought the state book was “A Lesson Before Dying.” Well, it ought to be.
This would be a great story line…….for a Simpsons episode.
Why would a god have inspired only a very small number of all the billions of great narratives that have been written by humans over time? What evidence is there that Shakespeare, Mark Twain, the Koran, Bertrand Russell, Howard Zinn were not equally divinely inspired or perhaps the latter were divinely inspired rather than the bible? How can a thinking person with a normal brain believe that a few writers in ancient times were divinely inspired and billions of other writers since then were not? Or even that perhaps none were divinely inspired.
It’s easier than passing laws to do actual work, like fixing the levies.
Reblogged this on U.S. Constitutional Free Press.