Despite far more pressing problems, Tennessee Senate and House committees have been working to make the Bible the official book of Tennessee — adding the Bible with catfish (the state fish) as a symbol of the state. Of course, cat fish are not matters of faith (beyond the hope and prayer of every fisherman). The House sponsor, Rep. Jerry Sexton, R-Bean Station, added “talking points” to bill. Sexton was only elected in 2015 but is wasting no time in trying to rollback on the separation of church and state.
The bill was approved by the Senate State and Local Government Committee by a 7-0-2 vote. Only two abstained. Not a single opposing vote. The House State Government Committee approved the bill (HBO615) by a voice vote about an hour later.
Rep. William Lamberth, R-Cottontown insists that it must be constitutional because “It doesn’t in any way, shape, form or fashion say that anyone has to read this book. It doesn’t mean anyone has to believe in the tenets of this book.”
Legislators could argue that they are associating the state with the generally accepted elements of the Bible such as the values expressed in the book. However, rabbis and clerics of other religious are objecting. The book also ascribes to one view of the Almighty. Moreover, the official designation will require some state action by employees in listing and featuring the book. It would raise an interesting and potentially expensive court case for the state. If the legislators tried to erect a monument to the Bible, there would be a credible challenge. What is the difference between a monument on the grounds and this designation?
Putting aside the question of the separation of powers, the claim of constitutionality does not make this the right thing to do. There are many citizens in Tennessee who follow other faiths or no faith. This is the majority forcing all citizens to associate with the religious book of one faith. If one truly believe in free exercise of religion, it should come with a respect for the faiths of others. The concept of tolerance and pluralism runs deeply in our values as a nation.
The fact that not a single member had the courage to oppose this bill on principle is a deeply sad reflection on our current politics. Imagine who people would feel is a bill passed making the Koran the official book or the Torah. It is not enough to say that you might be able to get away with dong something wrong — I learned that as a kid from the Bible.
Source: The Tennessean
Squeeky (kill the gays) continues the shame and blame game…
This is getting downright gross. I never trusted statistics of any kind because whomever does them always has an agenda no matter which way they go, they can always be skewed. I ran into this a lot with IUD’s and so on. I used to post it on here during the Hobby Lobby thing because they pierced Uterus and caused Pregnancies because they slipped off and thereby unplanned abortions and pregnancies both happened with these unsafe copper wire Paraguard which in ectreme cases caused death.
Anyway, I said it over and over and everyone ignored me because they were stuck on the meme of Hobby Lobby being unscientific and saying an IUD was and abortifacient even though they would ecplain it differently and the left wing MSM would twist it around. You get the picture. I was ridiculed.
The one thing that Paul said is that We are going to be despised and rejected of men and it is what it is so I figure if they start accepting us we are doing something wrong. 😉
@BFM
Well, it is distributed through out the population, but it is not evenly distributed. Per the chart above, only 1300 heterosexual white women got it compared to 11,200 white men who had sex with men. Left unsaid, is how most of the women who got it, ended up with it. My GUESS is, having sex with men who also had sex with men. Which brings us back to bi-sexuals. So yes, having safe sex helps a lot. But also, if you are a woman, stay away from gay and bi-sexual men.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Your concern with the incident rate in certain population make perfect sense if one plans on having unprotected sex.
If one is intent on having unprotected sex then one can reduce the probability of becoming infected from a single sex act by limiting ones sex partners to groups with lower prevalence of HIV.
I would point out that having unprotected sex is reckless and irresponsible in any case – regardless ones choice of partner .
Whatever the probability of HIV infection for a specific sex act, the probability becoming infected approaches certainty as the number of unprotected sex acts increase – regardless of whether ones partners are chosen from homosexual, bisexual or heterosexual populations.
That is a simple mathematical fact.
You cannot protect yourself from HIV infection by simply choosing your partner from a specific group. What ever partner you choose, the way to have safer sex is to practice safe sex.
Having said that, perhaps we should acknowledge that the probability of becoming infected from a single unprotected sex act seems to be very low – even with an HIV positive partner. That probability seems to vary depending on the sex act and the viral load of the positive partner.
Every group has some degree of HIV infection. If you have unprotected sex with a partner who’s HIV status is unknown there is some risk you will become infected. If you keep having unprotected sex the probability of becoming infected increases and approaches certainty. Safe sex practices reduce that probability and make sex safer.
Know your HIV status. Ask you partner about their HIV status. Practice safe sex.
@BFM
HIV is primarily a disease of men who have sex with men (MSMs):
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/images/web/msm_hiv_cases_graph_2014.jpg
FWIW, there is about the same risk of MSMs getting HIV (20%) as smokers who got lung cancer.
You can read about it here.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/gender/msm/facts/
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
The statistics you cite demonstrate conclusively that you cannot protect yourself from HIV by limiting your sex to certain groups or SES status. HIV is found in all groups.
The idea that you can protect your self by limiting sexual contact with certain groups is flatly wrong and illogical as demonstrated by the statistics Squeeky cites which show that HIV infection is not – repeat not – limited to specific groups.
Know your status. As you partner about their status. And practice safe sex including the use of condoms.
As Squeeky’s statistics show, HIV infection is distributed through out the population. There is no safe group – only safer practices.
@PaulCS
Well, I am just not going to do that kind of stuff at all. I remember the first time I ever even heard about it was when I was reading this book about the Hillside Stranglers. I was like maybe 12 or 13??? Anyway, the perps had this girlfriend they did that stuff to, and it was horrible the problem she ended up having, and the way she handled it, which I still remember after 18 years, and which I can’t even talk about at a G-Rated place. Sooo, I asked my mother about it, and then she started fussing at me for reading that book, and anyway, that is something I am not going to ever do. Yeccchh!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
@PaulCS
That country is Indiana. I think that is somewhere in North America. 🙂
@BFM
If Boyfriend Bobby is bi-sexual, that means that he is a man who has sex with men. That group has a 20% chance of being HIV positive, according to the CDC. The primary means of infection is anal sex. If you want the link, I will give it to you. Or, you can just watch this, which is a fascinating documentary. Well worth the time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Rf85eRNze0
As far as anal sex between heterosexuals, that isn’t exactly a joy ride, either, although HIV isn’t the biggest problem:
http://www.webmd.com/sex/anal-sex-health-concerns
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Squeeky
Not to be gross, but some women like anal sex. They actually like it better. idk. I knew this gal in the 1980s that swore by it in a threesome. People now days have really become very weird about sex imo. I haven’t had any in 12 years – lol. But I do know that people now days have become so rigid about the bedroom and reactionary that it is frightening and they need to loosen up. btw. It wasn’t me 😉
“The primary means of infection is anal sex.”
Do you mean unprotected anal sex? Perhaps you did not notice this passage from your own cite:
“The only way to completely avoid anal sex risks is to abstain from anal sex. If you engage in anal sex, it is always important to use a condom to protect against the spread of infections and diseases.”
We could paraphrase their advice the the true statement about all sex: ‘the only way to completely avoid the risk of HIV infection from sex is to abstain from sex. If you engage in sex it is important to use a condom to protect against the spread of infections and diseases including HIV – that or use safe sex practices with your known partner.
Finally the idea that one can protect him or her self from the risk of HIV infection by avoiding contact with acknowledged gay or bisexual individuals if simple wrong and illogical. HIV infection affects all lifestyles and social classes. Safe sex practice is essential for everyone.
@Ingannie
Whether HRC has moved on or not is the question. I have patiently explained to you that people often say one thing in public, and behave differently in private. I have asked a directly relevant question, and it is way past time for you to respond to it. You are NOt avoiding it because it is inane. Because there really are such things as “bi-sexuals”—persons who have sex with both boys and girls. They are the “B” in LGBT. It is not inconceivable that a woman would be courted by such a male person, and in fact is necessary for them to be “bi”. It is not inconceivable that the woman could be YOUR granddaughter???
Sooo, quit running like a fraidy cat and answer the question! Have you forgotten it??? Do I need to cut and paste it again??? Here,
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Maybe you did not hear but anal sex does not cause HIV infection. Having sex with an HIV infected partner causes HIV infection.
HIV status is relatively easy to determine with widely available tests. Knowing the HIV status of both you and your partner is vital information to reduce the spread of HIV.
Condoms greatly reduce the risk of HIV transmission.
BTW, if you google ‘safe sex practice’ there are a boat load of reputable web sites with good information about safe sex and how to reduce the likelihood of HIV infection.
bfm – there is some small country somewhere that is having an HIV outbreak caused by sharing needles. Some 100 new cases in the last couple of months.
” there is some small country somewhere that is having an HIV outbreak caused by sharing needles. Some 100 new cases in the last couple of months.”
And that tragedy could have been greatly reduced with legal needle exchanges – a policy belatedly adopted by the politicians.
Even where there are legal needle exchanges and condom distribution centers, sometimes misguided LE officers interfere and harass those trying access these life saving tools.
I advocate for legislation to make in a felony to interfere with the possession of safety or infection control equipment such as clean hypodermic needles and condoms.
LE who harass people for possessing and using infection control equipment make us all less safe.
HIV infection is everybody’s problem.
country = county
So Squeeky, as I thought, you CANNOT reconcile your conservative world view with your support of Hillary. I think you may merely be a hanger on from 2008 Puma land. Hillary has moved on, you haven’t.
Paul, I don’t care about your opinion, as I said, you’re too often wrong.
Inga – ad hominem attack at 8:28 pm.
@Ingannie
Quoting you, at 4:45PM above, the first time HRC and gayness cropped up in this thread:
Sooo, as you can see, YOU started off down this road. I have explained its relevancy to you, and it is in line with points first raised by YOU!
Your refusal to answer is not fooling anybody. It is time for you to put your big girl panties on and answer the question I asked.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
*Social world view*
Squeeky, I’m ignoring your inane question, it’s irrelevant to the discussion. How are you going to reconcile your extremely conservative social work view with your pro Hillary stance? Do it realistically, based on Hillary’s WORDS, not what you THINK she means.
Inga – I am more concerned with Hillary’s actions than her words.
@Ingannie
No, Annie, it is immensely relevant. I say people may say one thing in public, and a whole nother thing in private. I gave you a concrete, and very realistic scenario, to show how normal human beings really behave. Your refusal to answer it is NOT based on any relevancy, but instead on your sincere desire to avoid appearing hypocritical.
Or, if you would simply let your granddaughter go off and play “catcher” to her bi-sexual boyfriend’s “pitch”, then you appear both insane and cruel. I admit that you do not have a happy choice here, but it is a very real choice that real people make every day.
As stated above, some may preach “civil rights” and against “white privilege” but when it comes to their kids, there ain’t no way they are sending them to an inner city public school.
Now, it is your turn. Please quit running, and answer the question I asked.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Your question is hardly relevant Squeeky, to the discussion of Hillary Clinton’s gay rights advocacy.
@Ingannie
And the question of saying one thing while doing something else came up, hence my scenario for you! There I was, nice enough to tailor a question specially for you as a grandmother, and you just duck and dodge all over the place because it would force you to admit that you would probably tackle your granddaughter and duct tape her to chair to keep her from having anal sex with her bi-sexual boyfriend.
Then, all your fancy speeches about not discriminating against gays, would go poof when it is one of your own. Or, maybe you wouldn’t do anything??? Maybe you really did drink the kool-aid, and would just let your granddaughter go off with bi-sexual Booby. . .
Sooo, I think it is important that you answer this very relevant question.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
And I can guarantee you Hillary would be against Tennessee mixing church and state. She is a Democrat, not what you want her to be Squeeky, sorry.
Excuse me Squeeky, the subject we’ve been engaged in here for the past hour of so is Hillary’s announcing her campaign and her support of gay rights. Your silly questions are obfuscation and I won’t allow you to veer from the truth that you aren’t fit to represent Hillary Clinton because of your blatant homophobia and other stances you’ve taken here on RIL. Ted Cruz is your Guy Squeeky, seriously.
Inga – at this point Hillary is not going to refuse anyone’s support or vote.
@Ingannie
You are sooo trying to change the subject so you won’t have to answer a simple question. Here, let me repeat it for you!
http://youtu.be/33uKAYJVKsA
LOL, Squeeky, you made your homophobic bed, now you’re going to have to lay in it.
http://youtu.be/tgE65csAEw4
Hillary Clinton, “All Americans need to work harder to overcome bigotry…”