"Christian" is a race! Who knew?

[cytg111]

FOR a second assume that the bible never ever had anything to do with magic people in they sky and only only functioned as a tool to wield power over other people ... Why the hell should that be different today than it was then? Same shit, different millennia. People wants to do shit and wields magic book as reasoning... Thats why I dont think of religious people as being free... those chains man. those chains.

 

[CZroe]

Leviticus which is generally used to justify discrimination against LGBTQ and mixed race marriages also says mixed fabrics are a sin.

Baseball caps are made of mixed fabrics so anyone who cares to discriminate against MAGA hat wearing folks now has a “deeply felt religious belief” to do so.

The fabrics thing pertains to the Hebrews. It's essentially saying "don't be vain by wearing showy stuff" not "it is a sin to wear 50% polyester." Still, I've met many orthodox Jews who take it seriously. Of course, they also do not mix meat and dairy simply because their scripture used the boiling of a calf in its mother's milk as a metaphors for sacrilege (wasn't literally saying they couldn't mix meat and dairy).

Either way, Christians aren't sacrificing doves and lambs and stuff while carrying around an Arc of the Covenant, so they know that the instructions for Hebrews/Israelites (God's "chosen people") don't quite pertain to them. If anything, not mixing fabrics means no fancy jewelry or make-up... nothing about interracial marriages. Are they going to refuse a wedding because the bride wore make-up and the groom had fancy gold cuff links?

It's just absolute BS. The Christian Bible and the Jewish Torah clearly support interracial marriage and no one deliberately misinterpreting those passages would be unaware of the parts that prove their interpretation wrong... which turns their false interpretation into an out-right lie...and that sin was so important it got it's own spot in the Ten Commandments.

 

[MtnMan]

I hate to say it, but based on the title of the thread, I was half expecting to see one of Trumps off the wall Tweets.

 

[Moonbeam]

People seem surprised that people who can rationalize anything can also rationalize away what it says in their sacred books. The books only function, isn't to be read or understood but as something one can point at to justify ones bigotry. It's not what's in the book but the fact it supports their own take on authority that matters. These are all people who have been condition to fear disobeying authority so much they would never dare to think for themselves.

 

[Viper1j]

You sure? Trump is itching to mail Moscow Mitch’s mail order bride back to Chairman Xi.

Chief Justice Roberts, RBG, Stephen G. Breyer. Sonia Sotomayor. Elena Kagan, All have integrity. And let's not forget good old self interest. There's no way Clarence Thomas would vote to overturn Loving vs. Virginia, since his wife is Caucasian, and he would immediately invalidate his own marriage of 40 years. That's a clear majority.

 

[balloonshark]

If Christians aren't happy here in the US why don't they go back to where they come from?

Actually that would be interesting. It would give the two other groups of people to constantly bitch about and fight with.

 

[trenchfoot]

Right. The line about each animal to their own kind was just talking about creation and stating the obvious (lions produce lions, horses produce horses, etc). It had nothing to do with keeping black dogs away from white dogs or short-haired cat breeds away from long-haired cat breeds. It wasn't laying out God's law and it wasn't talking about race.

If they actually knew the Bible then they know that Moses married outside his race with God's support and that the Hebrews routinely used mules (sterile offspring of a horse and donkey), yet here these people are, acting like their racist grandparents amended the Ten Commandments to support racism or something so that their religion compels them to not help in any way. It's absolute BS even according to their own scripture.

As I've heard it being mentioned here(?), the Ten Commandments are actually "The Ten Suggestions" subject to personal/regional interpretations that align with one's upbringing.

 

[Sunburn74]

In like 20 years mississippi alongst with a handful of other US states will essentially be uninhabitable. Almost certainly.

 

[Indus]

Chief Justice Roberts, RBG, Stephen G. Breyer. Sonia Sotomayor. Elena Kagan, All have integrity. And let's not forget good old self interest. There's no way Clarence Thomas would vote to overturn Loving vs. Virginia, since his wife is Caucasian, and he would immediately invalidate his own marriage of 40 years. That's a clear majority.

Maybe Clarence Thomas should realize his marriage isn’t welcome in the “ Christian faith of Mississippi “

 

[pmv]

A sufficiently-large difference in culture or ideology sometimes appears indistinguishable from a mental-health problem. I honestly struggle sometimes with the concept of mental-health, and how it is defined. People are _so_ different in terms of how their experiences have led them to see the world that the idea of sanity sometimes start to look like just a continuum or a subjective judgement. Seems like whether something is a mental health issue or not is ultimately just a matter of numbers (and perhaps power).

 

[ivwshane]

Pretty soon we'll have white Christian only drinking fountains and white Christian only restaurants. I'm pretty sure we already have white Christian only schools.

Thank god for Christians, otherwise we'd probably be living under sharia law by now.

 

[Viper1j]

Yep...discriminating on race will (and should) cost them dearly in federal court. Of course, with the current administration...that might not happen.

Trump can't pardon a monetary civil judgement for 20 million dollars.

I hate to say it, but based on the title of the thread, I was half expecting to see one of Trumps off the wall Tweets.

Don't feel bad.. I wake up every morning, and turn on the news to see if nukes are headed to New York.

 

[Viper1j]

Maybe Clarence Thomas should realize his marriage isn’t welcome in the “ Christian faith of Mississippi “

I would LOVE to see him book a 45th "renewing of their vows". there..

After refusing him, they find out who he is, when they get "disappeared".

 

[brycejones]

Pretty soon we'll have white evangelical Christian only drinking fountains and white evangelical Christian only restaurants. I'm pretty sure we already have white evangelical Christian only schools.

Thank god for white evangelical Christians, otherwise we'd probably be living under sharia law by now.

FTFY

 

[amenx]

What the hell do gay weddings have to do with mixed race weddings? Did they throw that in there to somehow mitigate their racism?

 

[Puffnstuff]

Pretty soon we'll have white Christian only drinking fountains and white Christian only restaurants. I'm pretty sure we already have white Christian only schools.

Thank god for Christians, otherwise we'd probably be living under sharia law by now.

It's important to understand that they're religious not Christian. This is the same situation that Jesus found himself in during his ministry. Religion had churches on every corner just like today preaching in the name of a God they didn't know because if they did then they would treat everyone with respect.

Jesus stated that straight is the gate and narrow is the path that leadeth unto life and FEW there be that find it. Bona fide Christians are the absolute minority period!

 

[zinfamous]

No it isn't. They ignorantly think that their racial bigotry is supported by their faith which, laughably, means I know more about their own religion than they do. The law does not say that they can discriminate against interracial couples... only homosexual couples, since that actually is a sin according to their religion.

Not if they're Christians. The only anti-homosexual scripture that you will find in the bible is in the Old Testament, with the old vengeful, bloodthirsty gods. Christians believe that Jesus returned and died to forgive humanity of all sins, and represents the New Testament of God--essentially, Jesus is god, and that came before is now done. Any laws of God prior to Jesus are obsolete if they conflict with teachings of Jesus.

The Old Testament is useful as a guide for life, but for Christians of faith, it has no theological relevance wrg to holy law, above and beyond the New Testament. (I think this is why evangelicals are way too into Revelations. It's the one batshit mushroom dream, oddly similar to the crazy shit going on in the OT, that is otherwise absent from the NT. Evangelicals need their dose of crazy to keep the logic hard buried where it conflicts with the holy voices they hear in their heads)

 

[zinfamous]

The fabrics thing pertains to the Hebrews. It's essentially saying "don't be vain by wearing showy stuff" not "it is a sin to wear 50% polyester." Still, I've met many orthodox Jews who take it seriously. Of course, they also do not mix meat and dairy simply because their scripture used the boiling of a calf in its mother's milk as a metaphors for sacrilege (wasn't literally saying they couldn't mix meat and dairy).

Either way, Christians aren't sacrificing doves and lambs and stuff while carrying around an Arc of the Covenant, so they know that the instructions for Hebrews/Israelites (God's "chosen people") don't quite pertain to them. If anything, not mixing fabrics means no fancy jewelry or make-up... nothing about interracial marriages. Are they going to refuse a wedding because the bride wore make-up and the groom had fancy gold cuff links?

It's just absolute BS. The Christian Bible and the Jewish Torah clearly support interracial marriage and no one deliberately misinterpreting those passages would be unaware of the parts that prove their interpretation wrong... which turns their false interpretation into an out-right lie...and that sin was so important it got it's own spot in the Ten Commandments.

You do realize, don't you, that the very same scripture was used to justify bans on interracial marriage by the majority of churches up until the 70s, don't you? Were they wrong then, or now? Why didn't they know they were wrong then? was scripture somehow wrong all those centuries, or is the whole thing just stupid?

 

[HomerJS]

Wait a second, isn't providing service to spooks violate these God fearing Christians religious liberty?

 

[HomerJS]

Thank God this couple aren't gay. In our all white Christian Trump world they can be fired from their jobs.

 

[Puffnstuff]

You do realize, don't you, that the very same scripture was used to justify bans on interracial marriage by the majority of churches up until the 70s, don't you? Were they wrong then, or now? Why didn't they know they were wrong then? was scripture somehow wrong all those centuries, or is the whole thing just stupid?

Jesus's sacrifice is the fulfillment of the law so if a person accepts the free gift of salvation provided by Jesus they are no longer under the law. Otherwise a person remains under the law which is what they will be judged by at the great white throne judgement.

 

[Ajay]

Not if they're Christians. The only anti-homosexual scripture that you will find in the bible is in the Old Testament, with the old vengeful, bloodthirsty gods. Christians believe that Jesus returned and died to forgive humanity of all sins, and represents the New Testament of God--essentially, Jesus is god, and that came before is now done. Any laws of God prior to Jesus are obsolete if they conflict with teachings of Jesus.

No, Paul calls out homosexual behavior in Romans, 1st Corinthians and 1st Timothy. Some people today think Paul was referring to the use of boy prostitutes but, IIRC, the early church fathers didn't see it this way. Jesus said he came to fufill the law (old test) not to abolish it. The disciples added clarification to this (such as laws about what could be eaten) - so it's not so straight forward as it seems. So while what @Puffnstuff said is true, obedience (love for) God requires us to try and live up to certain moral standards.

Of course, the racism bit is utter bullshit.

 

[ivwshane]

FTFY

To be fair, if we can lump all Muslims together then I don't see why we can't do that for Christians. I certainly haven't heard from any "good" Christians speaking out against evangelicals.

 

[fskimospy]

This is yet another example of why Hobby Lobby was one of the worst decisions in the history of SCOTUS. I see no reason why anyone can't exempt themselves from basically any US law, Civil Rights Act included, as long as they say whatever law is against their religion.

 

[Ajay]

This is yet another example of why Hobby Lobby was one of the worst decisions in the history of SCOTUS. I see no reason why anyone can't exempt themselves from basically any US law, Civil Rights Act included, as long as they say whatever law is against their religion.

There has to be some room for conscientious objection, but the bar has to be set pretty damn high.