Jackpot!
Country club religion strikes again. When I was growing up, I was made to understand by Christians that you don’t say “Jesus Christ” or “goddamn” because these things were sins against god forbidden in the 10 commandments by Mr. Grumpy McJealous Yahweh. But according to the religious right, “god”=them, and the reason not to use blasphemous curses is it hurts their fee-fees. The nuts whined that Chris Berman at ESPN uses terms forbidden in their interpretation of the Bible at work. (Not even sure if he says these words on TV.)
The coalition is concerned there exists at ESPN a “lack of sensitivity to persons of faith and a culture of religious intolerance.” To support this position view the link listed below showing ESPN anchor Chris Berman using the term “Jesus” and “Goddamn” in the workplace.
I’m fairly certain that most of the employees at ESPN refuse to “tolerate” every religion out there by following all the various restrictions of each and every religion on earth. In fact, the defense leagues of actual minority religions that suffer actual oppression have real concerns and don’t protest, say, the eating of pork or cutting of hair at major sports networks as “intolerance”. It appears that the Christians are full of shit, and in fact are grasping at any excuse so that they can demand that other people accept their cultural dominance by following arbitrary religious rules that we don’t even believe in. This is nothing new. See: abortion. Also, see this and this—classic examples of women getting theirs for having insufficient religious “tolerance” of the dominant, utterly non-oppressed religious group of the area.
But wait! The total lack of perspective gets even funnier, in a sick, dark way.
t is the goal of the Christian Defense Coalition to help ESPN realize the negative use of “Jesus Christ” and “Goddamn” in the workplace is as offense and hateful as using the term “nigger” in the workplace.
Notice how they’re not about to tread on their followers’ rights to use the word “nigger” at home? Out of all the wonderful things about this quote, that might have been my favorite. Obviously, refusing to follow some other believer’s arbitrary religious restrictions is not the same thing as calling an actual human being a name that references actual, real world oppression.
My guess at what’s going on here: The folks at this Christian Defense Coalition are furious that the truly oppressed are fighting back, and more distressingly, being taken seriously. They don’t consider the fight against actual oppression legitimate, so they’re figuring that if these socially inferior people should get to set a bunch of meany-headed rules, then by gum, they should get to set even more, genuinely meany-headed rules to restore the balance of power in their favor. If you’re going to make them pretend to be respectful to you as a fellow human being, they should get to force you to submit to their arbitrary religious rules so that they’re the top dogs once again.
That, or they really do think they’re god/Jesus Christ and have the right to feel personally insulted. Probably a bit of both, I’d imagine.
81 Responses to “Don’t use our, er, His name in vain!”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
It’s not so much that they are god/Jesus, but that they are the American office managers-licensed distributors of Christianity, Inc. and they have to protect the brand name. I mean if it were to go into the public domain, who knows what would happen?
So if I were to make it plain that to me “god” or “goddamn” is not their god, I should be off the hook, right?
(I think it’s more about enforcing random, pointless rules because that’s what their “ten commandments” say is law. It’s a foot in the door thing.)
So much for changing the channel if you don’t like what you hear.
So if I were to make it plain that to me “god” or “goddamn” is not their god, I should be off the hook, right?
One of my favorite things about Battlestar Galactica is the in-you-faceness of the polytheism, which I look at as a slap to people like these–a reminder that not everyone shares their particular and limited view of deism.
Fuck `em all.
The Ten Commandments injunction against taking the Lord’s name in vain has nothing to do with using the words “God” or “Jesus” as curses.
It prohibits speaking for God, and religious leaders violate it constantly.
I wonder how they would feel about ‘godess’ as an explicative?
Hmmm… So unless He starts speaking for Himself, things should be pretty quiet in Jesusland, huh? I like it…
I hate the Christian Defense Coalition for making me side with Chris Berman.
Obviously, refusing to follow some other believer’s arbitrary religious restrictions is not the same thing as calling an actual human being a name that references actual, real world oppression.
If only this were so obvious to most people. Unfortunately, the rhetoric of the culture wars has been appropriated by the right, and they’ve realized that multiculturalism, identity politics, and moral relativism can be used to their advantage at least as much as they ever worked to the advantage of the left.
Christians in America actually believe that they’re oppressed. Amazing, I know. But once you get that kernel of belief in there, it sustains itself: if a handful of Christians believe they’re being treated unfairly, they start making ludicrous statements like this, which get justly ridiculed in the press, which further confirm the Christians’ victim complex, which makes them even more militant in their rhetoric and their demands for power, which makes them say even more crazy shit, and so on. This cycle has been going on for long enough that the press has actually backed far, far away from its reasonably moderate position of 30 years ago, and now only registers skepticism about truly over-the-top shit. It has listened to the batshit rhetoric of Christian victimization for so long that it has internalized it. This is a structural problem with the news media in the modern age: the story “Christians still crazy” doesn’t sell a lot of papers (er, I mean “boost your ratings”… I live in an imaginary world where people read the news), so eventually you start tinkering with the “… or Are They?” stories, and it all goes to shit from there.
Most Americans have internalized the most superficial notions behind multiculturalism and post-colonialism, but have not adopted any useful metric for distinguishing between real oppression and imaginary oppression. Many of the partisans of the multiculturalism movement of the 1990s contributed to this problem, of course, by equating trivial inconveniences with horrific atrocities, or by making overly broad claims about cultural relativism that amounted to nihilism. The news media contributed to the problem by cherry-picking those activists making the most ridiculous claims, as they made for better copy. (I mean, “better sound bites”.) But the problem is here, and it’s not going to go away until the left makes a concerted effort to back away from the language of cultural relativism and instead adopts a positive ideology that posits a liberal “culture” of reason and egalitarianism that trumps other cultures, e.g. any culture founded on religious superstition, patriarchy, racism, etc. This means hurting the feelings of a lot of people who are attached to their “culture”, whether they grew up in Alabama or Shanghai. But it’s the only way forward for the left unless they want the religious nuts to keep eating their lunch.
Tell that to MSNBC and David Shuster…
Goat: I agree. I’d rather get a moratorium in ON-AIR blatherings, like “New York Football Giants,” “rumbling, stumbling, bumbling,” any approximation of a Curly Howard “Whoop” when a ball is fumbled, and Keyshawn Johnson.
Did anyone else hear a troll mumble something?…
“I’m fairly certain that most of the employees at ESPN refuse to “tolerate” every religion out there by following all the various restrictions of each and every religion on earth.”
…and I’m fairly certain that if you TRIED to follow all the restrictions of every religion out there, you wouldn’t be able to do anything, say anything, eat anything, etc.
The various religions are inherently incompatible with each other. This constant possibility/availability of friction has been a goldmine for those to whom religious belief is just another powerful tool for accruing and using power, and manipulating people on a grand scale…
I think maybe I was midunderstood, I simply meant that they would probably take as much offense, or more at one saying godess even though they don’t believe in, or have, a goddess. So it’s not just using their god’s name, but any name or word they don’t like becomes offensive and inappropriate.
Great fucking Christ on a cracker, is that statement hard to believe.I still can’t quite go for the “Country Club religion” characterization, because it has class connotations that are misplaced … I just can’t see a bunch of fundies wearing ascots and smoking cigars on the 17th green … might I suggest “The Bowling League religion”?
/rank snobbery
I wonder how they would feel about ‘godess’ as an explicative?
My favorite imprecation is GoddessLadyMother. I roll it all together and at the top of my lungs. It’s fun, try it!
I was told that the injunction was against swearing in God’s name you would do something that you have no intention of following through on. (As in, I swear to God, if the Republicans win the presidency again, I’m moving to Canada!) And it was a rabbi who told me that. And while the rabbi certainly was not a Christian, I think we’re talking about the same commandment in the same book. So they are wrong for all the reasons described in the post. But I think they’re also wrong on their own terms.
How about using “the Lord’s name” to hornswaggle a bunch of dumb suckers out of enough money to buy a 20,000-square-foot Mediterranean mansion in Florida and a rambling compound in Palm Desert, California? Wouldn’t that be taking “the Lord’s name” in vain?
Oh, never mind. I’m, alas, unconvincing as a moral scold. It’s more fun just to say godfuckingdammit.
They wouldn’t be offended because someone was taking the goddess’ name in vain. They’d be offended at the implication that someone believes in the goddess. They’d be horrified that someone would say the word “goddess” on national television where it might corrupt their children.
So you mean that in order to stop offending secular humanists (who have been identified as a religion by fundie nutjobs since the 80s) these folks will cease all mention of “God’s will” or “creation” or “the Almighty” anywhere in public? I think I might take that deal.
Sort of what Matt said above at #10.
The more sophisticated of the Christianist leaders have realized that claims of particular speech or behavior being an “offense against God” no longer carry sufficient weight in the current culture. It’s progress, of a sort. While the underlying attempt to assert control is still the same, they can’t just go whine to the FCC that someone’s being blasphemous and get them shut down. Instead they have to assert that the offense is against them as believers.
Allowing their complaints to stand could be really great, because it opens the door to the rest of us complaining about Christians displaying insufficient reverence toward Disco Balls and spaghetti.
Sporting events (and fans) are just about designed to offend the religious!
Just look at the eating of hot dogs at a friday baseball games:
eating pork (Judiasm, Islam)
eating beef (Hinduism)
eating meat (Buddhism)
eating meat on Friday (Catholic)
eating hot dog buns (Discordianism)
Give it up, sports fans! Think of the hot dog buns!
Wouldn’t that be taking “the Lord’s name” in vain?
I believe that would taking the the Lord’s name for profit.
Jesus Christ this blog is hypocrtical. I’m sure you call Muslims nuts every time they make infinitely more ridiculous demands like preventing people from getting in their cabs with booze or, I dunno, giving up our Freedom of Speech and Press. They aren’t nutcases…they are oppressed!
“I’m sure you call Muslims nuts every time they make infinitely more ridiculous demands like preventing people from getting in their cabs with booze or, I dunno, giving up our Freedom of Speech and Press.”
Of course not! We only believe in oppressing nice, white, christian, middle-class Americans.
Opps, I forgot to add MALE to that list.
We’re all about the dhimmitude…
***
Look, asshole. Have you ever actually, you know, READ THIS BLOG?
I’m sure you’ll find plenty to offend, but mindlessly supporting religionist’s need to oppress other people isn’t one of them…
FreddyBak, that’s pretty funny, considering that the Persepolis thread disintegrated (almost instantaneously) into accusations that Pandagon was a tool of military-imperialist agression by pointing out that Iran is not a feminist paradise.
FreddyBak - they are nutcases. They are also relatively powerless in the USA, so not worth a whole lot of time and energy. The fundies, OTOH, have one of their own in the Oval Office, and likely will be running another of their own for the veep spot in November.
On another tangent - Given that ESPN regularly uses the word “Redskins,” there’s worrying about an indirect offense to some Christians is a little silly. Perhaps we could get an NFL team to change their name to “Goddam” or “Messiah.”
“I still can’t quite go for the “Country Club religion” characterization, because it has class connotations that are misplaced”
But there is the aspect of “belonging” to a privileged group … or of being “good enough” (or rich enough)” to join … (as in, “We don’t allow ‘those types’ here”).
Maybe this analogy applies more to individual churches and their memberships, rather than to Christianity as a whole.
we’re all screwed, haven’t we realized that yet?
Nice to see you’ve dropped the “fundie” qualifier (as well as any pretense of civility).
Can I still drop a letter into the office out-mailbox addressed to my sister, who lives on “Jesus Maria Road”?
(seriously! I just LOVE that)
Neil Armstrong: “Jesus Christ in goddamn chicken basket, I’m on the fucking moon!”
On another tangent - Given that ESPN regularly uses the word “Redskins,” there’s worrying about an indirect offense to some Christians is a little silly.
Some of my favorite names for non-existent sports teams: New York Hebes, Memphis Darkies. I mean, if we can call one team Redskins and another Braves, why not?
I still can’t quite go for the “Country Club religion” characterization, because it has class connotations that are misplaced
How so? The whole point of the evangelical mindset is to create an elite based on “salvation”. Why blanch at calling them out on their bullshit elitism?
norbizness: Can we also add (in a John Facenda voice) “the fronzen tundra of Lambeau Field?”
Well, I prefer to use the term ‘god-botherer’. And I can’t speak for Amanda, but it’s my policy to show them the same degree of civility as they usually grant atheists. Which is to say, very little.
That reminds me of a game we used to play, making up names for non-existent British makes of car, such as the ‘Hillman Hitler’ and the ‘Morris Moseley’.
Amanda, don’t talk bad about the woo, and especially don’t call it woo. It’s not nice.
I do remember talking to my dad about the Redskins team name, and we agreed that that was bad, but I wasn’t sure why “Indians” was bad - it’s at least not a slur, right? He just had to say “imagine the New York Jews - how would that feel” and I figured it out
They complain about using Jesus? What if a player’s name is Jesus? Is that a problem? Or do they not notice it since it’s usually a Latin American player and so pronounced differently?
Yuri, Cleveland Indians isn’t bad by itself (they’re actually named in honor of an Indian), but look at the mascot.
Seroj & Chico: Way to totally miss the point of Amanda’s post.
Amanda,
I got ya — I understand you mean “Country Club” in the sense of “elite” — and “elite” in the sense of “the elect.” Believe me, I don’t blanch at calling these fools out. It’s just that the phrase “Country Club” calls to mind imagery of upper-class Connecticut WASPs. When I hear “Country Club religion” I think of patrician half-hearted believers who belong to a church primarily as a wealthy social networking club. (Conveniently, there’s been a word coined for that: Episcopalian.)
To me,”Country Club” connotes comfortable leisure more than exclusivity. (That’s why the Coast Guard, rather than the Marines, is “the Country Club branch.”)
I was just being peevish. Hey, it was a good cup of coffee.
Another thing: there are a lot of Christians (I don’t know how the percentages break down) who take the view that the whole “taking the Lord’s name in vain” does not refer to simple casual use of the words, but to keeping oaths sworn to the Lord’s name. This is also the interpretation more supported by Biblical historians as being closest to the intent of the writers/redacters. So the complainers in this case are really trying to force everyone to follow their own rules, not even their religion’s.
So the complainers in this case are really trying to force everyone to follow their own rules, not even their religion’s.
No, they are. Religions are created by people. Religions are what people do and believe. They are not some pre-cultural, pre-social things. There is no core to any of them beyond what people who are part of them create.
JohnL, that named after an Indian (Louis Sockalexis) thing is just a myth drummed up years after the fact by Cleveland’s PR people. I know whereof I speak–unfortunately I’m a fan of said baseball team (although non-Chief Wahoo apparel is rather hard to come by).
Jesus H. Tapdancing Christ taking a day off of his pog0 stick…
do these goddamned wingnuts not know that, much as they wish it were, this is not a theocracy, therefore any one of us who no longer subscribes to the doctrine of a perpetually cranky celestial grandfather can blaspheme all we want?
In my experience, Christianity is terribly concerned with what you do and what you think *particularly* if you are not a believer. After all, *believers* do not break the Baby Jesus’ heart with their godless ways. They do not make Mary cry.
This is something that is almost exclusively the activity of the unconverted. Which is kinda funny since, you know, they don’t believe.
But consider: Christianity has a *terrible* track record when it comes to dissent. Whereas (for example) both Islam and Judaism both have councils of religious leaders who come together to reach agreements, what few councils exist in the Christian sphere are accorded little respect or authority. Frequently, those participating are suspected of diluting their own faith in order to “get along” and thus supposedly “endangering their souls” in the process. It is very much an insecure religion, and always has been.
I see this type of behavior (and our new pet trolls) as par for the course, sadly.
“In my experience, Christianity is terribly concerned with what you do and what you think *particularly* if you are not a believer. After all, *believers* do not break the Baby Jesus’ heart with their godless ways. They do not make Mary cry.”
That is true, and I think it stems from their disappointment. Jesus hasn’t come back for them yet, so that must mean there’s still be too many heathens who haven’t joined the christian team…
I don’t think we missed it at all. One the one hand, as customers (e.g., viewers) we have every right to complain about content we find offensive. On the other hand, if you don’t like it, change the channel.
As usual, you want it both ways. Sorry, but you can’t.
Goat, I really should use wikipedia. It actually says that it isn’t completely a myth. The team name was decided on with the help of newspapers. And, which probably had nothing to do with the naming, an earlier Cleveland team was sometimes informally known as the Indians because of Sockalexis.
Ok, I really should just say I was wrong.
I wonder what Jacoby Ellsbury (part of the Navajo tribe) really thought of the Indians mascot (he, of course, said it didn’t bother him)?
Oh Seroj. You do realize that mastering the art of being a truly Oppressed *MAJORITY* is a goal that few even aspire to, let alone rock the way Christianity in America does.
Freddy, see above. We are proud members of the global jihadist conspiracy.
Nice to see you’ve dropped the “fundie” qualifier (as well as any pretense of civility).
You’re right. I should return to using “godbag”.
JohnL, the Cleveland baseball franchise was, at one time, interested in acquiring Ellsbury. Mark Shapiro, Cleveland’s GM, actually discussed with Ellsbury whether or not he would have a problem playing for a team represented by such a mascot. I think this speaks volumes about even the front office being uncomfortable with that grinning, racist, idiot.
A friend of mine named his kitten Jesus (as in ‘Jee-sus’). However, he soon found out what a complete mindfuck that was, calling Jesus in from the yard for food. The Jewish students he was living with starting pronouncing the name the Spanish way, so that’s what Jesus became.
Lovely cat, too. Died a few years back.
When I used to work in sales, we had a saying: “The customer is King, but we’re a Republic.”
Snarki, Discordianism isn’t new, but let me clear up a litlte confusion for you: Jews and Muslims aren’t offended at “the eating of pork”. That’s why you don’t see pickets outside Smithfield Hams. The fact that we aren’t allowed to do something doesn’t mean we care if you do it.
Anyone want to take bets on the Christianist Defense Coalition’s position on using “faggot” in the workplace?
Anyone want to take bets on the Christianist Defense Coalition’s position on using “faggot” in the workplace?
How about the use of the word nigger for that matter? I almost spit out my peanut butter sandwich I was chewing when I read that. Thank god it was stuck to the roof of my mouth or else I’d be scrubbing my computer screen.
What is it with people comparing their half assed plights to the plight of people who actually suffered? These Christians compare saying “Jesus Christ” just SAYING it, to referring to a black person as a nigger? It’s not like people are walking up to someone going, “Hey, Jesus Christ,” or, “That god needs to learn his place,” or, “Stop acting like such a Jesus Christ,” and using it as a racial slur,it’s an EXPRESSION.
How the hell do they even begin to make that leap? I would try but I don’t want my nose to bleed…
I’d hate to think of what they’d say about people who take the lord’s name in vain during sex…
But hey, look at them crazy Muslims for going batshit at folks drawing cartoons of Mohammed! All good conservatives must stand shoulder to shoulder with the Danes for freedom of speech!
They probably would prefer you use dogwhistle words to actually saying “nigger”. Better for the PR.
What’s especially stupid is that, as already noted, taking God’s name in vain is not about swearing. It means you don’t call on God as if God spoke for you, for example to back up an oath. (Remember that back in Ye Ancient Tymes, names were very, very powerful.)
Jesus, on the other hand, was very clear that name-calling and insulting others is a very serious no-no. As in, you and your foul mouth go to the Big Crispy unless you apologize and make amends.
That reminds me of a game we used to play, making up names for non-existent British makes of car, such as the ‘Hillman Hitler’ and the ‘Morris Moseley’.
Lotus Blossom? Jenson Tonic?
Could I drive an Austin Powers? Hey, this is fun…
Surprised no one’s used “Jesus H Bloody Christ on a popsicle stick”- the pogo stick was close, though. When I was a kid, we used to say “Jeezum Crow!”- got in a mess of trouble from my “atheist/ but always worried about appearences” father one day on THAT one.
Re: sports teams… Old Town, just north of Bangor, was always the “Old Town Indians”. It always made sense in a way; the Penobscot Indians have a large reservation (Indian Island) in Old Town. But pressure was put on in the last few years, so the school changed their mascot to the “Coyotes”. And in western Maine, what was “Squaw Mountain” for hundreds of years is now “Moose Mountain”.
I’m a long term Tottenham Hotspur fan. Spurs have for many long been regarded as London’s Jewish team, to the point where opposing fans started referring to us as “The Yids”. This has been going on since the 1960s. Well, you know what happens when folks call you names; you tend to appropriate them. So as White Hart Lane we chant “Yids” back at the opposition, and hail our heroes with cries of “Yiddo”.
Lee, as an Arsenal fan, I hate to agree with you about something, but I’ve been advocating that the US National Team call themselves the Gringoes, as Mexico disparagingly calls us. It’s different, however, if someone else applies the nickname which is why a reservation hight school team calling themselves the Indians is entirely different from a non-Indian high school calling themselves the Braves, or Indians, or Redskins.
Lee, by the way, thanks for drawing ManU.
I don’t know who I hate more. Them or your lot.
Hey, at least they don’t burn us at the stake anymore for heresy and apostasy
. Wait, what is that, ohmigod, no I mean omigosh, noooo…. *in exceptionally bad taste.
Also “Mr. Grumpy McJealous Yahweh” = genius.
Hey Goat!
I was cursed to grow up in northern Ohio, so I am also an Indians fan.
Love the franchise: hate the name: really, really hate the logo!
Maybe they could go back to being the Spiders?
Almost anything — except Buckeyes. I don’t care if it was the name of the old Negro League team from Cleveland. One professional sports team from Ohio named Buckeyes is enough…
So let me get this straight: I can go on the 700 Club and say that a person who does something I don’t like will be consigned to hell for an eternity of torment, and that’s just a peachy-keen and totally Christian thing to do, but if I say “goddamn” on SportsCenter it’s the equivalent of burning down a church?
Exactly how the fuck does that work?
Hey Illogical,
I’m originally from Youngstown, went to Miami University when they switched from the Redskins to the RedHawks and now I’m in graduate school at Illinois which recently retired the dancing idiot Chief Illiniwek so I have a little bit of experience with racist mascots. I agree that Cleveland should go back to the Spiders with an old timey “C” logo (like the Reds and Chicago Bears) superimposed over an outline of a Spider (like the University of Richmond’s logo). I’m sure they’d make tons of money by switching (although I’m also sure there’d be a tremendous backlash). When I went to Miami, alums threatened to stop giving to the university if it changed nicknames. People were worried that funds would dry up. After the switch, donations actually went up.
Sophist,
He didn’t say goddamn on the air. It was just a rant during a commercial break.
Lee,
How can you hate something so pretty as Arsenal football*?
*does not apply to Christiano Ronaldo
does not apply to Christiano Ronaldo
Someone needs to stomp on and fracture that flopper’s shins.
This is why the US Commission on Civil Rights has been stacked with Republicans and spending its time protecting Christians from persecution instead of, you know, handling the resurgent threats of lynching–lynching, ca. 2007?– taking place these days.
For a good time, see the office of the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights.
These are matters of religion. We are Godly folk and you are Malignants.
I remember years ago that Tiger hit a ball badly and yelled, “FUCK!”- the annuncers simply said that tempers were running high and drove on…
As for cats- I tend to name the local strays that show up Ernesto, Che, Fidel, Chavez, etc. More fun to yell on the front deck at dinnertime.
To me,”Country Club” connotes comfortable leisure more than exclusivity. (That’s why the Coast Guard, rather than the Marines, is “the Country Club branch.”)
I don’t know what Coast Guard you served in, but the one I served in provided anything but “comfortable leisure.”
Unless you consider fighting shipboard fires on 20-foot seas or pulling Haitian migrants out of shark-infested waters in the middle of the night or jumping out of a helicopter to rescue a hapless pleasure boater who got caught in a storm “comfortable leisure.” I sure don’t, but maybe my dictionary is different from yours.
(Full disclosure: I never actually did that third thing. But lots of my friends did.)
Not slammin’ on the Coast Guard. Work buddies who were in the Marines call it that. They disparage the Navy even more, for whatever reason. Don’t ask me.
I’m honestly sorry if I caused offense.
Naw, Godmonkey, it’s just been one of those days. I’ve been taking a lot of shit today from people for things that are mostly their own fault. Sorry for the overreaction.
The funny thing is, we got along great with the Marines we used to ship around. The CG had a lot in common with the Corps, in that they were both smaller branches of the service that were designed for rapid deployment. Yes, their missions were very different, but for whatever reason that never came up.
And we *all* hated the Navy in their pretty white costumes with their fishbowl hats. So maybe that was what united us.
Louise, thank you. Once I achieve cat-lady status, I will now have some very good names
Yeah, that’s how I learned it too, back in my church-goin’ days. The groups/churches I belonged to were really into “The REAL Real Meaning of Those Biblical Texts” or whatever…..
Which makes George Dubya Bush not only an oathbreaker but a blasphemer, too. He’s breaking one of those Sacred-N-Holy Ten Commandments he says he loves so much. After all, didn’t he make a big production of swearing the Presidential Oath of Office on a Bible? You know, the one where he said he does “…solemnly swear that I will …. to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” ?
Ooops.
(dang unclosed tags…..)
He also swore his oath “so help me God.”