Is the Bible 100% Correct?

authority and claiming it is divinely inspired. Even worse, the resolution calls for the Bible to be placed prominently in all public buildings, including schools, and give it a reverend from state laws and policies, currently law declaring the Kingship

of Jesus Christ as being advanced to North Dakota. Of course, these resolutions are totally unconstitutional and hopefully won't hold up in court, but it seems at least some of the state government GOP leaders have recognized this as well, because they seem to be shuffling this bill around so it

doesn't gain any traction in any of the committees. Now, if it does manage to get past one of these committees, it will head to the ballot box and be voted on in twenty twenty six to see if the state's residents are willing to defy the US Constitution and codify this resolution into state law. So this will be an interesting vote to keep an eye on in the future. This story is from The Wild Hunt by Many moreto and Many Tejeda, published on March fourth, twenty twenty five.

they were going to do. So what they do instead is, well, hey, you know, the majority of our voters are Christians, so let's pass a Christian law to get them all back on our side, because as long as we keep doing that, they will keep voting for us, even if we don't solve any of their problems.

those statements do not hold up against reality. If I don't know what definition of true we're using, but mine is that which comports with reality, and the book doesn't comport with reality. So this, this statement is just a flat out lie. It is simply untrue, and they know it is untrue. If you look, America isn't a land where kings exist. If you vote to inaugurate Jesus this guy as the king of America, you have now voted for not having America anymore. If you vote to to

heighten a certain religious text above all others. Okay, well, that's directly flies in the face of the First Amendment. You have now voted to not have America anymore. It's it's pretty flat out and simple. And either of these laws, either of these ideas, are just voting because you don't like America. You don't want America to exist, you want some sort of theocratic regime. You don't like America.

you said, love thy neighbor. Jesus is reported to have said that I think that's not bad, Like, okay, yeah, if your neighbor is a dick, like I'm not going to hold you to that, Like, don't you don't have to be super kind to your neighbor if your neighbor's a dick. Like I think there's different Like there's subjective morality, and there's different ways to look at different situations, and what is the most moral choice is going to be primarily subjective, not only to the circumstances, but to the

individuals involved. So to as Tracy said, to name one religious code as the moral authority for all of a nation and not just that religious group is a direct violation of the establishment clause. And not only that, but I really really want to know where they're getting the idea that the Bible is morally good, because it's it's the construably not.

versus politics. And I think that we can have discussions even within religious institutions where we're talking about the establaged to clause and using like one book to say like this is the moral authority of but that everybody should be following. And I think those nuances are really really important. We're having this conversation because like, if you get your morals from the Bible, great, good for you. Great, I'm

a question why. But even if you're fram of your morals within a religious context, as long as you're have compassionate kindness for your fellow human being, I'm not going to poopoo on you. But when you start saying like the Bible has to be the moral authority for us the rest of us dirty heathens and people that don't particularly follow that religion, whether you're atheist or not, I'm going to have some quibbles and I'm probably gonna throw my hands up and go, hold on, why are you

saying this particular book has to be correct? So, Tracy, do you think the Bible should be the ultimate authority on morality? Obviously, I'm I I kind of already know your answer, But following that up, what do you think other states are going to follow suit? And what happens if we try to codify the Bible, Like are we going to go back to like stoning people on Sunday

for working on the Stabbath? Like what is the actual outcome of us if we're going to actually say that this is the moral authority of how people should behave well.

basic concept. If you move into a primarily Jewish neighborhood. You are still allowed to eat pork. If you move to Utah, which is primarily you know, the where the US, where the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints is. You do not need to revere the con man Joseph Smith. And if you and just because you live in America does not mean you need to revere an iron age, mytho, history, sex manual, and cookbook. It's that plain, flat out and simple.

This is a country for all people, not just the group of people that some, not just the most populous. It's a group for everyone.

We got mandatory teaching of the Bible and Oklahoma publicsouls. We got that Jesus is King of the USA or some other weird shit going out of North Dakota right now. And a lot of these bills just aren't really getting passed. They're getting put put in, but a lot of them aren't getting passed because the GOP leadership realizes that in the end this is not going to get them votes.

There there's a small group of radical people within the GOP that thinks the entire country thinks the same way they do, and they need to be slapped out and shown that the country doesn't. And that's why we're seeing like this bill is just getting passed around in committees, so eventually it's going to die somewhere and these but the party leadership knows that these down ballot races are

really hurting them with these with this kind of legislation. Sure, people are going to vote for the guy at the top because there's a cult of personality built around them, but as we've just seen in the last election, that is not always carrying down carrying through to the down ballot races, and a lot of the GOP leaders are afraid of that and they're trying to do something about it.

But we're still going to have these freaking crazy Christian nationalists that keep putting these bills in boom boom boom.

people throughout. But like, but that aside, that's not my point. It's it's that I do think that this is a performative measure. This is let's propose this, let's get it shut down. It's going to get shut down, and we know that, so then later on we can be like, well, we tried to do this, and we try to do this, but those liberals stopped us. And now if you don't, if you don't reelect us, then there's there. You have no hope, well your last hope, you know, we need.

So I think there's some element of that to it. But I also think that you can talk to almost any Christian about like the types of things they find moral and immoral, and there will come a point in which their opinion of what is morally good will diverge from what the Bible says, and you can point that out to them and you can say, look, you can tell like you, you agree that this is not a morally good thing, whereas it does say it is a morally good thing here in the Bible, or vice versa.

You think this is not morally bad, but the Bible says that it is. So you know that you don't get your morality from the Bible. That is an example of you having some morality that is distinct from what God says. Yet you, like those people who have that opinion, will still insist that they get their morality from the Bible. And I don't understand what the benefit is of of knowing that this is not your source of information, but insisting that it is and insisting that you maintain with it.

That's it's something that it's not a logical process that I can follow.

And also again our constitution. So there's no sane reality where this stays and is actually observed. There's no sane reality where that happened.

that are on gone now. They're all gone because we couldn't figure out what porn was, right, I think there was was it a US representative senator or a senator that I don't remember who it was that said, you know porn when you see it? And that was it. How do you talk about a law no porn when you see it? And that's that's you're kind of in that same situation. How do you know sin when you see it? And and so how do we codify what sin is? How do we codify with what religion what

religion is? We just can't do it. You know, we just can't. So I don't think we're gonna hopefully, we will see all of these laws eventually get struck down. They may even get through some of the local courts, they may even get through state courts, but I don't think in the long run they're going to be They're

going to hold up in federal courts. And I want to point out that we not only have a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, but we have a Catholic majority on the Supreme Court as well, and a lot of these Protestant evangelical zalet Ze laws are not going to get past that Catholic majority. I really don't think they will.

it punishable to in some contexts to say otherwise. So I think whether it is for smoke and mirrors, whether it is performative, or it is for like true effect that they think they want to achieve, I think we should be loud. I think we should you know, not just count on it to get struck down in the Supreme Court. Because even if I'm not sure that I have that I know enough to either agree or disagree with Kelly, So I'll just have to kind of defer

to you. But I think if I did hold the opinion that it's very likely to get struck down in the Supreme Court, I would still recommend being loud, because, like I mentioned earlier in the week, our silence can be used as a weapon against us. But also it's important to not allow the perception that things like this are acceptable, that advocating for laws and policies like this could have the potential to come into effect. Like, we shouldn't allow that perception at all.