things to come...
In case you were wondering what kinds of things are coming under the new House Leadership, here is a quote from Representative Shimkus regarding global warming, or, more appropriately, why it isn't real:
While this isn't theocracy in the definite sense of the word, it does strike me as an affront on reason and the separation of church and State that this guy uses his theological beliefs to dismiss the scientific arguments of those who are testifying. Actually, in all fairness, he brought up this argument because for some reason the House felt the need to have someone speak on behalf of the "Council of Lutheran Churches" in favor of action on global warming. So, his argument was against the Bishop who was speaking. He was basically trying to undercut the Bishop's testimony (that if global warming affects the poorest of the poor and the marginalized, then we have a moral obligation to combat it) by arguing that the Bishop was theologically incorrect in even believing global warming was real.
It is ridiculous that this is part of the national, political discourse in the US. Now, people like this Representative will be making policy for the Country. Let us hope his knowledge of the bible is exceeded by his knowledge of the Constitution since he is, after all, a legislator and not a pastor.
The earth will end only when God declares it is time to be over. Man will not destroy this earth. This earth will not be destroyed by a flood.It is here in lines 233-245 that he makes this argument.
While this isn't theocracy in the definite sense of the word, it does strike me as an affront on reason and the separation of church and State that this guy uses his theological beliefs to dismiss the scientific arguments of those who are testifying. Actually, in all fairness, he brought up this argument because for some reason the House felt the need to have someone speak on behalf of the "Council of Lutheran Churches" in favor of action on global warming. So, his argument was against the Bishop who was speaking. He was basically trying to undercut the Bishop's testimony (that if global warming affects the poorest of the poor and the marginalized, then we have a moral obligation to combat it) by arguing that the Bishop was theologically incorrect in even believing global warming was real.
It is ridiculous that this is part of the national, political discourse in the US. Now, people like this Representative will be making policy for the Country. Let us hope his knowledge of the bible is exceeded by his knowledge of the Constitution since he is, after all, a legislator and not a pastor.
posted by Adam at 11:06 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home