Tennessee Bill Would Give Anti-Bullying Laws A ‘Religious And Political Beliefs’ Loophole

[babylonsister]

Tennessee Bill Would Give Anti-Bullying Laws A ‘Religious And Political Beliefs’ Loophole
Jillian Rayfield January 4, 2012, 1:33 PM 7006 43


A proposed bill in Tennessee would create a loophole in the state’s anti-bullying laws to protect those expressing religious, philosophical or political beliefs, which one proponent says would ensure that people can still express their “views on homosexuality.”

The proposed bill would amend the state’s current anti-bullying laws to specify that the anti-bully policy should “not be construed or interpreted to infringe upon the First Amendment rights of students and shall not prohibit their expression of religious, philosophical, or political views” as long as there’s no physical threat or threat to another student’s property.

David Fowler, a former Republican state Senator and current Christian activist, is pushing for the legislature to take up the bill in the new year after it stalled before the end of the last session. According to the Chattanooga Times Free Press, Fowler sent out a newsletter for his group the Family Action Council of Tennessee (FACT) in December that said he wants “to make sure {the law} protects the religious liberty and free speech rights of students who want to express their views on homosexuality.”

more...

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/01/tn_bill_would_give_anti-bullying_laws_a_religious.php?ref=fpb

[spanone]

1. my state of tennessee is returning to neanderthal times

this is what you get with a republican house, senate and governor

[eShirl]

2. why stop at bullying? Why not a religious/political clause for rape or murder?

After all, "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live," right?

[lolly]

4. They are, of course, too irony-impaired to notice this

But the idea of using Christianity to justify bullying--to the point of carving out an exception for it--is beyond ridiculous. Even blasphemous.

WWJB?

(Who would Jesus Bully?)

[justiceischeap]

3. Then we should arm gay students with the following scriptures from the bible

Some Christians confidently assert that God did not create homosexual people "that way." This is important because they realize if God did create gays "that way," rejecting them would be tantamount to rejecting God’s work in creation. In pressing their “creation order” argument, some Christians are fond of saying, "God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!" To bolster their position, they often cite Jesus’ words in Matthew 19:4-5, where he responds to a question about whether divorce is permissible:

“Jesus answered, ‘Have you not read that the One who made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh”? Therefore, what God has joined together, let no one separate.’ ”

From these words, some Christians draw the conclusion that heterosexuality is the creation norm and, thus, heterosexual marriage is the only legitimate way for people to form romantic relationships. Ironically, Jesus’ own words in this very same passage refute these conclusions.

As the dialogue continues, Jesus’ disciples are disturbed by his strict teaching on divorce. The disciples say that if divorce is not a ready option, perhaps it would be best for a man not to marry a woman. Jesus responds:

“Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.” (Matthew 19:11-12)

Here Jesus identifies three classes of men who should not marry women.

http://bit.ly/xRVJGS

Ancient text using "born eunuch" often referred to effeminate men (i.e. homosexuals). So Jesus contends that some men are born gay and, wow, doesn't condemn them.

“When David had finished speaking to Saul, the soul of Jonathan was bound to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul. Saul took him that day and would not let him return to his father’s house. Then Jonathan made a covenant with David, because he loved him as his own soul. Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that he was wearing, and gave it to David, and his armor, and even his sword and his bow and his belt.” (1 Samuel 18:1-4)

“David rose from beside the stone heap and prostrated himself with his face to the ground. He bowed three times and they kissed each other and wept with each other; David wept the more. Then Jonathan said to David, ‘Go in peace, since both of us have sworn in the name of the Lord, saying, “The Lord shall be between me and you, and between my descendants and your descendants, forever.” ’ He got up and left; and Jonathan went into the city.” (1 Samuel 20:41-42)

http://bit.ly/AdgxrC

Apparently, the story of David & Jonathan is considered a great love story from the bible, who knew? And it can be argued the bible celebrates their relationship.

“Do not press me to leave you or to turn back from following you! Where you go, I will go; where you lodge I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God my God. Where you die, I will die — there will I be buried. May the Lord do thus and so to me, and more as well, if even death parts me from you!” (Ruth 1:16-17)

http://bit.ly/AgCMk1

I think most everyone knows the story of Naomi and Ruth and many Christians even admit that the love they shared was a great love... those are probably the most used vows in wedding ceremonies.

So, if they want to use religious language to bully kids, let the kids that are being bullied have some ammunition to fight back with.

[msongs]

5. germany had laws with that effect in the 1930's. religion is a curse nt