Thad McCotter Cosponsors Resolution to Declare 2010 the Year of the Bible

Thought Experiment (4.00 / 2)

Anyone care to guess how the fourteen sponsors and cosponsors would react if someone tried to introduce a resolution declaring 2011 the Year of the Qur'an? Or the Year of the Popol Vuh?

---

by: boehmianrhapsody @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 17:51:16 PM UTC

It's a political trap. (4.00 / 1)

They're trying to make it look like Obama and the Dems hate the Bible because they know that Dems are going to be opposed to it simply because they want to keep church and state separate.

I say pass it, sign it into law, and then leave the Repugs with egg on their faces.

---

by: djtyg @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 18:53:57 PM UTC

I Don't Follow (4.00 / 1)

Obama should go along with a bad idea because it is a bad idea?

---

by: boehmianrhapsody @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 21:03:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Repugs.... (0.00 / 0)

are putting forth the bill in the hopes the Dems will kill it.  This way they can fuel the persecution complex that the radical right thrives on.  Just passing the thing will take away the fuel.

---

by: djtyg @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 03:41:11 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sorry (4.00 / 3)

That's not how you deal with things.  This is how the Dems got in trouble, before, by bowing to these little ploys.  Fact is, though, the thing's not going to make it out of committee, so there is nothing to worry about.  And, even if it did, you don't play their insane games.  Really, I thought we'd learned that, by now.

---

by: MiddleGrandGuy @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 09:19:55 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

We play their game... (0.00 / 0)

by fighting it.  They don't want it to pass.

---

by: djtyg @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 09:57:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Incentives at Work (4.00 / 4)

And then what happens when they introduce the Repeal the Income Tax Act or the Withdraw from the UN Act? If you pass bad bills, you encourage more bad bills.

If they push on this particular bill, the way to fight it is head on. Something along the following:

Over our nation's history, many people of faith have spoken up out of conscience in order to build a more just society. [Rattle off a few examples of Christian and non-Christian activists.] One of this country's strengths is the coming together of people with different faiths and perspectives to collectively forge a more perfect union. As a people, we owe a debt to the religious and non-religious texts that have fueled this process.

But this bill is not about celebrating that legacy. This bill is about elevating the authors' preferred religious text above others. In these ever-changing times, we need the voices of all people of conscience working together to advance our nation, not squabbling over the superiority of one text or another.

Et cetera.

And that's if the proponents even push for it.

---

by: boehmianrhapsody @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 11:21:54 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't even see why this is a bad bill. (0.00 / 0)

They could name 2010 the year of The Origin of Species, the Koran, the Talmud, and Shoeless Joe Jackson for all I care.  It's a meaningless piece of legislation and the only purpose for it being presented was to watch us get our panties in a bunch over it so we look like we're anti-religion.

I don't even get why anyone cares about this.  Yes, I know-separation of church and state-but meaningless legislation like this has gone through for decades and it hasn't taken away anyone's freedom to worship how they please.

I couldn't care less what happens to this bill.  I do care, however, that we're taking the right-wing bait and fueling the religious right's persecution complex.

---

by: djtyg @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 17:27:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

P.S. (0.00 / 0)

Buster made a good point below.  This thing has died in committee for years now.  We're freaking out over something that has no chance of passing.

Getting freaked out about it just gives it more attention.  Let it go so it can die a quiet death.

---

by: djtyg @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 17:29:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This will die a quiet death. (4.00 / 2)

It won't be brought forward, it won't pass, it will hardly make a sound. If McCotter et al. insist on harping on it, they will only sound more out of touch with what our concerns are than they already have.

---

by: memiller @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 22:40:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I must be missing something here.... (4.00 / 1)

but if RR declared 1983 as 'The National Year of the Bible', why do we need another one? How many years are required?

---

by: memiller @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 22:37:05 PM UTC

Stick (0.00 / 0)

Gotta make sure it sticks/holds, huh? lol  We wouldn't want to risk it wearing off, now would we. [/sarcasm]

---

by: MiddleGrandGuy @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 09:18:16 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

That... (0.00 / 0)

is what I came here to say.

---

by: Buster Vainamoinen @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 12:57:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

How many times will they wrongly predict the year of the Rapture? (0.00 / 0)

As I seem to remember, we've had at least three or four credible Rapture predictions since 1983.  Seems like we ought to get a few more of these declarations in just so we can remain on the right side of things, Apocalyptically speaking.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 18:24:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rapture Index (4.00 / 1)

The Rapture Index is currently at 164. This means it's coming soon.

---

by: rich @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 19:28:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Year(s) of the Bible (4.00 / 4)

110th Congress H. Con. Res. 284: Encouraging the President to proclaim 2008 as "The National Year of the Bible"
http://www.govtrack.us/congres...

109th Congress H. CON. RES. 431 Calling on the President to proclaim 2007 as the `National Year of the Bible'.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/...

101st Congress H.J.RES.275 Designating 1990 as the "International Year of Bible Reading".
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/...

97th Congress H.J.RES.487 "requesting the President to proclaim 1983 as the "Year of the Bible".
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/...

94th Congress H.J.RES.662 "declare November 23 through November 30, 1975, National Bible Week."
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/...

---

by: Buster Vainamoinen @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 16:39:03 PM UTC

Good research. n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: memiller @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 16:58:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

These things are introduced all the time (4.00 / 1)

As Buster just pointed out.  

It will go away quietly, buried in a sub-committee and Thad and his Klan will refer to it in their e-mails, newsletters and speeches as an accomplishment:

"I introduced a resolution...blah, blah".

It's just a way of currying favor with certain demographics without actually doing anything.  A sadly large chunk of Americans know diddily squat about the legislative process, so they think that introducing a resolution means something actually happened.  

 

---

by: DocHopper @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 17:35:56 PM UTC

And in Their Fundraising Letters Too (n/t) (4.00 / 3)

---

by: boehmianrhapsody @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 21:08:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Year of the Bible (0.00 / 0)

Enough already. It's already been done in 1983. Separation of church and state forever. There's a reason for that.  

---

by: riar @ Wed Dec 30, 2009 at 15:16:35 PM UTC