• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Someone should tell Republicans that violence is the last refuge of the incompetent, or possibly the first.

Since when do we limit our critiques to things we could do better ourselves?

If you thought you’d already seen people saying the stupidest things possible on the internet, prepare yourselves.

It may be funny to you motherfucker, but it’s not funny to me.

Republicans firmly believe having an abortion is a very personal, very private decision between a woman and J.D. Vance.

Every one of the “Roberts Six” lied to get on the court.

Republicans want to make it harder to vote and easier for them to cheat.

President Musk and Trump are both poorly raised, coddled 8 year old boys.

A thin legal pretext to veneer over their personal religious and political desires.

We’ve had enough carrots to last a lifetime. break out the sticks.

Imperialist aggressors must be defeated, or the whole world loses.

They want us to be overwhelmed and exhausted. Focus. Resist. Oppose.

When we show up, we win.

If you cannot answer whether trump lost the 2020 election, you are unfit for office.

Incompetence, fear, or corruption? why not all three?

Accused of treason; bitches about the ratings. I am in awe.

Dear Washington Post, you are the darkness now.

The Giant Orange Man Baby is having a bad day.

My right to basic bodily autonomy is not on the table. that’s the new deal.

Narcissists are always shocked to discover other people have agency.

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

Everybody saw this coming.

Nancy smash is sick of your bullshit.

There are consequences to being an arrogant, sullen prick.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Raising the Stakes

Raising the Stakes

by John Cole|  July 15, 200510:00 am| 8 Comments

This post is in: Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

The NYT also has this write-up about “Just Us” Sunday II:

Stepping up efforts to rally churchgoers for a Supreme Court confirmation battle, Christian conservatives are organizing a telecast to churches and religious broadcasters denouncing the Supreme Court as hostile to religion and families.

The event, scheduled for Aug. 14 and called Justice Sunday II after a similar telecast in April, will focus on “the court’s hostility toward religion and Christianity in particular,” said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council and the principal organizer of the event. Its subtitle is a prayer said each time the court meets: “God save the United States and this Honorable Court.”

The telecast was organized by some of the most influential conservative Christian supporters of the Bush administration after Justice Sandra Day O’Connor announced her retirement. But its organizers are evidently disregarding White House requests not to inject talk of a culture war into the debate over a Supreme Court nominee.

“People have to understand, this is not just about a process,” Mr. Perkins said. “This is about the future of the country, it is about our families, it is about the freedom of religion.”

Shorter Tony Perkins: ‘It’s for the children.’

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Senatorial Hijinks
Next Post: Just Some Perspective »

Reader Interactions

8Comments

  1. 1.

    Mr Furious

    July 15, 2005 at 10:33 am

    Shorter Mr. Furious: “Tony Perkins is a fucking jerkoff.”

  2. 2.

    Defense Guy

    July 15, 2005 at 11:02 am

    I don’t know who Tony Perkins is, so I can’t contest his status as to jerkoffedness. It seems to me that these people are entitled to have this conversation if they wish. There is nothing that states that individual citizens cannot seek to influence policy, even from the pulpit. There is also nothing that states that those who came to worship rather than play politics are not free to ignore the message.

    However, it may not be wise depending on your definition of the phrase ‘to Caesar what is Caesars and to G-d what is G-ds’ is.

  3. 3.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    July 15, 2005 at 12:32 pm

    “it is about the freedom of religion”

    You know using my fundamentalist translator that translates into: “it is aboutr the freedom of religion to take over the government”.

    Noone is arguing that they shouldn’t be able to do this Defense guy. But acting as if the courts are against people of faith is not only absurd, it is blantantly false and unfounded.

    The seperation of church and state has yet to be realized. If the courts are against anything, it is the idea of a complete separation of church and state, which is what this country was founded on.

    If these nuts get thier way, it will be done away with completely.

  4. 4.

    jcricket

    July 15, 2005 at 12:48 pm

    Posted outside of Just Us 2 is a sign that says Catholics need not apply

    So not only do the nut-jobs want an official religion, it’s a narrow brand of Christianity only.

  5. 5.

    Defense Guy

    July 15, 2005 at 1:13 pm

    The seperation of church and state has yet to be realized.

    If you can point out where in the constitution this clause exists, I will buy the drinks. Hell I may buy them anyway, as I think we all need them at this point, if just to remember that those on the other side of the argument are still human beings.

  6. 6.

    jcricket

    July 15, 2005 at 1:26 pm

    If you can point out where in the constitution this clause exists, I will buy the drinks.

    Defense Guy – “Separation of Church and State” is short-hand for the establishment clause, and has been since the time of Jefferson. I think he’s somewhat of a reliable authority on the meaning of the document in question.

    Read Jefferson’s Wall of Separation Letter

    The Constitution isn’t a collection of “facts” (e.g. “2+2=4”, or “that rock is 1 meter wide”). The principles contained within are broad, and as such, necessarily, subject to philosophical and (especially) legal interpretation.

    Moreover, the people who wrote the Bill of Rights were very concerned, at the time, that people would think that because only those rights were spelled out, people would later believe that Americans were only “granted” those specific rights. Seems they were right to be concerned.

    It’s remarkable that the founding fathers were smart enough to write a document whose principles still apply 200+ years later. I attribute the usefuleness of the Constitution as a guiding document to the fact that the principles don’t narrowly proscribe Americans as only having certain, explicitly stated rights.

    To your other point:

    …if just to remember that those on the other side of the argument are still human beings.

    I would be more charitable towards people like Dobson and Frist if weren’t using their Constitutional rights to attempt to undermine the Constitution and my freedoms. They are entitled to their own opinions, but I’m not so happy with people who agitate for the destruction of the judiciary, the institution of an officially “Christian” America, etc.

  7. 7.

    Defense Guy

    July 15, 2005 at 2:04 pm

    The establishment clause is a 2 way street, do you agree? Just as the government can not hold one religion up as the religion of the state, neither can it suppress one or reguire that our elected representitives have no religion.

  8. 8.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    July 16, 2005 at 1:27 am

    If you can point out where in the constitution this clause exists, I will buy the drinks.

    While it may come as a surprise to you, this country is a secular one; or at least it was meant to be one. Many of the founding fathers were not Christian, and a good amount were deists, in fact.

    We are not a Christian nation–not that you said we were–but I felt the need to clear this up:

    I refer you to the Treaty of Tripoli, Defense Guy:

    “Article 11 of the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli (which was drafted during George Washington’s second term and was unanimously approved by the Senate and signed by President John Adams) states:

    As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen (Muslims, I believe); and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan (Islamic, I believe) nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.”

    Now, to show that we are suppose to be a secular society, I will refer you to the Constitution. There is a complete seperation of church and state, which is the foundation of a secular society:

    While the exact phrase “Seperation of Church and State” isn’t in the Constitution it is clearly implied. Anyone who carefully reads the first amendment can see that there is a complete seperation of Church and State.

    The first amendment reads…

    Amendment I

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    Notice the first words in this amendment. It states : “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” That means there should not be any law that respects any establishment of religion. Many argue that this means only that there should be no state religion, unfortunately for them, they are wrong.

    If that is what the founding fathers meant then they would have wrote “no law respecting THE establishment of A religion.” It does not say that however, and thus clearly the word “establishment” is synonomous with the word “institution”. Therefore the amendment means: “Congress shall make no law respecting an institution of religion” That means, not one single law that derives from a religious institution.

    “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.” — James Madison, considered the father of the Constitution

    Here are some quotes by Adams that back up my claim that we are indeed a secular society:

    “. . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.” –John Adams

    “The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.” –John Adams

    Hell I may buy them anyway, as I think we all need them at this point, if just to remember that those on the other side of the argument are still human beings.

    Well said. Heh.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - beckya57 - Copper Canyon, Mexico, April 2025 6
Image by beckya57 (6/19/25)

Recent Comments

  • Miss Bianca on AM in NC – NO KINGS – Durham, NC (with the Durham images this time!) (Jun 19, 2025 @ 3:38pm)
  • prostratedragon on Excellent Read:‘The Struggle to Fulfill Juneteenth’s Promise and Reckon with Its History’ (Jun 19, 2025 @ 3:32pm)
  • WTFGhost on Thursday Morning Open Thread: Juneteenth (Jun 19, 2025 @ 3:29pm)
  • Enhanced Voting Techniques on Excellent Read:‘The Struggle to Fulfill Juneteenth’s Promise and Reckon with Its History’ (Jun 19, 2025 @ 3:24pm)
  • oldgold on Simon Rosenberg Sees Emerging Opportunity, and I Make Some Lists (Jun 19, 2025 @ 3:23pm)

Personality Crisis Podcast (Cole, DougJ, mistermix)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
No Kings Protests June 14 2025

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!