Who Hijacked Our Country

Saturday, October 28, 2006

Fuck South Dakota II

Since the original Fuck South Dakota was such a hit, it’s time for the sequel. Not content with their medieval abortion law, the people of South Dakota are threatening to turn the clock back even further. In November they’ll be voting on a ballot initiative. If it passes, judges who make unpopular decisions could be imprisoned.

Again, this is South Dakota, United States of America. Not South Yemen. Not Saudi Arabia. South Dakota.

The ballot measure is known as JAIL 4 Judges. Apparently these braindead rednecks think our judicial system — you know, checks and balances and all that — is just too much trouble. What these assholes really need is a time machine so they can travel back to the Spanish Inquisition.

The concept of judicial immunity dates back to the thirteenth century. This doctrine protects judges against personal liability for their decisions. South Dakota’s law, if it passes, will create a grand jury — basically a fourth branch of government — whose sole purpose is to indict judges for “improper” decisions.

If this initiative gets passed, the organizers are planning to export their revolution to all 50 states. Ever get the feeling we’re going backwards?


Blogger J. Marquis said...

Man, they want to make sure SD is America's most miserable state to live in. Unbelievable.

October 28, 2006 at 5:00 PM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

J. Marquis: Yup, that's how it seems. For decades, Southerners had the expression "thank God for Mississippi." No matter how bad something was in their state, the lowest they could rank was 49th because Mississippi would always be worse. Now I guess we can have a national motto of "thank God for South Dakota."

October 28, 2006 at 6:13 PM  
Blogger PTCruiser said...

I get the feeling we're going backwards every day I wake up and read the news.

October 29, 2006 at 7:21 PM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

PT Cruiser: Yeah, unfortunately I get that same feeling.

October 29, 2006 at 7:44 PM  
Blogger Jolly Roger said...

I have informed my counterpart that it's the plank fer any more stealin'! :)

This is a sneak-peek of Jesusistan.

All the people who listen for how often a politician cites "God" before voting for him or her really need to pay attention.

October 29, 2006 at 10:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

hey, who needs the judiciary when we have a supreme executive??

October 29, 2006 at 10:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good post Tom, first time I heard of that one, it is utterly preposterous.

October 29, 2006 at 11:32 PM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

Jolly Roger: Yeah, that’s one way to measure a candidate. The more they invoke “God” and the more self-righteous they are, the faster you need to run in the opposite direction.

Mike: Supreme Executive, that’s where we’re headed. Hell, we don’t even need Congress any more. King George is the Decider, as long as Karl and Dick keep telling him what to decide.

Floyd: Yup, it’s preposterous all right.

October 30, 2006 at 12:34 AM  
Blogger Elizabeth said...

South Yemen used to be a Marxist state. Not sure how that related to their policies on abortion and judges, but I just thought I'd mention that.

October 30, 2006 at 4:37 AM  
Blogger Jenn of the Jungle said...

Positively archaic. Such a beautiful state too.

Now, why do you have to rip on Rednecks. They are the only AMERICANS that do those jobs other Americans don't want to do. They are solid, hardworking people.They get such a bad rap. Poor little rednecks.

Vote Republican!!!!!!!!

October 30, 2006 at 11:19 AM  
Blogger Dustin said...

I've always been a little sad that the Dakotas are the only states I've never visited...maybe I shouldn't. Hadn't heard of that one, thanks for posting it.

October 30, 2006 at 12:02 PM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

Elizabeth: I was mostly just making a play on words — South Dakota, South Yemen. I think I knew they were Marxist, but forgot. But I just made the reference because I assume they’re a police state.

Jenn: That’s true, rednecks serve a purpose, like you say. The California wine industry would be lost without them. Who else would be willing to pick grapes out in the hot sun for 12 hours a day?

You’re gonna vote Republican?? Oh my God, I’m shocked.

Dustin: I’ve never been to the Dakotas either. That Northern Midwest area is the only region I’ve never been to. The Dakotas, Michigan and Minnesota. I’ve been to Milwaukee, so technically I’ve been to Wisconsin.

October 30, 2006 at 12:59 PM  
Blogger ariadneK, Ph.D. said...

This is some scary shit indeed...and your observation that things seem to be lurching backwards has been on my mind for quite some time.

Hey, why don't we all just move to Mexico? From what I hear, most Mexicans are wanting to come here, anyway: we can have a trade!!! ;-)

October 30, 2006 at 3:31 PM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

Ariadnek: Yup, it's scary all right. We're definitely going the wrong way. I don't know if going to Mexico is the answer. But it's probably less crowded there at least, since they're all moving up here.

October 30, 2006 at 5:33 PM  
Blogger Snave said...

It all makes me think of the title of an Elvis Costello song, "Five Gears In Reverse".

Reconstructivists... tsk, tsk. This is from Wikipedia, re. Gary North:

"Most Christian Reconstructionists hold to a type of Postmillennialism that holds that Jesus will return to earth only after Trinitarian Christianity has become the religion of the majority of the planet, with God's moral law as the civil standard for society. They believe that Old Testament moral and civil laws, such as those against adultery and sodomy and murder, should be presumed binding unless the New Testament says otherwise; this belief they call theonomy. Critics argue that what North is describing would be a theocracy, and that North and other Postmillennial proponents of Dominion Theology have influenced the growth of the Dominionist tendency among the much larger (and largely Premillennialist) Christian Right."

"North's economic views are somewhat libertarian, but socially, he is an advocate of theonomic rule ("the rule of God's law") and proposes a strict legal system based on Biblical laws, which might execute people for violations of those laws (such as sodomy, adultery, witchcraft) that are not capital offenses under current U.S. laws. North claims such measures are in line with libertarian social principles because, as in Ancient Israel, the church/community would execute people, not the state."

Also from Wikipedia, under "Christian Reconstructivism":

"While many Christians believe that biblical law is a guide to morality and public ethics, when interpreted in faith, Reconstructionism is unique in advocating that civil law should be derived from and limited by biblical law. For example, they support the recriminalization of acts of abortion and homosexual sodomy, but also oppose confiscatory taxation, conscription, and most aspects of the welfare state. Protection of property and life needs grounding in biblical law, according to Reconstructionism, or the state set free from the restraint of God's law will take what it wishes at a whim. Accordingly, Reconstructionists advocate biblically derived measures of restitution, a definite limit upon the powers of taxation, and a gold standard or equivalent fixed unit for currency."

"They do not view politics as their primary, or even an important, instrument of change. Nevertheless, in political terms the ideal that they aim toward might be called "denominational tolerance", or "tolerance within the bounds of Christianity": in the predominantly Christian world they envision, this is the only kind of tolerance that will be necessary. Therefore, they use the Bible, in contrast to political documents like the Constitution of the United States, as their pattern and guide for envisioning the future."

"However, some critics categorize the Christian Reconstructionist movement as a form of totalitarianism or theocratic neofascism. For example, Karen Armstrong sees a potential for fascism in Christian Reconstructionism, and notes that the system of dominion envisaged by Christian Reconstructionist theologians R. J. Rushdoony and Gary North "is totalitarian. There is no room for any other view or policy, no democratic tolerance for rival parties, no individual freedom," (Armstrong, Battle for God, pp. 361-362). Berlet and Lyons have written that the movement is a "new form of clerical fascist politics," (Right-Wing Populism in America, p. 249). Many critics view that a Christian Reconstructionist state in the U.S. would much resemble the Taliban in Afghanistan or the theocratic dictatorship in Iran under Ayatollah Khomeini and his successors. One of the derogatory terms often used for Reconstructionists is American Taliban, asserting that they are similar to the Taliban in ideology, differing only in their particular religious sect."

See any parallels with what some far-right politicians are trying to push? Reconstructivists are active behind the scenes, and some of the more prominent ones (who won't admit they are reconstructivists but who also won't say they aren't, i.e. Dobson, Falwell, Robertson and their like) find ways to exert influence on some of our top leaders. Knowing that Tim LaHaye is a close friend and adviser of GWB absolutely creeps me out...

I'm not into suppressing people's rights to believe what they want to believe, but I do get uneasy when some of the more oppressive beliefs are being put into action. I am into suppressing things like reconstructivism when it sneaks out from its hiding places and starts to show up in various disguises in the public square, masquerading as mainstream opinion.

To me, the South Dakota thing smells like Christian Reconstructivist policy getting its foot a little farther in the door. It's a case where punishing judges is deemed o.k., because maybe someone else (i.e. the churches?) should be deciding what is right and wrong, not judges.

Google "Gary North" and Christian Reconstructivism" or look them up at Wikipedia... there is a lot of information, but I start delving into it, I find it very difficult to believe that reconstructivists don't have influence on modern evangelical/pentecostal churches and their congregations.

Five gears in reverse... !

October 31, 2006 at 8:41 AM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

Snave: Thanks for the info. Lots more reasons that we don't want these people running things. Five Gears in Reverse -- LOL.

October 31, 2006 at 1:25 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home