The Bible condones slavery. And many slave holders invoked the Bible to justify slavery.
From Frederick Douglas' first autobiography:
Were I to be again reduced to the chains of slavery, next to that enslavement, I should regard being the slave of a religious master the greatest calamity that could befall me. For of all slaveholders with whom I have ever met, religious slaveholders are the worst. I have ever found them the meanest and basest, the most cruel and cowardly, of all others.
What you would say with irony, I say with conviction.
Full blown de jure chattel slavery? Yes, I would be surprised.
Slavery didn't end because people realized it was bad. They always knew that. It ended because of the industrial revolution.
A decent person would be ashamed of themselves.
(Hint: he's not)
Of course it's a Republican. Really scraping the bottom of the culture war barrel now.
Congress has no oversight of state prosecutors. Jordan is using his position of power and trust to pervert the course of justice. This is blatant obstruction of justice.
"Che-kwe"
“We obviously disagree with the Supreme Court’s ruling. But more importantly, we are deeply disturbed by the chilling impact this decision will have to crush dissent,” said Senate Republican Leader Tim Knopp (R-Bend), another state senator who is ineligible for re-election.
You're still entitled to dissent. You're being fired for missing 40+ days of work.
Blackstone Inc. is an American alternative investment management company based in New York City. Blackstone's private equity business has been one of the largest investors in leveraged buyouts in the last three decades, while its real estate business has actively acquired commercial real estate. Blackstone is also active in credit, infrastructure, hedge funds, insurance, secondaries, and growth equity. As of June 2023, the company's total assets under management were approximately US$1 trillion, making it the largest alternative investment firm globally
Yeah, I'm going to suggest that this oligarch keep his mouth shut, ere the revolution eats him alive.
Hartley was essentially admitting that Satanists (and Muslims and other non-Christian groups) would theoretically have access to the funds. However, if the state had a really good reason not to give it to them, there was a way to restrict the funds from going to those groups. You don’t have to be a lawyer to realize that a group being considered a “fringe” religion would never pass strict scrutiny.
N.B. "Strict scrutiny" is a standard applied by courts, not legislatures, when reviewing a law for infringements of constitutional rights. It's the highest standard of scrutiny, and when applied almost always ends with the law being struck down.
In other words, she's saying that a law that excludes "fringe" religions would almost certainly be struck down.
Which one to shatter my delusions of an alien mental hospital?
Firefly