Jesus, Satan, Huckabee & Hitler

Naturally, Mike Huckabee's faux-naïf concern about whether Mitt Romney believes Jesus and Satan are brothers is inspiring considerable chatter appropriate to the race for the presidency.

A Romney/Mormon apologist blog is offering that Jesus and Satan are brothers in the same sense Huckabee and Adolf Hitler are brothers, which is an interesting analogy.

It makes sense, however, since Huckabee's GOP rivals are deriding his socialist inclinations and, as has been demonstrated in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Hitler was a liberal.

And, in the kerfuffle's wake, Huckabee's camp is now denying that the candidate has a theology degree, despite Huckabee's touting exactly that in a speech to the Center for Strategic and International Studies in September. Huckabee implied that his “theology degree” put him in a better position than his rivals to understand Jihadism.

Now his campaign is claiming Huckabee only has a BA in Biblical Studies, which doesn't count as a theology degree, and maybe doesn't put him in a better position to understand the strange doctrines of Mormonism.

A piece in the New York Times this morning refers to Huckabee's “ignorance” and offers an attempt at clarification courtesy of Robert Millet, a professor of religion at Brigham Young University:

Jesus was God’s first-born son, and everyone who came after that, including Satan could be considered the siblings of Jesus, he said.

“Latter-day Saints believe that all of us, Christ included, existed in a premortal existence, as spirits,” Mr. Millet said. “Yes, Jesus and Lucifer were in that premortal existence, together. But what we need to make very clear is that Jesus was God and there was never a time when Jesus and Lucifer were on the same plane.”

Er, what? Jesus was God's first-born son and Jesus was God?
But according to some literature at the official Mormon website,

Jesus Christ and Lucifer are indeed offspring of our Heavenly Father and, therefore, spirit brothers.

Jesus Christ was with the Father from the beginning. Lucifer, too, was an angel “who was in authority in the presence of God,” a “son of the morning.” Both Jesus and Lucifer were strong leaders with great knowledge and influence. But as the Firstborn of the Father, Jesus was Lucifer’s older brother.

The author then points out that it's not unusual for two brothers to choose career paths at variance with one another, in this case, the elder as the “savior of mankind,” the younger a mischievous demon, and concludes,

We can only imagine the sorrow of our Heavenly Father as he watched a loved son [Satan] incite and lead a rebellion and lose his opportunity for exaltation. But we can also imagine the Father’s love and rejoicing as he welcomed back the beloved son [Jesus] who had valiantly and perfectly fought the battles of life and brought about the great Atonement through his suffering and death.

That's some tricky business right there, to claim God was Jesus, when God sent Jesus away, and then welcomed Jesus back after he was dead. Excuse me while my brain explodes.

I'm thinking the operative words in that passage are, "we can only imagine." It's nice to see such candor for a change.

And who knows what BYU Prof. Millet means by Jesus and Satan never having been “on the same plane,” because I don't see any difference between “loved son” and “beloved son.” Before they went their separate ways, that is.

Maybe he means the plane Jesus flew to Missouri on to meet up with Joseph Smith. One thing's for sure, it ain't easy keeping all these fairy tales straight, least of all for Mike Huckabee, who's puzzled by Mormon doctrine yet draws inspiration from a talking snake.

However, there is some evidence, also in the Journal-Sentinel, that it's possible to both be related to a person and be that person:

Q: Joe of Milwaukee - How many cheesesteaks have you eaten in the course of your lifetime? Also are you related to Big Daddy Kane?

A: Eugene Kane - 2,645, give or take a hoagie or three. Also, of course we're related. I AM BIG DADDY KANE.

Another thing's for sure, the cheesesteak is a tool of Satan.

A better explanation for promiscuity: Satan

Prof. Amy Wax believes it's caused by the gay agenda.

And the gay agenda, says Father Jeremy Davies of Westminster, is driven by "a contagious demonic factor." Father Davies is also the town exorcist, looking to drum up new accounts, apparently.

Even regular old missionary position intercourse, if committed outside of marriage, is a "pathway for evil spirits," sez the exorcist, who took a four-month training program in Rome under the Catholic Church's top caster-outer-of-demons, Father Gabriele Amorth.

Satan doesn't mess with married people, or something.

Furthermore, Satan is working overtime to blind "secular humanists" to the "dehumanising effects of 'homosexual marriage.'" Dehumanizing humanists — clearly an insidious Satanic trick.

Satan also reportedly keeps in shape by performing "trendy exercise" such as yoga and even finds time to compose your daily horoscope.

So stay away from those, even "for fun," advises Father Davies.

Satan himself was unavailable for comment, despite Father Davies's claims that he's relatively easy to summon via séance, Ouija board, or the local atheist, who of course maintains close contact with most supernatural personages including Zeus, Thor, and the leprechauns.

Their Satanic Creationist's Request

J. Shallit: I've been contacted by some cretin named Bill Crofut, who proclaims himself "an unlettered Traditional Roman Catholic, militant young-Earth Biblical creationist and geocentrist." Crofut proffered a quote by Birch and Ehrlich from a 1967 Nature article as evidence against evolution. Only problem is, the quote was stripped of context and is a well-known quote mine. When confronted with the evidence of his misrepresentation, Crofut told me he was "a son of Satan."

E. Knight: ...Crofut told me he was "a son of Satan."
Clarification: He said he was, or you are, a son of Satan?

J. Shallit: No, he said he was.

h/t: Recursivity.

Reince Priebus and all his Minions

Item: WISGOP complains "lobbyist" not actually lobbyist

[Plaintiff] alleges that Satan has on numerous occasions caused plaintiff misery and unwarranted threats, against the will of plaintiff, that Satan has placed deliberate obstacles in his path and has caused plaintiff's downfall. . . .

We note that the plaintiff has failed to include with his complaint the required form of instructions for the United States Marshal for directions as to service of process.

Mayo v. Satan And His Staff

Earlier: Rich is the name, retail sales is the game*

* I hear Rich's joke was so stupid, not even Keith Olbermann got it.

eta: More Michael "Rich" Brickman, "retail" salesman:

[Tom Barrett said] he would fire a campaign staffer who secretly recorded anyone and lied about his identity.

I guess so. Most people would have fired him weeks ago.

Good for Walker, however. Keep that reckless liability on board.

Belial intervenes in beauty pageant

James Dobson: Why did you give the answer you did with regard to the affirmation of marriage?
Carrie Prejean: . . . I felt as though Satan was trying to tempt me in asking me this question.

Satan has two assists in his last two games:

UW-Oshkosh professor a "minion of Satan"

It says so right here. The psych lit refers to these as delusions, occasionally coupled with the descriptive modifier, "paranoid."

Makes you wonder whether the interior decor at 222 S. Hamilton Street, Suite 24, Madison, WI 53703* features rubber wallpaper.

"Evil never takes a vacation," claims Julaine Appling, literally [sic] demonizing her political adversaries, always a compelling strategery.

Nevertheless and for whatever reasons, many Americans willingly accept the legitimization of this particular manner of delusion so long as it's accompanied by correct citation to Bible chapter and verse.

By the same means, Julaine Appling presents herself as a "minion of Jesus Christ," engaged in eternal struggle with the forces of Darkness and Evil. In the present instance, people who happen to be gay.

Charming, isn't it. No, not exactly. More like reprehensible.

* Appling v. Gov. Jim Satan and all His minions (.pdf; 17 pgs.).

Heroic Scott Walker battles Satan

Seriously.

And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. — 2 Corinthians 12:7 (KJV)

Talk about your delusions of grandeur (and persecution).

On the other hand, it makes sense where Walker plays the thorn.

Scott Walker battles Satan

Satan prevails. Meanwhile, Walker GOP rival Mark Neumann faces off against Beelzebub's emissary, the Pope. Game two goes tomorrow.

Jim Doyle: Antichrist or Pope?

If you listen to his adversaries, it's difficult to tell.

Julaine Appling, who is suing WI Gov. Jim Doyle over the alleged unconstitutionality of the State's domestic partnership provision, considers those opposed to her schemes to be "minions of Satan."

Meanwhile Ms. Appling's lead counsel Rick Esenberg, appearing on local public radio this morning, suggests the State of Wisconsin is making an attempt at "sanctifying in some sense" the partnerships.

This, evidently, in furtherance of the proposition that the domestic partnerships are "substantially similar" to marriage.

It may come as a rude surprise to many that the State is in the business of "sanctifying" in any sense any thing, least of all marriage.

But, for the sake of argument, if it really is the case that the State of Wisconsin does "sanctify in some sense" marriage and the domestic partnerships are conversely incapable of "sanctification,"* wouldn't that mitigate against a potential finding of "substantial similarity"?

Clearly. After all, it's Esenberg himself who opposes "toting up" the individual legal protections afforded by marriage versus domestic partnerships and reaching the substantial similarity determination in that manner, preferring instead a more "holistic" approach.

* They exist solely "for purposes [no] greater than the relationship itself and the self-directed needs of the individuals comprising it."

Or so we are reliably informed by both metaphysicians, Ms. Appling and Mr. Esenberg. Notably, well in advance of any such partnership having even been applied for or undertaken, let alone "sanctified."

"I love your tan lines." — Satan

If conservatives were really serious about protecting marriage, they'd demand that adultery laws be enforced and they'd make no-fault divorce illegal. But they're not, because those are sins that they and their colleagues commit. So instead, we get a bunch of conservative adulterers and serial monogamists lecturing America about the sanctity of marriage.

Quite so. And on Fathers' Day, with four adolescent sons at home, by another woman. The said woman being his wife, who had foregone her own career to further the man's political ambitions. Thanks, buddy.

Of course, the worst aspect of this latest conservative Republican tour de farce is the fact that SC Gov. Sanford fed his staff the "Appalachian Trail" line. No adult believes this chap had some leisurely intention but to go a-schtuppin' right under the nose of Our Lady of Bonaria.

In any democracy other than America or Iran, Mark Sanford would have resigned yesterday. Is this not what lieutenant governors are for?

Best of all is the cancellation of a morality lecture Gov. Sanford was scheduled to deliver at the Family Research Council's "Values Voter Summit" in September:

But I think the Bible says, “Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father that’s in heaven.“ Hopefully, by the way in which you act.

Uh huh. Spare us the sermon, thou deceitful hypocrite.

Satan to blame for SiteMeter troubles

Prayer request.

Plant activist returns twigs to soil

A concerned Green Bay environmentalist, apparently disturbed that a Wiccan group had removed some topiary from God's green Earth and fashioned it into a seasonal wreath, early this morning stealthily scaled a ladder and liberated the clippings, returning them safely to their natural habitat behind a hedge.

The activist, described as of medium height, slightly heavy build, and wearing a parka bearing the Packers insignia and a camouflage hunting cap with ear flaps, was reported to Green Bay police, who immediately focused their manhunt on a list of 47,359 suspects.

Meanwhile a whimsical local Catholic attempted to have a Festivus pole — "I find tinsel distracting" — installed at City Hall, but was chastised by Mayor Jim Schmitt for making something “rather serious” into a “laughing matter.”

And we certainly can't have that at this joyous time of year.

In other Solstice celebration news, presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee has released a new television spot presenting him seated beside a reconstruction of Thor's Oak, while rambling incoherently about a virgin birth, an aspect of a number of pagan religions.

GOP rival Rudy 9iu11iani is said to be upping the Solstice ante by producing a “reply ad” featuring the former mayor slaughtering a Yule Goat with his bare hands at the entrance to the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.

And Mitt Romney's seasonal message is to depict Jesus training a stun gun on Satan while the latter protests, "Don't tase me, Bro."

December 21 is roughly the day when some inhabitants of the Northern Hemisphere have traditionally commemorated the Sun's position relative to its angular distance from the Earth's equator. For many others, however, it has special significance as the shortest day of the year, and about the halfway point of the NHL hockey season.

Atheists score highest in religion quiz

Not surprising: they've looked closely at religion; that's why they don't believe its claims. I've seen this pointed out over and over again on religion discussion boards. The response from Christians is invariably the same: 'The Devil knows the Bible backwards and forwards also.'

The implication being, of course, that non-believers are under the spell of the believers' imaginary bugaboo, Satan. It's a classy retort, considering this character is purported to be the embodiment of all evil and vileness (and worse, an avid collector of Hummel figurines).

Associate professor of sociology Lakshmi Bharadwaj and Susan Wood, chairman of the Theology Department at Marquette University, say they've seen an erosion of religious knowledge among students over the last 30 to 40 years — brought on, they say, by the growing secularism of society.

Is that so.

Then how come the "secularists" scored the best, and the adherents the lowest? The latter didn't even know about their own religions.

Surely the secularizers are not responsible for that.

Telling, too, that when Stephen Colbert turns up in Congress and quotes — in complete sincerity, it seemed to me — the words of Jesus Christ, he's condemned by so-called conservative Christians.

Wisconsin ruling raises cash for conservatives

Send money now, help us fight Satan and also the gays, also.

Mr. Alan Sears is the author of The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today. Yes, seriously.

Foust on Faust

Faust says Satan is a job-creator: pride (pro-USA jingoism and all its marketing opportunities), avarice (tax-lowering obsessions, dollar worship, Sam's Club, ten pounds of crap in a five-pound bag for $3.99), envy (cul-de-sac homes and lawn care, bass boats, 60-inch screens), wrath (gun porn, Fox News' Daily Hate, cocaine sentencing), lust (Dancing with the Stars, Cosmopolitan magazine, Hooters, most advertising), gluttony (all-you-can-eat buffets, drive-throughs, HFCS), acedia (golf, couches, the Packers, computer gaming). (Coincidence? I think not.) — Foust on Faust

The music was music of nightmares

The S From Hell

A hilarious (especially for persons of a certain age) Sundance Festival short (nine minutes) concerning "the scariest corporate symbol in history, built around interviews with survivors still traumatized from viewing the logo after shows like Bewitched or The Monkees."

Eric Siday is the villain of the piece (he and Satan).

What hath Dan Barker wrought

Satan Claus (h/t capper)

Speaking to War On Christmas Obergruppenführer Bill O'Reilly last night, Fox News "legal analyst" Megyn Kelly said the God Hates Fags crowd could be excluded from the Olympia, WA holiday display because GHF was from "out of state" (Topeka, KS, that is).

Only trouble is, Dan Barker and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which installed the "Happy Solstice" plaque that ignited breathless consternation in the first place, are out of Madison, WI.

"See, I think it's all part of the secular progressive agenda."

— Bill O'Reilly

eta: Commenter Pete Gruett points out that the "Happy Solstice" plaque was in fact installed by a local WA affiliate of the FFRF.

Even so, I don't see anything in the State's original settlement agreement (.pdf; 24 pgs.) that preceded this entire debacle which would authorize WA Gov. Gregoire to exclude "Reverend" Phelps's cheery message simply because it originates from out of state.

Indeed, the agreement itself was memorialized by some lawyers from the Alliance Defense Fund, which is based in Arizona.

Phelps, too, is a pro-vice hack.

Satan wants you to pull out

Just in case you haven't been following the discussion of same-sex marriage at the Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog, here is some of the very latest in "natural law" assertion wisdom:

Our country’s entire legal system is based on religious beliefs.

Some people absolutely refuse to acknowledge that ethics exist independently from supernaturalism.

I don’t recall [Jesus] condemning moving property line markers either.

Must be an early version of the Implied Preemption Doctrine.

Contraceptive sexual relations (even within marriage) ... [are an] affront to the inherent dignity of Man ...

You have to be pretty hardcore to condemn the rhythm method.

The idea that people have a "right" to engage in any sexual activity in private is a legal and social fiction of extremely recent vintage.

So much for "natural law." As far as I can tell, homosexuality is perfectly natural in the sense that it's a fairly regular feature of nature. That it may be uncommon doesn't make it unnatural.

If this guy would just accept that and move on, then maybe he could overcome his apparently obsessive fixation with its mechanics.

Earlier: Madness! Hubris! Wanking!

Wisconsin's top right-wing blogger announces

[Flourish]

I disagree with this ruling. [snip MSNBC (!!!) reporting] It is not a right for your marriage to be recognized by the state.

What is Wisconsin's top right-wing blogger's point, I have no idea, because the court never said there was any such right. But seeing as the invalidated California proposition reads, "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," then our top right-wing blogger should find it unconstitutional as well, no?

After all, according to his claims, not even the opposite marriage people have any right to expect their nuptial consummations to be recognized by the State.

Indeed, you'd think that would be the politically conservative position, where the State (and in parallel, the state, but the Defense of Marriage Act is another question) interferes at only the bare administrative minimum in the private and consensual domestic arrangements of individual Americans.

Nobody, to my knowledge, has empowered any State (and certainly not the federal government) to draw an arbitrary line somewhere along the continuum of sexual orientation or gender (or "race" or ethnicity or religion, the latter of which is chosen) for those administrative purposes.

And when I say arbitrary, I mean that as the most charitable compliment that might be mustered as to the quality of the Proposition 8 proponents' evidence. Some of their testimony relied on that rentboy guy, other of it on "the internet." (The latter proponent also jabbered about Satan, which, let's face it, was to be expected. That's the sort of hocus-pocus that drives their arguments.* Wisconsin's leading marriage expert Julaine Appling, anyone?)

The top blogging continues:

There is a right to marry, but that’s not what we’re talking about here.

Yes, that's precisely what we're talking about here and the judge's opinion could not have made clearer its distinguishing between the creation of novel rights and the simple recognition of existing ones.

The top blogger has it exactly backwards. This case is not about the State of California's recognizing a right to marry. This case is about the State of California's refusal to recognize that right. Even more to the point, the State of California's affirmative denial of that right.

And it cannot so refuse and at the same time be in compliance with the 14th Amendment, which maybe the top blogger should read.

Along with the opinion, and not some MSNBC-generated** syllabus.

h/t WisOpinion, which aggregates the views of "opinion leaders."

* And those of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, if I'm not mistaken.

** Bonus irony.

In which I lose some respect for Sonia S.

Sotomayor quits women's club after criticism from GOP

GOP criticism isn't just the worst reason not to do something, it's also the best reason to keep doing whatever it is you were doing.

When I first came to this country, being unfamiliar with the leading issues in American politics, the remedy was simple: Subscribe to Jerry Falwell's weekly e-nail newsletter, and then adopt precisely the opposite position to whatever it was he was advocating.

Hate the gays? Love the gays. Accept Jesus? Embrace Satan. Etc.

Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor said she resigned from the Belizean Grove* because she didn't want it to become a distraction during her confirmation hearings, which begin July 13.

That may well be an admirable rationale, in that Judge Sotomayor would prefer the time better spent in helping facilitate a substantive examination of her record and qualifications.

But having watched these Senate characters in action on many occasions, I'm here to tell you that nothing will prevent them from bringing up any nonsensical ephemera they can lay their hands on.

Most of them aren't the slightest bit interested in her jurisprudence anyway. They're there to posture for their respective constituents and the fact that Sotomayor has resigned from her club is certainly not going to restrain them from cross examining her about it.

I mean, come on. After all, the Republicans installed Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, a physician, on the Committee on the Judiciary. All he's going to do is try and get her to stipulate that mentioning "foreign law" is an impeachable offense. E.g., Blackstone's Commentaries.

And now, by popular demand, the best TV Funhouse ever:

To the extent that the statement is making the basic point ...

* OTOH, major props to Sullivan's aggregating the news out of Iran.