Johnson: We're Not A Democracy, We're A "Biblical" Republic And Separation Of Church And State Isn't Real
Johnson: We're Not A Democracy, We're A "Biblical" Republic And Separation Of Church And State Isn't Real - Joe.My.God.
This is terrifying.
This is seditious.
This is the scariest part about it
Remember when people were saying that Ron DeSantis was "very intelligent"?
Under his eye.
If the American electorate was slightly less stupid, I’d be ecstatic, because he made himself effectively kryptonite to reasonable, intelligent people with that statement.
Unfortunately, the American electorate is, on average, that stupid.
Yup. That about sums it up. You guys wanna talk about something else or?
He said it in 2016 though and has still been re-elected and elected speaker of the house regardless. Hopefully this has an effect on the republican party at large though now. It might fly where he's from, but it won't in the US at large. We just need to make sure people know what they're voting for.
On average? 35% of people believing lies makes us all "on average" as stupid as they are? By your own logic, you just be American
They treat the Constitution like they do their bible.
They don’t read it.
If they do read it, they just read the bits they agree with.
If they read the parts that don’t fit their desired narrative, they engage in mental gymnastics to reinterpret what was written to fit their desires.
Edit:
Jefferson's reply did not address their concerns about problems with state establishment of religion — only of establishment on the national level. The letter contains the phrase "wall of separation between church and state," which led to the short-hand for the Establishment Clause that we use today: "Separation of church and state."
Which led to the Establishment Clause…
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...
And also The point of Article 6 wherein no religious test is to be given to hold office.
Better?
From article VI (3rd paragraph)
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executige and judicial officers, both of the united states and of the several states, shall be bound by oath of affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
They're lawyers, they are idiots and they twist every word to suit their agenda - that's what lawyers do.
I don't want to be that guy, but in fairness, ol' boy didn't actually say "biblical republic" (He just wheeled out the old "constitutional Republic" bit).
Doesn't make this any better, but I want to be sure we criticize with facts.
Amen
Over under on this guy being a pedophile?
He's either a pedo or dogfucker, there was some statement from him about how homosexuality was bad because it makes people want to have sex with their dog.
Money line to be correct, but yes im sure he is.
Why is it that every time a dumbass steps down from being speaker, you guys manage to find an even bigger wanker? It's kinda impressive, honestly.
Not me bro. I voted for the other guys.
Pump the bilge pump, get bilge water.
So this is the alternative history they want to write eh?
Clown, it was called the "Enlightenment Age" for a reason, people started breaking the chains of organized religion. Yes they were Christians, but they knew enough to not trust religion as a form of government.
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in the material world are some of the founding principles, not "death, misery and suffering but maybe get lucky choosing the right god and you'll be rewarded with eternal paradise..."
If they founded the country on the Bible, we'd live in a theocracy with no elections and no opposition parties.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Founding-Fathers-Deism-and-Christianity-1272214
Britannica covers it pretty well. I guess they'd better, they have been covering shit for longer than we have been a country.
The phrase is "we the people."
There is nobody else coming to decide things for humans.
Of course, he's from Louisiana... The south always was the worst part of American, even in colonial times. The US might have abolished slavery much earlier if not for them. There was even a draft of the Declaration of Independence that critiqued the British slave trade as one of the moral failure of the empire and grounds for independence.
This batshit motherfucker is going to drive so many voters to the Dems. Keep amplifying his insane bullshit.
Surely boosting far-right candidates won't backfire again
It worked flawlessly for Hilldawg
If we just keep platforming fascists eventually people will start voting for our milquetoast fascist-lite candidates who offer no solutions to any problems!
lol, lmao
This batshit motherfucker is going to drive so many voters to the Dems.
Did I miss a memo and there's suddenly a dem worth voting for? Until we get a non-warmongering climate crusader as a dem candidate, my vote's going to Afroman. (Obligatory >:( from the brainwormed; saw that coming lmao)
This batshit motherfucker is going to drive so many voters to the Dems.
Rich Republicans will continue voting for whoever taxes them the least. Poor Republicans will continue voting to spite their perceived opponents (minorities, gays, "the woke mob").
Normies actually believe what he says.
Look at 4chan, there's no shortage of idiots who want to believe that porky is our lord and savior and they're actually the good guys when they go around ruining other people's lives "for teh lulz".
I am begging you to stop whinging about "normies", as well as pretending 4chan is a reasonable representation of the general population when it's q freaks and reactionary societal outcasts.
White Taliban gonna Taliban
Y’all Qaeda.
Y'all quaeda
Christians always try to re-history the world in their favor. They are the most dishonest hypocritical fascists.
Then again, they stole most of what their religion allegedly stands for.
Separation of church and state is both the first amendment and a clause in article six of the constitution:
First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
article six
no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Thomas Jefferson's use of the words "separation of church and state" was to explain the purpose of the first amendment specifically but the actual legal text of the constitution is worded broadly enough to cover not only separation of church and state but separation of mosque/synagogue/ect and state rather than singling out Christianity.
the actual legal text of the constitution is worded broadly enough
Ahh, then you just engage in a narrow interpretation of it, hence allowing the combination of church and state.
It's in the First Amendment. It's more important than the Second Amendment. This guy is dangerous.
Yeah. I think what these people mean usually is that the phrase "separation of church and state" isn't in the Constitution, which is true. They heard that somewhere and repeat it. Maybe that West Wing episode where Charlie does a bit about it.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
Seems pretty clear to me.
Well the good news is that just because this fuckbrain said it doesn't make it true.
When he won the spot he said “good to see our democracy working” or something like that. Fucking shameless lunatic
This is literally frightening to read that any American politician would think this. I don't see how any moderate R could support this train of thought.
There's no such thing as a moderate R. They voted for Johnson.
The key is realizing that moderate Republicans don't oppose evangelical wackos either (and Dems, at best, try to have it both ways)
Moderate R are an endangered and disappearing species. And even if you find one, you'd be safe to assume they're "moderate" rather than moderate.
Do they even exist? Bacon voted for Johnson.
Lots of them think it. The more frightening aspect is the willingness to say it out loud.
Remember when Cheetoh-Man said things out loud and they loved him for it. Eight years later, they feel emboldened to do all kinds of shit that wouldn't have been on the radar back then. We're in trouble.
Yo. Shit for brains. Here's the deal.
Get your god on the ballot. We'll vote for it. If it wins then maybe we'll give a listen to what it's got to say.
Otherwise keep that fucker OUT of our government.
Isn't that effectively what he's doing? A vote for him is a vote for his opinions, including that of God.
And people have been pulling this shit since religion was just thanking the forest for food.
Humans can be real pieces of shit.
No, that is not what he's doing. He's pretending to be the will of some magical sky fairy, and he is anything but that. He claims to "hear" this imaginary person "telling him what to do". That is not the same thing as a god - that is a charlatan using the snake oil of an imaginary sky fairy to con the poorly educated.
What I want is god, I don't care which one (they're all imaginary) put on the ballot and voted for. This would be decisive two ways... First, how does one get on a ballot? (they have to prove they are a real live human being, among other tests). And the second doesn't matter, because an imaginary thing can't be on a ballot.
Republicans (see, it's right there in the name) have been openly mocking people who think we live in a democracy for literally my entire life
I remember I had a thought that maybe they feel the need to claim so because the line that they were going into Iraq to establish democracy created lots of democracy fans (however misinformed about the US's goal they were) that would otherwise be part of the republican base.
It's probably just because their policies are actually deeply unpopular and they need a fig leaf to cover for the fact they're pursuing legal-but-undemocratic means to achieve their ends.
Fucking excellent. I'm so sick of this ride. Life could be soooo good. Yet this shit exists
I see this nutjob has no idea what he's talking about and cannot fulfill the duties of his oath of office, so he should simply be removed from office, right? Right guys?
You got the form letter going yet?
This guy is a fuck
Guillotine.
Hopefully this guy won't last past this election cycle.
His job isn't to last, it's tonflog whatever the Russians are paying him to do. Which will almost certainly be to jam up the government so it can't function, and to kill any Ukraine spending bills. If he can cause a civil war or constitutional crisis all the better.
How is this banal? Seems like he's doing a lot more than just trying to succeed in his career.
It's a good thing a bunch of 6 year old children weren't murdered! Otherwise Republicans would have to pretend to care about the Constitution again!
What are the first ten word of the first amendment you hold so dearly when a minority asks you politely to be nice?
WHAT ARE THE FIRST TEN WORDS, MOTHERFUCKER!?
As if they've ever bothered to read any part of that document aside from the second amendment.
If there are two wolves and a lamb, the wolves don't need to hold a vote.
Liberal democracy is a wolf telling a heard of sheep what's for dinner
Ah, but with just one swing of this handy church-state separator...
This is revisionism
Divine right of kings go thump in the bucketI can't wait for my first chance to ask someone the following:
"I have three questions: 1. What does 'Democracy' mean? 2. What does 'Republic' mean? 3. What is your point?"
This is something I'm needlessly pedantic about. Democracy and republic mean roughly the same thing under most definitions. Republic tends to mean a country that's not a monarchy, and democracy tends to mean a place with public input. Nearly every country on Earth outside of absolute monarchies (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Eswatini,etc) is some kind of republic with some level of public input into policy. Everything's a democratic republic.
American Republicans get all bent up about trying to explain how they're structurally different than Democrats even though they're largely two wings of the same bourgeois party
Republicanism usually implies that the officials get a sizeable level of autonomy in their decisions once in office, and has no investment in proportional representation.
Untrue:
Republic = no monarch or emperor Democracy = a form of choosing those who govern
This is a very important distinction and you can have either with or without the other. I think that Republicans really want to say that your vote doesn't matter.
Wow. This jackoff needs to go right now. That didn't take long. Isn't about time for Mr. Smith to start indicting these fuckers for treason?
Good luck with that Johnson, you absolute fucking moron.
Let's see how far your far-right bullshit gets you.
The American people are sick and tired of your dysfunctional inability to get anything done.
People keep saying this but I've been around since Reagan and with every election cycle things get noticeably worse. The Democrats never keep their promises and continue to cede ground. The Republicans continue ramping up their antics. People said they had enough in 88, in 92, in 96, in 2000, etc etc.
Every time the American people fell for whatever was being peddled in front of them. As someone who is almost 40, I can tell you the only time I ever thought there might be positive change and people standing up for themselves and their communities at large was during the 2020 protests and pandemic. Surely, I thought this would be the beginning of something new.
But the media began to ignore things, social media algos quickly adjusted to bury protests and boost disinfo actors. Now I have to wonder just how much worse things will get if this is what we put up with. What will it take to get people to fight for their rights. If we wait until the government makes us (LGBTQ, etc) illegal it will be too late to act.
I honestly doubt most people will be moved to do anything to defend our rights, they don't even care about their own until the police show up for them.
Also
, for fuck's sake!I’m seeing lots of ‘New Speaker is [insert whatever you want that’s against humans in general] (maybe a slight over-exaggeration, but it doesn’t feel like it) But can anyone ELI5 how you all ended up in this state, and how you get back out? What’s the impact of this individual being Speaker?
But can anyone ELI5 how you all ended up in this state
First off, the US government has always been full of absolute ghouls and clowns. That said, the well-being of the typical american has been on a downward trend for a while, and people are seeking radical change. This isn't really new, Obama ran on change in 2008 (and then governed like a Republican, alienating voters), and Trump obviously did the same, though in a more unhinged clownish way in 2016. Biden only won a (very narrow) victory in 2020 because Trump was so openly disgusting, helped by mishandling of COVID being an obvious giant talking point.
how you get back out?
The various alphabet agencies, national guard, and police forces have to be purged and reformed at all levels nationwide, then various actions (political arrests and blackmail, mostly) taken that effectively decapitate and dismantle the republican party while being subtle enough that they don't cause armed rebellion. This would require the dems to be ideologically opposed to fascism, which they aren't (see their support for Israel as one easy example).
What’s the impact of this individual being Speaker?
Nothing too special, the government probably gets shut down at some point when they try to hold funding hostage, but at the end of the day business as usual (which is, to be clear, very bad) continues apace.
Fortunately, not a whole lot.
If Democrats control the Senate.
And if he can be removed in 2024.
Our government was designed, probably not intentionally but it is possible, to not work.
Currently it's not working so we can't do anything unless the president orders it, which isn't how shit is supposed to work but now has precedent.
American exceptionalism strikes again
How we ended up here: Following Trump, an increasingly aggressive, authoritarian, what you might call fascist far right coalition has started causing problems in the house (ironically, they're called the Freedom Caucus). The Republicans are divided, but they technically have the majority along registered party lines. Because of this, the Freedom Caucus can choose to force them to do things because, without them, they can't do anything at all without crossing the aisle.
What effect it have: Mostly nothing. Democrats have a majority in the senate and hold the presidency. The house alone can't pass anything. They can vote on things and pass it on to the senate where it will die if it's bad, but that's it. They can also choose to not allow a vote on bills with bipartisan support that would pass if they didn't have control.
The largest effect will hopefully be in the elections. Hopefully people see this shit and choose to vote for something else. There's no way to know though. This could empower them potentially by allowing them to grandstand and maybe force the senate to vote against things that are poisoned to make then look bad.
How we ended up here: Following Trump,
no. stop. history didn't start 3 years ago. rightwing christians made abortion a wedge issue in the 1970s, dominionism is older than that, and creationists have been actively sabotaging public education forever. Meanwhile democrats abandoned new deal politics for neoliberalism and constantly punch left while seeking compromise with the fascists, creating a ratchet effect on american politics.
nd that's without even getting into the founded on slavery and genocide thing, america has always been evil and was only briefly the lesser evil 70 years ago.
I am not interested at having to let guys like this shove me around at literally any point in time for literally any reason, god or no
I've heard stories about people who took up arms against people trying to force their religion on others. They were the heros of those stories so lets see how this works out for him.
I hate how we only find out about these fuckshits AFTER they come to power.
expired
Americans don't learn on their own faults, do they... After electing a complete idiot and criminal for a president, they give the house majority to the same party that chose Trump as their candidate (twice!) It's absolutely not surprising to me that the party that had Trump as its candidate twice, now appointed this moron as a speaker. But Americans could learn on their own faults...
Thomas Jefferson isn't real, ya'll.
So, uh, what are you doing here then?
He's busy Implementing his version of the will of God that just so coincidentally is exactly in line with the sick shit that he likes to do. Perfect match, that's why God put him in this place.
I'll leave it up to you to figure out if I'm serious or sarcastic
I'll leave it up to you to figure out if I'm serious or sarcastic
I just. Can't. Tell.
I've read somewhere else a book recommendation, and after having read it I can recommend it to you:
"Christian Nation" is an alternate history novel by Frederick Rich about the USA turned into a wholly fanatical theocracy with the necessary amendments to the constitution for it to be lawful and everything else.
From the description in one of those online book-selling websites:
"They said what they would do, and we did not listen. Then they did what they said they would do."
So ends the first chapter of this brilliantly readable counterfactual novel, reminding us that America’s Christian fundamentalists have been consistently clear about their vision for a "Christian Nation" and dead serious about acquiring the political power to achieve it. When President McCain dies and Sarah Palin becomes president, the reader, along with the nation, stumbles down a terrifyingly credible path toward theocracy, realizing too late that the Christian right meant precisely what it said.
In the spirit of Philip Roth’s The Plot Against America, one of America’s foremost lawyers lays out in chilling detail what such a future might look like: constitutional protections dismantled; all aspects of life dominated by an authoritarian law called "The Blessing," enforced by a totally integrated digital world known as the "Purity Web." Readers will find themselves haunted by the questions the narrator struggles to answer in this fictional memoir: "What happened, why did it happen, how could it have happened?"
Edit: I've read it in epub format on my phone.
Is that the prequel for a handmaids tale?
Nope. It's a different novel, by a different author, in a different way. Margaret Atwood is a much better writer, in my opinion, but Frederick Rich's book is, nonetheless, a real page-turner in a way that if you start reading it in the evening, get ready for a sleepless night.
The house will decide your fate.
I AM the house!
The dream of the Islamic state came true
Cool. Cool cool cool. Glad we've got this turd as speaker 🫠
This is a ... thing for him to say, but also everyone in this thread read both Losurdo's Liberalism: A Counter-History and Kruze's One Nation Under God
It's actually his platform, he has spent his entire career trying to dismantle democracy and promote Christo-fascism. He is wildly popular in his district.
That is their origin but they mean different things.
Lol that's a great visual
Always have been 🧑🚀
I never thought I'd say this, but can we have Mitch McConnell back?
Assuming you're not American and are unfamiliar with our bicameral legislature: Mitch McConnell is a Republican senator from Kentucky who served as the Senate Majority Leader when Republicans held a majority in the Senate. Mike Johnson, on the other hand, is a Republican representative in the House of Representatives--the other half of Congress--who was elected to the position of Speaker by a majority of House Republicans. The Speaker is second in line to the Presidency and actually be held by anyone. However, at no time has Mitch McConnell been Speaker of the House.
If you are American: Jesus Christ go back to civics class.
No! Fuck no. Absolutely not.
I better get my gay gangbang desires out of the way before this guy gets to say anything about it. I gotta ask my wife first. She said no. Again. Well I will ask her once more and if she says no again we'll see who gets the last laugh. She said no again. Either way, I'm going to keep voting for liberals. Because someone in this country must keep the gangbang lifestyle moving forward. More gay gangbang and less war!
This “not a democracy, a republic” crap is becoming more and more popular on the right. They’re not even trying to hide the authoritarianism and fascism any more. They’re now openly saying they don’t support democracy.
It's literally "democracy = Democrats" and "a republic = republican" to them, simple as.
The Democrats should rename themselves the "Freedom Liberty" party just to fuck with em. Take back some of their words.
This is great, call it the Patriot Party or something and talk about how government waste has turned "Citizens On Patrol" into a bunch of lazy, freedom-suppressing, union members.
We already have the Libertarian party, which is the actual Freedom Liberty party.
A republic is a type of democracy. This guy is an idiot. 
No, republic just means that the role of head of state isn't hereditary. Lots of dictatorships are republics, some democracies are as well. The actual political system of the USA is representative democracy (in theory at least).
The fact that these terms are so muddled in the minds of the average American is completely deliberate, because it makes it so much easier for them to subvert US democracy when people have been told that the US is not one.
I just looked it up and did not find a concise definition. According to the German bpb even dictatorships can be republics.
https://www.bpb.de/kurz-knapp/lexika/lexikon-in-einfacher-sprache/250057/republik/
Not necessarily, North Korea is technically a republic.
Yeah, they really should pop open one of those dictionaries – if they know what those are – and look at the definition of republic.
Some grade 9 ass shit. A republic IS a democratic structure of government. It's representative democracy.
I think what they're getting at is that majority does not neccesarily rule in the US. You can have an election where a majority of voters go one way but the electoral college (your representation) goes another.
Idk why they want to harp on that right now but whatever.