If he persists in believing that God promised not to dick us all over, there's always: "Ah, well. /GOD/ promised not to. But He didn't say anything about man-made effects, or about letting the nature He created just run its own course without His interference, and there'll still be an earth left to gather the angels from after the whole place has been flooded or rendered barren or desertified - just a really messed up one."
This explanation assumes that the Senator doesn't think that his interpretation of the Bible must be correct despite drawing mostly from thin air, and that he is open to having his interpretation of his holy text challenged.
Shouldn't the separation of Church and State suggest that religious views should not be allowed to openly influence policy making? I know the country is kind of hit-and-miss about its application and interpretation of such, but it may still be an option if the challenge is well worded.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2011-01-07 12:44 am (UTC)"Ah, well. /GOD/ promised not to. But He didn't say anything about man-made effects, or about letting the nature He created just run its own course without His interference, and there'll still be an earth left to gather the angels from after the whole place has been flooded or rendered barren or desertified - just a really messed up one."
This explanation assumes that the Senator doesn't think that his interpretation of the Bible must be correct despite drawing mostly from thin air, and that he is open to having his interpretation of his holy text challenged.
Shouldn't the separation of Church and State suggest that religious views should not be allowed to openly influence policy making? I know the country is kind of hit-and-miss about its application and interpretation of such, but it may still be an option if the challenge is well worded.