No, not at all. Biblical law: Kill all the males and impregnate/enslave the females.
Leviticus 21:5 ESV / 15 helpful votes
They shall not make bald patches on their heads, nor shave off the edges of their beards, nor make any cuts on their body.
Leviticus 19:28, which says,”You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks on you: I am the Lord.”
Dude shaves his head and has tattoos. That’s a stoning.
Y’all can keep your Theocracy nonsense. I hear some places overseas think it’s a good idea, but I somehow doubt this guy would agree with them. They DO have a biblical sense of justice.
@Faffenreffer is absolutely correct in his statement and ignores nothing.
There’s a difference between recognising the broad influence and legacy of Biblical law and jurisprudence in successor legal systems in the West on the one hand and claiming that judges should be members of a particular reason and take a specifically “Biblical view of justice” on the other – especially since that view involves barbaric practises based in nothing more than superstition and hatred of the Other.
The Framers, well aware of that distinction, put the Establishment Clause into the First Amendment and Clause 3 into Article VI precisely to avoid what this Xtianist yahoo is advocating. Sell your disingenuous “concern” somewhere else; no-one here is buying.
Having a black & white world view will make it much easier to reach decisions and be out of the courtroom fast enough to make their tee time.
Not all tools are edged. I would argue that dildos are tools, and this guy is a dildo.
And yet the things they do believe in… hooo boy.
People who say they favor a “Biblical view of justice” have usually broken at least seven and often all ten Commandments. They always believe they have a special dispensation from the Almighty, so it’s all good.
I think Bill O’Reilly says something like that. That’s all I have to say about your statement.
How utterly delightful to find some that high up in government to whom the Constitution might as well be written in Linear B and to whom the concepts of a secular legal system as intended form day one are as foreign as tensor Calculus.
Maybe we should start requiring a basic test of the Constitution before someone gets an appointed Federal job where they swear an oath to protect and defend it.
I am ashamed of our current administration and I used to be a conservative until the nut jobs and religious
whackos took over.
Now if he’d just use that “biblical” perspective on the Orange in Chief it could be really amusing.
POINTING OUT INTOLERANCE IS THE REAL INTOLERANCE
And by ‘Biblical’, he means specifically the stuff about eyes for eyes and teeth for teeth, and pain, shame, and suffering in general. None o’ that lovey-dovey New Testament turn-the-other-cheek crap. And that thing about rendering unto Caesar, jeez. How did that happy horseshit ever get in there?
Not shocked, not at all. Horrified, terrified, “watching a train wreck in slow motion” can’t look away, but no, not shocked.
Then we are, it would seem, in complete agreement.
We’re all just in a simulation:
Yep. Amazes me how Rush Limbaugh lost no fans at all after he admitted to drug addiction, and got busted flying to a sex traffic heavy country with a suitcase full of condoms.
…and continues to look down from his moral high ground on people who do the same.
Actually, the so called “Christian values” also go back to ancient Greece. The philosophers of the classic antique (or their chronists) wrote down a lot more and a lot more acceptable thoughts about ethics and justice than you will find in any “holy book”.
Because Christians are well-known for skipping the entirety of the Old Testament, especially when it lets them discriminate against minorities. I wonder how he feels about homosexuality, being an NT man, since Jesus had fuck all to say about it. Hmm.
Trump promised to drain the swamp, but all he does is scraping the barrel.
I have no problem with religious people. I have a REAL problem with religious people seeking to impose their religious views on the rest of us through the application of religious law. As a entirely secular person, I have no interest in the biblical view on issues such as marriage rights and my right to make medical decisions for myself and rape. Gay people getting married, women having access to birth control, and having protections from sexual predators does NOTHING to impinge on the religious rights of my fellow citizens, while banning these most certainly infringes upon the rights of their fellow citizens.