Sweet Home Alabama

I like the state of Alabama. Really, I do.

In 1995, I ran the Rocket City Marathon in Huntsville, Alabama. I’ve also been to Birmingham, as well as a couple of other small towns. It’s a nice place, filled with some real southern charm and class.

That said, given the choice between moving to Alabama or permanently affixing a Starbucks cup atop my nose while changing my name to Anal Rupture, I’d pick the latter. Without question.

In short, Alabama is fucked up. Not all of it. And not all of the people. But the politics is straight out of the 1950s, to the point where I truly believe many of the more vocal and powerful Republicans would gladly erase the majority of Civil Rights legislation in favor of a return to the good ol’ days of peace and harmony and separate drinking fountains. If only those damn Negroes hadn’t demanded certain things …

I digress. This blog has been a place to share and embrace some hella fine Alabama political ads, but the one above might be the bestest. It’s paid for by a group called the True Republican PAC, and accuses a Republican gubernatorial candidate named Bradley Byrne of (gasp!) believing in evolution! And saying that not everything in the Bible is true!

Dear heavens, the devil is coming! Let’s run for the bomb shelter, Millie! Run!

Sadly, we know where this one goes. Byrne drops a few points in the polls, then releases his own inane ad, standing alongside his family and saying “My opponents say I believe in evolution. They know darn well that I love and embrace God, and that he created the world in six days. Why, I even teach Sunday school at my little church back home in Bumbleville …”

Here’s the worst part: Byrne actually seems somewhat sensible. He’s a solid candidate with strong credentials who will end up in the mud with the idiot pigs.

PS: Crap—the dude actually did what I predicted. So sad. Here’s the statement, from his website …

•    I believe the Bible is the Word of God and that every single word of it is true. From the earliest parts of this campaign, a paraphrased and incomplete parsing of my words have been knowingly used to insinuate that I believe something different than that. My faith is at the center of my life and my belief in Jesus Christ as my personal savior and Lord guides my every action.

•    As a Christian and as a public servant, I have never wavered in my belief that this world and everything in it is a masterpiece created by the hands of God. As a member of the Alabama Board of Education, the record clearly shows that I fought to ensure the teaching of creationism in our school text books. Those who attack me have distorted, twisted and misrepresented my comments and are spewing utter lies to the people of this state.

•    I have a long and proven record when it comes to opposing tax increases on the people and businesses of Alabama. In 2003, I joined many other Republican lawmakers in supporting our Republican governor in voting to allow the people of Alabama to vote on a constitutional amendment that included a restructuring of our tax system, education enhancements and government accountability measures.   Every vote my attackers mention were included in that constitutional amendment and none of them could be implemented without the people’s approval.

•    Like so many other Alabamians, I was raised in a conservative-minded Democratic household. Nearly 15 years ago, I realized the Democrat Party had taken a sharp and decisive turn to the left. Its liberal social policies, wasteful spending habits and big-government expansion no longer represented the principles in which I believed. I became a Republican in 1997 and have been an active member of the Republican Party since then. Unlike all my opponents, I have worked hard to help elect conservative Republican candidates, to change the direction of our Democrat-controlled legislature and to help build a strong Republican Party in Alabama.

Pages: 1 2

34 thoughts on “Sweet Home Alabama”

  1. I’ve never understood why God and evolution have to be mutually exclusive. Or, for that matter, why the Bible is treated as a historical document rather than a religious one.

  2. Once again, proud son of Alabama here.

    Should be noted that Byrne won the Republican primary. I’m actually sadder that his opponent, Tim James (of that ad above and the “Language” ads) may have a shot at a runoff (it’s between him and newcomer Robert Bentley, a doctor who has offered not to take a salary until the state has 0% unemployment), something I didn’t see as possible considering how AWFUL his father, Fob, was as governor.

    Also, I want to note that Artur Davis got shellacked in the Democratic primary. Normally, most would chalk this up to good ol’ Alabama racism, but Davis may have run the worst campaign in history. I live in north Alabama, about 80 miles west of Huntsville, and I did not once see a Davis sign, commercial, or representative campaigning for him. Sparks, meanwhile, got out by playing nice, not bashing Davis but rather offering some bipartisanship and decency. All in all, I wasn’t horrifically disappointed in my home state on Tuesday.

  3. That ad is strikingly similar to the ads being run by both top Republicans in the California gubernatorial race. Both Steve Poizner and Meg Whitman have been running ads claiming that the other is more liberal and that the other has supported Democrat policies or people in the past. Its rather amusing to watch them do this.

  4. I don’t understand why someones personal belief is relevant when running for office.
    Sounds to me that his opponent tried to make religion an issue and Byrne was forced into a defensive position.
    You can’t blame Byrne for bringing religion into the race. What he did was not sad at all.

    What the people on this blog are doing, is saying religion IS important. Don’t elect someone who has strong Christian beliefs. You want only people that believe as you do.

    Evolution is a belief system. Creationism is a belief system. Neither has irrefutable proof. The public schools have shoved evolution down our throats. If you disagree with evolution you will find your GPA suffers. You may have trouble graduating, going to college, and getting a decent job. All because you don’t agree with their belief system. Talk about power.

  5. Jim K. said:
    “I’ve never understood … why the Bible is treated as a historical document rather than a religious one.”

    It is both. Archaeologists have found extensive proof of the historical accuracy of the bible.

  6. Evolution is based on science. Creationism is based on faith. While there may be some historical facts in the Bible, to say it is an historical document is absurd.

  7. No Ted, Evolution is no more based on science than Creationism is.

    Both the octopus and man have similar eyes.
    A creationist would say this is evidence that God used the same tool because it worked.
    Evolution created the term convergent evolution. It is the only way they can explain how to unrelated species have a similar trait.

    Archaeologists AKA “Scientists” have found extensive proof that the bible is historically accurate.
    Individuals, such as Paul, wrote about their personal experiences. That is called History.

    Having someone claim it is not history is no more true than those people claiming the earth is flat.
    You’re point is BS.

  8. jmw,

    You couldn’t be more wrong. So archaeologists have proof that the earth was created in six days? I’d love to see that. I guess carbon dating is just another of those tools of the devil. And dinosaurs were his pets.

    Of course there is evidence that men such as Moses and Jesus walked this earth. But calling the Bible a historical document is ridiculous. Even the Gospels have four different accounts! It’s the difference between ‘history’ and ‘theology’.

  9. Jim K
    They don’t have proof that it took any longer.
    Stick with the history of man. Archaeologists study humans not the universe.
    I’m not going to pretend to be an expert in carbon dating, but I have some idea how it works.
    Calculations are made based on readings when they know the historical age of a piece.
    For instance:
    An item from the Revolutionary War will give a reading. We can know that same reading will date other objects at that same age.
    Another object is found that we have a historical record of, say Leonardo Da Vinci art. Objects with that reading are dated as such. A mathematical equation is established that assumes this to be a constant.
    However there is no way to know how accurate this is beyond our known historical record. AND no way to prove it.
    Then there are the flukes. When Mt. St Helens blasted I remember some scientists from the U of Washington took samples of the Volcanic tuft, New Rock. They Carbon Dated it and it came out as 4.5 billion years old. They knew that wasn’t possible so they declared the results an anomaly and threw them out. That is how scientists get the results they want.

    The gospels do not have 4 different accounts. They are in perfect harmony.

  10. Carbon dating is the measurement of the build up of carbon in a certain object. Carbon has a natural build up over a year. They measure the level of carbon in a object like a rock and that will tell you how long the object, like a fossil, has been buried.

    Too say the Bible is the history of the universe is kind of laughable. And people who take the book literally is scary. To think that we are all born from the same two people? And that the Earth was destroyed by a flood and all that was left was Noah and his family? There is a lot of imbredding going on in the Bible. Not to mention the whole Jonah and the whale thing. It’s all highly unlikely. Evolution is not perfect but it is by far a more reasonable account than a magical being that created the whole world in a week. And Christians think the world is 6,000 years old. Seriously. I guess they think it’s like the Flintstones and man and dinosaurs lived side by side and they rode them around.

  11. Scott said it better than I ever could. Although most Christians with a brain don’t think the world is 6,000 years old.

    As for the Gospels, they were written by four different people, all well after Christ’s crucifixion (some decades after, in fact). I’m not saying they contradict each other, but they were not written as historical documents. They told the story of the life of Christ, each with different themes (John focuses on love, Mark on Jesus’ role as the Son of Man, etc.) To deny these facts and just say they are in ‘perfect harmony’ is an ignorant statement.

  12. While you may feel the bible doesn’t tell the history of the universe, would you agree it IS a historical book on the history of man?
    That was my original point.
    It was in response to Jim’s statement:
    “Or, for that matter, why the Bible is treated as a historical document rather than a religious one.”
    Anyone that says the bible is not a historical document simply doesn’t know what they are talking about.

  13. Carbon dating is not based on how much carbon builds up. It is determined by how much has decayed.
    It relies on an assumption that we can calculate how much carbon 14 was there to begin with.
    Carbon 14 amounts are results of cosmic ray activity. Scientists make the assumption, and it is a BIG assumption, that cosmic ray activity is a constant.
    If it was such a perfect system then we would not get different results from different labs, which does happen.

    Fact is none of that matters to God. God can make a universe to appear as any age he wants. It’s his Play-Doh he can do what he wants with it.

  14. As far as dating the earth, I don’t agree with the studies of Ussher who dates creation as 4004 BC.
    I don’t believe it is biblically accurate, it also fails in the secular record.
    He places Noah’s flood as 2348 BC. We have a very good historical record in China, Egypt, and S. America that goes back about 5,000 years.

    There is another bible study made in 1970, using the bible only, that dates creation at 11,013 BC. The variation is based on how time was kept. The observation was made that instead of a “begat” referring to a direct child it refers to the child (G.Child or Gr. G. Child) that was born at the same time the patriarch died.
    There are interesting correlations in the historical and secular record that line up to this time line.
    For instance:
    This bible dating says in the time of Peleg the Earth was divided (3153 B.C.
    to 2914 B.C
    ) . Scientists would call it continental drift. The bible indicates it was a sudden ripping, today they drift.
    The date of this occurrence corresponds to the Mayan date of the beginning of this age (August 3114 BC). Certainly if your Earth had been ripped apart it would be a new age.
    There are other secular correlations.

  15. In the end Evolution makes the claim everything evolved from something else. Even the creation of the universe was the result of something existing previously.
    Everything in the physical world must come from something else.


    Where did it all start?

  16. Yes, it is a surprise, a) because my religion has never taught that, and b) it has nothing to do with anything we’ve discussed. By the way, if you really care about God, you would capitalize the pronouns that refer to Him.

  17. Now you are nit picking.
    If there was an edit feature I would have corrected other things such as:
    This bible dating says in the time of Peleg the Earth was divided (3153 B.C.
    to 2914 B.C
    ) . Scientists would call it continental drift.

    (3153 B.C.
    to 2914 B.C).

    Would have looked better.
    The fact you are nit picking says you don’t have anything of value to say.
    I’ll play, where did I goof?

    I don’t doubt your religion never taught you right.
    There is a lot of religion that is taught to make people feel good, they give more $$$ when they feel good.
    Too many people are in it for the money.

  18. The fact that you presume that your religion is ‘right’ and mine is wrong is insulting. How in the hell do you know? I was educated by Jesuits, who undoubtedly had faith but used critical thinking and analysis, skills you clearly lack. Listen, if you want to believe that everything in the Bible is factually accurate, and come up with examples like platypuses and octupuses to disprove evolution, be my guest. Just don’t be upset when most of the scientific community laughs in your face.

  19. The Catholic Church is in rebellion against the word of God.

    The very leadership of the Catholic Church is not qualified to lead according to the bible.
    According to scripture those in charge of the church must be married, and not divorced.
    How many of those Jesuits were married?

    Plus there is that “call no man father” verse of scripture that kind of seals it.

    Oh, and the Catholic Church relies on fables and genealogy such as claiming Peter was in Rome. The bible warns against such people:

    1 Timothy 1:4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: [so do].

    2 Timothy 4:4 And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

    I am very familiar with the scientific community I was once a follower of their religion.
    I don’t really care about the scientific community, they have their god.
    All the science in the world will not save anyone from the wrath of God.

  20. Once again, completely offensive. The Bible also calls on all gays to be put to death (Leviticus 20:13). Let me know how that goes with your daughter (although she’s a woman, and the passage only cites men, so maybe lesbians get a pass). But since you reject the Holy Catholic Church, you’re a hopeless cause who will burn in hell for all eternity anyway. So you’ve got that going for you.

  21. Yes, and adultry is also punished by death.
    Yet later we have Jesus stepping between the crowd and the adulterous woman telling them, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”
    The point of these punishments is to establish that there is a penalty to be paid for sin.
    The penalty is death.
    The only way you can escape the penalty is to find somone qualified and able to take your sins on his back. Jesus is the only one qualified.

    The Catholic church claims to be a bible based religion, yet they do not follow the bible.
    Decide for yourself:
    1 Timothy 3:2
    A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
    1 Timothy 3:5
    (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

    The word translated Bishop means overseer. That would be the people that oversee the church be it the Pope or the parish priest – they MUST be married.

    I’m not worried about the Catholic church, they are false prophets.

  22. ‘translated’–in other words, YOUR interpretation. Which is why being a fundamentalist Christian always leads to insanity. You have to come up with cockamamy theories to ‘justify’ everything, including your breaking away from the One True Church. It also explains why your posts lack logic and sense.

  23. Jim
    I can understand why this is a problem for you. Some churches hold people with a fear that it is the church that will keep them from the wrath of God.
    Any threat to their church authority puts them in fear of their salvation.
    It is better to approach things (the unknown) with an open mind.

    I came up with a Catholic resource for you to explain the word.
    Before the Catholic link I also will give you the verse in the KJV and the Original Greek (Textus Receptus).
    (KJV) 1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

    (Greek/English Interlinear (tr) NT) 1 Timothy 3:2 dei (5904) {IT BEHOOVES} oun {THEN} ton {THE} episkopon {OVERSEER}
    That word, “episkopon” is addressed by the “United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.”


    In the comments section:
    Overseers: the Greek term episkopos literally means “one who oversees” or “one who supervises,”
    Was this at all helpful?

  24. Not really. Again, this is your interpretation. One could also interpret the emphasis to be on the number ‘one’, as opposed to multiple wives. But again, your misinterpretations have led you astray anyway, so it doesn’t really matter. You’re doomed.

  25. Now you’re just reachin’ for straws.

    1 Timothy 3 is very clear that overseeing a church is to be done by someone that has developed those skills running a family.
    Because the catholics lacked the skill of dealing with a family they mishandled the child abusers among them.
    In fact the inability to use proper disipline has been a problem for the church throughout time.

    Here is 1Tim3 from the Catholic bible:

    Therefore, a bishop must be irreproachable, married only once, temperate, self-controlled, decent, hospitable, able to teach,
    not a drunkard, not aggressive, but gentle, not contentious, not a lover of money.
    He must manage his own household well, keeping his children under control with perfect dignity;
    for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he take care of the church of God?

  26. What Would Jesus Do?

    Oh yeah, He was SINGLE. So He fails your own test.

    Catholics lean more towards the teachings of Paul (like Jesus, also celibate…notice a pattern here?)

    1 Corinthians 7:1 “It is a good thing for a man not to touch a woman.”

    1 Corinthians 7:7 “Indeed, I wish everyone to be as I am.”

    1 Corinthians 7:27 “Are you free of a wife? Then do not look for a wife.”

    1 Corinthians 7:32-33 “I should like you to be free of anxieties. An unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord. But a married man is anxious about the things of the world, how he may please his wife.”

    1 Corinthians 7:38 “So then, the one who marries his virgin does well; the one who does not marry her will do better.”

    By the way, celibacy for the priesthood is not a basic tenet of the faith. It has changed over the years and could change again. It is certainly NOT a good excuse to break away from the One True Faith.

  27. Jesus doesn’t fail my test at all. When he walked this earth there was no Christian Church. The Church was founded on his death.

    The Church is made up of all true believers from various denominations. Some are even from the church here on earth that calls itself Catholic. You are not saved because you joined the right organization, or follow a certain charismatic person, salvation is totally dependent on the mercy of God. If you don’t care about him he really has no obligation to save you. Mans only hope is to come as the publican:
    Luke 18:13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
    Luke 18:14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

    Our only hope is in the mercy of God.

    It is entirely possible, in fact likely, Paul was married but lost his family. Not unusual in his time to have a desease wipe out a family. The reason it was a benefit to him is because he traveled extensivly. His was a unique situation, but since he says marriage is a REQUIREMENT it is safe to say he was married at one time.

    1 Corinthians 7:1 is talking about those that are not married. We are not to be intimate unless we are married. Didn’t you check the context?
    There is nothing wrong with being unmarried it just doesn’t allow for such an individual to oversee the church.
    1 Corinthians 7:27 is speaking about those that have been divorced. Again check the context, the full verse:
    1 Corinthians 7:27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.
    That is my situation, my wife left the marriage so I can’t look for another. It is hard to deal with, I have always liked women. I am very familiar with these verses as I have looked for some kind of a way out. I have been single for the past 14 years. The only out is if my ex should die, I don’t want or expect that happen. I am celebate.

    1 Corinthians 7:32-33 is not talking about those overseeing the church. I have done more bible study when I was not with my wife than I did with her.

    In these latter times the Catholic church forbids Priests to marry. Pay close attention to verse 3.
    1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
    1 Timothy 4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
    1 Timothy 4:3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

  28. Well, this is going nowhere. It’s pretty obvious that you cannot accept counter-arguments, and that your self-righteousness has allowed you to twist your own interpretations into your perception of truth. Typical for a fundamentalist. Goodbye.

  29. I can accept counter arguments if they have substance, that is why I am no longer an Atheist, Reincarnationist, or Southern Baptist.
    It is clear you worship old men and your church instead of God.

Leave a Reply