North Carolina Senate Stems the Tide of Religious Thuggery by… Imposing Their Own Religious Thuggery

A few days ago, the Senate in North Carolina tinkered with a bill called the Family, Faith, and Freedom Protection Act of 2013. It had been referred to as the anti-Sharia bill, but that was before the lawmakers pulled a creative switcheroo (or maybe adderoo). The Atlantic explains:

The North Carolina Senate is not only considering an anti-Sharia (or Islamic law) bill passed in the state’s House earlier this year, they’ve tricked it out with a whole new issue. House Bill 695, which began as a cookie-cutter ban on the use of foreign law in family law and custody cases, now would implement several restrictions on abortion services in the state.

The irony is thick on the ground here. But no need for me to elaborate, because Tina Dupuy already did, and it’s a doozy:

North Carolina state legislators introduced what was described as an anti-Sharia law bill this week. The concern was a religion would trump our laws — threaten our constitution. This religion, they fear, would dictate our rights and punish dissent. It would blur the lines between church and state! Women would be subjugated! This is such a threat North Carolina lawmakers must act posthaste!

Then, with absolutely zero appreciation for irony, the state senate amended the bill to quickly and somewhat secretly restrict access to legal and constitutionally-protected abortion.

Why? Their religious convictions.

Then Dupuy goes from micro to macro, neatly finishing off her point with humor and passion:

Christianity has been used to justify everything from the crusades, sectarian wars and inquisitions, to witch burnings, cross burnings and Christian rock. The idea that it would be a better basis for a free country isn’t supported by history.

Theology makes for horrible government. (See: every theocracy ever.) No matter how wonderful it seems, in theory, for everyone to be of the same religion — praying the same way to the same god — it never ends with expansive human rights for all people.

So, in summary: To thwart the so-called religious threat posed by maybe one-third of one percent of the U.S. population, the North Carolina lawmakers are bravely making good on their own threat to impose their massive cult’s religious mandates on everyone else.

Funny, or outrageous? I vote both.

(image via Think Progress)

About Terry Firma

Terry Firma, though born and Journalism-school-educated in Europe, has lived in the U.S. for the past 20-odd years. Stateside, his feature articles have been published in the New York Times, Reason, Rolling Stone, Playboy, and Wired. Terry is the founder and Main Mischief Maker of Moral Compass, a site that pokes fun at the delusional claim by people of faith that a belief in God equips them with superior moral standards.

  • baal

    Don’t those two gentlemen in red shirts have something better to do than stand around lying for Jesus?

  • blah

    Pro-abortionists: Keeping it classy since…….?

    Nice work all. Still think you’re “good without God?” Think again.

    The worst part, handing a sign for the kid to hold. Wow

  • The Other Weirdo

    Well, it’s better than joining a mission with Captain Kirk.

  • Sven2547

    Oh no, a kid was holding a sign with some profanity on it, clearly all pro-choice atheists are evil insensitive people! I must hurry to an atheist blog to paste a link to my manufactured outrage!

    And get this through your christian-male-supremacist head: there is no such thing as “pro-abortionists”. The pro-choice crowd wants abortions to be rare. In stark contrast, the so-called “pro-life” conservatives are fighting against the most effective anti-abortion measures: contraceptives, education, and social welfare.

  • Greg G.

    Yes, but Captain Kirk is real.

  • BradGunnerSGT

    ” it never ends with expansive human rights for all people.”

    There’s your problem. You assume that these people actually want expansive human rights for all people. They just want expansive human rights for their people.

  • baal

    Of course he’s real. I’ve heard him speak Esperanto* (see 1:13).

    *a language created by Espers for non-espers.

  • Cyrus Palmer

    I’ve never seen so much hate on one sign, or two people so proud of so much hate. Fuck these guys.

  • PsiCop

    Another example of the “If Christians do it, it CAN’T be fascism” notion.

  • arensb

    To thwart the so-called religious threat posed by maybe one-third of one percent of the U.S. population,

    The US has nearly-homeopathic concentrations of Muslims. Therefore, they pose a larger threat than the Christian 75%. (This reasoning does not apply to the less than 1% who are Jews because shut up.)

  • Miss_Beara

    That is a lot of hate in one picture. Irony is completely lost in the fundies.

  • jferris

    If Jesus is the standard, humanity has set it’s sights way too low.

  • rhodent

    “Funny, or outrageous? I vote both.”

    Those of us who actually live in North Carolina only agree with the second one.

  • Paula M Smolik

    What’s wrong with making people use US laws in family and custody cases? There is a lot of shit in Islam and other religions. Women and children are treated like less than animals sometimes in other countries. They should obey our laws if they want to live here.

  • Thin-ice

    Blah. What an appropriate username.

    For every single sign that an atheist might hand to one of their offspring to hold, there are 500 or 1000 signs being handed by Christian parents to their offspring. Now there’s a case of the pot calling the kettle black, to the extreme. (and if you want Christian profanity on signs, check out Westboro Baptist signs.)

  • Bill Santagata

    It’s an inane law because foreign laws are not applicable in the United States. A judge is not going to say “Well North Carolina law mandates that the Court order x, but the laws of Islamic Republic of Iran say we have to do y, so I’m going with y.”

  • Holytape

    I wonder if those two gentlemen in the red shirts know that they make such a cute couple. And as a cute couple, they have no choice but to stone themselves.

  • Noelle

    That wasn’t the problem. The problem is tacking on a rider to the bill that would restrict rights based on religious beliefs. That’s some irony.

  • TBJ

    They should obey our laws if they want to live here.

    Got totalitarianism?

  • SeekerLancer

    “Jesus loves everyone, except for everyone who isn’t us.”

  • SphericalBunny

    “What’s wrong with making people use US laws in family and custody cases?”

    Nothing. It would be lovely if we could get Xtians to understand they’re not exempt either.

    “There is a lot of shit in Islam and other religions.”

    Yes. There’s a lot of shit in all religions. Like Christianity.

    “Women and children are treated like less than animals sometimes in other countries.”

    And with the restrictions on this bill, women would be treated as less than something that hasn’t developed a central nervous system or brain – which will probably have a knock-on effect on any present or future children they have or would’ve planned.

    “They should obey our laws if they want to live here.”

    Someone should really inform the Xtians of this…

  • Bjorn
  • TBJ

    The true definition of Pro Life Ideology: Save a baby but enslave the parent, to the Welfare System. Seems to me Pro Life is just another attempt to reinstitute slavery. But I doubt you can grasp that because you are still distracted by the pretty icing on the cake.

  • LutherW

    And if Christians don’t do it, it must be bad for you. Someone should do a study of who wears glasses more, Christian men or godless men. Depending on the result we could have even more fun with their scienceless beliefs!

  • C Peterson

    You don’t think it’s a bit circular to have a separate law that simply says you have to obey the law? What’s next? A law that says you must obey the law that requires you to obey the law? Crazy!

  • C Peterson

    No, they were both problems.

  • Mario Strada

    A link to “” really? That’s hilarious. Was not aware such an abomination existed. Do they give out free pizza for joining?

    BTW, where is the source of such outrage? All I see is an animated GIF. Nothing else.

    BTW, what does that have to do with the topic of the article? If there is one thing beside unoriginal manufactured outrage, is off topic outrage. I can just see the moron googling “atheist blogs” and quickly fill out the post without even reading what the article was about.

  • Carmelita Spats

    Classy? Pro-lifers are the ones who traffic in child pornography with pictures of grossie NAKED fetuses! Oh. My. Aphrodite. Have you no shame? No decency? It’s a child, not a choice, so you should really photoshop a little bikini on the microscopic bugger BEFORE you blow him up on poster-board for EVERY registered sex offender with an icky fetus fetish to get a hard on! It’s one thing to get a hard on for Jesus but when you involve NAKED fetuses, that’s just sick, Sir. I don’t know what kind of weird fetish you are into…Reynold’s Wrap and chipmunks and a bottle of Creme de Menthe? Old clogs and a rake? If you are involved in a fetus fetish, please cover them up before you blow them up. I bid you good day.

  • ShoeUnited

    Do the women who were raped by a family member that have illegal abortions that survie get life in prison or the death penalty for murdering an unborn child?

    Just want to know which side of the fence you weigh in on with punishing women because you didn’t want a safe surgery legal. Making the surgery illegal won’t stop it from happening. It was a problem before it was ruled legal, so do please tell me how you want to punish the women who got raped by a family member.

  • blah

    The fact they it was a pro-abortion rally and decided to chat “Hail satan”

    Wasn’t the original post about abortion?

  • blah

    That’s why I thought it was interesting. That it works both ways and that people from both viewpoints do this to their kids.

  • blah

    How many people does that actually happen to? Please, cite me a source and not Jerry Springer :/

    And yes, I do believe it’s murder. So it was a problem before it was allowed. Hmm…couldn’t that be said of every law that was changed?

    Homicide. Man! Now there’s a real problem. If only we would make it legal than it would morally acceptable and no longer a problem.

    That argument doesn’t really make much sense does it? Just because you try to shift the line of what is moral, doesn’t make it right.

    If so, let’s legalize homicide and theft. I’d be glad to come steal your valuables while you’re at work once theft is legalized. I’m sure you wouldn’t mind. After all, you probably have more than me anyway and THAT wouldn’t be fair would it? Geesh. Libs!

  • blah

    Interesting. I could have sworn this morning that I was female. Ha ha!

  • Feminerd

    Somewhere in the 2-5% of abortions are confirmed cases of rape and incest; there’s probably more, but a lot of rapes are not reported as such and the women surveyed don’t give it as their reason for getting an abortion.

    So, tens of thousands of women each year.

  • Artor

    They’re wearing red shirts. They’re already doomed.

  • Artor

    No, they want to destroy the welfare system too. You have to have babies, but once they’re born, you can all just starve to death. It’s the Pro-Life way, you moocher.

  • blah

    So 2% of abortions are confirmed cases of rape and incest. Therefore it must be okay to kill a baby. Have you ever heard of the adage, “two wrongs don’t make a right?” Yeah. That kind of applies here

  • blah

    I can post peanuts and people will “down-vote” my comment. What about the previous post can someone disagree with? Funny stuff!

    What I just realized is that both stories were run by The Atlantic. Interesting.

  • Beutelratti

    zygote/embryo/fetus =/= baby

  • Feminerd

    Two rights don’t make a wrong. Would you care to tell me why you think body slavery is not a wrong?

  • Grazzly

    Oh noes she killed mah baby!!!! Cleetus, git the shotgun!

  • Sven2547

    I never said you were male. Lots of women support the Christian-male-supremacist cause. Phyllis Schlafly is a big example.

  • Grazzly

    I bet you teach your kids that a guy got tortured and executed by Roman soldiers, CAME BACK TO LIFE, and flew up to Never-Never Land on fairy wings. Yet you want to talk about “child abuse”.

  • C.L. Honeycutt

    You’ve earned your downvotes by throwing out red herrings and changing the subjects to avoid having to respond to rebuttals to all your other posts.

    Maybe Jesus can help ‘oo wittle ego withstand seeing a mean ol’ number. You should ask him about that right after you ask him if he loves that you’re intentionally dishonest.

  • Baby_Raptor


    You want definitive proof we’re good without God? We don’t sit around whining about people using words we dislike.

    We worry about bigger things, like, say…Your lying. There’s no such thing as a pro-abortionist. You can keep trying to slander the pro-choice side all you want, and it’ll work with the lower IQ crowd. But the day you mature enough to value the truth…

  • Bear Millotts

    Would you have a problem if they chanted “Hail Zeus?” or “Hail Thor?” or “Hail Hades?” or “Hail Allah?”

  • RobMcCune

    We already have laws about people obeying the law. It’s called the law.

  • Bear Millotts

    So which is better? The parent that teaches their child to believe in a sky fairy with no evidence or one that teaches their child skepticism?

    Far better to teach the child to be skeptical of claims. At least then, the child can make their own decision based upon whether evidence exists to support that belief.

  • wmdkitty

    Or “Ia! Cthulhu!”

  • Malby

    Um, people in the US have to use US laws in family and custody cases already. Where’s the problem?

  • Bear Millotts

    Please accept my profound apologies for not including the Great Old Ones.

  • wmdkitty

    When one parent takes the child out of country, that can be a problem.

  • ShoeUnited

    You never said if you wanted the raped women to be killed or to spend life in prison. You don’t get to ask questions without answering any.

  • Tom

    I knew what was coming, but I watched it anyway. I don’t get peoples’ issue with that movie – as long as you just remember not to take it remotely seriously and simply revel in the OTT silliness, it’s actually pretty fun.

  • Stev84

    We don’t sit around whining about people using words we dislike

    That’s certainly not true.

  • onamission5

    Seems to me that first they want to do away with abortion, and then they want the unwilling parent to pull herself up by her (often nonexistent) bootstraps so she doesn’t become a “welfare queen.” Then, they will shame her for leaving her kid to be raised by daycare providers, and accuse her of caring more about her career than her kid. But if she can’t find a job which actually pays the bills, then she’s just lazy. Because there’s no winning when you have a uterus, you can’t do anything right, ever. Abort and you’re a horrible person, give birth under less than ideal circumstances and you’re a horrible parent.

  • Baby_Raptor

    Well, it was supposed to be a reference to the OP getting his/her panties in a wad over swear words, but you’re right. My phrasing was unclear.

  • Noelle

    Fair enough

  • blah

    But being pro-choice would imply that you are for abortions to be legal. If they were illegal, then there wouldn’t be a choice in the first place.

    So…you are pro-abortion.

  • blah

    Okay, how about prison

  • blah

    Well, considering my child is 10 months old, no. No, I do not.

    I bet you’re a person who can’t handle someone else thinking different than you, but yet you call yourself a free thinker because it makes feel important. Even if it is wrong because you don’t think freely at all. You too are a sheople who follows the trend of society.

    I bet you LOVE indoctrinating others about how bad it is to indoctrinate people. Irony? You don’t teach others that thinking is good, no matter what the concluding outcome is. You just teach how terrible religious people are. That isn’t free thinking at all.

    Either way, the child is being influenced right?

  • blah

    The first two, yes.

  • blah

    Clearly I’m not as butt-hurt as you people are. I was just saying it because I know that there are people who just hate me because I have come to a different conclusion than they have and not because they actually have put thought into this conversation.

    I admit there are a lot of people on the religious side of the discussion who have done the same thing. But, as soon as I try to point that out, people on both sides shut down. Wow.

    What rebuttal have I not responded to? Enlighten me, please.

  • C.L. Honeycutt

    Explaining at length that you don’t know the definition of “Freethinker” doesn’t exactly make you look less desperate and grasping.

  • C.L. Honeycutt

    Oh well gosh, saying “I’m rubber, you’re glue” completely wins!

    You’re the one whining about it due to your need to continually express your Christian Persecution Complex. Pray to Jesus to forgive you for lying, again, to protect your ego, again.

    The points you’ve dodged are in the exact places as I described them. Either quit lying or learn to read, whichever is your issue.

    I’m rubber, you’re stupid.

  • Sven2547

    No. You’re being stupid.
    If a woman chooses to have her baby, I support her decision. That is pro-choice, not “pro-abortion”.

    In stark contrast, the so-called “pro-life” crowd is still angry that she had a choice to begin with. They don’t want women to have that choice. They are anti-choice.

  • wmdkitty


  • Jim Charlotte

    The problem in North Carolina: gerrymandering. In the 2012 election there were 2 million votes cast for GOP congressional and state house candidates, and 2.2 million votes cast for Democratic congressional and state house candidates. Yet somehow the GOP has a super-majority in both houses.

  • blah

    So I’m lying now? What exactly about? What points did you point out that “I’ve dodged”? You said:

    1) That you think I look desperate b/c I called you out on
    your intolerance of someone with a different viewpoint. | I’m constantly amused by the sub-group that screams
    for “tolerance” but gets the word confused with the word
    “acceptance” then will turn around display intolerance for
    others. I see an inconsistency there, do you?

    2) You said that I didn’t respond to any rebuttals, but when
    asked to point them out you don’t.

    3) You claimed that my ego was hurt (btw it’s not)

  • Mira

    Maybe they’d make better decisions stoned…and let loose some of those inhibitions that keep their panties so tightly wadded.

  • Mira

    Carmelita, you come at me with old clogs and a rake and I don’t know what I’ll do with that. I’ll just…yeaaaah baby.

  • Mira