Every Child Needs Jesus Law Passed In Oklahoma

Every Child Needs Jesus Law Passed In Oklahoma July 13, 2015

Oklahoma

Oklahoma City Last night Governor Andrew Kannard signed bill 10A-1-4-72, commonly referred to as the “Every Child Needs Jesus” bill, into law. Both legislative houses had overwhelmingly voted for the bill earlier in the day, and Governor Kannard rushed to put the people’s — as well as God’s — will into action.

The new law is seen as a victory for social conservatives who have recently suffered a string of defeats. The Supreme Court’s recent pro-marriage equality decision is seen by many in Oklahoma as the last legal barrier holding back waves of happy homosexuals from flooding the streets. The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled in June that the monument of the Ten Commandments that is on Capitol grounds is unconstitutional. Many God fearing parishioners felt besieged by modernity.

“Jesus is back, and he intends on staying,” announced State Representative William Frederick Pickering. “This law fully funds case managers and the Family Apostolic Court (FAC). Our children will be fully protected from hell fire and the horrors of Obama-culture.”

Under the new law every child in the state will have a special Family Apostolic Court Shepherd (FACS)  appointed to him or her. The task of these caseworkers/shepherds is to guarantee that each member of their flock is exposed to Jesus. Those in favor of this new program point out that every family’s religious tradition will be respected. “We even have a few Catholics mucking about,” stated Abraham Jacobs, FAC’s Ombudsman.

Critics of the law point out that while proponents state that children will only be exposed to Jesus, the legalistic language is far more ambiguous. For example, the law is written so that Jewish children may have to celebrate Hanukkah in July to make sure there is no confusion between the Festival of Lights and celebrating the manifestation of God into flesh. Muslim children may or may not have to wear Jesus isn’t through with me yet! vintage t shirts.

Fiscal conservatives are also pleased with the recent turn of events. The new law requires no extra revenues, so taxes and fees will not have to be raised. This financial miracle has been achieved by shutting down the state’s family drug court and reallocating all the social workers from the Department of Children and Families.

“God works in financially mysterious ways,” beamed Representative Pickering.

Children around the state have mixed feelings about being exposed to Jesus via overworked and underpaid FACS. Younger children are perplexed by having to make artistic depictions of the Great Flood with macaroni and glue. Many older children are reading their good books and learning important Bible verses in order to test out of the program at 15.

Local atheists are not too upset with this state enforced indoctrination. It’s commonly understood that 10A-1-4-72 will be struck down in the courts as unconstitutional, and spreading biblical literacy is a sure fire way to make more atheists.

 

 

 

 

 


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Tuna

    What if they had taken all of the time and effort that went into crafting and passing this bill, and used it to make sure none of those precious children went hungry? What if they assigned social workers to make sure every child had a safe place to live?

    • ohnugget001

      “What if …?”

      Because that would have been more Christ-like (at least in his hippy persona) rather than the OT Yahweh who they really worship.

      And I’m hoping you actually realize this is an Onionesque article.

    • Annerdr

      Tuna, please see your physician. I think you are suffering from irony poor blood.

      • Tuna

        I was having a Roseanne Roseannadanna moment. Caffeine has been administered. I’m all better now. 😉

    • Jim Jones

      What are you? Some sort of dirty commie? Those children need to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps . . . once they can afford to buy boots.

  • jrb16915

    I am not sure why atheists think a school system that only exposes children to humanist secularism is some how neutral in its treatment of religion. If you are able to be objective that forcing an atheistic agenda into the school system is no more open minded than the pretend law you had to make up just to have something to piss and moan about.

    • Annerdr

      Because secularism is not a religion. it’s a lack of religion. Like bald isn’t a hair color. And mixing the sacred and the profane has never turned out well for either. When religions gain secular power, they historically have lost focus on their religious mission and focused more on consolidating power. This is why groups like Americans United, a group led by a Christian, encourage separation of church and state.

      Humanism is the desire to help your species. I’m not sure what your beef with that is. Every group to help the homeless or feed the poor is humanist, even when their motivation is their religion. Humanism is completely consistent with religion except when religion encourages adherents to harm themselves or others. When I was Christian, I was also a humanist.

      • jrb16915

        If only bald people were allowed to teach in school, and children were taught that bald people where honest and sincere and people with hair were judgmental bigots, I guess you would see no problem with that.

        Do you think for example that children should be taught that the crusade or war of the roses were fought at least in part over disagreements on religion?

        Do you think children should be taught that Stalin and Mao outlawed religion in their countries?

        Or should schools pretend that the only world view that is acceptable is the world view of the atheist.

        I am not suggesting the atheist view should driven out of the schools. I just don’t think the schools owe that world view a monopoly. I think if a teacher wants to wear a Star of David, or a Crescent or a Cross they should be allowed. If a history teacher teaching his class about Nazism is Jewish and wants to let his class know his personal perspective on the Nazi’s he should be allowed. I don’t think everyone should have to figuratively shave their heads, so that we can pretend everyone is an atheist.

        • TheMightyFicus

          But you CAN wear personal religious icons at school as long as they are not intrusive and you don’t proselytize to the students. And students should definitely be taught about religious influence on the crusades and the War of the Roses and about Stalin and Mao’s religious stances because that is what happened and there are facts to back it up (which is why the baldness affecting honesty comparison doesn’t actually work). The problem, it seems, is that we want provable, unbiased facts taught in schools instead of assertations of truth that have no supporting evidence.

        • Annerdr

          You create a bunch of hypotheticals that don’t happen. History should be taught to children based on the best understanding of professional historians. Teachers are allowed to wear a cross or a crescent or a Star of David or no jewelry at all.
          Christians aren’t allowed to teach creationism as science because that is a specifically Christian origin story found in their religious book. Just as a Hindu teacher wouldn’t be able to their origin story found in their religious books. Instead, we teach science to children based on the best understanding of professional scientists.

        • SamCam

          Not sure what you mean by the “atheist world view”. That the crusades were (at least in part) over religion isn’t excluded from the “atheist world view”. Neither are the actions of Stalin or Mao. That the Nazis had an agenda to exterminate Jews, among others, is pretty widely taught and I’ve never heard any atheist suggest it shouldn’t be or that a Jewish teacher shouldn’t be able to give some of their own perspective.

          Complaints of atheists tend to be around Christian pastors having exclusive access to kids during school time, distribution of Bibles, and teachers actively bullying kids of different religions or no religion. Not personal jewelry, especially if it’s not obtrusive.

        • Jim Jones

          > Do you think children should be taught that Stalin and Mao outlawed religion in their countries?

          A perfect example of lies taught instead of truth.

          When Stalin came to power there were only about 500 Orthodox Russian churches left (down from 54,000), but when he died there were about 25,000

          Nikita Khrushchev initiated his own campaign against the Russian Orthodox Church and forced the closure of about 12,000 churches.

          And yet he wants teachers to lie to children so they wind up as ignorant as he is.

          • jrb16915

            Stalin came to power in 1924. In the time between 1927 and 1940, the number of Orthodox Churches in the Russian Republic fell from 29,584 to less than 500. Between 1917 and 1935, 130,000 Orthodox priests were arrested. Of these, 95,000 were put to death.

        • CoffeeAddict001

          What the hell is the “atheist view?” If you’re upset that public schools do not promote/encourage your personal religion, then send your kid to a private religious institution.

          ETA: In what world do we have to pretend that everyone is an atheist? When I was in HS, we had “See You at the Pole” prayer events every year, religious organizations/clubs that met at school, and creationism was taught in my science class along with evolution (which is outlandish, btw). Same with college and graduate school… different religions groups were present and accepted on campus and in the classroom. Just because your religion isn’t ruling the world doesn’t mean that you’re being silenced.

          • UncommonCents

            They can’t understand the difference between teaching a religion in schools and teaching about religions and events in history involving them.

          • MarquisDeMoo

            His mention of the War Of The Roses makes me wonder if like me he is British. In which case instead of ‘public schools’ you would have to say ‘state schools’ as public schools in the UK were historically the first schools open to the public on a fee paying basis, hence are what you would call private schools. Two nations divided by a common language or what?

          • CoffeeAddict001

            Ah, thanks for clarification. 🙂 If by chance he is British, is there an evil, malicious, “atheist view” being pushed upon innocent children in your schools across the pond?

          • MarquisDeMoo

            Not so much atheism. We have the ‘Trojan Horse’ scandal whereby the boards of governors of certain schools have been loaded with Islamists trying to push their agenda on the schools. Christian Creationism is not a serious issue as most Christians here treat the bible as apocryphal and do not take it literally. However the Islamists are more like your Creationists than either side might wish to admit. That said the Christians here like yours scream persecution when you take away their right to proselytise in schools or discriminate in society.

            http://www.secularism.org.uk/

        • UncommonCents

          Is that the best you can do?
          Using an obviously ridiculous fallacy to make a point? HA!
          You are so deluded.

    • Chuck Farley

      You conflated secular humanism with atheism, and It only took you two sentences.

    • Jim Jones

      > an atheistic agenda

      Like teaching the truth is better than teaching children silly lies? That ‘agenda’?

      • jrb16915

        So you are sure your world view has a monopoly on truth and all others should be excluded.

        • Jim Jones

          I’m more than happy to accept the views of over 90% of the scientists who study biology, especially since evolution is so obviously true, even to me.

          If there is a hell, those who lie to the children who trust them will surely burn there forever. Or is there a bible verse where Jesus says, “Keep them stupid and ignorant”?

    • UncommonCents

      If you are willing to send your child to a school to learn and adopt a religion different than your own; then we’ll talk about the objectivity of religion vs secular in public schools.

      • jrb16915

        I am Catholic. I would be happy to Hindus, Muslims, Jewish Rabbis, and the entire spectrum of protestant ministers as well as atheists teach in school why they believe what they believe. I would like my children to be learn why people believe what they believe,

        • MarquisDeMoo

          You are confused by the differences between secularism, Humanism and atheism. For the school to teach about the entire spectrum of religions as you suggest without bias it would have to be secular. You can be Christian and secularist and many are. Humanism is a philosophy and ethics for guiding your life much as religions are. I agree many atheists are both secularists and Humanists but atheism itself is nothing more than stating a god is unproven. It comes with no beliefs or dogma. Thus I support your view that children should be taught about all religions and atheism, which should be done in a secular environment to avoid bias.

          • UncommonCents

            Teaching religion and teaching about religion are two completely different things.
            To teach every religion would take more than a lifetime and would entail bias from every point of view.

          • MarquisDeMoo

            Not sure what your point is; why would anyone want to teach every religion? All you need do is give the precepts. You don’t teach every job to children you give the precepts and let them decide on a career.

  • MarquisDeMoo

    Despite the odd differences between American and British English I assume it should be “not ‘too’ upset”?

    • Thank you. Missed that one and changing that now.

      • MarquisDeMoo

        Spell checkers are really great but annoyingly not so good at context.

  • Ryene A.

    Ugh… you know, I wouldn’t put it past OK to do something like that.

    • Oklahoma and Mississippi are vying to be my favorite states to bust on.

      • Annerdr

        Hey! Don’t leave Tennessee out. We put the dumb in dumbass.

      • UncommonCents

        I’m guessing Texas isn’t on your list since it writes it’s own satire then appoints it to Governor.

  • Margaret Whitestone

    You got me. I was ready to pound my head against the wall when I found out it was satire. Sadly you’ve probably given some idiot religiouslature nutjobs ideas.

    • Snowflake

      Yeah, he got me also. I ranted for a bit, scrolled down to the comments.

      Some of us are old here. Took a while for the heart to slow down.

      This should win Poe of The Year Award.

  • Peter_J88

    If there was an Atheist Onion this would be a story published by it…

  • Bob Jase

    Free will apparently only pertains to Christians,

  • SamCam

    Kind of believable since a legislator did suggest a law requiring church attendance might be a good idea (note she didn’t actually propose a law for enactment, just mentioned it as a possibility).

    • dagobarbz, fine Italian shoes

      After the Pilgrims got here, they made it illegal to skip church on Sundays. Failure to comply would get you a session in the stocks, along with lots of free fruit past its prime.

      • SamCam

        sure, but that was pre-Costitution (or pre-14th amendment, anyway. church attendance could stil have been mandated by states before then)

        • dagobarbz, fine Italian shoes

          I know, but just sayin. They’d do it if they could.

  • lady_black

    This is a reprint from The Onion, right?

  • graciebaddog

    I spit the hook out at “We even have a few Catholics mucking about,”

  • Without Malice

    The sad thing is; if they could legally do this they would do it in a heartbeat. That’s just how nuts these folks are, and how dangerous.

  • Doug B

    Poe’s Law. Took me halfway through to see it. Wow.

    • Thanks for the wow. That’s what I shoot for.

  • Thin-ice

    The line is so blurred these days between parody and actual evangelical behavior, that us poor readers go crazy trying to figure if this shit is real or not.

    • Alicia

      I actually swallowed it hook line and sinker. The fact that something is 100% against the establishment clause doesn’t seem to be any barrier whatsoever in OK, so I just grunted and moved on with my life. Figured it’d give the FFRF folks a bit of work.

      • Thin-ice

        And since I’m the VP of the local Portland chapter of FFRF, we appreciate the “bit of work”!