7 2

LINK Baptist Preacher’s Invocation in Virginia House Condemns Non-Christians to Hell | Hemant Mehta | Friendly Atheist | Patheos

It isn't surprising that this hatred was allowed in a government building... My surprise that someone spoke out against it.

By DGJ01147
Actions Follow Post Like

Post a comment Add Source Add Photo

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


Oh no... I'm going to a place that doesn't exist.

Dyl1983 Level 6 July 18, 2019

I will be happy to live in hell if that means I never have to look at another fucking "christian".


I often wonder if their anuses get extremely jealous of their mouths when they dribble so much shit all of the time?

Triphid Level 8 Apr 16, 2019

That is actually pretty tame by fundamentalist standards. I can assure you he toned it down for public consumption, compared to what he utters from the pulpit.

I'm not saying that to justify it, just to put it in perspective. This is just matter of fact dogma to fundamentalists; they don't see it as hateful or otherizing; indeed, they even see it as "loving" in that they are warning sinners of the peril they put themselves in. And I would imagine that the ironically named Rev Snipes would be baffled and hurt by the pushback, for about 5 seconds, and then proud that he had been "persecuted for righteousness' sake". In the world of self-ratifying nonsense that is fundamentalism, he would see the criticism as confirmation he's doing it RIGHT.

Why not more people calling him out? They realize they may jeopardize their own hold on power with such call-outs as they will offend way more people than they will give pause. The political solution is, as AOC puts it well, not to focus on "calling people out" but rather on "calling people in". They need to speak to the kinds of invocations they want to see rather than the ones they don't. And even these two objectors did a good deal of that. After all, if you're arguing FOR inclusiveness and ecumenical sentiment, that is something that even a fundamentalist will understand even if they think it's misguided. But if you directly attack them then they'll just see it as an existential threat. It should be framed as a disagreement about what's appropriate, not over opposition to what believers believe.

When you stop to think of it, that'd just be good politics, as you don't want to commit the opposite error in the other direction. In other words if Rev Snipes made the error of turning what was supposed to be an inspirational leadership moment into a thinly veiled ideological attack, it makes zero sense to respond with an opposing ideological attack; then it's just two ideologies arguing about who is right. It needs to be acting not in accordance with ideology but in accordance with what constitutes civil debate and discourse, regardless of the view that informs it.

mordant Level 8 Apr 15, 2019

At least he didn't call down fire and brimstone on us heathens sinners! Would have been awkward if the whole assembly was smitten on live TV!

jondspen Level 7 Apr 14, 2019

Might be able to get industrial light & magic to come up with that 🤔

@oldFloyd Ehhh...this is one time I was actually hoping for the real thing!!! smile002.gif


the bible is full of condemming and crap like that it is a book of fiction


Eh, you invite a cow to the podium, it's going to "moo". lol Everything he prayed comes straight out of the Bible.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text 'q:331114'.
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content read full disclaimer.
  • is a non-profit community for atheists, agnostics, humanists, freethinkers, skeptics and others!