Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Define "religious nut".

In Alphecca's post on the Shiflett case, a commenter noted
"the guy sounds like a religious nut (10 kids in a mobile home, “recite bible verses” ???)"
Last I checked, religious nuttery was still legal in this country. Hell, if Shiflett had shaved and combed his hair, he could have won Iowa.


Carteach said...

Those who would throw their neighbors to the wolves, will soon be kibble themselves.

He's obviously a (enter slur here) so of course he deserved (enter human rights violation here).

As I tell my students.... laws are enforced at the muzzle of a gun. Always have, always will be.

staghounds said...

If this had happened in Virginia, his name would have been enough. About a third of the criminal appeals cases there are Shifflett v. Commonwealth.

Anonymous said...

Next thing you know, they'll want to outlaw snake-handling in church.

Anonymous said...

People can make fun of those snake-handling versions of the Pentecostals, but I'll tell you something...if I was to ever find myself having to pick a service to attend, it'd be one that featured people banging on electric guitars, folks convulsing about, and hoistin' of serpents. Seems like it'd be a hell of a lot more entertaining than the average Methodist service.

Plus you could probably sneak a few Ministry and Rob Zombie riffs in there and no one would be the wiser...

Anonymous said...

Heck this country was FOUNDED by religious nuts with guns!

Anonymous said...

I don't understand it in the least.

I'm atheist, and I don't see the problem with this parent raising his kids as he sees fit.

It's not like he was raising them to be leftists or anything (hides)

daleosborn said...

So, Christians reciting the Bible are "religious nuts"? Heavens, if they actually sing the hymns with passion, why, we should institutionalize them!!!

Jeez, people, grow up. Thanks God (can I say that?) for people of conviction.

Tam said...

Jeez, Dale, sensitive much?

I just said it was perfectly legal. Nobody's talking about institutionalizing anybody. (Except maybe folks with thin skins, persecution complexes, and the like.)

Roberta X said...

It's the iconoclasts, they're after me!

...It's always way easy to judge others who are different from ourselves and forget they've got a right to their own peaceable weirdness just as we each have a right to our own shining perfection of though, belief and deed. :)

Roberta X said...

...Make that "thought." As in, "You would have thought I would have previewed that to look for spelling errors."

Les Jones said...

The guy who said that was an idiot.

That doesn't preclude the possibility that the guy he was talking about was also an idiot.

"If you bring a court order, you'd better bring an army."?

Real smart, dude.

Before anyone goes making up posters with Shiflett as the poster boy they might want to wait until the whole story's told. Maybe he's a perfectly innocent aggrieved citizon riding on a unicorn to the land of rainbows, or maybe this story is a bit more nuanced than that. This guy makes my skeptical hairs itch.

Unknown said...

"You and what army?" is a pretty common expression for guys of a certain age. It's not meant to be menacing, it's meant to be insulting, like when some little d*ckweed is giving you a hard time and you want him to go away. I can see that in this situation.

Anonymous said...

Religious nuts huh? Kind of lile the people who founded this country?

Anonymous said...

Religious nuttery may not be illegal, but if the JustUs Dept. gang decides you are dangerous to The Children, they may come and burn down your house with you in it.....

Rob K said...

...they may come and burn down your house with you in it.....

and the children too.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous & CurtisLowe:

The original quote is from P.J. O'Rourke:

"The Clinton administration launched an attack on people in Texas because those people were religious nuts with guns. Hell, this country was founded by religious nuts with guns. Who does Bill Clinton think stepped ashore on Plymouth Rock?"

(Source: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/p/p_j_orourke.html)

Anonymous said...

Yeah "You'd better bring an army" sounds like basic bombast 101.

I always wonder when I see these SWAT -entries, if they'd not better be served by a nice relaxed young Constable Courteous passing over the warrant and hiking his thumb over his shoulder at the SWAT Vans parked down the street.

"Sir, you may think getting served this warrant by me & Officer Friendly is a pain in the rear, but if you don't cooperate real quick, the nice men down the street & surrounding your house, will serve it. Let's do this the easy way, please"

Let's face it unless there's a REALLY good reason you need to get in in the next 10 secs, the polite relaxed threat will get you further with less anger and mis-placed adrenaline with _most_ people.

What do I know.

Divemedic said...

The two nice officers TRIED to serve the warrant, and were asked to leave. What did the guy expect them to do? Just go away?

The cops had a warrant. The guy received multiple warnings. There are plenty of people to use as a poster child, this guy isn't one of them.

As an aside, I think it is funny that the religious groups are so quick to defend the "Children's right to life" when a parent wants to choose abortion, but are so quick to defend the parent's right to choose over the child's right to life when the parent wants to choose prayer over medical care.

Isn't that ironic.

Anonymous said...

What is your source? From the sources I have seen the 2 "nice men" were paramedics who forced their way into the family abode and were less than pleasant. Unless you are referring to the "nice" social services people who well, are social services people. Other than that the only references I have seen was that a warrant was issued, though for the life of me I don't know what the legal basis was, and the sherriff decided to use his shiny, expensive SWAT team in a no knock fashion.

If you have a valid warrant, or in this case what probably ought to have been a subpoena, then good. If the warrant is not supported by law then it is invalid. The case that we have here could have been handled by requesting the person in question to appear before the court. Once it was determined that there was no abuse involved then the paramedics and social services personnel should have been summarily fired.

However, instead of handling this like everyone is an adult, it was handled badly. This is the type of thing that increases an US vs THEM mentality.

Oh, BTW nope, not considered "Christian" and I fully support right to choose.

Divemedic said...


The quote:

Community relations sheriff's deputy Tanny McGinnis said two deputies were first sent to notify Shiflett of a court order for his son's medical treatment and that Shiflett did not comply.

staghounds said...

And after Constable Courteous gets shotgunned onto a ventilator, how would you explain why you ignored the clear warning of "bring an army" to his wife?

It may be basic bombast in some saloon or dorm room, but when you say things like that to a police officer, he listens.

That's what the public pays him to do, remember? Take EVERY threat seriously.

We don't have a swat call out once a month, I'll bet. Hundreds and hundreds of warrants are served in that county without them, too. It seems foolish to me, but Mr. Shiflett asked for this.

Just because you have the RIGHT to say stupid things doesn't mean it's wise.