Render unto VISA what is VISA’s

Senator Chuck Grassley (R.-IA) wishes to pass a bill making credit card debt bankruptcy-proof, so that going through personal bankruptcy will not help those who have excessive card debt. Fairly standard big-money idea, and of course the credit card people are slavering for it.

Jeff points out that it’s a bit worse than that, though. Senator Grassley is not just fiscally conservative. He’s a fundamentalist Christian moral conservative who follows the strict evangelical line on gay marriage, abortion, sex in general, etc. But he won’t apply any Christian principles to debt. A plea from a Christian attorneys group to consider the biblical arguments against usury falls on deaf ears. Why? Because Chuck doesn’t want to mix government and religion! Why, that would be theocratic!

I can’t listen to Christian lawyers because I would be imposing the Bible on a diverse population,” Grassley said. “I’ll bet those lawyers wouldn’t want us to impose the principles of forgiving debt every seven years. If that were the law, nobody would loan them money.

Jeff’s full story, which I recommend for anyone interested in the current “religious” conservatism, is here.

This in a nutshell is why I left the Christian community. Hypocrisy is always part of a religious experience. But the people in my country who call themselves Christians are so puffed up with false pride, so in love with money, so ready to spend others’ lives for their own comfort, so hateful, so greedy, so imperial that to be an apostate is a great blessing to me.

We have met Antichrist, and it is us.

14 thoughts on “Render unto VISA what is VISA’s

  1. “I can’t listen to Christian lawyers because I would be imposing the Bible on a diverse population,” Grassley said. “I’ll bet those lawyers wouldn’t want us to impose the principles of forgiving debt every seven years. If that were the law, nobody would loan them money.”
    Er, I thought that was a Jew-derived thing? Forgiving debt every 7 years, I mean.

    1. Yes, it is — but so are the majority of the “deeply held moral principles” that conservative lawmakers like to pull out when it’s time to push their constituents’ hot buttons. Those folks are usually very keen on pointing out penalties for adulterers, pagans, fornicators, homosexuals, etc. They’re also very quick to discard some of the Old Testament’s curiously progressive provisions as outdated, irrelevant, or unrealistic. Completely redistributing land ownership every 50 years to prevent generational cycles of poverty? Nope. Wouldn’t work. Leaving a percentage of every crop field behind at harvest time so the poor and unemployed can harvest it for themselves? Nope, that’d be a handout.
      The New Testament folks are the ones who sold all their posessions, pooled their money, and formed a commune in Palestine. Er… well, perhaps we’ll ignore that one, too…
      Sorry. I’m just really pissed about this Grassley thing. Spitting mad. Grrrr.

      1. A lot of your interests are things I like, and we live in close proximity, at least as far as the Internets go. I’m going add you to my flist. Reciprocate if you want, or not.

      2. Sure — glad you found the micro-rant interesting. *grin* Although my livejournal is pretty much mothballed now, I post at the blog that substitute pointed to:
        Someone has syndicated the feed for it as the lj user ‘vp_jeff’ if you’re interested in subscribing in the friends list.

  2. I keep trying to reply intelligently, but all I can do is sputter in incoherent anger.
    Is there no mirror that these people can see their hypocracy in? How clearly does it have to be laid out for them to see their own double standards? Will this never generate enough cognitive dissonance in them to cause them to reconsider what they’re saying, or will they keep reinterpreting things to suit their needs in perpetua?

    1. Don’t worry. Incoherent sputtering rage is the healthy response.
      Just remember to save some for Santorum’s gutting of the minimum wage and 40-hour-workweeks.

      1. Theory-excess
        “Religion is always falling apart and promoting lip service and imitation.” — Alan Watts

  3. It’s the arrogant “we’re correct, and the rest of the heretics believing in something else are wrong” attitude bred into Catholic followers which seems to drive this attitude. Sure you can separate church and state, but can you separate the self-righteousness attitude and drive to convert others to your beliefs from the Catholic followers?
    I would be surprised if abolishing credit card debt from bankruptcy laws would be a choice the majority of the population would want. And if that’s the case, what’s the net difference between a theocracy and an autocacy?
    You’d think that Senator know-it-all would drive towards reforming consumer habits towards over drawing on credit. Or mandating stricter laws on loans. The current trend towards no-hassle lending, no payment for 12 months, low interest, buy it now instead of saving for it, is destined for disaster. All it takes is a slight increase in the interest rates, and the massive amount of debt accumulated by the consumer population will stall the economy as all those consumers will end up paying interest as opposed to principle. Then the spending will stop, and the economic machine will stall.
    Why the hell am I talking economics? Someone slap me.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.