Jesus, Thomas Jefferson and the good folk of Texas ...

(Above: an oldie but a goodie, click to make larger).

Say what you will about Jesus - and plenty of people have been willing - he was a dab hand at politics.

There's something pretty canny about his line:

Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

But then Jesus had a pretty good idea of the separation of church and state:

Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk. And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Hero'di-ans, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.
Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
Show me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
They say unto him, Caesar's.

That's when he delivers his killer line. Which didn't of course stop Luke from reporting that Jesus got dobbed in for opposing payment of taxes to Caesar. Never get in trouble with the tax man, even when they pretend to wash their hands.

Still not satisfied Jesus was all in favour of the separation of church and state? How about this?

My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.

A bloody peacenik refusenik. Worse than Gandhi.

In the usual way of the wiki, you can find an entry on Render unto Caesar, and you can then head off to an extensive survey of Separation of church and state as a topic of endless intrigue.

You might even find therein a reference to Thomas Jefferson, and a link that leads you off to his Letter to the Danbury Baptists, here, in which he makes the remark:

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

Proving that once again there's more nutrition and goodness in wiki than in all the assorted pea-brains of Texas, no matter how much they pretend to be good for you.

The problem is of course the Texas Board of Education, and in particular one ratbag member of the board, one Don McLeroy who's been making waves with his ideological zeal, and attempting to re-write history, in the usual manner of ideologues.

Here's his pitch on proceedings:

Under his (McLeroy's) proposal, students would "contrast the Founders' intent relative to the wording of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause, with the popular term 'Separation of church and state.' "

That'd be the same popular term deployed by Jefferson way back when. A johnny come late to a long line of adopters of the concept.

The language reflects the opposition of social and religious conservatives to the legal doctrine of separation of church and state, which has been upheld multiple times by the U.S. Supreme Court, including one far-reaching decision that outlawed school-sponsored prayer.

McLeroy and other board members contend that separation of church and state was established in the law only by activist judges and not by the Constitution or Bill of Rights. (here).

Yep, bugger off Thomas Jefferson and activist judges. Probably Jesus should take a hike as well.

There's plenty of other bright ideas flowing from McLeroy and his band of history distorters, and it would be tremendously funny except for the way Texas is such a big market for education texts, and so wields disproportionate power in helping spread ignorance through an already insular education system (not to mention the general population, where getting a passport is just one short step away from experiencing the wickedness and decadence of Europe).

Naturally there are more than a few people up in arms, and we should shortly know the result of his politicking.

But in the end it doesn't matter much, at least if you care about the United States as home to free thought, and occasional logical coherent thinking. The lunatics somehow got into the asylum, and took over the management thereof, and the damage is done.

Head off here it you want some more on this showdown.

And if you want more fun, head off to read the scribbles of a jolly chappie who passes himself off as a professor of philosophy at the University of Texas: Koons: Liberal bias evident in simplistic narrative in which powerful federal government is sole engine of progress and equality.

Well I don't know what the good professor knows about philosophy, but it's clear he knows bugger all about historical method, or the usefulness of avoiding interpreting history through a narrow set of prejudices, be they liberal or conservative. History isn't particularly helpful when it's viewed as a head count of goodies and baddies.

Never mind, it's a pity there's an absent god, because right at this moment I feel like appealing to her.

God save America, they sure as heck need some salvation.

(Below: hey we're an equal opportunity for religions outfit here at the pond).