Alabama Chief Justice Tom Parker indicated on the show he was a proponent of the “Seven Mountains Mandate,” an explicitly theocratic doctrine at the heart of Christian nationalism.
Alabama Chief Justice Tom Parker, who wrote the concurring opinion in last week’s explosive Alabama Supreme Court ruling that frozen embryos have the same rights as living children, recently appeared on a show hosted by self-anointed “prophet” and QAnon conspiracy theorist.
Parker was the featured guest on “Someone You Should Know,” hosted by Johnny Enlow, a Christian nationalist influencer and devoted supporter of former President Donald Trump. Over the course of an 11-minute interview, Parker articulated a theocratic worldview at odds with a functioning, pluralistic society.
“God created government,” he told Enlow, adding that it’s “heartbreaking” that “we have let it go into the possession of others.”
One need only look at the state to realize it’s a shit show. Nothing in the Bible belt is worth saving.
Lotta good people you’re throwing out with the bathwater there, but fuck 'em, I guess. You’re stoking the flames whose destruction you condemn.
I don’t know where you’re seeing “good people” in the South. I live in Tennessee and I have to endure hearing people every goddamn day talking about destroying the country just to get back at the “left.”
It’s the only place I’ve ever seen “Trump Stores.” And these people are ravenous about a second civil war. I just refuse to engage in trying to save people who don’t want to be saved. Fuck the lot of them.
Imagine a gay woman living in Alabama. There’s certainly a lot of them, we’re everywhere after all. Do you think she’s going to say what she really thinks while around strangers? Or is she going to keep her head down and try to avoid getting hate crimed?
You are in the bible belt. Should we abandon you too?
I’m not staying here. I’ve been planning my exit from this shit hole and the people here for a few months. I’m a gay man who has simply had enough.
There’s no saving these people. The good ones are leaving, the rest are some of the worst people in the country; they either are dismissive of what’s going on or indifferent.
Why would I waste my time voting here when my vote literally means nothing? This is a traitor enclave.
These people don’t give a shit about anyone who doesn’t go to their church, which is very denomination exclusive. You can’t make them be civilized.
Not everyone can afford to leave. Should we leave them to die?
You, yourself, haven’t left yet. What if we abandoned the south before you had time to move? Oh, maybe you’re the Last Good Person in the south, and once you’re gone we can leave the rest to suffer! It’s their fault for being born in the wrong states, after all. Especially the ones that are going to be born because their mothers were forced to give birth. They deserve it.
I’m not saying anything about whether or not I’m a good person. I’m saying that the number of good people here is a lot lower than you imagine. Pull up the draw bridge, IDGAF, I’ll swim if I have to, but the American South is a shit hole that didn’t deserve the reconstruction. They’ve not learned a goddamn thing.
Not everyone can escape. Do they deserve to suffer and die?
And maybe we won’t just blow up the bridge. Maybe we build a wall! Why not? You’re all evil, we don’t need that blight on our society. In fact, why not declare war? Why not kill literally everyone! D o n t y o u a l l d e s e r v e i t? 🙄
Partisan judges are automatically unqualified.
Wrong
We need partisan leftist judges to crack down on cops, slumlords, union busting, discrimination, and other vile expressions of rightist ideology.
To me, the things you mentioned lean more towards basic human rights. I don’t think it would be fair to call a judge partisan if he or she rules to preserve those. But I’m just a dude on the internet. Happy Friday friend!
You aren’t wrong, and and yet all those things I mentioned fall on partisan lines anyway. The problem isn’t partisanship, it’s right-wingers. If we got rid of those judges and replaced them with leftist partisans instead we could actually start fixing things. Justice is political, you can’t escape that!
But I’m just a girl with a dream. 😏
I don’t think you are wrong either. I just think that the word partisan might be too strong? Ideally, I’d like my judges neutral, but where do you find those nowadays right?
Stay safe sis.
I think that’s a trick the right played on us, to convince us that we should be apolitical and stop us from getting politically organized. Meanwhile, they’re explicitly partisan and that’s why they keep winning. Basic human rights aren’t neutral and we shouldn’t be either.
Reject idealism. Embrace politics. Solidarity forever. ✊
I don’t think you are wrong either. I just think that the word partisan might be too strong? Ideally, I’d like my judges neutral, but where do you find those nowadays right?
I think that’s a trick the right played on us, to convince us that we should be apolitical and stop us from getting politically organized.
The core belief system of the United States of America has always been to have fair and impartial judges. It’s not a conspiracy theory from either side.
Having said that, either side would love to stack the court system in their favor, and the conservatives especially have been actively working on that for quite a while now.
As Americans, we shouldn’t allow that to happen (FFS vote smart on judges!), either way. There’s a reason why Justice is always shown with a scale.
The core belief system of the United States of America has always been to have fair and impartial judges. It’s not a conspiracy theory from either side.
The bipartisan consensus is right-wing because America is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.
Everything is about perspectives and everything has nuance that must be taken into account. Yes, that can be really fucking annoying and sometimes works against our hopeful outcomes and does cause our good soundbite moments to be tarnished. There is not a singular universal argument in favor or against every single possible concept we create as a thinking society. To some extent, everything as we conceptualize it is malleable.
Your whole argument looks wholesale more about rejecting politics to embrace idealism. Which is a good thing in my estimation, and seems better situated to have outcomes more inline with what you, and we all, may be looking for out of life in general. Basic human rights aren’t political, they’re an ideal that goes beyond the limitations of politics.
So in that way, the following works exactly the same towards your preferential outcomes:
Reject politics. Embrace Idealism. Solidarity forever.
Okay so if you reject politics you literally can’t get judges appointed. 👀
With that out of the way-
“Rights”, as a concept, are inherently political. A right is literally a political carve-out that enshrines a mandate and creates a political obligation to uphold it. Idealism can be employed to support certain rights, but rights themselves can only exist through politics.
