The ruling states that the law — which amended the state constitution — violated the Establishment clause of the First Amendment by singling out one religion, Islam. In addition, the court noted that the proponents of the law, which passed November 2010 in a state referendum, could not identify one occasion in which Sharia was used in Oklahoma.

Too bad courts can’t comment on the stupidity of laws, too.

Oklahoma’s Islamophobic factions took the lead nationally in pressing for such a law, creating a nontroversy about “creeping Sharia” and Muslim infiltration of the USA. After the Sooner State’s successful ballot initiative, other states jumped on the bandwagon, fabricating Muslim threats from whole cloth.

The 10th Circuit got to the heart of the matter in its ruling: “Sharia? What Sharia?”

Appellants do not identify any actual problem the challenged amendment seeks to solve. Indeed, they admitted at the preliminary injunction hearing that they did not know of even a single instance where an Oklahoma court had applied Sharia law or used the legal precepts of other nations or cultures, let alone that such applications or uses had resulted in concrete problems in Oklahoma. See Awad, 754 F. Supp. 2d at 1308; Aplt. App. Vol. 1 at 67-68.

Given the lack of evidence of any concrete problem, any harm Appellants seek to remedy with the proposed amendment is speculative at best and cannot support a compelling interest.15 “To sacrifice First Amendment protections for so speculative a gain is not warranted . . . .” Columbia Broad. Sys., Inc. v. Democratic Nat’l Co., 412 U.S. 94, 127 (1973).

In other words, it’s a bit like locking the barn door to keep the horses from escaping before they are actually inside. Except in this case, there aren’t any horses, either. So, it’s both stupid and crazy.

Isn’t all bigotry like that?

I’ve blogged before about David Barton’s peculiar version of American history. He teaches that the USA was deliberately conceived as a Christian nation, despite considerable evidence to the contrary. Barton misquotes the Founding Fathers, twists and quotemines historical documents, and when all else fails outright lies about history to support his cockeyed ideas.

The Religious Right adores him. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), who is vainly trying to be the presidential nominee of her party, invited Barton to teach the Constitution to newly minted Representatives. Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, who at one point was considering a presidential run, famously said:

`“I almost wish that there would be, like, a simultaneous telecast, and all Americans would be forced–forced at gunpoint no less–to listen to every David Barton message, and I think our country would be better for it. I wish it’d happen.”

The Atlantic Monthly had a lengthy analysis of Barton’s appeal and his peculiar methods of historical research. There is no doubt that Barton’s religious belief drives his interpretation of history, but what kind of beliefs does he have?

Here’s a clue. Right Wing Watch posted this excerpt of Barton’s appearance last year on televangelist Kenneth Copeland’s “In God We Trust” video series. Barton is talking about the need for Christians to get involved in public affairs.

I’ll tell you one of the things too we’ll never get right until we understand this, it is a spiritual battle. We’re told in Ephesians, it’s not flesh in blood, we’re dealing with spirits. And I’ll tell you out of Daniel, praying, why did that answer get delayed for twenty-one days? Because the Prince of Persia fought against it. There are principalities that sit over certain areas.

And I can tell this in the U.S. Capitol. When I walk from the House side to the Senate side, I cross the middle line of the Capitol, I can feel a different principality because they have jurisdictions over different things. And there are principalities that sit over different government entities that cause them to think really goofy and you can’t get prayers through, they get delayed twenty-one days because the principalities are up there fighting in the Heavenlies.

Because we’re not fighting flesh and blood. And if you don’t understand this is a spiritual battle, and if you don’t understand there are really big principalities and powers sitting over places of power, whether it be banking, or education. There’s principalities that sit over schools to keep those kids from getting knowledge, there’s principalities that sit over financial institutions. They sit over households. That’s why you have principalities in powers, that gradation, you have the corporals, and you have the sergeants, and you have the lieutenants, the captains and the generals, and the generals have a bigger principality and those little corporals may have control over the house but it’s a spiritual battle.

It’s a spiritual battle and we’ll never win until we understand that.

Demonology 102 there. I’ll summarize Demonology 101, in case you cut the entire semester.

Barton is referring to Ephesians 3:12, in which the author (presumed to be Paul) tells the church in Ephesia that they are battling not flesh-and-blood enemies, but evil, spiritual powers. The Daniel allusion refers to a 21-day period when Daniel prayed, and subsequently got a message from God.

The idea of “principalities” originally referred to an order of angels in a complex medieval hierarchy. Principalities were the angels who were messengers or guardians on Earth. Evangelicals later appropriated the term to refer to the angels’ adversaries on Earth. For every order of angels, there is a corresponding order of demons.

I had to do some googling, since I’m not up on demonology. I found this explanation:

Principalities are small insignificant irritating little demons. They are the kind of demons that put thoughts of temptation in the minds of man and cause irritations. They do not have much power and there are millions of them. They are the peasants of Satan’s kingdom if you please. They are the Privates in his army and the ones that do all his grunt work. In the Spirit I normally see them pictured as little monkeys.

Flying Monkeys? I wonder.

From the same website, we have a gloss on the allusion to Daniel:

In Daniel 10:12 we read that Daniel had been praying and fasting and waiting on God, and he had waited 21 days.

After that an angel appeared to him and said, Daniel 10:12 Fear not, Daniel: for from the first day that you set your heart to understand, and to chasten yourself before your God, your words were heard, and I have come because of your words. 13 But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty one days: but, look, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia. (GMR)

The prince of the kingdom of Persia was a demonic prince that was in charge of the whole kingdom that Daniel was in. Before that angel could come and get through to him, he was opposed by this high level demonic power in the heavenlies, a demonic prince of darkness.

Satan has set up his system over this world, and he has princes of darkness over every single area. There are princes of darkness in charge of your country. There are princes of darkness in charge of your city. There are princes of darkness in charge of your community. They have all been allocated responsibility to oversee the principalities, powers and rulers of darkness that are in that area.

So, basically speaking, David Barton believes that demons (agents of Satan) have control over Business, Government, Family, Church, Education, Media and Entertainment/Arts — the so-called Seven Mountains that some Christians want to take over to make the USA into the Christian Nation they believe it was destined to be.

People like Michele Bachmann, Mike Huckabee, Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R), probably Sarah Palin, and other declared or wannabe presidential contenders. They are not just running for political reasons; they’ve got religious reasons, also (to varying degrees, I’m sure.)

Perosonally, I find all this demonology stuff befuddling. Though I am now an atheist, I was taught to believe there is a God, who is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. Satan entered the picture only when talking about the serpent in the Garden of Eden and Jesus’ temptation in the desert. Ditto for angels and demons — not a lot of stress on these critters, since they generally just have walk-on parts in the Bible. God was basically The Guy in Charge, though at times it did seem like he was having one too many “power lunches,” sipping ouzo with Zeus, in between smiting entire cities and putting reluctant prophets inside big fish.

So, from a theological standpoint, I can’t fathom why some people like Barton and Les D. Crause, whom I have quoted twice here, give these demons, or principalities, so much power. What happened to God’s omni-whateverness?. For many of these Christians, there is a demon for every affliction, every kind of behavior they don’t like: cancer demons, drug demons, homosexuality demons, rock music demons — the list goes on.

And these demons are not imaginary or allegorical. When Barton says two principalities have separate control of the House and Senate, he means that literally — demons are in fact sitting on top of both legislative bodies, making the people’s brains all fuzzy and confused.

Sounds mighty like polytheism to me. Or a story arc from Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

So, if you read or hear about anything David Barton says about American history and our Christian Nation™, keep in mind that this is the kind of crazy-ass Christianity he’s talking about, not your mainstream go-to-church-on-Sunday kind. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Draw your own conclusions. And enjoy your weekend — maybe it will be rapturous in an entirely different way.

He calls it a “pre-emptive strike.” Just in case those 300 Muslims rise up and try to impose religious law on Wyoming’s people … and livestock.

Voters in another hotbed of Islam, Oklahoma, approved a similar measure last year. It was later struck down as unconstitutional by a federal judge. Despite the futility of trying to have a similar referendum in Wyoming, Rep. Gerald Gay wants to waste everyone’s time anyway.

I can’t decide if these guys are insane, or are playing to the crazies to garner votes. Maybe both.

Several biologists, however, are not so convinced, and have pointed out weaknesses in the scientific paper announcing the discovery. Carl Zimmer at Discover magazine just published a summary of some of these objections.

The late astronomer and author Carl Sagan once wrote that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” In other words, if you claim you saw a UFO zipping across the sky from your backyard, your photographic “proof” had better not look like blurry shot of a modified dinner plate. Briefly, that’s what critics of the arsenic-loving bacteria paper are saying. They believe the authors’ methodology and analysis is flawed, so they want further evidence that these bacteria have really incorporated arsenic into their DNA, for example.

This is how science works. Even Newton and Einstein, whose theories of gravity and relativity are now considered foundations of modern physics, had their critics when they were first published. Science is all about testing and verification of hypotheses. Peer-reviewed journals, like Science, run submissions past a panel of editors, who judge in part whether the authors of the paper did an acceptable job of supporting their conclusions. Then, once it’s published, scientists reading the paper get to pick it over, too, as they are doing now with the “arsenic aliens.”

Valid criticisms require the authors to re-check their methodology, analysis and conclusions. Perhaps other researchers will attempt the same kind of investigation, to see if they get the same results. For an experiment or analysis to be considered scientifically valid, it has to be repeatable, after all.

If, after all this checking and re-checking, the original conclusions still hold water, then scientists will accept them as tentatively valid, meaning it may take years, even decades, before those findings end up being part of the scientific “furniture.”

Unfortunately, the popular media don’t convey this process well at all. It’s a lot more fascinated to read “scientists discover brand-new lifeform” than “maybe some bacteria can use arsenic to live, we think. Let us get back to you on that.”

Print it and keep it in your wallet

Click on the image to see the original, so you can read the mouse-over comment there.