Virginia Delegates Pass Bill That Bans Chip Implants as 'Mark of the Beast'

While I am glad legislatures voted to prevent chipping people, it concerns me that they did so not out of the need to protect the constitutional rights of citizens but to stop a religious event from occurring.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


forced, or volunteered, it's a power our government should not be able to excercise over us, and if someone needs to make an embellished religious anecdote, then be my guest. i don't see how anyone can have a problem with that.

it is especially insidious in a world where the FED controls our money. you become a self-proclaimed slave instead of simple sheep.

A true christian would be for mandatory implants

end times = christ = judgement = they all goto heaven...isnt that ultimately what they want anyhow?

Why do christians hate god soo much as to try and slow the coming of the antichrist...

hmm...what of those trying to stop the coming of the beast are indeed the demonic forces to begin with...they dont want the return and judgement...they dont want God to finally once and for all defeat Satan in front of the kings of the world and all that...

reply to post by SaturnFX


saturnFX can you take it to a different thread please? i think i speak for a bunch of people when i say you have no informed religious perpsective, just a paranoid one and you have just been making a bunch of pointless hypothetical posts about christianity.

I live in Virginia, I'm NOT Christian, and I still think this law is great.

Being chipped isn't just a concern of Christians. I wouldn't want to be chipped, either!

I'm not worried about them passing any religious laws that would force me into Christianity, because that would be unconstitutional and impossible to enforce anyway.

taking a stance against anything forced is good...but in the name of some fairy tale event? some argue we should be glad by the mere fact that someone took this stance against enforcement and ignore the religious part of it. but umm isnt it going to be as easy to ban every bit of your constitutional rights in the name of Bible`s words?

Originally posted by bsbray11
I live in Virginia, I'm NOT Christian, and I still think this law is great.

Being chipped isn't just a concern of Christians. I wouldn't want to be chipped, either!

I'm not worried about them passing any religious laws that would force me into Christianity, because that would be unconstitutional and impossible to enforce anyway.

Nothing is impossible to enforce. Every time I fly and watch in bitter angry as I am being searched as a criminal. I understand I use to have more privacy and was innocent until. However, with the right laws and regulations. People will get in line and demand a chip if the right reasons are used sadly.

Originally posted by marsvolta
but umm isnt it going to be as easy to ban every bit of your constitutional rights in the name of Bible`s words?

No.

And if you lived in Virginia, you would know that.

Religion may be important to our breed of rednecks, but so are guns and the Constitution. It's all good man, I'm telling you, and I'm not a Christian either.

You need to calm down and see the bright side of this. Implanted microchips are bad. So what if the law was passed under religious pretext at least it got passed in the first place. This implant mc law is a good trend in reclaiming privacy.

reply to post by SaturnFX


Seriously, can we get rid of the condescending attitude and talk about this like it's a law banning implanted chips in Virginia and not like this is a thread based on the topic of religious belief systems....

You already have your militant views on that topic plastered all over this site. Give it a break will ya?

Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by liquidself

 

While I understand you general point , I am forced to point out that the mark of the beast is infact mentioned in revalations in the bible, and that is the origin of the idea expanded upon by Iron Maiden and other metal bands.
I think it is also worth mentioning, that for the Christian population , this is a serious concern. Just as serious as some other religions are about C4 and tastefully tailored vests.

I m afraid I was just making a funny with the Heavy Metal bands remark; to highlight the fantasy aspect of deriving laws from ancient visions. I suppose it is beside the point where it comes from; its a law I would get behind if I was a delegate so perhaps a lot of the Virginia delegates did the same thing i.e. not all were basing their vote upon revelations. I am certainly no expert on the Bible but I also do not regard it as any kind of authority whatsoever. For me it is simply historical literature. For me the point is that at this moment in time forced implanting is not something we have to deal with in daily life. Its like making a law against blowing up the sun - sure, its a good idea, but why make that law? So to reiterate - why are these laws coming down now?

Also - about the Christian populatin - I think your point about it being a serious issue for them is valid. Within their worldview it is a serious concern and while I do not wish to belittle that - it also happens that for me that worldview contains not a small amount of fantasy. For the record I am niether pro nor con any kind of Christianity (ok, i m not keen on fundamentalists but that is not restricted to Christianity).

The real test for me is whether another worldview contains within itself a notion of tolerance. I have little tolerance for intolerance. but i thinks thats getting offtopic.

Obvious rhetoric, Cole stated that the reason for the law was people did not want the chip to replace their IDs. Nothing truthfully religious about that. Of course if you were the reporter and asked if "Cole" believed it was the "Mark of the Beast" being the obvious "Christian" he is affirms it. I don't want a chip in me, as for my laptop umm well it can have all the chips it needs to run smooth and efficient. Get the point?

The Book of Revelations was brought in like always by MSM or wanna be MSM kind of a secular ideal to attack one's religion at any level.

Learning to comprehend the nature of MSM and wanna-be is a wealth for any individual.

Honestly now...who has actually proposed chipping people other than maybe Alzheimer's disease patients?

I haven't heard of anyone actually suggesting it much less it actually having a chance at passing...

its just another paranoid fantasy.

Besides the mark of the beast was supposed to be on the forehead. Six hundred and sixty-six...not a fricking ID chip.

[edit on 2/11/2010 by iMacFanatic]

reply to post by iMacFanatic


A little bug to put in your ear over the mark of the beast thing. In Book of Revelation 13:17-18 it says "17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666."

For instance lets look at maybe Social Security numbers or even the Foreign version of it. It could be a way to implant the number since you are looking at a way to identify. Far as the number 666, that one is always up for grabs since so many theories of what that really is.

One thing to always remember about a lot of things when it comes to conspiracies and cover ups and the rest is most things are hidden in plain sight very little is actually buried under tons of secrecy.

[edit on 11-2-2010 by Awakening4America]

I found the article pretty amusing when I 1st read it, but then I started to think further. Seems like a slippery slope type of situation. If a fear based on an interpretation of scripture can be used as the basis of a law, what other religious fears might also prompt legislation? Precedent has been set...
Perhaps US servicewomen accused of adultery whilst in Iraq should have some particular sanction against them? In case they're the Whore of Babylon? Lets not even go into the Little Horn...
Facetious, moi? Yes, but from a UK perspective, no more so than the Mark of The Beast idea.
A lot of brave people suffered horrendous persecution to drag us out of a time when something was right because it was deemed in accordance with somebody's interpretation of old text into a time of ethics based on reason that can be understood by all. To turn our backs on that fact is a case of
"Those who refuse to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it."

Originally posted by Bunken Drum
I found the article pretty amusing when I 1st read it, but then I started to think further. Seems like a slippery slope type of situation. If a fear based on an interpretation of scripture can be used as the basis of a law, what other religious fears might also prompt legislation? Precedent has been set...
Perhaps US servicewomen accused of adultery whilst in Iraq should have some particular sanction against them? In case they're the Whore of Babylon? Lets not even go into the Little Horn...
Facetious, moi? Yes, but from a UK perspective, no more so than the Mark of The Beast idea.
A lot of brave people suffered horrendous persecution to drag us out of a time when something was right because it was deemed in accordance with somebody's interpretation of old text into a time of ethics based on reason that can be understood by all. To turn our backs on that fact is a case of
"Those who refuse to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it."

I can respect any opinion in regards to keeping religion and government separate. But, if you see the fact the reporter baited the politician to respond with his religious belief not the fact it as passed under the premise that people simply do not want to have the chip or be forced by corporation to have it.

Personally, I do not feel that religion in the "United States" affects laws. You have politicians that run with "Religious" card to get votes but in reality point out any where laws passed are directly influenced by a God or Gods? The difference in "America" you can be a christian, a muslim, a satanist, atheist and still be a politician and pass laws!

This is all a clever psy-op to create a "Guilty by Association" trend in the United States, for when these chips actually surface.

They're trying to openly humiliate anyone who speaks out against it by trying to infer that they are "religious nuts" who believe in the "mark of the beast", etc. They've got it all covered, starting with this "mark of the beast case".

When these surface, in the next few years, soon anyway.. This case will be brought up along with many others, directed to whomever speaks out. I can see it now on Fox news, "So, are you one of these people who believe in the Mark of the Beast? "Haha, you are, haha, let's go to commercial."

reply to post by liquidself

On Wednesday, Virginia’s House of Delegates passed a bill that forbids companies from forcing their employees to be implanted with tracking devices, a move likely to be applauded by civil libertarians.

I think the information in bold is more vital to the issue than the shallow doomsday myths which actually say not a damned thing about computer chips. That a chip is the "Mark" is ultimately a modern assumption made on inferring the intent of authors who's closest concept of a computer chip was an Abacus bead.

To be honest, I'm actually quite surprised such an issue was addressed. Of course, I support the passage of the Bill. To allow employers to force tracking devices to be implanted in their employees would represent a gross violation of human rights. I have to wonder, though, whether this Bill was proposed preemptively in anticipation of such abuses - or did somebody cross a line and forced them to deal with it? I might look into the issue a bit more later.

I look forward to the coming integration of our biology and technology, and I think it will be a positive step forward for humanity as a whole. Software operating systems who's GUI display is linked directly to the visual cortex. Functional "telepathy" over local wireless or internet. Real-time medical diagnostics. Memory "recording" and backup to external disk. 15x Telescopic corneas capable of detecting and displaying in the IR/UV spectrum. Heightened auditory range allowing us to compose music in scales and octaves we're currently deaf to. Light-weight, low profile exoskeletons capable of lifting 150~300lb loads while compensating for impact pressure on the knees and ankles - providing full-range mobility for the elderly, on-demand "download & display" tattoos... and I'm not even scratching the tip of the iceberg.

Yeah... the idea of being scared of a little "chip" is quaint to those who embrace cybernetics. However, human augmentation and implantation should remain solely up to the discretion of the individual. If you don't want a chip in your body, then you should have the right to refuse it without reprimand. Same goes for gene therapy, tissue engineering/organ regeneration, life extension, etc. Just don't expect the rest of society to slow down to your pace.

I don't think transcending our humanity necessitates the abandonment of our humanity.

reply to post by hotbakedtater

Good grief, more pandering to the religious, in the name of our LAW.

This could be a stroke of brilliance on their part. I mean, there's going to be some seriously complex social and ethical decisions that will need to be engaged in the next half-century... and we can't afford to delay these discussions or neglect the foundations of law governing the use of these technologies because the fundies are dragging their feet expecting the rapture to come for them. If dressing these issues up in the guise of bronze age mysticism is what it takes to get a law passed banning employers from forcing compulsory tracking devices into their employees - then fine. I guess that will do for now. Even if it is playing with fire. They haven't exactly been a strong voice of reason and compassion in the issues concerning environmental policy, stem cell research, and gene patenting/tissue ownership rights.



... more than likely, though, I'm just placating myself with optimism. I have a bad feeling that "Stopping the AntiChrist" could well have been their primary motivator.

I was brought up in a Christian home. Do I believe everything that the religious right says? NO WAY.

However, I have studied the scriptures enough to know that people freak when they hear "Mark of the Beast!"

Personally, I agree that it is more about the greed, money and the power, but questioning the Biblical scripture behind it shouldn't be scoffed at. It should be accepted as a point of view.

reply to post by Lasheic

"If dressing these issues up in the guise of bronze age mysticism is what it takes to get a law passed banning employers from forcing compulsory tracking devices into their employees - then fine. I guess that will do for now. Even if it is playing with fire. They haven't exactly been a strong voice of reason and compassion in the issues concerning environmental policy, stem cell research, and gene patenting/tissue ownership rights."

Hmm, had not thought of it that way.

Yet as an American, it always makes me stop and think twice before solidifying an opinion, and that's that ALL groups, even the religious have a right to representation of their opinion as much as I do. And in the end I will never waver on my support of THAT.

Lots to ponder on this topic.