Why the Veto of S.B. 3 Was a Victory for Religious Freedom in Texas

 


 

 Did Texas Almost Ban the Temple Incense?

In a political climate already saturated with debates over freedom and tradition, Texas S.B. No. 3 stood out for an unexpected and disturbing reason: it would have made possession of the biblical incense used in the ancient Temple in Jerusalem a criminal offense in Texas.

Yes, you read that correctly. Under S.B. 3, if you possessed the ingredients of the incense commanded in Exodus 30, you could be prosecuted under felony and misdemeanor provisions—even if your purpose was religious, historical, or ceremonial.

Thankfully, Governor Greg Abbott vetoed the bill. But it's important to understand why this bill was dangerous, and what it tells us about the growing threat of state overreach into religious practice.

๐Ÿ”ฅ The Temple Incense: Sacred, Scriptural—and Apparently Illegal

The Bible describes a specific incense used in the Tabernacle and later in the Temple:

“Take unto thee sweet spices, stacte, and onycha, and galbanum; these sweet spices with pure frankincense…”
— Exodus 30:34

This mixture—known as the Ketoret—was considered holy. While unauthorized personal use was forbidden in the Torah, possessing or preparing it for sacred study, reenactment, or cultural commemoration has never been a crime under biblical law.

For Jewish communities, Hebrew Roots Christians, Messianics, and others, reproducing or studying the incense is part of devotional life and Scriptural education.

๐Ÿ˜ฑ Driven by Misinformation and Moral Panic

S.B. 3 was pushed in part by a wave of pearl-clutching church ladies and bureaucrats who seem more concerned with regulating plants than understanding Scripture. They treated “cannabinoid” as a dirty word—even though the Bible itself used plants with cannabinoid content in sacred rituals.

Yes, you heard that right: the same Bible they’re waving in the air actually included cannabis in Temple worship.

Modern scholarship increasingly identifies the Hebrew word ืงְื ֵื”-ื‘ֹืฉֶׂื (kaneh-bosem)—translated as “aromatic cane” in Exodus 30:23—as referring to cannabis. This would mean that both the anointing oil and the incense itself included cannabinoid-bearing plants.

So let’s get this straight: S.B. 3 criminalized something God commanded in the Torah.

That’s not just bad law. That’s bad theology.

⚖️ S.B. 3: A Modern Law That Criminalizes Ancient Worship

S.B. 3 banned any “consumable hemp product” containing any cannabinoid other than cannabidiol (CBD) or cannabigerol (CBG).

Here’s the problem: one of the four incense ingredients, galbanum, is a resin that naturally contains cannabinoids such as CBN (cannabinol) and CBC (cannabichromene)—substances not permitted under this law.

According to Section 443.252(a):

“A person commits an offense if the person knowingly or intentionally possesses a consumable hemp product that contains any amount of a cannabinoid other than cannabidiol or cannabigerol.”

That means even if you're recreating the Temple incense for a Passover teaching, seminary lecture, or synagogue display, you could have been charged with a crime.

๐Ÿ” The Legal Trap

S.B. 3 defined a “consumable hemp product” broadly—not by how it’s used, but by how it’s classified. A spice mix, incense blend, or ceremonial oil that contains a trace of non-approved cannabinoids would still be criminalized.

  • No exemption for religious use

  • No allowance for educational display

  • No consideration for Scriptural context

Even if your goal was to honor the God of Israel, you’d still be treated like a drug dealer.

๐Ÿ›‘ Criminalizing Faith and History

Under S.B. 3, Texans could have been prosecuted for:

  • Possessing galbanum resin or frankincense blends used in Temple reenactments

  • Selling or displaying such items in religious stores or cultural institutions

  • Teaching about biblical incense using accurate ingredients

  • Preparing the anointing oil of Exodus 30:22–25, which included cannabis

This law crossed a dangerous line, making traditional faith practices into criminal acts.

⚠️ The Bigger Picture: Bureaucracy vs. Belief

S.B. 3 wasn’t just a hemp bill—it was a state attempt to control religious expression by regulating nature itself. It treated God's creation like contraband and Scripture like contravention.

If it had passed, it would have:

  • Created felonies for sacred objects

  • Suppressed religious education

  • Criminalized Bible-based practices

  • Pandered to fear, not fact

This wasn’t about protecting kids from candy-shaped edibles. This was about criminalizing cultural and spiritual heritage.

๐Ÿงพ Thank God for the Veto

Governor Abbott’s veto of S.B. 3 was a major win for religious freedom. But this bill shouldn’t have reached his desk in the first place.

We cannot allow hysteria and ignorance to shape our laws—especially when those laws risk criminalizing the very Scriptures on which many Texans build their faith.

๐Ÿ—ฃ️ Final Thought: Texas Must Remain Free

We must ensure that no government—red or blue—ever gets to decide which parts of the Bible are “safe” for you to believe or practice.

๐Ÿ•Š️ Liberty means freedom of conscience. Freedom of belief. Freedom to walk in ancient paths without fear of a state citation.

Let’s keep Texas that way.

✍️ —Texas Liberty Defender

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Introducing: Texas Liberty Defender

Image
  I have a core political philosophy from which all meaningful policy positions naturally arise. It's simple, powerful, and distinctly American: More freedom, less government. Personal responsibility. I am the Texas Liberty Defender . If you truly believe in these ideals, they lead—without contradiction—to a consistent worldview. That worldview doesn’t pick and choose when to favor freedom. It doesn’t embrace government expansion when it happens to serve your pet issue. It means standing for liberty even when it's uncomfortable or inconvenient. Historically, this is what set us apart from big-government Democrats. They may not have agreed on much—environmentalists and union loggers often found themselves at odds—but they were united by one thing: a belief in an ever-growing state powerful enough to enforce their respective agendas. They didn’t need to be ideologically consistent. All they needed was a big enough government to get their way. Unfortunately, many in the Repub...
Read more

The Party of Freedom—or the New Nanny State?

Image
    Once upon a time, the Republican Party stood as the final barricade against government overreach. It was the party of Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, and Ron Paul. It championed limited government, personal responsibility, and individual freedom —not as talking points, but as sacred principles. But something is changing. The party that once railed against the nanny state is now flirting with becoming one. And it must stop. In her monumental book  The Discovery of Freedom (1943), Rose Wilder Lane—daughter of Laura Ingalls Wilder and one of the great thinkers of liberty—traces the long, tragic arc of human history through the lens of one central question: Why have people been poor, hungry, and oppressed for six thousand years, and why did that suddenly begin to change in America? Her answer is profound: Freedom works. Control kills. "The plain fact is that human energy operates more effectively in these United States than it has ever operated before... Because it ...
Read more

Why Texas Ten Commandments Bill Is Bad for Liberty — And Bad for Texas

Image
  By: Texas Liberty Defender  The Texas Legislature recently passed S.B. No. 10 , a law requiring every public school classroom in the state to display a specific version of the Ten Commandments . At first glance, this might seem like a victory for traditional values. But when you examine the bill carefully, it's clear: S.B. 10 is a serious threat to liberty, religious freedom, and even the integrity of Scripture itself. Here’s why this law is a bad idea for Texas . ๐Ÿ”น 1. S.B. 10 Mandates a Faulty Translation The bill uses the word “ kill ” in the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” —but the Hebrew word in Exodus 20:13 is ืจָืฆַื— (ratsach) , which means “murder,” not “kill.” The distinction matters. The Bible never forbids all killing (e.g., in self-defense, war, or capital punishment), but it does forbid murder. By mistranslating this verse , S.B. 10 misrepresents the original meaning of the commandment and misleads students. ๐Ÿ”น 2. Inconsistent Use of the Divine Name The...
Read more