Blog Against Theocracy 2013

Its been a long time dear readers. One of my earliest posts took part in the 2007 blog against theocracy. When I saw there was no organized blog against theocracy this year, I felt called to write. There is a great need to address this topic.

This past week has seen a historic awakening – a cultural awareness of the validity and importance of recognizing gay rights. It is a big moment, but underneath it an even bigger moment waits to be discovered: Religious belief alone is not a valid source of law. If your belief in the unity of all beings or the importance of love for they neighbor drives you to do good work – that is a beautiful blessing. But when your beliefs force those who do not share them to act as if they do: you cross a line. We see this play out in the absurd arguments against gay marriage. We see it in the obsessive drive to control and repress female sexuality. Increasingly though, we see it burrowing into harder to reach places. As America becomes less religious, as America pushes back on church incursions into state, we are going to see religious influence look for other ways to retain (and expand) power.

That is at play in this effort to push Bibles into public schools.

The foundations of knowledge of the ancient world—which informs the understanding of the modern world—are biblical in origin.

A statement like that ignores the prolific writings of ancient Greek, Roman, Egyptian sources. It ignores the musings and discoveries of the Islamic Golden Age. The thoughts of Chinese writers are also missing. It also ignores the more interesting contributions of Christian thinkers like St Augustine and St Anselm. I speak from experience when I say you can understand their wonderful and engaging philosophical musings without having read the bible.

If you really want to expose the underbelly of the effort to bring bibles into the classroom, ask if they think students should study the koran. After all, the koran is foundational to much of modern society (just not in the US). Better yet, see if Roma Downy and Mark Burnett would support including critical views of the bible. Is it to be read as is, without the criticism found in English or History classes? Or do they imagine students free to dissect the many logical errors and contradictions found within? More than likely not, since that would defeat the purpose of their effort, similar in spirit and aim to efforts to install the ten commandments at courthouses.

The highest promise of religious thought is to inspire acts of great compassion and vision. When it is instead used as an aggressive evangelical power grab, its value is demeaned and lessened. The strongest and most vocal ally in the fight against theocracy should always be the religious believer. For religion is worth far more than its current use – as a tool for social control.

Trading Jesus for Caesar

Andrew Sullivan has a provocative thought: That the politicization of Christianity in the US is turning people away from the faith (hat tip Pam).

I think there is a lot of truth to this.  The union of conservative politics and conservative Christianity has created a brand. A very strong brand that is associated with denying women access to health care, and reproductive choices. A brand associated with the Duggars and the Quiverfull movement – aimed at trading away agency and free thought for obedience and servitude. Conservative Christianity is tied tightly to the battle against gay rights. A battle that is losing the cultural war with each passing year. A battle with young casualties for gay youth growing up in caustic religious environments. In Rick Santorum the religious right has a champion who is bold enough to publicly attack pornography and pre-marital sex. This union of church and state – this theocratic movement – has a very strong brand with a very simple message: A return to a time where women were second class citizens, homosexuality was hidden or “treated”, and religion enjoyed unelected power.

That brand is costing believers. It is a trade, as the dominionist army gives up their goal of “saving souls” for Jesus in return for taking from Caesar what is Caesar’s.

So to the religious right I ask: Is it worth it?

The Fake SEAL Pastor and His Enabler

Can we fit three of the most poisonous things wrong with our society into a single incident?  YES:

A Pastor fabricated his past as a Navy SEAL (emphasis mine):

Several former SEALs wrote into The Patriot-News casting doubt on the reverend’s account of his service.

“We deal with these guys all the time, especially the clergy. It’s amazing how many of the clergy are involved in those lies to build that flock up,” said retired SEAL Don Shipley. Shipley also speculated the waterboarding and kitchen details came from the action depicted in “Under Siege.”

One could write a library’s worth of books about the propensity to lie in order to convert, or that sticky mix of patriotism and bloodlust that so fully consumes the national discourse on war.

The paper’s response upon finding out about this falsehood takes the cake (emphasis mine):

The paper, meanwhile, is unapologetic for printing Moats’ prevarications.

“The Patriot-News regularly interviews veterans to tell their stories. We do not regularly ask those we interview for proof of their service, believing these men and women would not lie and dishonor those who have fought bravely defending our country,” the paper said in a special note to readers about the incident.

A newspaper that eschews proof in favor of faith is worthless.

So there we have it.  A pastor who lies and the newspaper that enabled him and refuses to apologize for taking the information it gathers at face value, and the underlying obsession with our warrior class simmering underneath it all.  If you have any question as to how we find ourselves continually suffering as a nation, look directly at this fact: That we glorify violence and avoid the truth.

Huckabee – Jesus in Every Home

If Huckabee does end up running again – in 2012 or 2016 – remember this guy is going to use his position of power to push Christianity into our legal system, into our policy, and onto our citizens.  He consistently “jokes” about forcing Christianity on citizens in the same way Bush used to joke about wanting to be a dictator.

Actually Bryan Fischer Has a Point

I’m an unabashed liberal, and stand firmly for the separation of Church and State.  The rest of Bryan Fischer’s worldview is morally repugnant in its blatant support of theocracy.  That being said, Karoli and John Amato of Crooks and Liars are wrong, and Bryan Fischer is correct, in this particular argument.  They are discussing the case of a Mr Cranick, who refused to pay the Fire Department until his house was literally on fire, at which point the Fire Department refused his last minute offers to settle the bill and let the house burn down.  He writes:

What angry folks fail to realize is that if Mr. Cranick had been able to get away with this – if he’d been able to wait til his house started to burn, then offer $75 and immediately get help – it wouldn’t be long before everybody else stopped paying. Why bother if you can wait until the emergency hits? If you pay when you don’t need to, that just makes you a sap. Pretty soon nobody would have fire protection at all since the city can’t afford to fight fires at $75 a pop. The city would have to withdraw its offer to the county, and everybody, especially responsible folk, would be less safe.

(Essentially what Mr. Cranick wants is “guaranteed issue” for fire protection. This is the same thing that is going to destroy the health care industry, as it is already starting to do under RomneyCare in Massachusetts. If you can wait til you get sick before applying for insurance, and the insurance company has to provide it, everybody will just wait til they get sick to get insurance and pretty soon nobody will have insurance or health care, either one.)

This is a very good point.  What does our school system look like when only the parents of children attending a given district paid?  That situation leads to huge disparities between districts.  Now imagine going a step further and only paying when their kids actually attended.  Would that work everywhere?  What would the tax burden for those particular families be?  Now imagine pay as you go applied to the police, fire department, hospitals, etc.  Some services are essential and require infrastructure and investment to operate effectively.  Pooling resources allows us, as a society, to get more (or in some cases anything at all) for our buck.  This is where Karoli misses the point:

No, actually what Mr. Cranick wanted was grace — the ability to pay whatever he needed to pay at that moment and in that time to get them to turn on the damned hoses. What he wanted was someone to say yes, we will accept your perfectly good money and turn the water on for you. What he wanted was forgiveness, which is above all else, the foundation of Christian values and principles. That’s what Mr. Cranick wanted.

His money wasn’t perfectly good.  Again, if everyone acted that way, there would be no Fire Department.  Now perhaps if we ran a Christian society where grace and forgiveness were law, then the Fire Department would have been obligated to respond.  Ironically, Bryan’s argument is a secular one – one which does not rely on any sort of religious precept to make its point – it works just fine with logic.  Bryan doesn’t seem to get that himself:

This story illustrates the fundamental difference between a sappy, secularist worldview, which unfortunately too many Christians have adopted, and the mature, robust Judeo-Christian worldview which made America the strongest and most prosperous nation in the world. The secularist wants to excuse and even reward irresponsibility, which eventually makes everybody less safe and less prosperous. A Christian worldview rewards responsibility and stresses individual responsibility and accountability, which in the end makes everybody more safe and more prosperous.

Actually that “sappy” worldview is Christian.  The view that suggests Mr Cranick should have paid properly isn’t one that stresses individual responsibility.  It is a pragmatic one that says “if we want x, we need to do y”.  Simple, no god-magic needed.

Don’t get me wrong, John and Karoli are dead on in their criticism of Bryan Fischer and his religious-political views.  One would not have to stretch the imagination to call them anti-Christian, and they are clearly anti-American.  We are not a theocracy, no matter how hard extremists like Mr Fischer might wish it.

That being said, Cranick’s actions expose a gaping flaw in the reality challenged perspective of the libertarian.  Sometimes – not always – taking a communal approach to resources and services is a far wiser move than leaving them to the unstable winds of the market.

It leaves one with some interesting food for thought though.  What would a truly Christian country look like?  With tithes – there would surely be taxes.  With grace and compassion, there would surely be a social safety net.  Christian conservatives can count on opposition from secularists who respect freedom of and from religion as a founding precept of this country of ours.  Its only a matter of time before their own argument bites them in the ass, as the heart and soul of Christianity is anything but violent, fearful, reactionary, or conservative.

When Religious Insanity Maims and Kills Children

Religion – throughout history – has on occasion stoked the fires of ignorance, hate, and violence.  The attacks on witchcraft – often a cover for overt misogyny or the elimination of competing religions – are a particularly brazen example.  Witch hunts continue to this day in NigeriaSpecifically targeting children (nytimes – may prompt you for registration – if so visit bugmenot.com):

Those disturbed by the needless immiseration of innocent children should beware. “Saving Africa’s Witch Children” follows Gary Foxcroft, founder of the charity Stepping Stones Nigeria, as he travels the rural state of Akwa Ibom, rescuing children abused during horrific “exorcisms” — splashed with acid, buried alive, dipped in fire — or abandoned roadside, cast out of their villages because some itinerant preacher called them possessed.

some have read her book “Unveiling the Mysteries of Witchcraft,” where she confidently writes that “if a child under the age of 2 screams in the night, cries and is always feverish with deteriorating health, he or she is a servant of Satan.”

in her sermons, Ms. Ukpabio is emphatic that children can be possessed, and that with her God-given “powers of discernment,” she can spot such a child. Belief in possession is especially common among Pentecostals in Nigeria, where it reinforces native traditions that spirits are real and intervene in human affairs.

Since “Saving Africa’s Witch Children” was first shown in Britain, in 2008, Mr. Itauma’s home state has adopted a law against accusing children of witchcraft. But Ms. Ukpabio went on the offensive by suing the state government, Mr. Foxcroft, Mr. Itauma and Leo Igwe, a Nigerian antisuperstition activist.

In the lawsuit, Ms. Ukpabio alleges that the state law infringes on her freedom of religion. She seeks 2 billion naira (about $13 million) in damages, as well as “an order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents” from interfering with or otherwise denouncing her church’s “right to practice their religion and the Christian religious belief in the existence of God, Jesus Christ, Satan, sin, witchcraft, heaven and hellfire.”

In other words, in the name of religious freedom, Ms. Ukpabio seeks a gag order on anyone who disagrees with her.

This is Christianity at its very worst.  The strategies employed by Ms. Ukpabio mirror those we see in the US from conservative Christians – claim persecution and vigorously defend their “right” to persecute and vilify others – often with violent results.

In general one wants to say people have a right to preach and spread ignorance.  One’s will to defend this right begins to erode when that ignorance clearly leads to violence.  What is absolutely clear is that we do have a right to criticize that ignorance and do our best to counter it.  That means everything from explaining the difference between autism and witchcraft to tackling a belief system that was founded on bronze age fears of the unknown – and fears of competing belief systems.

Religious Conservative Incestual Rape Apologists

Sharron Angle is making public a textbook psychotic position on the horrible matter of incestual rape that leads to a pregnancy.  Digby Reports:

Sharron Angle has a plan for girls who are raped by their fathers and get pregnant. Force the little girl to have a child and then adopt both of them out to a new family!

Angle: I think that two wrongs don’t make a right. And I have been in the situation of counseling young girls, not 13 but 15, who have had very at risk, difficult pregnancies. And my counsel was to look for some alternatives, which they did. And they found that they had made what was really a lemon situation into lemonade. Well one girl in particular moved in with the adoptive parents of her child, and they both were adopted. Both of them grew up, one graduated from high school, the other had parents that loved her and she also graduated from high school. And I’ll tell you the little girl who was born from that very poor situation came to me when she was 13 and said ‘I know what you did thank you for saving my life.’ So it is meaningful to me to err on the side of life.

No word on what happened to the incest victim, but that’s really not something anyone should waste much time worrying about.

And anyway it just shows that God provides many good alternatives to abortion for for young girls who are raped by their fathers — perhaps we could just bend the rules a little bit and the little girl could marry her daddy so they could make a new family all their own.

That she leaves out the rape victim – aka the baby carrier (you know, the non-woman as per fellow Republican Christianist David Vitter) – is telling.  Nuts like these really don’t give a shit about mothers.  They aren’t anti-choice, they are anti-mother.  And God help you if you become a mother against your will, or if becoming a mother poses serious health risks.  Because they sure as hell won’t.  At that point you cease to be a woman, cease to be a rape victim, and become an incubator.

Let’s put the positions of these religious nuts who advocate forcing raped girls to bear their father’s children into context.  Consider the biblical story of Lot and his daughters.  He offered them up to be raped by strangers, and later had offspring with them.  Is this what religious conservative mean when they suggest using the Bible as a basis for law in our country?

The AP and Soft Support of Theocracy

Lightning struck down a giant statue placed alongside a public highway in Ohio.

No author is listed for this piece, which is just as well.  It is an embarrassment.  It softly offers up uncritical support for the religious statue (emphasis mine):

Travelers on Interstate 75 often were startled to come upon the huge statue by the roadside, but many said America needs more symbols like it. So many people stopped at the church campus that church officials had to build a walkway to accommodate them.

Oh?  Many said they want more Jesus statues in public?  How many, dear anonymous AP writer?  10?  50?  1 in 10 people surveyed out of 6,000?  Or 3 of the 10 people you called on the phone but didn’t bother to source?

In the very next sentence the reporter is at it again, uncritically mentioning that church official had to build a walkway, on account of so many people stopping.  How many is so many?  Was the walkway built do to a massive outpouring of support for Jesus and the church?  Was it built to accommodate the few people who did stop?  Was it built later on regardless of the number of people coming, simply as a wise addition to the church?  No answers are provided, just the presumed word of church officials without a hint of sourcing, evidence or what lay people might call proof.

The 4,000-member, nondenominational church was founded by former horse trader Lawrence Bishop and his wife. Bishop said in 2004 he was trying to help people, not impress them, with the statue. He said his wife proposed the Jesus figure as a beacon of hope and salvation, and they spent about $250,000 to finance it.

Are statues built to either help or impress?  How about persuade?  The clear evangelistic angle of the statue looming over a public highway is left entirely out of the equation.  Surprising since earlier in the same article the church is referred to as the “evangelical Solid Rock Church”.  (As of this writing their website is currently down).

The article makes it seem as though the giant Jesus statue intruding into public life was either a surprising curiosity or a welcome reminder of religion, which enjoyed wide support.  Perhaps appropriate for an article concerning religion, no proof was offered.

Fighting Religious Tyranny

Blog Against Theocracy

We need to step up our fight against religious tyranny, for there are surely those fighting as hard as they can on theocracy’s behalf.

The politically dominant expression (and face) of faith in this country is that of conservative Christianity.  And conservative Christians are in battle mode over their perceived right to force their religion on Americans.  Attempts to portray themselves as the victims only makes sense in that they are weakening.    To paraphrase Mike Gronstal’s incredible daughter(via),  they don’t get that they’ve lost.  Maintaining love segregation is a position held by the old and the fearful.  Men and women who clutch onto their bibles tightly in the presence of unbelievers, and who are only comfortable to the extent that they can force their peers to adhere to their own religious laws.

That this flies in the face of the letter and spirit of our constitution means nothing to them.  Theirs is a single-minded pursuit that allows no room for observation of facts or the inclusion of reason.

Fortunately ours is a resistance to religious tyranny that allows no room for pessimism or blindness.  Rather than fight for control, we stand up for freedom.  For all the Christians who wear their faith on their neighbor’s sleeve, there are those who truly embody the noble spirit of love and humility.  And that is why this is a fight that will go to those who value love.

But no fight is sure until the ending bell tolls.  We must engage in the practical optimism of committment and steel ourselves to see this battle through to victory.  And be certain that the anti-love crowd will surely to step up their attacks (mostly by ratcheting up the crazy) in the coming years.  For example, ironically named NationForMarriage (aka NOM NOM NOM) has a video attacking gay marriage by suggesting it is in fact an attack on conservative Christians and their own faith.

Irritating, no?  So how should we respond?

I think there are two immediately clear approaches.  One is satire that cuts close to the bone.  An idea behind NOM’s deliciously innacurate ad is that public schools teaching kids gay marriage is ok is somehow wrong.  We can run a satirical using impact and extension.  The impact ad would go like this:

Teacher: “Everyone, during the last week of parent teacher conferences, we found out Billy’s parents are both men!”

(Flash to a surprised and slightly embarrassed Billy)

“Gay marriage is morally wrong.  His parents are sinners.”

(Billy slinks below his desk)

“Feel free to bully him during recess.”

(Billy gulps and looks at a nearby, larger kid with a mean look on his face).

“Next up, Rachel!  I hear your parents are Jewish, and are therefore going to hell?”

(Cut to the slogan “Church and State: They Belong Together”).

The extension ad would go like this:

Concerned Parent: “Do you want schools teaching your kids about gay marriage?”

Concerned Parent: “Just how many other non Christian ideas might your kids be subjected to?”

Concerned Parent: “Sex before marriage is ok?  The Bible isn’t 100% true?  The world wasn’t created by God?  Not believing in Jesus is ok?”

Concerned Parent: “Where will it end?”

(Cut: “Put the Christ Back in Schoolchrist”)

The other approach to satire is to go for the throat of their interpretation of Christianity itself.  We can start by advocating and adgitating to give liberal and moderate Christians a voice in the national dialogue on faith.  Too often the only people allowed to speak for Christianity in the public square are conservative Christians.  A good next step would be to bring discussion of religion’s rationals and merits into the public square.  This means more discussions not just of whether or not to be religious (and finally including the nonreligious), but internal religious discussions of what it means to be a Christian brought out into mainstream discourse.  When all we have are conservatives controlling what we are allowed to talk about, we’ll get nowhere.  There is so much more to the disccusion of what religion means and what we can get out of it.

As a part of this effort we need to make an effort to give the 15% of Americans who have no religious affiliation a very public political voice.  This means more elected officials, more voices in the media, and inclusion in discussions of faith’s role in public life.  It means aggressively revealing and debating public officials who treat unbelievers as social deviants.  We need to start including the non religious in inter religious efforts to promote understanding.  For example, a local interfaith dialogue between Christians, Muslims and Jews needs to include Humanists!  We need to get those who do not believe in God, or in Scriptures, or just in organized Religion into the light so religious Americans can realize “hey, they aren’t that scary after all”.  We need to make clear that the 15% with no affiliation are not all atheists, but include Americans who believe in God but don’t adhere to holy books (like myself), and Americans who believe in Scripture don’t take kindly to organized religion.  Each of these groups needs to be seen and heard.  We need to give the non religious the voice we are so adamantly denied.

To sum up, we have every reason to feel optimistic, but now is the time to step strongly forward.  We should use sharp humor as our primary weapon, and work to change the rhetorical landscape to include more traditionally excluded voices (liberal and moderate Christians, the non religious, etc).

Digg Stumble It! Twitter Bookmark on Google Add this to Live

(blog against theocracy logo author)

Invasion of Love and Privacy

The people who brought you prop hate have decided to go after existing gay marriages:

The sponsors of Proposition 8 asked the California Supreme Court on Friday to nullify the marriages of the estimated 18,000 same-sex couples who exchanged vows before voters approved the ballot initiative that outlawed gay unions.

The religious right is literally tearing families apart.  How many of these married couples have kids together?  What will there status be?

That doesn’t matter at all to the theocratic  freaks who would rather force the government stop anything not approved by their interpretation of the Christian Bible.  (And these are the types of people Obama is trying to reach out to).  They aren’t pro-family, they are pro-theocracy.

They need to be stopped.  They do not have the right to ruin lives because they think their God disapproves of homosexuality.  While I approve the irony and creativity behind the initiative to ban divorce in California (petition and more details here), I think we need to come up with a sharper plan of attack.  We need to find a way to make areas of discourse that have been regarded as politically safe, dangerous.  We need to shift the overton window of religion’s role in public life to expose the ridiculousness of allowing irrational faith of some to dictate the rights of all.

GodTube: Sex Before Marriage

The video itself isn’t remarkable.  It compares marrying someone who has had pre-marital sex to getting an order in a restaurant a previous patron has already eaten.  Would that make marital sex like eating the same order over and over again?  While the endless cycle of regurgitation and ingestion hinted at does provide some mirthful moments, the comments section is a fascinating read.  Most of the comments express disgust with the video with a few “yay let’s be holy and chaste” shout outs sprinkled throughout.  This one comment really stood out (emphasis mine):

Just so you know, this vid is circling the net right now, garnering ridicule and outrage from folks who are intelligent, compassionate Christians. No, the circulation of this vid will not help you “spread your message”…if anything it will harden even more hearts, and probably turn more hearts against God. We are fortunate that one of the creators of this has explained himself (comments below) and is even intelligent enough to understand the flaw of his work. He even sums up the major problem with most “Creative Arts Ministries” in America; There is too much interest in condemnation and reinforcing negative prejudices. It is created solely for shock value (the “shock” aspect being questionable at best, and regarded by most young people as “lame” at worst). There is little or no interest by the people using the creative arts to present God’s message in showing/exploring the teachings of love, the railing against hypocrisy, and the values of compassion…these are the cornerstone of Christ’s teachings. Instead, these folks capitalize on kid’s fears and insecurities. The more intelligent young people who view this vid will see it for what it is: a desperate attempt by people who claim to “get it” to maintain the status quo. Your arrogance will drive them away. The more easily swayed will, sadly, take these values more to heart. They will take a condescending stance towards those they can easily label as sinners. They will place themselves higher than others, because you teach them it is right to do so. I ask you: If call yourselves Christians, how do you have ANY right to judge others?

I keep the reactions to videos like this in mind when considering national politics.  There’s always that segment of the population who could care less what specifically a candidate says so long as they believe in Reagan as their lord and savior.  For them the concept of truth boils down to “does it reinforce my beliefs?”.

Posting this again for “cooket” since he is so “high and mighty” This video was done for our youth group a couple years ago and was for total shock value. The message was covered with Grace and love and truth. Looking back, I don’t think I would have changed anything about the video, but I think I would have make a part 2 showing the Grace side. Blessings, Vince

In addition to turning people off to the compassionate activist side of Christianity, the thinking exposed by the reactions to this video show a very watered down concept of truth and identity.  How many of the children in that youth group who tone down their faith to sane and have sex before marriage will internalize the video’s message?  If their concept of self and correct action always comes down to an argument from authority, its no surprise the religious right is cannon fodder for this nation’s fascist tendencies.

UPDATE: I forgot to mention I got wind of the GodTube item from my friend Brad.  Doh!

Jesus Christ the Dread Champion

Sarah Palin has been linked to Joel’s Army, an apocalyptic cult preparing to use violence to force Christianity on unbelievers.  The details are over at Orcinus, I’m just going to give you the link.  This is something to be read in its entirety.  Trust me, once you start reading, you won’t stop until you’ve finished.

The title of this blog post comes from Todd Bentley as quoted in this Southern Poverty Law Center report:

“An end-time army has one common purpose — to aggressively take ground for the kingdom of God under the authority of Jesus Christ, the Dread Champion,” Bentley declares on the website for his ministry school in British Columbia, Canada.

Theocracy by force.  Say those words out loud and contemplate what they mean for you and your family (emphasis mine):

Placing family in higher esteem than the Lord is dangerous to be sure. It’s a condition of the heart that, for the most part may go unnoticed. Not only is it the esteeming of people above the Lord, in the season of great falling away and betrayal, it will cause one to make fatally flawed decisions. As much as we dearly love and fervently pray for those around us, we must ensure that Jesus is truly our Savior AND Lord. That he is first in our life and that we will remain faithful; regardless of the consequences in the physical realm.

This is the kind of logic that leads directly to bloodshed.  Its the same logic behind children betraying their parents to fascists, this idea that loyalty to some outside authority means more than familial ties.

There are faithful who believe the end times are coming very soon.  And they are lashing out at the most unlikely scapegoats:

The battle goes far beyond the old issues such as abortion. Far and away, the issue of the hour is homosexuality, same sex marriage and the elimination of differences between sexes. Old terms such as “mom” and “dad” are being threatened with extinction. For those intent on destroying the old concept of the family; there can be no distinction between mom and dad, for there are either two moms or two dads.

The paranoia is in some cases palpable:

The enemy is determined to make those of us who believe the Bible is the only rule for faith and practice to look like fools or mentally challenged freaks not worthy of believing. The enemy hates those who faithfully and boldly stand on God’s Word. Those who do, are targeted and marked for attack. Assassin squads are daily dispatched from hell to try and trip up those who are marked. Every possible effort is made by the enemy’s minions to deceive, trick or physically injure those on his “hit list”.

Even getting to the point where Sarah Palin is a candidate for the Vice Presidency is insane.  A politician linked to a group bent on violent conversion and religious war, who says god tells her what to do, is viscerally alarming.

Its no surprise Palin’s candidacy is pushing moderates and conservatives alike to the left.

Slavery is OK: Republican 527 Attacks Obama

Context is a weak excuse.  Under what context is slavery ethical?  Under what context is stoning someone to death moral?  In a clip that drives home Obama’s fortitude standing up to theocrats who’d eagerly switch the bible for the constitution, Republican political consultant Stephen Marks accuses Obama of arrogantly mocking the bible:

The narrator intones:

You then condescendingly stated that, quote ‘Folks haven’t been reading their bible” unquote, as if the American people do not know what’s in there.  The real question is, do you know what’s in there Senator?

Actually Stephen, the question is why should a political candidate have to know what’s in the bible?

The thing is, Barack Obama clearly has a much better grasp of the bible than the narrator.  Stephen’s arguments lose their cogency as soon as you skip the pacing and tone and get to the content:

And did you not know Senator Obama, that the book of Deuteronomy, which you also arrogantly mock and ridicule, is what gave us the ten commandments?

That’s his response to Obama’s argument.  Seriously.  Well, let’s take a look at the passage, in context, that Obama was criticizing (King James):

18If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

19Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

20And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

21And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

That’s right.  Disobey your parents and you should be murdered by “all the men” of your city.  This is the nature of Marks’ attack: utterly inane.

Did you not know that most Christians and historians agree, that the Sermon on the Mount contains the most spiritually inspiring words ever uttered by Jesus Christ or any other religious leader.

Who’s arrogant Mr Marks?  Who is holding their personal faith up as the measure of who should lead this country?  This 527 ad is spit in the face of separation of Church and State.  It is a clingy example of corporate rhetoric, with repetitions on the theme of arrogance and smugness reinforced by to with a backdrop of an informercial soundtrack.

And in all that, PH For America, Stephen Marks’ organization, leaves out one crucial counterpoint.  The Bible condones slavery.  Telling for a group that holds the exposed liars “Swiftboat Veterans for Truth” as their role models.

Still this ad may find some play with Americans who think shoving their personal faith down America’s constitution is their God given task in life.  But we can hope that more people will recognize the hollowness of PH For America’s underhanded attacks, and support a candidate on the merits of his politics, his insight and his character.

The Bible is Wrong: Part 1: Mercy, Suicide and Homosexuality

Religion is a political beast wherein spirituality plays a varying part.  It is therefore apt to go beyond discussing the role of religion in public life, to discussing the nature of religion itself.  It is essential to balance respect for beliefs and people’s freedom to have and express them, with one’s own freedom to express one’s own beliefs and criticize others.  Aside from a few brave atheists, the discussion in this country thus far has been tilted grossly towards the Conservative Evangelical Christian worldview, with liberal Christians, secularists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans, Atheists and others meekly keeping to the Church vs State debate.  Its time to step past that, and the only way to do that is to speak for one’s own beliefs, and use that as a platform to counter the beliefs you find harmful.

We need to be honest with ourselves.  It isn’t simply that we oppose conservative Christians using their religion to oppress homosexuals, it is that we abhore the belief itself that homosexuality is a sin (and all that entails).  So let’s bring that criticism into mainstream discourse.  In its absence we create a society where fear of blasphemy de facto retains its power unweakened by our distance from the dark ages.  The only way to move the frame of discussion back to a place of strength and equality is to make our opinions loud and clear, and no longer shrink back from voicing them.

Which brings me to my first topic in this series.  I was *finally* spurred to write about this after reading this post by Father Joe (and a particular comment in response), but I’d been meaning to write about the concept of suicide and mercy for a while now.  I’ve been hearing Disturbed’s Inside the Fire for a bit on the radio, and understanding the song plays a role in revealing how twisted a psychology the concept of hell and mortal sin raises.  The song is essentially David Draiman fighting the temptation to commit suicide and join his girlfriend.

The problem is with the concept of judgment, which is central to the judeo-christian-muslim tradition (growing up in conservative Judaism, we made a big deal out of the second most important holiday, Yom Kippur, the day of judgment).  In the case of a murderer, judgment, whatever the punishment, appeals to our sense of justice and revenge.  We want people who do bad things to suffer (however unholy that desire itself is).  However that same concept of judgment is extended to people who have not hurt anyone, or who themselves are suffering from a disease.  On this we should be perfectly clear.  Homosexuality hurts no one.  Suicide isn’t the act of a person who in a moment of weakness gave up on life.  Suicide is a fatal expression of clinical depression.  Condemning someone to hell for eternity for having cancer would be just as “just” and “compassionate”.

Father Joe writes:

When the topic of homosexuality is raised, immediately there are those who deny that we can make a moral evaluation. We are told, “It is not for us to judge, only God.”

Yes, it must be admitted that God is the judge of such things, but that verdict is not pending but has already been expressed by his revealed Word:

To those of us who do not buy the idea of “God’s revealed word” (finding the circular argument of “The Bible Says its So” unconvincing), that is a very hollow stance to take.  And it is one that serves a vision of God that is petty, vengeful, mean, flawed, violent, and utterly unholy.  What kind of God would condemn someone to an eternity of torture for loving another human being in a mutual relationship?

This is why I detest seeing the Bible used as a source for how to live one’s life, let alone how all Americans would be forced to live our lives.  The Bible describes a God who judges people for forbidden love, for depression, for believing in the wrong God, and condemns them.  Is that merciful?  Is that loving?  Is it holy?

Such beliefs have no place, no place at all in the running of our country.  And frankly subjecting people to them is a cruelty we seem unfortunately far from recognizing.  Its painful to think of the faithful relatives who think their loved ones are burning in hell, and whose hearts weep, confined by the belief that they will always be imprisoned there.

Street Prophets: Theocrat Rod Parsley Attacks Pastor Dan

Anytime somebody like Rod Parsley – whose ordination consists of allegedly having a “sword of anointing” passed on from another revivalist, who lives in sumptuous wealth, whose family all seems to live in sumptuous wealth, who has been sued multiple times and had to settle lawsuits against his own father and teachers at his church, who lives in the pocket of war-mongers and free-market dogmatists, who wants to establish a theocratic government – anytime Rod Parsley wants to compare notes with me on what the penniless itinerant preacher and Prince of Peace Jesus Christ had to say on abortion, I’d be happy to consult with him. Until that time, he can stick his definition of orthodoxy where the sun don’t shine.

Street Prophets :: Faith and Politics.

Wow.  Color me impressed.

(I’m trying out the nifty new “Press This” functionality from wordpress.com.)