It seems like every election we have another extreme religious figure who becomes a campaign issue for a candidate. Obama had Rev. Wright and McCain had Rev. Hagee and Parsley. Sarah Palin has an actual Kenyan witch hunter. Now Ron Paul has his own embarrassing association. The preacher is Rev. Phillip G. Kayser, a pastor at the Dominion Covenant Church in Nebraska, who has a following in Iowa. The Paul campaign issued a press release (that it later removed from its site) heralding the endorsement of Kayser. The problem is that Kayser believes that gays should be executed according to biblical law. It was a a highly destructive endorsement for Paul who is attracting civil libertarians to his campaign. No one can stop someone from endorsing you, but the campaign clearly sought this endorsement from an extremist with reprehensible views. Unlike Wright, Kayser is not Paul’s personal minister, but the press release made him Paul’s problem in reaching out to civil libertarians.
While the campaign was right to pull the press release, it now should take responsibility and disassociate from Kayser. This is, in my view, another example of the dangers of faith-based politics, something that I have long condemned as inimical to separation principles.
I have not hidden my admiration for Paul, with whom I have spent considerable time discussing constitutional and policy questions. He is genuinely committed to the anti-war and civil liberties issues that he has made part of his campaign — the only such candidate in either the Democratic and Republican campaigns.
It was Paul’s Iowa chair, Drew Ivers, who recently touted the endorsement of Kayser — stating “the enlightening statements he makes on how Ron Paul’s approach to government is consistent with Christian beliefs.” Either Ivers did not know about Kayser’s extremist views (which is possible) or he didn’t care (which would be scary).
Kayser has stated that he and Paul disagree on homosexual rights, including Paul’s support for repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Paul also voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment. Kayser’s views are toxic and hateful. He told TPM, for example, he wanted to reinstate Biblical punishments for homosexuals, which include the death penalty. It is also a concern that Paul’s Iowa state director, Mike Heath, led the Christian Civic League of Maine and was involved in an anti-gay campaign in that state.
It was not Paul’s view on homosexuality but his view on federalism that attracted Kayser. “Under a Ron Paul presidency, states would be freed up to not have political correctness imposed on them, but obviously some state would follow what’s politically correct.” I share many of Paul’s federalism concerns about the shift toward unlimited federal jurisdiction. However, Kayser appears to think that federalism means that states can exempt themselves from the Bill of Rights. He is obviously wrong. Yet, he views federalism as a way of restructuring society along sectarian lines: “Ron Paul’s strictly Constitutional civics is far closer to Biblical civics than any of the other candidate’s on a whole range of issues.”
Kayser’s church appears at war with the separation of church and state — heralding a society that directs implements Christian rules and values:
Christ said, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth” (Matt. 28:18). Not some authority or most authority, but “all authority.” There is no square inch of planet earth over which Christ does not have authority. He has the authority to rule over the state, business, farming, science, art, economics, education, etc. This means that all of life must be governed by His Law-Word. Christ will not be satisfied until all enemies are placed under His feet (1 Corinthians 15:20-28), and “He will not fail nor be discouraged, till He has established justice in the earth; and the coastlands shall wait for His law” (Isaiah 42:4). A major portion of the church’s ministry must be to call all competing authorities to repentance through the faithful teaching of the Law-Word of Scripture.
That vision of government seems strikingly similar to the model found in places like Iran, which apply their own religious code.
Notably, he admits that it may be difficult to switch over to a Christian version of Sharia law.
“Difficulty in implementing Biblical law does not make non-Biblical penology just. But as we have seen, while many homosexuals would be executed, the threat of capital punishment can be restorative. Biblical law would recognize as a matter of justice that even if this law could be enforced today, homosexuals could not be prosecuted for something that was done before.”
Notably, the Dominion Covenant Church proclaims its purpose as “[p]romoting and enjoying the dominion of King Jesus over every area of life.” The church calls for “a reconstruction of our society.”
For civil libertarians who are unwilling to support President Obama after his long record of rolling back on civil liberties and increasing national security powers, including his recent signing of a law allowing for indefinite detention of citizens, Paul has become an alternative candidate. However, he cannot court civil libertarians while maintaining associations with such people as Kayser. Once his campaign chair put out the press release, it became a campaign issue and requires more than just a withdrawal of the release without comment.
Source: TPM
Mike S:
“About 25 years ago at a yard sale I found this bound 5 book set for $2.”
*********************
That would qualify as a treasure trove for less than price of a cup of coffee. Now you’d be lucky to find anyone who knows who Gibbon is, much less possess his works. You probably couldn’t get a three tape VHS rendition of Star Wars for $2.00.
http://www.alternet.org/teaparty/153607/major_ron_paul_supporter_favors_death_penalty_for_gays/ Paul has a long history with Christian Reconstructionists.
SwM,
As in my discussion with Jill, Libertarians are hardly the warm and fuzzy civil liberties people that others would hope they would be. The reality of a Libertarian society would play out into a strict hierarchical system, where only those with power would rule. It is truly feudalism by another name, but the structure would be the same. Little fiefdoms as vassals owing their allegiance to their multi-national Lords. Everyone else a serf or slave, which is the same difference.
Mike S:
“Thanks for the Gibbon quote. I only have and have read the abridged editions of the whole series, but that was enough to make me realize that it is one of the greatest historical works ever written.”
***********************
Gibbon’s work was the first serious historical work I ever attempted. I slogged through it, complaining all the way, and feeling it more punishment that pedagogy. Like a lot of sons’ relationships with their fathers, it takes a lot of time and reflection to realize that the first one you ever meet is the best one.
Mespo,
About 25 years ago at a yard sale I found this bound 5 book set for $2. I was always curious about Gibbon so I bought it and read it. Blown away by his prose, the information and his point of view. I’ve always read a lot of history, but Gibbon opened my eyes to the work of a true historian.
anon nurse,
Great speech!
***********
Mike,
In re Dittmer link: What OS said. Great catch.
Mike,
I like your suggestion to follow the money. It is interesting how our biggest scandals can be uncovered by “following the money”.
Mike, great link to Dr. Dittmer’s interview with the libertarian. I don’t think it is satire or a spoof, because some of the Ayn Rand admirers who have been hanging out on this site have said many of the same things. Dittmer does a good job of pulling it all together. He says this posting is the first of a six part series. The selfishness and lack of understanding of the Law of Unintended Consequences is reason to give any rational person pause.
I find much of Paul’s platform quite toxic and hateful in the extreme.
Mike S.,
IMO, Libertarianism is the guiding principle of our lizard overlords! We now live in the dictatorship of the GLObotariat!
Although I am being humorous about it, I mean what I say. What’s worse is that many of Libertarianism’s key tenants are believed by quite a few people in our society. This is becoming less true as middle and working class people sink into poverty. These tenants are more difficult to sustain when applied to one’s own poverty than they were when used to “explain” away the poverty of others.
I’m not discounting the neo-liberal and neo-conservative nature of the overlord’s thought system, it’s just that what seems to really underlie their thinking is Libertarianism. I’d be interested to see if you think that is true or not.
Jill,
My contention here for a long time has been that the country’s elite (the 1%), whether right or left is steering us in the direction of Corporate Feudalism. It really is class warfare and they are waging it. One has to look beyond the various “Isms ” to see that it is motivated by the need of certain people to have power. Progressivism, for instance, as it was defined by Teddy Roosevelt, was very structured on the correctness of an elite ruling class.
The Libertarian viewpoint. is less an “Ism” and more a codification of might makes right. That was amply shown in the article you referenced. The “Isms” are merely the fog to keep us confused. As in Watergate the maxim always should be “follow the money”. Even very smart people can be confused by the Libertarian lure. We all believe in “freedom” don’t we? As in the article you referenced “freedom” can be defined in horrific ways.
Mespo,
Thanks for the Gibbon quote. I only have and have read the abridged editions of the whole series, but that was enough to make me realize that it is one of the greatest historical works ever written. Gibbon had a great flair for capturing the historical essence of the Romans and contextualizing it so that the history was a universal commentary on the sad history of humanity.
Jill,
Great catch! I’ve posted the link below because I think everyone should read it. I’m not certain if the interview was real or sardonically ironic, but that is immaterial. It does present the ultimate result of a society that is run on Ayn Rand and/or Libertarian principles. That such a society would be ultimately fascistic is a no-brainer. What was expressed in this interview is the ultimate result of Libertarianism rampant.
http://distributistreview.com/mag/2011/12/journey-into-a-libertarian-future/
We can’t afford to be passive anymore.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/12/30
anon nurse,
Great speech in that link!
While I’m not a fan of Iowa’s caucuses, I appreciate this young man’s spirit… The stakes have never been higher — it couldn’t be clearer… We have to do all that we can, starting now. Jill was right on the mark in her last comment.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/12/30-4
A good friend of mine, Aaron Jorgensen-Briggs, gave the opening welcome for the People’s Caucus on Tuesday night. The following was his statement (as seen on C-Span):
Friends, neighbors, members of the press, visiting Occupy delegates, honored guests, welcome. I’d like to begin with some words from a great American leader of the past. He wrote:
‘I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money-power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.’
These words of President Abraham Lincoln, in 1864, resonate loud and clear tonight, in Des Moines, Iowa, in 2011.
We have gathered here tonight because the political system in the United States no longer represents the values of the American public. Just as President Lincoln predicted, the money-power of the country now resides in the hands of a tiny portion of the population, the 1%.
We are here tonight to overthrow money-power with people power. We are here tonight as citizens and patriots to preserve our democracy from the corrupting influence of Wall Street and big corporations. We are here tonight to raise our voices in defense of the American dream. We are here tonight to restore the American political system and American society, to make it human-centered, not profit-centered. We are here tonight to follow through on the vision of our founders and the vision of the great American social movements of the past, the movements that ended slavery, gave women the right to vote, ended racial segregation in our communities, established safe working conditions and good wages for hard-working Americans and their families. We are here tonight, because our political leaders are no longer able to lead us.
Now is the time for us to lead, for the people of the United States, the 99%, to rise up, and restore America, to recreate it, truly, as a nation of opportunity, equality, and justice. Honored guests, members of the 99%, we are here tonight because of you. ‘Join Us!’ we cried, and you have answered. And for that, we thank you, and we bid you welcome to the first-in-the-nation People’s Caucus!
S.M.,
There is a lot to do. Everyone has health, time and financial limits. I respect that. But what ever amount of health, time and finances you can contribute to a true citizen’s movement for justice would help.
It is also important to tell current and hopeful candidates for any office of any party that you will not support them in word or deed when they currently harm or intend to harm other people or the rule of law. That one thing alone is powerful.
Telling sociopaths that you will speak up for them, send them money and vote for them, is a powerful action. You are telling them you accept their behavior. You are telling them you support that harm. That is why we have a police state in this nation. People have been willing to support it.
Unless you actually support police state actions, the harm of other human beings and the destruction of the rule of law, then you do have power. You have the power to make it known that you will not EVER support people who engage in those types of things.
In advance, I know there will be people saying, what about the supreme court? We already have real evidence to go on about that. Obama appointed Eric Holder to run the DOJ and has instructed him to ignore the rule of law with regards to serious war and financial crimes. He has tortured and imprisoned Bradley Manning. Omar Kadhr is still being held in Gitmo. Obama has claimed he is above the law. There’s your answer.
Take the power of telling the powerful wrong doers that you withdraw support. You might pay for doing this, but it is something worth paying for.
Not too much for a disaffected democrat to do, anon nurse, except to vote for a random third party and allow a republican sweep. -Swarthmore mom
Well, it’s not November of 2012, yet. We’ll see where things stand then… There’s a lot of time… a lot of time… (Fell free to say “I told you so” when November rolls around without that Watergate-like moment… 🙂 )
Not too much for a disaffected democrat to do, anon nurse, except to vote for a random third party and allow a republican sweep.
“That said, to my way of thinking, worrying about the next president is somewhat of a waste of time.” -Jill
Agreed. There’s still a lot of time between now and the next election.
Jill also said, “The problems facing us need to be addressed immediately, by citizens. There doesn’t appear to be in cavalry coming. We need a citizen’s movement for peace, environmental and social justice and the rule of law.”
True, true and true. We need Watergate-like moment… We’re unlikely to see one, but it doesn’t keep me from hoping… There are Stasi-like groups operating in our communities. They’re working beneath the radar of most but, make no mistake, they are a serious problem for anyone who gives a damn about the future of our country.
I cannot say strongly enough that Ron Paul – while he has his strong points – is simply the wrong man for the job of President. That being said, nobody else currently running deserves the job either. -Gene H.
And therein lies the rub… Absent a miracle of some sort, what in the hell is a voter to do?
Gene,
Have you looked into the Green and Justice party. There is even a Republican you might like, Buddy Roemer. That said, to may way of thinking, worrying about the next president is somewhat of a waste of time.
The problems facing us need to be addressed immediately, by citizens. There doesn’t appear to be in cavalry coming. We need a citizen’s movement for peace, environmental and social justice and the rule of law. I think we should be less distracted by candidates and work as a people for things we really want. OWS is a good model. I think the authorities agree with me because they certainly have pulled out all the stops to kill that movement off!
Romney and Paul are the only two candidates on the republican ballot in Virginia.