By Mike Appleton, Weekend Contributor
“All governments are theocracies. We now live in a secular humanist theocracy. I want to change that to a government with God at its head.”
-Gary DeMar (quoted in John Sugg, “A Nation Under God,” Mother Jones (December, 2005)
When I started first grade in 1951, each school day began with the Pledge of Allegiance. We recited “one nation, indivisible,” because people understood that fidelity to one’s country is not a religious virtue. The National Prayer Breakfast was not on anyone’s calendar because it didn’t exist. Politicians felt no compulsion to invoke God’s blessings on the United States at the conclusion of every speech. Protestants opposed every effort to secure public funding of Catholic parochial schools in order to preserve the “wall of separation” between church and state. The corner grocer didn’t care whether a customer was gay or had been born again. Textbooks were not reviewed by religious committees for conformity with the King James Version. No serious person had yet suggested that insentient, artificial commercial entities could magically channel the religious beliefs of their shareholders. And no one complained that a war was being waged against religion.
But following some of the events at this year’s Values Voter Summit, I have become nostalgic for 1951.
The Summit is the premiere annual political event for conservative Christian evangelicals, and making an appearance has become almost a required pilgrimage for Republican presidential candidates who desire the support of the religious right base of the party. Those in attendance this year heard many of the usual rants against same-sex marriage, abortion and the contraception mandate in the Affordable Care Act. However, those concerns did not top the priority list. Instead, a 39% plurality of those polled at the conference believe that the most important issue facing the country today is religious liberty.
So how is this possible? The past 30 years have seen an explosion in government support of religion. Millions of dollars in public funds are provided to a variety of so-called “faith-based” programs. Taxpayers support charter schools with decidedly sectarian curricula all across the country. A number of states provide tax credits to enable parents to send their children to religious schools. Religious institutions and, after Hobby Lobby, for-profit businesses as well, have been granted exemptions from compliance with portions of the ACA. This is in addition to the exemptions from anti-discrimination legislation which religious institutions already enjoy in their hiring and firing practices. Religious groups distribute bibles in public schools and operate after-school programs on school property to proselytize grammar school children. The Town of Greece decision now permits governments to schedule ceremonial prayer in accordance with local majoritarian religious preferences. Most rational people would agree that freedom of religion and religious expression are hardly at risk.
The comments of several of the event speakers may furnish us a clue. Kelly Shackelford of the Liberty Institute repeated the false story of the child disciplined for saying grace before eating her lunch. Michele Bachmann reminded the audience that the battle against Islamic terrorism is “spiritual warfare.” Gary Bauer accused President Obama of protecting Muslims while ignoring the persecution of Christians in the Middle East. Jason and David Benham, whose proposed television program on HGTV was cancelled after revelations of their virulently anti-gay activities, compared themselves to victims of ISIS, silenced for their Christian beliefs. And Sen. Ted Cruz, who for the second year in a row won the presidential straw poll, intoned “We need a president who will speak out for people of faith, for prisoners of conscience.” So for the attendees at the Values Voter Summit, there is indeed a war on Christianity. It is being waged by Muslims and by those who object to intolerance.
But the whole story is really darker. When members of the Christian right speak of freedom of religion, what they mean is freedom for a particular brand of conservative Christianity. Tony Perkins is the president of the Family Research Council, the principal sponsor of the annual Summit. He is neither a legal scholar nor a theologian, but that does not matter. In Mr. Perkins’ view, religious freedom does not apply to Islam. It also does not apply to Christians who support gay rights. In fact, religious liberty is reserved solely for those holding “orthodox religious viewpoints. It has to have a track record, it has to come forth from religious orthodoxy.” Mr. Perkins’ First Amendment does not compel government neutrality toward religion; it requires preferential treatment for those Christian sects whose doctrines adhere to Mr, Perkins’ notion of orthodoxy. He is a theocratic dominionist in religious liberty’s clothing.
And that, in a nutshell, is what the war on religion in America is all about. It is a war declared by Christian fundamentalists on all religious traditions deemed non-conforming. The goal is a society in which separation of church and state is eliminated and religious pluralism rejected as unbiblical. Ted Cruz is merely the latest last hope for the hapless.
AY, darned if I know. 🙂
I don’t have religious people giving me pamphlets. When they show up at my door to give me a pamphlets, I respectfully tell them I’m not interested and they mostly appear to accept the decline with grace. When they don’t, agenda is revealed. If “gay people” were to come by “to get me to come to their club” they’d receive the same response.
Mutual respect. When it’s not present, there’s usually an agenda rolling, regardless of faith of sexual orientation.
Annie – “It’s extremists and fundamentalists that have caused major problems.”
I’ve heard that that number is 10% of their religion. Sounds like a lot of major problems.
Tsk, tsk, tsk Annie, pray tell what did you do…..
Why does JT allow this continuous stirring of the pot? We ALL were admonished many times to NOT bring up past disagreements, now there is a commenter who is doubling down on doing just this very thing, once again. Just WHAT do these threads linked to above, have to do with THIS blog post topic??
paulette92122 – “This might be off topic, maybe not. Here’s a posting I saw recently.
“I’ve never had gay people show up at my door and give me pamphlets, trying to get me to come to their gay club – it’s always religious people showing up, giving me pamphlets and trying to get me to come to their church.
Now, tell me again who has an agenda.””
Of coarse they don’t come to our doors. They have the public schools to push their agenda. Not to mention the tasteful parades.
The 11/4/13 California Teachers post, as well as the 11/18/13 New Mexico Police are also worth reading.
Nick,
I have deleted a comment that refers to a prior deletion and prior conflicts with specific commenters under our civility rule. I also deleted a prior comment on the same grounds. (I do not always post a notice with such deletions if I am working off my cellphone).
Anonymously Yours,
You have had two repeated comments containing offensive language deleted under our civility rule.
Anonymous, you have had a comment deleted that referred to a prior deleted comment under our civility rule.
This might be off topic, maybe not. Here’s a posting I saw recently.
“I’ve never had gay people show up at my door and give me pamphlets, trying to get me to come to their gay club – it’s always religious people showing up, giving me pamphlets and trying to get me to come to their church.
Now, tell me again who has an agenda.”
I’ve read similar articles about Jesus was the founder of “separation of church and state”
http://americancreation.blogspot.com/2010/04/did-jesus-endorse-separation-of-church.html
Wow, even this RINO is calling a terrorist a terrorist.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/09/29/Scarborough-Hammers-FBI-for-Labeling-OK-Beheading-Workplace-Violence
“And yes, thank God we have the second amendment.”
—————————————–
“Try reading a little history. Constitutional amendments were enacted by MEN, not god(s).”
***********************************
Excellent MarkK!
markkernes – “Try reading a little history. Constitutional amendments were enacted by MEN, not god(s).”
What does me thanking God for us to have the wisdom to write the second amendment have to do with how much history I’ve read?
markkernes, So the terrorist who beheaded his co-worker was a Christian disguised as a Muslim? Wow this place is really getting warped.
And yes, thank God we have the second amendment.
Jim22 wrote: “So the terrorist who beheaded his co-worker was a Christian disguised as a Muslim?”
No one said that—although those who’ve investigated the incident think this is merely workplace violence having nothing to do with the perp’s religious faith. Of course, that hasn’t stopped jackasses like Glenn Beck from speculating otherwise.
“Wow this place is really getting warped.”
Been that way for a while now—very entertaining!
“And yes, thank God we have the second amendment.”
Try reading a little history. Constitutional amendments were enacted by MEN, not god(s).
markkernes wrote: “… although those who’ve investigated the incident think this is merely workplace violence having nothing to do with the perp’s religious faith.”
If that were true, the ones investigating would not have called in the FBI. They called the FBI in because of a jihadist connection. Those who insist it was mere workplace violence without any islamic motivation are lying. They said the same thing about the Fort Hood shooting. And if they really believed it was only workplace violence, why did they arrest another muslim who made threats of beheading his coworker?
I realize that the man had a tattoo on his arm written in arabic saying “peace be with you,” but all you had to do was look at his facebook page to see that the man believed in jihad. The background has images of Muslims, one with a machine gun, and one with an RPG. His profile picture is him alone in all white praying in a mosque. His verbiage was typical jihadist rhetoric, and he expressed a fascination and admiration toward the recent beheading videos published by jihadists.
The Brit’s did the same kind of media cover up with that woman beheaded in her garden. No word about it being a muslim taking off her head, his Muslim name was never reported, and no mention that the woman beheaded was the only woman on the block who did not wear a full hijab. They tried to make it look like just some normal crime where a strange man beheads his neighbor. No terrorism here, no jihad, no attempting to enforce the code of your religion.
Unfortunately, these days, we have to always be reading between the lines and looking for what is not being told to us by the media and government.
You and I frequently disagree, but I always value your comments.
Whether it turns out this particular case turns out to be jihad or not I think you have made a perfectly valid point.
There seems to be an attempt by officials to minimize reports and recognition of jihad based attacks. I am not sure why that would be. But several possibilities suggest themselves: to minimize the possibility of copy cat attacks, CYA – to avoid blame for not preventing the attack, the mistaken belief that we can avoid jihad if we do not acknowledge it, misguided attempt to minimize stereotyping peaceful Muslims by bigots.
I wonder if Hassan the Ft Hood shooter would agree that his acts were a workplace shooting rather than jihad?
In any case to official silence on jihad is deafening.
And the answer to your stated “question” so often is, sadly, “The 2nd amendment.”
Yes. It is “one” of the answers. You protect yourself your way…..I’ll do it mine.
And Jim, I’m talking more about Christians showing some more tolerance to other Christians that do not worship in the exact same manner they do. As far as Muslms go, there is no need to wage a war on Muslims. There are plenty of Muslims who live in peace and harmony with non Muslims in various countries. It’s extremists and fundamentalists that have caused major problems. I don’t advocate tolerance for Muslms who behead or kill, but I see you’d like to spin it that way. No surprise.
Annie, Again, show me or tell your moral equivalence of current Christian activity with current terrorists beheading innocent people.
Jim, perhaps a remedial reading of the Bible is in order? Concentrate on the New Testament.
Annie, So in your world beheading terrorist is the moral equivalence of Christian what? What “talk the talk” have Christians been doing? Your logic makes no sense.
Jim22 wrote: “So in your world beheading terrorist is the moral equivalence of Christian what?”
Ooh, ooh, I got this one!: “Fundamentalists destroying the First Amendment’s right of the people not to have government-sponsored sectarian policies, and any other constitutional freedom that Believers think makes Americans less religious.”
You don’t think you’re better than the Islamists? I recall hearing many times, dismay at how moderate Muslims don’t speak out against the extremist Muslms. So moderate Christians just get a pass? They have an opportunity here to walk the walk, not just simply talk the talk of Christianity. Lip service doesn’t make one a serious Christian, put your faith where your mouth is.
Annie, Yea, your right it’s the Christians fault. We need to just be better, not the beheading terrorists. Really? What color is the sky in progressive land?