Why do they lie?

This is just one of those things that is super fascinating about the Christian right, which is that they have this deep-to-the-core disrespect for the truth that manifests in telling really obvious fairy tales and fantasies. The pleasure derived from demonizing abortion providers or Planned Parenthood [you can also insert atheist, humanist, or any individual/group not agreed with] outstrips any concerns about the immorality of lying about people, but it also outstrips any concerns about people realizing you’re a sleazy, no-good liar. Robertston and Calhoun [and Starnes] don’t worry about being caught in flagrant lies, because their own people will never hold them accountable for it,,,

I think the problem is that because they’ve convinced themselves they’re the only moral people left in the country, they, perversely, feel entitled to do any immoral thing they want without consequence. “Morality” is a tribal identity issue, in other words, and not a result of your actual behavior. They’re convinced they’re good and pro-choicers [insert group individual of choice] are bad, and so that means that everything they do is good and everything we do is bad, even if they’re lying and we’re telling the truth. (The Christian Right’s Ease With Lies And Dishonesty | The Raw Story)

Oh, how true this observation/opinion is.  I have lost count of the numerous faux outrages, based on lies, I have posted about.  Yet it still continues as the following (headlines) will demonstrate,,,

First reported by Charisma News with the headline Atheists Work to Block Charity From Feeding Starving Kids:

Students at the School of Engineering and Arts recently visited Calvary Lutheran Church to participate in a volunteer program sponsored by Feed My Starving Children, a nonprofit organization run by Christians that seeks to eliminate world hunger for children. As part of the program, students prepared prepacked meals that would be sent to malnourished children across the globe and did not engage in any religious activities.

[,,,]
“It’s shameful for groups like the American Humanist Association to attack charity groups that provide impoverished children with help they wouldn’t otherwise receive,” says senior legal counsel Jeremy Tedesco. “We hope that our letter will help Robbinsdale Area Schools understand that they can continue to allow students to participate with Feed My Starving Children and other worthy humanitarian service programs for the benefit of the needy.”

The next day, the master of hyperbole, Todd Starnes states once again claims of anti-Christian persecution, American Humanist Association demands students stop feeding starving kids:

The humanists got their britches in a bunch after the family of a student at the School of Engineering and Arts objected to the project being held at Calvary Lutheran Church.

[,,,]
The humanists took special offense to biblical terminology used to describe the mission to feed starving children.

[,,,]
How the atheists must have trembled at the sight of the cross as they tried to avert their eyes lest they soil themselves and spontaneously combust.

What I find so telling and why the highlighted statement above is spot on, Starnes continues:

I called Latisha Gray, the spokesperson for the school district – a very nice lady who seemed rather perplexed by the controversy and said they don’t believe they violated the U.S. Constitution.

“We believe that this activity was a service learning activity,” she told me. “There was absolutely no evangelizing or religious activity in the event.”

In other words, she is a nice Christian lady, who has no personal understanding of the First Amendment and what legal ramifications it entails.  Her misguided thinking concerning this issue,

the project was held during school hours as part of a community service project.  [AND] It’s the second year the school has partnered with “Feed My Starving Children.”

is fed by the "we believe" faction that holds to "their interpretation of the law is the only correct interpretation," and the atheists are bad, therefore wrong.

What is so infuriating is the blatant mis-characterization of what is at issue.  Spinning a possible SOCAS violation as, atheists trying to block the charity itself is dishonest and unnecessary.

The first point that Starnes et al choose to ignore in this case, "Christian" exceptionalism.

"Gray said the school is aware that a parent had complained about the event,,,The AHA said the parent also complained about the event last year."  So the school, knowing there was a previous issue with this project, chose to ignore it, "it is even more egregious that, after the parental complaint was made last year, you did nothing to remedy the problem, but instead suggested that the parent was misguided for complaining."  What Starnes leaves off, "We therefore seek immediate assurance that activities such as those complained of herein will cease immediately and not be continued in the future."  So the nice Christian lady, Latisha Gray who "seemed rather perplexed by the controversy" is full of shit.  She knows exactly what the problem is and so does Starnes.

A second point, trivializing the obvious

Further down in his diatribe, Starnes gives us this statement, "AHA said they don’t have a problem feeding hungry children. They just have a problem doing it inside a “theologically-charged environment.”  And concludes with, "This is a new low even for humanists. It takes a special kind of godless thuggery to take food out of the mouths of starving children."

Dude, I should say dudes as Jeremy Tedesco (ADF) alludes to this as well, I think you missed the point.  The AHA is NOT trying to stop the charity from feeding children, they are trying to prevent religious indoctrination of young impressionable children

1]  As we all know, charities such as Feed My Children (why is it MY Children?) depend on volunteers.  These kids were NOT volunteers, this was part of a school requirement for community service.  Hence why it was deemed a field trip and performed during school hours.

2]  Just the fact that this field trip occurred at a church implicitly supports a connection between church and state.  Church implies religion, specifically, Christianity.  I know of no 6,7 or 8 year old that would be able to separate the connection. 

3]  The goal of Christianity, proselytization (the Great Commission).  "The website of the church in question (the Calvary Lutheran Church) describes its mission as “to lead people into a growing relationship with Jesus Christ."

4]  The mission of the charity in question, "We believe God answers the prayers of His people and ask you to join us in praying.”

So yes Mr. Starnes it was a "theologically-charged environment" to insinuate otherwise is disingenuous.  For me to think that proselytizing to a "captive" audience was not the main focus of such organizations, I would have to ignore this and this:

Brannon, 25, said they decided to hand out care packages to the homeless after being told they could not volunteer at the Spartanburg Soup Kitchen.

"I told them we wouldn't wear our T-shirts. We wouldn't tell anyone who we are with. We just want to help out," Brannon said. "And they told us that we were not allowed."

According to the Soup Kitchen's website, the organization is dependent upon volunteers, having more than 600 community volunteers with a mission to serve the hungry in Spartanburg.

Lou Landrum, executive director of the Soup Kitchen, told the Herald-Journal she would resign from her job before she let atheists volunteer and be a "disservice to this community."

"This is a ministry to serve God" she said. "We stand on the principles of God. Do they (atheists) think that our guests are so ignorant that they don't know what an atheist is? Why are they targeting us? They don't give any money. I wouldn't want their money."

And,

The bad news is that we aren’t likely to have a volunteer event. The reason is unfortunate: Kansas City Rescue Mission has decided to use the meals they deliver as a chance to proselytize to its recipients by inserting religious literature into the meals. They informed us that we “would not be a good fit” (emphasis theirs) for volunteering with them, and declined to respond to any further inquiries. We can only speculate at their motivation behind this,,,

So why do they lie?  I have no clue.  The author of the original article couldn't answer it succinctly either:  "With the religious right, however, the tendency to put fantasy in front of fact is the dominant cultural imperative. Conspiracy theories about Planned Parenthood are the norm. Entire laws are being passed based on the lie that legal abortion is dangerous. For other interest groups, being a bunch of dishonest hacks is a legitimate obstacle, and understandably so! It’s interesting how much the Christian right is an exception.

But do you see the pattern, the formula and how well it works [insert ACA, gay marriage, atheist, humanist, or any individual/group not agreed with.]