Generally not something I would expand upon but this "head in the sand" attitude needs to cease as it has been going on for way too long. Due to space considerations I could not elaborate as much as I would have liked concerning some points I made. So here we go, and this is gonna be long, very long!
As I noted, religionists have a troubled relationship with race and segregation.
In May 1969, a group of African-American parents in Holmes County,
Mississippi, sued the Treasury Department to prevent three new
whites-only K-12 private academies from securing full tax-exempt status,
arguing that their discriminatory policies prevented them from being
considered “charitable” institutions,,,
In Green v. Kennedy [https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/309/1127/2096127/] (David Kennedy was secretary of the
treasury at the time), decided in January 1970, the plaintiffs won a
preliminary injunction, which denied the “segregation academies”
tax-exempt status until further review. In the meantime, the government
was solidifying its position on such schools. Later that year, President
Richard Nixon ordered the Internal Revenue Service to enact a new
policy denying tax exemptions to all segregated schools in the United
States. Under the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which
forbade racial segregation and discrimination, discriminatory schools
were not—by definition—“charitable” educational organizations, and
therefore they had no claims to tax-exempt status; similarly, donations
to such organizations would no longer qualify as tax-deductible
contributions.
What Balmer argues, Paul Weyrich used this opportunity to organize the Religious Right as the IRS began sending questionnaires to church-related “segregation academies.” One such institution which become the battleground is Bob Jones University. While the initial legal battle began in 1971, it wasn't until 1983that SCOTUS upheld the right of the IRS to rescind the tax-exempt status of
the University in
Bob Jones University v. United States 461 U.S. 574 (1983).
From
Amanda Marcotte,
Balmer doesn't mention it, but there was one other shift in the public
consciousness going on at the time. The "Stop ERA" campaign, headed up
by Christian right leader Phyllis Schlafly to kill the Equal Rights
Amendment banning sex discrimination, got moving in 1972. By the time
male Christian conservative leaders like Weyrich and Falwell decided to
make abortion a centerpiece issue, Schlafly had done the yeoman's work
of convincing huge numbers of evangelical Christians that feminists were
a threat to the very fabric of society. With hostility to women's
equality rising, making the anti-abortion pitch was probably much, much
easier.
In regards to the Bible being used as a sledge-hammer (justifying slavery and anti-LGBTQI+ discrimination), two books come to mind:
Saving The Original Sinner: How Christians Have Used the Bible’s First Man to Oppress, Inspire and Make Sense of the World, by Karl. W.
Giberson (2015) AND
The Bible Tells Me So: Why Defending Scripture Has Made Us Unable to Read It by Peter Enns (2015). Both books explore the intellectual games used by
conservative Christians to “protect” the Bible and justify their actions or in-actions.
It is in c
hapter
9 that Giberson explores racism and slavery. Contrary to AiG some of the most ardent racists were so-called Christians who used the
Bible to support such. (I contrast with Ham and AiG as I am more familiar with their stance than any other creationist/religionist organization.) Just for shits-n-giggle,
this is AiG's review of Giberson's book (abstract).
According to Dr. Karl Giberson, the molecules-to-man evolution that supposedly spawned us also made us the morally messed up creatures that we are. In Saving the Original Sinner he attacks belief in the historicity of Adam. He teaches that we are “original sinners” not as Adam’s descendants but as a result of our evolutionary heritage. Believing
sin and death did not enter human history through Adam but are the
natural results of evolution, he considers Adam irrelevant. Gone
with Adam is the biblical foundation for understanding why the “last
Adam” Jesus Christ came to die for the sins of the first Adam’s
descendants. Bible-believing
creationists who believe Adam and Eve were the first parents of all
people refuse to accept Darwinian evolution’s explanation of human
origins. Therefore, belief in
Adam is a stronghold that evolutionist Karl Giberson assaults with this
book, hoping to precipitate a crisis of faith in biblical creationists.
While I would have to review my copy of Giberson book to be sure, but this goes to Ham's fear of losing authority,
something I have written about before - specifically
The Evolution Connection. Why he pushes so hard for creationism to be taught in schools.
As for my take away from Enns' book, while he was a bit more fluffy for my overall liking, he makes an interesting point that I believe highlights the mind-set of the Religious Right,
"God
never told the Israelites to kill the Canaanites. The Israelites
believed that God told them to kill the Canaanites."
Again for shits-n-giggles, AiG's critique.
What we know of Jesus Christ’s love and grace comes to us through the reliable testimony of God’s Word.
That simple and beautiful biblical truth, summed up in the familiar
phrase “The Bible tells me so” from the hymn “Jesus Loves Me,”
introduces many children to the love of Jesus. This
sweet refrain also reminds adults that God’s revelation to us in His
Word is the foundation for faith and the ultimate source of truth. A new book capitalizing on the familiar song—The Bible Tells Me So: Why Defending Scripture Has Made Us Unable to Read It by Dr. Peter Enns—is a collection of compromises, written for the layman. The book wastes a great deal of ink claiming that the Bible is simply not to be trusted or taken seriously. In it Dr. Enns
continues his destructive influence on the Christian faith and biblical
understanding through his relentless assault on God’s Word.
We are all well aware of the "clobber passages" used to justify hatred and discrimination, re-hashing them now would be a bit redundant (and make this post even longer). What I want to focus on are some of the preachers of hate both members of clergy and pols-n-pundits. As I said many years ago, this type of rhetoric is
no longer fringe.
Sorry to say, if you do not speak out against the extremism you condone
it, it is no longer fringe when it is occurs in our everyday life. To
borrow a phrase from a wise friend, I leave you with this: "The
religions of "love" teaching hate!!"
Scott Lively in his own words,,,
"There is no question that homosexuality figures prominently in the
history of the Holocaust. … The first years of terrorism against the
Jews were carried out by the homosexuals of the SA."
– The Pink Swastika, 1996
"Homosexuality is thus biologically (and to varying degrees morally)
equivalent to pedophilia, sado-masochism, bestiality and many other
forms of deviant behavior."
– “Deciphering 'Gay' Word-Speak and Language of Confusion," May 2002
Lively is
currently running for Governor of Massachusetts, is
responsible, in part, for the "kill the gays" bill in Uganda. With author Kevin Abrams, wrote
The Pink Swastika (1995); which is thoroughly debunked. Believes his advocacy helped inspire the Russian law passed in 2013 that bans “propaganda for non-traditional sexual relations among minors.”
Next comes a man who is of the opinion all gays are pedophiles and will have sex with
anything, believing all homosexuals should kill themselves. (See:: America's Hate Preachers a BBC documentary, highlighted below, and
this little gem.)
ANDERSON: To normal people, homosexuality [and] pedophilia are disgusting. To a normal person.
LIVINGSTON: Why do you put pedophilia and homosexuality in the same group?
ANDERSON: They are in the same group! Because any man who would have sex with another man would have sex with anything. Period. Like, I’ll put it this way: Any man who would have sex with another man would have sex with an animal.
LIVINGSTON: That’s blatantly not true, though!
ANDERSON: It is true! That’s reality. Even if you don’t think it’s reality…
…
LIVINGSTON: What do you think homosexuals should do, then?
ANDERSON: Kill themselves, as far as I’m concerned, because they’re horrible, wicked people. They’re just gonna keep molesting and destroying people. So I
don’t have any advice for homosexuals, except to put a bullet in your
own head so that you don’t molest my kids or anyone else’s kids.
Steven Anderson has been banned in
Jamaica (2018),
Botswana (deported - 2016),
South Africa (2016),
the UK (2016) and Canada. He is known for, not only the above, but also
calling on the government to execute homosexuals as well as declaring there are “
50 less pedophiles in this world” after the Pulse nightclub shooting. (
Theodore Shoebat is another anti-LGBTQI+ crusader who has also advocated for executing homosexuals. Along with his father Walid
"more than a few holes in his backstory" Shoebat, they are a potent hate duo.)
[Besides advocating for the death of LGBT people, Steven Anderson also
made an antisemitic film and promoted Holocaust denial (
“Marching to Zion.” released in March 2015 - mirror site),
saying the Jews lied about the Holocaust in order to create the state
of Israel, and that slave laborers at Auschwitz were compensated for
their work and could buy items at a commissary. This is a horrid little film and if you have a strong stomach, it is worth the watch.]
Next on my list is
Gordon Klingenschmitt (sadly a hometown boy as he was born in Buffalo and hence my interest), this man should be a nobody but for his one claim to fame. In 2006 he was
court-martialed and subsequently ousted from the Navy and sued in the Court of Federal Claims, claiming that he was wrongfully discharged from the Navy and
seeking reinstatement, and arguing that his First Amendment rights were violated. (Readers Digest version.)
Now Gordon has had a fairly long career by hate-mongers standards. While
not as vitriolic as Anderson, he is anti-LGBTQI+; he's a bizarre little man.
Although he has a thing for "demonic spirits". What makes Klingenschmitt so dangerous, he has served as a state legislator (CO) and
is considering another run in 2018.
As Luning notes,
A lightning rod for controversy who put actual lightning rods to shame
during his one term in the General Assembly, Klingenschmitt maintained
President Barack Obama is possessed by demons and once performed an
exorcism on him. He accused U.S. Rep. Jared Polis, who is gay, of
wanting to “join ISIS in beheading Christians,” although Klingenschmitt
later said the remark wasn’t meant seriously.
He was admonished by House GOP leadership for calling it “the curse of
God upon America for our sin of not protecting innocent children in the
womb” when a pregnant Longmont woman was attacked and her baby was cut
from her womb.
Not only is he considering another run for office, he does have the ear of
some notable if not
infamous politicians. As I have sated before, Klingenschmitt is guilty of biblical hyperliteralism;
it is a false way of biblical interpretation which leads to his many bigoted
statements.
While Gordon is in some cases mild, not so with our next homophobe, Kevin Swanson. He like Anderson and Shoebat
advocate for the execution of homosexuals. What's worse is he has political clout as demonstrated by the 2015 National Religious Liberties Conference. An event he organized featuring, then, three Republican contenders for the presidency: Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, and Ted
Cruz.
As Katherine Stewart notes for the NYT,
The comfortable thing to do would be to dismiss Mr. Swanson as just
another wombat from the embarrassing fringe of American politics. But
that would be a mistake. Mr. Swanson’s murderous imaginings did not
interfere with his ability to attract senior Republican figures to his
conference, including as a keynote speaker Bob Vander Plaats, an Iowa
politician who will grant the “Most Wanted Endorsement of 2016,” according to the Conservative Review.
Mr.
Swanson is the product of a significant political movement that has
coalesced around the theme of religious liberty. Many of its leaders and
their allies appear at the Family Research Council’s annual Values
Voters Summit. Other power centers include Liberty University (now a
required stop on the campaign trail); conservative policy organizations
like the American Family Association and Concerned Women for America;
and Christian legal advocacy groups like Liberty Counsel (whose
co-founder, Mat Staver,
acted
as Kim Davis’s lawyer) and the Alliance Defending Freedom, the legal
powerhouse behind the Hobby Lobby decision (whose president, Alan Sears,
co-wrote a book in 2003 titled
“The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today”).
When
talking about religious conservatives in America, we might perhaps
conjure up an image of a farmer in Iowa or a small-business owner in
Ohio who goes to church and holds traditional values. But the leaders to
whom such conservatives deliver their votes have a distinct, often
different, political vision.
Speaking of Ted Cruz (and
by proxy his father Rafael) let's take a look-see first at elder Cruz and his dominionist ideology, "
that fundamentalist Christians should take over, well, just about everything".
It’s not hard to figure out Rafael Cruz’s basic message. He has given
scores, probably hundreds, of sermons and talks at religious and
political gatherings, and many are on YouTube. His primary theme is that
the United States is a “Christian nation”
and that only true believers who adhere to biblical principles—that is,
who accept the literal truth of the Bible, as Rafael Cruz and other
fundamentalists see it—are worthy of guiding the United States forward.
He regularly rails against pastors and church leaders who eschew
politics and do not enter the political fray to combat the enemy:
secular humanism.
Rafael Cruz is an advocate of Christian dominionism, which
essentially holds that fundamentalist Christians should take over, well,
just about everything. Speaking at a Texas church in 2012, Rafael Cruz told
the crowd that God instructed Adam and Eve to go forth, multiply, and,
as he put it, “take dominion over all my creation.” He said this meant
that true-believers ought to dominate all areas of life: “That dominion
is not just in the church, that dominion is over every area—society,
education, government, and economics.” (During that sermon, he also
noted that husbands, not wives, should be the “spiritual leader” of
their families.) In Cruz’s view, those who accept Christ and his word
(as Cruz believes it should be understood) will prosper spiritually and
financially. In that same sermon, he noted that God not only anoints
priests to lead the faithful, but also anoints “kings…to take dominion.”
By that, he means those who rule a nation, and, he adds, these rulers
one day (and he makes it sound as if this day will come soon) will
transfer the wealth of the “wicked” to the “righteous.”
So, how far do you think the apple falls from the tree? Rafael Cruz is not only Ted Cruz's father, he is also his closest
personal and professional mentor who actively campaigned for his son
among evangelical voters in regards to the 2016 Presidential election cycle. While Junior's speeches are not laden with hate like his father's, he does accept his father endorsement and council.
It's difficult to succinctly pin a direct statement like Swanson's "kill the gays" on Cruz; but he sure does attract a, shall we say, questionable crowd. For example,
Mike Bickle
(IHOP) has notably
claimed God sent Adolf Hitler to hunt down Jews who refuse to convert
to Christianity;
James Dobson of Focus on the Family, who
has suggested taking up arms against transgendered individuals;
Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty who in 2013 had
the infamous GQ interview where he stated,
"Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there.
Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that
woman and those men," he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: "Don't
be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male
prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the
slanderers, the swindlers—they won't inherit the kingdom of God. Don't
deceive yourself. It's not right."
Bob Vander Plaats of Family Leader, who led a successful
2010 effort to oust three state Supreme Court justices who ruled in favor of marriage equality.
Pamela Gellar, the anti-Muslim
activist who
claim to fame is her 2010 campaign in opposition to the Park 51 Islamic Center project in Manhattan, which she deemed the “Ground Zero Mosque”. Not only is she
associated with National Security Advisor John Bolton, but Richard Spencer and Milo Yiannopoulos as well. She is an active columnist at Breibart and WND (note:: direct link be careful!)
Now just to demonstrate how wacked these associations are, consider this,,, Theodore Shoebat has, in the past, called for Pamela Geller to be put to death for associating with “faggots” and “sodomites” at the “Gays for Trump” event during the RNC convention noted above. I shit you not!!
The list of influences on Cruz is endless in regards to what I consider far-right crazies (
for complete list.) But,,, it highlights very well that no matter how small the crazies influence, it has ramifications for a wider audience. In some case individuals that are responsible for making our laws. It is why I personally bitch so much in regards to SOCAS.
These are but a few individuals, some I have had personal run-ins with but most interactions have been on the inter-web. I am going to leave with one last person, someone whom falls into the former category mentioned; Michael Brown.
(Some individuals I have mentioned for a specific reason. Currently Ted Cruz is up for re-election in Texas against Beto O'Rourke. While he is not well liked by his colleagues, Cruz does wield much power - w/ Mike Lee of UT - and like Mike Pence, his notion of theocratic control concerning the "Seven Mountains Mandate" is scary, the individuals listed endorse his brand of dominionism, it even scarier.)
Like Scott Lively, Brown has no problem
exporting his hate nor like Klingenschmitt
claiming homosexual demonic forces or some such shit. Brown is also a big
purveyor of the "Christian persecution" narrative (I am a fan of JMG and use him as reference in many a posting, including this one.) But
what makes Brown dangerous, (besides his association with Lou Engle, founder of the International House of Prayer (IHOP) and leader of TheCall; a man who believes the LGBT fight for equality is a bigger threat than Islamic terrorists), he employs verbal and religious violence as a tool of thought and
instruction.
"
[V]erbal, spiritual and theological violence will be to silence and strip
all LGBT people of their legal, civil and social equality, freedom and
liberty, effectively creating a theocracy governed by the principles
they believe are set forward in both Old Testament and New Testament
law."
IOWs,
while Brown may not advocate for physical violence, his "imagery
and allegory, are a threat to LGBT people, even if he and his
organization are not,,, there is a thin line between violent thoughts and words, and
violent actions and deeds. I believe it is this precariously thin line
Brown seems to disregard,,," (From
“Jesus Manifesto,” via
Interstateq.)
“Revolution means upheaval. Revolution means the
overthrowing of the status quo. We dare not downplay the significance of
the word. Revolution is a matter of life and death, and our revolution
flows from the blood of the Savior to the blood of the martyr. We put
down our sword and take up our cross, overcoming Satan by the blood of
the Lamb, by the word of our testimony, and by not loving our lives so
much as to shrink from death (Rev. 12:11).”
Our revolution is fueled by the power of the gospel, and the gospel
does violence to the forces of hell. We must recover the fullness of the
gospel of Jesus! It is nothing less than a direct assault on the
kingdom of Satan, a frontal attack on hostile, spiritual powers, a
mortal confrontation of light against darkness. It brings about the
ultimate counterculture conflict.”
"We’re in a war, and war means conflict, hardship, and sacrifice. As
Leonard Ravenhill wrote, ‘When a nation calls its prime men to battle,
homes are broken, weeping sweethearts say their good-byes, businesses
are closed, college careers are wrecked, factories are refitted for
wartime production, rationing and discomforts are accepted — all for
war. Can we do less for the greatest fight that this world has ever
known outside of the cross — this end-time siege on sanity, morality,
and spirituality?'”
"Our society is deteriorating all around us and even non-believers
sense that something is wrong. Why? It is because we, the people of God,
the army of the Lord Jesus, the messengers of liberation, the
ambassadors of reconciliation, have been sidetracked by the love of this
world and distracted by the cares of this age.”
Matt sums up the issue well in the comments, responding to Brown, "
my utmost concern is your verbally and theologically violent rhetoric
and language. People have a right to be aware of what you are teaching
and how it is being taught. People have a right to be aware of the
possible threat — not from you or your group — but from others who hear
your words and are unable to distinguish between your “spiritual
concepts” and allegory, and real calls for physical violence."
So I will end there (I leave out Westboro as they are no longer the only player in the game), but to say I am "
reeeeeaally reaching with those examples. Especially if you're trying to use them as examples in the present day," is utter bull-fucking-shit. You and your head-in-the-sand ilk need to start paying attention. Hell even my 16y/o co-worker is more aware of the religious batshittery going on without doing a deep dive into all the religious rhetoric.
