We Have A Village Idiot In This Country: It's Called Fundamentalist Christianity
Wednesday night, after Pres. Carter's remarks identifying the racism attendant to the teabagger rally in Washington and the other virulent eruptions of the right, Rachel Maddow interviewed a fellow named Frank Schaeffer about what it all means. She introduced the segment by pointing to some of the survey results about New Jersey "conservatives" and how many of them believe that Obama either is the antichrist or might be. Schaeffer grew up in the "Evangelical" movement and was an influential player early on in organizing the Christian right. Like Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus, Schaeffer, at a certain point had an epiphany and changed the course of his life. He now recognizes Christian fundamentalism for what it is and does what he can to combat it's continued malignant growth.
I think Mr. Schaeffer has a great deal of wisdom to impart about the Christian right, what it's all about and why it manifests itself politically as it does. People should listen carefully to what he has to say on this subject.
Rachel noted that about 60% of McCain voters in New Jersey do not think Obama is an American citizen. She wondered aloud why this is and how this could be and this is what Mr. Schaeffer said:
Those of us who come from the evangelical subculture have been weaned with our mother's milk on a changing cast list of villains. It might be Kennedy to one generation, Obama to the next, but I think the larger point this brings up is that the mainstream, not just media, but culture doesn't sufficiently take stock of the fact that within our culture we have a subculture which is literally a fifth column of insanity that is bred from birth through home school, Christian school, evangelical College, whatever to reject facts as a matter of faith. And so this substitute for authentic, historic Christianity, and I may add a little caveat here I'm a churchgoing Christian, really brings up the question can Christianity be rescued from Christians?
And that's an open question and when you see a bunch of people going around thinking that our President is the antichrist you have to draw one of two conclusions. Either these are racists looking for any excuse to level the next accusation or they're beyond crazy and I think beyond crazy is a better explanation and that evangelical subculture has rotted the brain of the United States of America. We have a big slice of our population waiting for Jesus to come back. They look forward to Armageddon. Good news is bad news to them. When we talk about the Left Behind series of books that I talk about in my book Crazy for God, what we're really talking about is a group of people who are resentful because they know they've been left behind. By modernity, by science, by education by art, by literature.
The rest of us are getting on with our lives. These people are standing on a hilltop waiting for the end. This is a dangerous group of people to have as neighbors and they are our national neighbors. And this is the source of all these insanities that we see leveled at the President, one way or another they go back to this evangelical subculture. Uh, it's a disaster.
Rachel then went on to discuss the large numbers of self-identified "conservatives" who pay heed to the birthers and deathers, etc... She then asked...
Q: How do you work to move people off of that position? It doesn't seem like facts are relevant in trying to move people away from these beliefs.
You don't work to move them off this position. You move past them.
Look, a village cannot reorganize village life to suit the village idiot. It's as simple as that. And we have to understand we have a village idiot in this country: it's called fundamentalist Christianity, and until we move past these people, and let me add as a former lifelong Republican, until the Republican leadership has the guts to stand up and say it would be better not to have a Republican Party than have a party that caters to the village idiot there's gonna be no end in sight. The next thing they'll do is accuse Obama of being the antichrist and then who knows what comes next? On and on it goes. There is no end to this stuff. Why? Because this subculture has, as it's fundamentalist faith, that they distrust facts per se.
They believe in a young earth, 6000 years old, with dinosaurs cavorting with human beings. They think that whether its economic news or news from the Middle East it all has to do with the end of time and Christ's return. This is La La Land and the Republican Party is totally enthralled to this subculture to the extent that there is no Republican Party. There is a fundamentalist subculture which has become a cult. It's fed red meat by buffoons like Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and other people who are just not terribly bright themselves and they are talking to even stupider people. That's where we're at. That's where all this is coming from and it's becoming circular. It's becoming a joke. Unfortunately a dangerous joke because once in a while one of these looney tunes we see brings guns to public meetings. Who knows what they do next? It's a serious thing we all have to face but the Democrats and sane Americans just have to move past these people and say, go wait on the hilltop for the end. The rest of us are going to get on with rebuilding our country.
You can go to the following url which will take you to Mr. Schaeffer's website. The clip from the Maddow show is front and center and can be watched by clicking on the link:
http://www.frankschaeffer.com/
Mr. Schaeffer knows these people and their beliefs very, very well. He understands their mentality. Mr. Schaeffer does not dispute that much of the vitriol for Obama comes from racism but interestingly, he thinks that racism is only a part of it and even the racism we see emanates in large part from fundamentalist Christianity. I went and looked around on his blog and he believes that soon they may well turn to violence. I think he may well be right. The paranoid, sensationalist rhetoric of the right is very reminiscent of other times in the not too distant past when right wing violence sprang up. Speaker Pelosi was warning of that today and was all but ignored by the Republican leadership. People need to be prepared. And we need to be prepared to smack down any further violence by the right quickly and effectively so they do not pick up anymore momentum.
I saw this. Great description Oleeb. And good solid quotes. I did not get to read those.
Of course you know I have probably done ten or twenty blogs on this subject. It started catching my eye, I think about six or eight years ago.
I had forgotten about Watts, Secretary of the Interior WHO WOULD PRAY FOR THE END OF THE WORLD EVERY GODDAMN DAY IN OFFICE.
Yeah, I want a guy in charge of our national resources and our parks...who would logically not give one goddamn about resources since we are all going into the 'other world' any minute.
That is my only disagreement with your expert here.
We surely must not take the views of whackos into consideration in deliberating the best manner in which to deal with our NATIONAL RESOURCES.
But we are stuck fighting fire with fire. There is a battle ablazin out there for the hearts and minds of our children and of those adults who have problems dealing with not so complex issues.
We have to be armed and ready.
September 18, 2009 2:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, my view of Schaeffer is that he understands them very, very well and can explain their thinking and actions for those unfamiliar with how the fundamentalist thing works. I agree with him that we cannot waste time trying to disabuse them of their beliefs but we must move past them and recognize them for the kooks they are and be prepared to stop them when they make their inevitable power grab.
I've been following them and this issue almost all my life. My father was a very liberal minister who locked horns with them many times as I grew up so I became aware of their weird world view a long, long time ago. Far too many people fail to grasp just how delusional and "beyond crazy" these people are as Schaeffer puts it.
September 18, 2009 2:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
The problem that I see is that the right wing politicians have learned to mobilize the fundamentalists to the voting polls and occasionally to the streets in order to support their grasp for greater power and wealth.
It's hard to avoid the village idiot when someone is teaching him to hurt others who don't obey orders. It's not hard to wind the fundamentalists up, either. They feel threatened and rejected, not just ignored, so they are ready to lash out. All the right-wing leaders have to do is aim then at particular targets. That aiming process is just a matter of money and propaganda.
There is that cabal of mega-church leaders who have a weekly phone conference with right-wing politicians to set the targets and the message. I forget who runs that phone conference.
Really good post, Oleeb.
September 18, 2009 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, there's evidence that the lashing out occurs when the prevailing culture attacks them.
One example: it was the Waco debacle that really drove Tim McVeigh over the deep end to action.
Schaeffer is right to try to push ignoring and marginalizing. It's like on the internet: don't feed the trolls. The more they are mocked, the angrier they will get. (Odd the way many liberals in the blogosphere wouldn't consider mocking an Islamic fundamentalist the way they would a Christian fundamentalist.) And the more they are taken as serious threats, the more empowered they will feel.
September 18, 2009 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
P.S. That the Amish and many Hasids don't believe in evolution, and that some Hopis still have a belief that their ancestors sprang from the earth, is no threat to me.
And if people find they can't manage to have input into their local public school board because too many of one type of person is in control, maybe they should think about moving to a different school district? I wouldn't expect my kid to get a liberal education in a town heavily populated by Mormons, that's just the way things go...yeah, I know, minorities are supposed to be protected by the courts in this country...but maybe it's easier picking a neigbborhood more friendly to your values than going to court over the school book list? Don't get me wrong, kudos to those who want to do the martyr thing, but don't expect it to be easy.
September 18, 2009 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can only point out that yes, it isn't really a problem if they don't believe in evolution. The problem is that they are attempting to conflate science with blind faith by creating Intelligent Design.
One of my heroes is Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. His work in the Paleontological field was extraordinary and he put forth a marvelous theory that blended evolution with creation. But this is not curriculum for a science class. It is a curriculum for theory and philosophy classes that come from the proper perspective.
September 18, 2009 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have no problem with the beliefs of the Hopis, Amish, and Hasids - or the fundamentalist Christians for that matter. What I have a problem with is when they become Dominionists in the Rushdoony tradition and try to take over government and force the rest of us to live according to whatever arbitrary crap they consider is their religious law. That's what's behind the Discovery Institute concepts, and it's being funded by wealthy ideological conservatives.
The result is an effort by so-called religious groups to take over the American government the way the Shiite fundamentalists took over Iran and subject us all to the kind of religious police that the Saudi Arabians have. That's the goal of "the Family" (of C-Street fame, Pat Roberson, and the cabal of fundamentalist Xtian pastors who coordinate a bunch of the mega-churches.
This is separate but parallel to the Wall Street and Big Business wealthy oligarchs who run the other major branch of the conservative Republicans.
When you can start listing the religious crazies in Congress and Governorships I don't think you can ignore them anymore. This includes Mark Sanford, Judge Roy Moore, Sarah Palin, Katherine Harris from Florida, both Oklahoma Senators, DeMint, Rep. Joe Lewis, at least half the Texas Congressional delegation, Sen. Ensign, etc. then in Texas I'm not sure that Sens. Cornyn and Hutchinson and Gov. Perry are true believers, but they get elected by the religious right base and give them what they demand.
The Texas Education Agency consists of 15 members each elected in a single member district, and they never speak of how they will change textbooks when they are elected. It is a down-ballot election, so a lot of people never bother to vote for or against anyone. But the religious right does so obsessively. These are the guys right now deciding what the curriculum and textbooks for public schools will teach for the next decade, and since Texas is such a big market, they are deciding for much of the U.S.
Ignoring and marginalizing those turkeys has been and remains dangerous to the mental health of growing children in public schools everywhere. ("What's the matter with Kansas?") I really don't think that is a valid strategy for dealing with them as they try to take over the schools, the courts and police and the government. I have lived in the conservative fundamentalist theocracy of Texas since the Republicans swept all the state offices in 1994 and elected George W. Bush as Governor. Ignoring his religious fanaticism sure worked out well for Texas and for the U.S. generally in 2000, didn't it?
September 18, 2009 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
"What I have a problem with is when they become Dominionists in the Rushdoony tradition and try to take over government and force the rest of us to live according to whatever arbitrary crap they consider is their religious law."
Word.
September 18, 2009 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
So you think I should have to uproot my family and my life so that my children won't have to be subjected to someone else's religous beliefs? I'm sorry, but just that you would think this is an acceptable solution really bothers me. And, yes, quite frankly, if I took a job in Salt Lake city I would expect my children to not be forced to listen to Mormon propoganda. As a taxpayer whose taxes go to support public schools, why should I expect otherwise?
September 18, 2009 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I had a friend who went to Brigham Young U, and she said that all students had to take some courses in Mormonism. Her roommate didn't like that much. On and examination, her roommate was asked "Who is the Angel Moroni?" She answered "An Italian immigrant."
September 18, 2009 9:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Used to be Ted "I'm not really gay" Haggard that ran the conference call, but I'm sure they've found a manly substitute. LMAO!
September 18, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some ex-Congressman from Louisiana more recently, I think. I hadn't realized it was Haggard earlier. He was the guy evangelizing the U.S. Air Force Academy also, wasn't he? That has been one of the most dangerous activities they have conducted, and much too effective.
September 18, 2009 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
So because the town idiot abuses and mocks the truth, is reason enough for the unbelievers to justify their own conduct? Who’s the town idiot?
(Revelation 20:8-9) . . .and he will go out to mislead those nations in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Ma′gog, to gather them together for the war. The number of these is as the sand of the sea. 9 And they advanced over the breadth of the earth and encircled the camp of the holy ones . . .
Hint: Unfaithful Christians are not the Holy Ones.
Interesting propaganda tool, “You don’t’ want to be considered a town idiot do you, then give up Christianity, and join us in circling the camp of the Holy ones?”
The Nations will seek to kill the messengers of the TRUTH, because they have there own WILL, and it doesn’t include Love Thy Neighbor.
But it would be wishful thinking, to believe the Nations will just move on, beyond the village idiot. Bible prophecy says otherwise.
There’s going to be an all out attack, not for the sole purpose of destroying Religion, which has always been a tool of the Wicked one. But an attack on the TRUTH, as it has always been the objective.
Throughout history, unbeknownst to the majority of fleshly beings, a battle has been ongoing.
Attacking the Truth is not a new tactic. Time and again the people have been divided into camps opposing one another, as evident even in the sciences.
Do you grow tired of the battle, weary of the constant conflict? Then you have been nullified, faith weakened, no longer wanting engagement, the enemy has succeeded, you have fallen. Stay down, don’t resist. No need for religious Truth. Loyalty is meaningless. Be kind to yourself.
You are no longer the objective; The TRUTH is the one under assault.
When many individuals find they don’t want to hear of their weaknesses, or their responsibilities to one another, tired of having to deal with training their conscience.
Tired of the ones coming to their homes and workplaces, preaching repentance and telling you to turn around from your displeasing conduct and LIVE. To be in harmony with HIS WILL, which in reality is what saves the World from Nuclear annihilation, saving the world from the ravages of global warming, TRUE Christianity, preventing the killing of one another, caring for the least fortunate.
Or as DD wrote of Watts, who because of greed pillaged the Earth's resources, in violation of his Christian precepts.
A TRUTH, there are true Christians and there are false ones.
A TRUE Christian believes the only hope for mankind, is the elimination of the wicked ones. Without that judgment day, there can be no real peace and security. Should this not motivate the wicked to turn around and repent? Whats wrong with a motivator?
What is the ultimate question facing all individuals? You have heard of your responsibilities, how your conduct towards others WILL be judged, including the judging of so-called Christians.
Just as in the truths of science, scoffing or putting off as folly, the idea of a judgment day will not be a protection for individuals; that is a Truth. You’ve heard it said, “Your Will be done”? It will be, the question is will you “be?
There will be a war; will you survive?
September 18, 2009 7:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ah, the unintended irony of a case-in-point.
September 18, 2009 8:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yup
September 18, 2009 8:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
(Ecclesiastes 5:2-3) . . .Do not hurry yourself as regards your mouth; and as for your heart, let it not be hasty to bring forth a word before the [true] God. For the [true] God is in the heavens but you are on the earth. That is why your words should prove to be few. …..
Ironic indeed, that the first one to crawl out and ridicule would be you.
You made of clay, to suggest the potter has know say?
Your rebellious spirit stands out in contrast to the Meek ones that will possess the Earth. You ridicule me, because I have seen a course, a way to a life, without tears and ridicule and I want to share this knowledge with others?
I look forward to the time when the Most High of the Universe, spoils the plans of stupid Earthlings, who are intent on ruining the planet and causing misery to those who love Righteousness.
My Grand Creator promises a New heaven and a New Earth, filled with people who really care for one another. People who have already applied themselves, to correcting the errors prevalent in today’s World, in order to make life enjoyable now and into the future for all of Earths inhabitants.
A future free of hatred and ridiculers has already begun, change or be removed.
Let me ask your highness, what is your plan to end the suffering, oh powerful Orlando? Or is that all you have, is ridicule? Surely you must realize by now as did the Pharaoh of Egypt, you offer nothing of substance or any thing of value that would produce the changes necessary, to assure a life without tears, For ALL.
Ridicule and slavery to a system designed to inflict pain and suffering, is that what you promote?
When will you speak up, tell us your Grand design, to end human suffering? Allow me to show other readers, the depth of your understanding of things.
(Revelation 7:16-17) . . .They will hunger no more nor thirst anymore, neither will the sun beat down upon them nor any scorching heat, 17 because the Lamb, who is in the midst of the throne, will shepherd them, and will guide them to fountains of waters of life. And God will wipe out every tear from their eyes. . .
(Revelation 21:3-4) . . .“Look! The tent of God is with mankind, and he will reside with them, and they will be his peoples. And God himself will be with them. 4 And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away.. . .
There is a leader, who will shepherd them, and I’m sorry to disappoint you, or that it is YOU who will not accept his invitation, to come and in live in a New World, a new way of life, a New way of thinking.
September 18, 2009 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stop bearing false witness.
September 18, 2009 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
What happened to the part about " your words should prove be few"?
Just sayin'
September 18, 2009 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, if your comprehension level is distracted by the length. Maybe you should find a twitter page?
September 18, 2009 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps it's your comprehension that is lacking? Anyone may quote scripture to support their cause; without true comprehension of the teachings of Jesus the words are meaningless.
September 18, 2009 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't ridicule your belief. I ridicule your refusal to respect the beliefs of others.
September 18, 2009 4:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why would I respect the viewpoint of others, determined to destroy my faith?
Or respect those who prey upon the weak
I should respect those who find delight in slander, or name-calling intended to bring disrepute?
Would you not stand up, for justice, for uprightness, or would you say to the oppressor, "I respect your right to inflict harm. Sorry I spoke up in defending the defenseless"
If you knew of an impending disaster, would you sit by idly and say "It's there choice" Yet did you do all you could, to warn your neighbor? Maybe your neighbor hadn't heard?
Your neighbor was never allowed to hear about the impending disaster, because some felt You Christians should shut up, and if words were not enough to persuade you from preaching, we'll threaten you with pysical harm.
Ridiculed in order to denigrate the messenger, ridiculed as the Village idiot. Ignore him; he's just an idiot.
Is this disrespectful to say "I will not be quiet, my neighbors life is at stake"
September 18, 2009 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
No one here is your enemy, the "destroyer of your faith". Everyone here has their own point of view and often says it. If a point of view is a destroyer of your faith, then your faith is shaky, correct? If you seem so set in your thinking, so willing to manufacture and "us vs. them" mentality, then you may want to think about why you bothered to comment here at all. I'm guessing that the blog title annoyed you and got your attention. Fine. Then argue your points and show where oleeb went wrong.
But in this venue, as in many others, preaching is not going to be effective.
September 18, 2009 8:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I did address the attitude of many in this country.
It becomes too easy for some on the liberal left to shrug off and to label any and all preachers, as the village idiot.
Comments given by Mr. Schaeffer
“Look, a village cannot reorganize village life to suit the village idiot. And we have to understand we have a village idiot in this country: it's called fundamentalist Christianity,
Our country’s problems are not going to be laid at the feet of TRUE Christians. Our villages are in trouble because many have left the healthful teachings of the Bible.
Some on the left, the liberal fringe, have become the enemy of the people, because it does not look to counter the religious right specifically, it only looks to denigrate people of Christian faith, Republican Christians as well as Democratic Christians.
People like Mr Shaeffer make no distinction between True Christians and false Christians. Calling Fundamentalist Christians, Village idiots, promotes hatred and abuse.
How long before a left wing lunatic such as Stalin, decides to outlaw ALL Christian groups? Because it has been determined they are idiots and they undermine and are subversive to your Values.
When critical decisions about such matters as healthcare and the psuedo- Christians make affordability the issue, rather than WWJD, people like Sheaffer and some on the left would say, who cares WJWD.
Because of that hatred or dislike for things considered to Preachy or why bring up Christian values, this country does not move towards Social progression, Social progression based upon Christian Values.
The liberal wing of the party undermines the ability to draw all Christians to do what is right, because the real motivation of the liberal wing is to destroy Christian influence.
Are you too blind to see, comments suggesting “Sane people move past these Christians”, and you think that draws reasoned Christians, to not feel they are under assault?
First they came for the Jew, but I was not a Jew, then they came for the trade unionist, but I didn’t care I was not one of them.
Then they attacked the fundamentalist Christian, but I was not one of them. Then they came for me and no one was left to defend me.
Wake up, without the help of Democratic Christians you will fail,
You beat back the rightwing Fundamentalist, by knowing the fundamental things of they’re faith.
But the liberals will not allow a discussion of what would Jesus do, because the liberals could care less what Jesus would do.
Mr Shaeffer exposes his intentions towards Christians when he comments “It's a serious thing we all have to face but the Democrats and sane Americans just have to move past these people and say, go wait on the hilltop for the end.”
What? Ignore Christians, tell them to get away, Oh, but he did make some kind of distinction, calling them Fundamentalist Christians, suggesting they are the problem. The real problem lies with a stupid electorate wondering who or what is a fundamentalist Christian?
Lets round them all up and we don’t need them, to go to the hills, we’ll just transport them to Siberia. No need to ignore them, just exterminate the village idiots.
If you think this is far fetched read your history books, about the persecution of Christians in our common era.
If you were a Christian you would know, if your not, you don't care.
September 18, 2009 11:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's people like yourself that drove me away from religion and into the arms of Truth. Get thee behind me, idiot.
September 19, 2009 8:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your comment only plays on TPM where the faithful already agree. You are therefore preaching to the choir.
As you can see, religion comes in all shapes and sized.
September 18, 2009 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I dunno. I also posted it at bikersrule.com and it killed.
September 18, 2009 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. Who are the good christians, and who are the bad christians? You do realize, don't you, that the Anti-christ will come from your ranks?
September 18, 2009 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oopsie, "true christians" and "false christians." When you throw words like Truth with a capital-T around, my skin gets the creepy-crawlies. I have relatives who hate to love me, because they know I am going to hell. It tickles the be-jeseus outta me!
What are you "reisting" about? (your screen-name)
September 18, 2009 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
To some ridiculers, it’s easy to look at the imposters and with a broad brush condemn even the faithful. Of course the ANTI Christ infiltrated the Church, to prey upon the congregation.
(Matthew 7:21-27) . . .Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of the heavens, but the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. 22 Many will say to me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And yet then I will confess to them: I never knew YOU! Get away from me, YOU workers of lawlessness. (Luke 6:46-48) . . .“Why, then, do YOU call me ‘Lord! Lord!’ but do not do the things I say? 47 Everyone that comes to me and hears my words and does them, I will show YOU whom he is like: 48 He is like a man building a house, who dug and went down deep and laid a foundation upon the rock-mass. Consequently, when a flood arose, the river dashed against that house, but was not strong enough to shake it, because of its being well built. . .”
This was in contrast to the man who built his house on the sand, when the tide was out.
Shifting sands of worldly-wise philosophies. Valueless, when faced with a testing environment.
To you ridiculers, upon what foundation do you rest your hope? Still hoping policies of politicians, or World leaders, will really solve our problems? Trusting men filled with deceit, and wicked desires? Oh! How’s that been working out for you?
I am not as credulous as some of the ridiculers appear to be.
Whereas those who have built their foundation upon doing the will of the Most High, have changed their mental attitudes and there hearts. Something No political rulership could ever legislate.
Just one simple example of applying the Bible in ones life would solve so many of todays problems.
(Matthew 7:12-15) . . .“All things, therefore, that YOU want men to do to YOU, YOU also must likewise do to them; this, in fact, is what the Law and the Prophets mean. 13 “Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it; 14 whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it. 15 “Be on the watch for the false prophets that come to YOU in sheep’s covering, but inside they are ravenous wolves.
Hindu leader Mohandas K. Gandhi quote “I know of no one who has done more for humanity than Jesus. In fact, there is nothing wrong with Christianity.” However, he added: “The trouble is with you Christians. You do not begin to live up to your own teachings.
It would more beneficial for the members of TPM to respect the intellect of Gandhi, than the likes of those who would ridicule, True Christian faith. Ascertain for yourselves if the ridiculers so called wisdom is built upon the sand, and surely you would find, if you based your hope upon their judgment, you’d find a worthless foundation.
Who’s going to accept your excuse, when you’re swept away? Orlando told us, or that ridiculer told us not to believe.
Mankind is incapable, of producing the fruitage that the Spirit has, in making the people United in pure worship, in Truth. Have you not figured it out yet; that in order to have true peace and security, all must adhere to the same righteous principles; NO EXCEPTIONS; otherwise we only get what we have always gotten. A world so twisted, and full of strife and war, greed and selfishness, sickness and death.
Show me, you ridiculers, that you have a solution, better than what True Christianity promotes.
Tell me how you’re going to change people’s hearts, in time?
September 18, 2009 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
What in Sam Hill was all of that? Wow.
September 18, 2009 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suppose you'd say the same thing to an astrophysicist?
My love is for the law, found in the scriptures.
When you find a particular study you enjoy, you become more knowledgeable.
(Proverbs 1:1-6) 1 The proverbs of Sol′o·mon the son of David, the king of Israel, 2 for one to know wisdom and discipline, to discern the sayings of understanding, 3 to receive the discipline that gives insight, righteousness and judgment and uprightness, 4 to give to the inexperienced ones shrewdness, to a young man knowledge and thinking ability.
5 A wise person will listen and take in more instruction, and a man of understanding is the one who acquires skillful direction, 6 to understand a proverb and a puzzling saying, the words of wise persons and their riddles.
(Proverbs 1:22) 22 “How long will YOU inexperienced ones keep loving inexperience, and [how long] must YOU ridiculers desire for yourselves outright ridicule, and [how long] will YOU stupid ones keep hating knowledge. . .
The more knowledge one gains, it becomes a safeguard, so you will not be easily ensnared in false teachings or false promises.
Ridiculers offer nothing; they are like the court jesters, fools and clowns, putting on a great show for their hosts.
September 18, 2009 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I personally am finding humor in your assumption that you are one of the True christians. In my town, there were nine churches two decades ago. The churches keep splintering and splintering, and there are now at least double that amount. In a valley of maybe 2,000 people. Each and every church and splinter church is adamant that their beliefs are The Truth and The Way.
My husband's family is full of Evangelical christians; they can barely speak to each other for the disrespect of each others religious beliefs.
September 18, 2009 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, I never said I was a true Christian.
I said those who listen and obey are True Christians.
September 18, 2009 11:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then go out and gain knowledge. Knowledge doesn't come from memorizing one book. Knowledge comes through experience, experimentation, questioning, testing the waters, and failing. To claim that all knowledge that is important comes from a single book is to claim that the universe isn't limitless and beautiful but simple and trite.
September 18, 2009 7:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah...Oh...and blah.
September 19, 2009 8:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is that baby talk? Intellectually incapable of speech or discussion?
September 19, 2009 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Frank Schaffer has unresolved issues with his father and his childhood and despite his attempts to remake himself he still talks and writes in the same style religious fundamentalists do - venom, hate language, etc.
Frank Schaffer is also the inventor of the term "islamo-fascism" and he only turned away from Bush when her heard the guy call islam the religion of peace.
For Rachel Maddow to bring a guy Schaeffer on her show only demostrates the length some people would go to in order to create the appearance of a point and to provide a sound track for her spin of the NJ poll results.
Well, that was really really stupid.
According to that poll:
- 4% of OBAMA VOTERS think the government should be elminated (and 11% are not sure!!!). That's 15% of people who voted for Obama who think maybe we should get rid of the government.
- 5% of Democrats think he's the anti-christ (and 7% are not sure). 11% of African-Americans are NOT SURE if Obama is an anti-christ. Wow!
- 24% of Hispanics think Obama is the anti-christ (18% not sure!). These latinos are filthy racists, aren't they.
- 5% of OBAMA VOTERS are birthers (9% not sure!!)
- 24% of hispanics (same as whites) think he wasn't born in the US.
- 50% of African Americans (and 35% of hispanics) think Bush knew about 9/11 in advance.
So give me a break.
This poll is a garbage is only useful for tools like Rachel Maddow to use it as prop in her propaganda - same as she used Frank Schaeffer.
September 18, 2009 8:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
She basically was just using the poll for entertainment purposes. Personally I didn't take the results that serious and it seemed to me that neither did Rachel.
The question is what specifically did Schaeffer say that you disagree with. You can shoot the messenger if you want, but the truth is what it is.
September 18, 2009 9:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
"but the truth is what it is"
- What is exactly is the truth?
That "evangelical subculture has rotted the brain of the United States of America" and/or that "You move past them"?
That's not the truth.
That's incendiary bullshit from a religious fundanmentalist in denial and worthy of Rush Limbaugh.
September 18, 2009 9:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
so you think we should be teaching intelligent design in the science classrooms of all our schools? want to teach them that it is a valid point that the light from the stars haven't travelled all those gazzillion years, rather it is a way for God to test our faith? The disregard for rationally agreed-upon truths because it doesn't jive with my book of faith is a rotting of the mind, and one of the primary reasons this country has failed to keep up with other countries in the fields of science.
There is no way you can reach them, so other than locking them up which I don't condone, we just have to do our best to move past them
September 18, 2009 9:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Lalo is a troll. I don't know why anyone bothers with him. He is exactly what this post is about. Not just christian looneys, but people that refuse to think past their own belief systems.
And by the way, Lalo does not understand that 'truth' is subjective. Two people have an auto accident, both tell the 'truth' but both stories are different. Facts are much more reliable. Car A hit car B. That is the 'truth'.
September 18, 2009 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is Global warming a truth?
Why is it I should suffer because some resisted the truth.
I really don't want to hear "Sorry" from the naysayers and the ridiculers, when the day arrives and WE REAP what we sowed.
Truth can be found, if one is really looking for the truth.
It takes the qualities of honesty and humility, something the World of mankind is in short supply of.
Another truth: because of the lack of these qualities we all suffer.
September 18, 2009 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would add that it is not incendiary since there are enough states, Kansas Missouri Texas (which influences all textboos), where these wingnuts have major influence and decision making power on school boards. On the local level there are only too many examples of their attempts of to ban critical thinking and exposure to reality. These people are a threat to our educational system if nothing else.
September 18, 2009 9:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Missouri is not one of the states that orders a set of books like Texas. That is done on a district by district basis.
September 18, 2009 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
If only you knew as much as you think you do.
What difference does it make if Schaeffer has issues with his father? None. That is only relevant if what he is saying is untrue or so tainted that it is inaccurate, but that isn't the case at all.
There is no parrallel whatsoever with the beliefs of others that you point to and the set of dogmatic beliefs and practices that fundamentalists adhere to across the board as articles of faith. The points you are attempting to make are mere diversions from the real issue at hand. The issue is not the poll. Neither is the issue Schaeffer's personal history. The issue is the very real, very widespread and very dangerous set of beliefs that fundamentalists adhere to when applied to society in general.
September 18, 2009 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
No.
The real issue is that you CONSIDER these set of beliefs dangerous. You BELIVE them to be wrong.
And you (or Rachel Maddow) are using bogus poll and hacks like Schaeffer to make your BELIEFS appear to be the truth.
I disagree with religious fundamentalists, especially on issue that affect me personally, like DOMA and others. But my mother is a 7th Day Adventist and she has as much right to her beliefs and to organizing in their name as you have for your own.
September 18, 2009 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Should have said - my grandmother. Sorry for the typo.
September 18, 2009 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nobody said they had no right to believe their weird beliefs. Except you of course.
September 18, 2009 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
"to her beliefs AND to organizing"
September 18, 2009 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
No the beliefs aren't dangerous, no matter how delusional...acting on those beliefs are. When those borderline insane beliefs are attempted to be imposed on the rest of us it is a danger...especially when those who are trying to impose them, with religious fervor, believe they are on a mission from God. These nuts feel the rest of us need to believe what they do and will not stop until they succeed...that is the danger. Not the beliefs but the actions...
September 18, 2009 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
"When those borderline insane beliefs are attempted to be imposed on the rest of us it is a danger"
- But that's exactly what they're saying too.
September 18, 2009 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
How so...they are free to believe what they want to. It is a free country...if they want to believe that God has taken the form of a Fruit Fly they can. They are trying to impose their beliefs on us by trying to get their nutty agenda into our public school systems and into the public sphere by politicians who think like them. Freedom of religion covers private life and freedom from religion is the way the government is supposed to operate. They are trying impose their beliefs by putting proselytizing politicians in place. They feel the should have the freedom to worsgip the way they want to but the rest of us shouldn't have any choice...we need to worship just like them.
September 18, 2009 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lets try to correct this by posting it in English this time
*the end of my post s/b
They are trying impose their beliefs by putting proselytizing politicians in place. They feel they should have the freedom to worship the way they want to but the rest of us shouldn't have any choice...we need to worship just like them.
September 18, 2009 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is a difference between what you say (they are free to believe what they want to. It is a free country) and what the hacks like Schaeffer say (in oleeb's own words: He now recognizes Christian fundamentalism for what it is and does what he can to combat it's continued malignant growth.)
Secondly, what kind of freedom is it when you're free to BELIEVE in something but not free to ACT in accordance with your beliefs? You can believe all you want in the goodness of the public option, but you should be banned from acting in its support.
A bit of a condundrum isn't it?
September 18, 2009 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
And just to be clear: I have no problem with what he believes in and with what he does. He has a right to both, as long as he doesn't hurt anyone or trample their rights.
I have a problem with tools like Rachel Maddow using him as a prop to peddle her garbage about opponents of Obama.
September 18, 2009 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
But in this country we have freedom of religion...and does that give the right of those who believe a certain religion to force it on another? No, that is the waterline where that freedom ends. And that has to be made clear to the people who are pushing their beliefs on the rest of us.
So you are defending their belief that freedom of religion gives them the freedom to limit what the rest of us believe? If not then you should agree that acting on those beliefs, and then by extension those beliefs since those beliefs call for those actions, are dangerous.
September 18, 2009 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fair enough. They shouldn't be allowed to impose their beliefs on THE REST OF US. Just like the Left shouldn't be allowed to impose its own beliefs on the rest of us.
But the fundamentalists SHOULD be allowed to act in accordance with their beliefs as long as they don't violate the rights of others. You would agree with that, right?
So how do we square this, NJ "conservatives" believing Obama to be the anti-christ, and stopping their "malignant growth"?
September 18, 2009 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed, but only if we are talking in the context of religious beliefs.
September 18, 2009 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would be unconstitutional to endorse one particular religion in the public education system. It would be perfectly fine if a private school teaches creationism instead of evolution.
It's a little bit desparate and low for Rachel Maddow to use a former evangelical (now orthodox christian, who has issues with his past) to "expose" the malignant world of religious fundamentalists for the sole purpose of demonizing the opposition to Obama.
OK?
September 18, 2009 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some of this coming from just the sheer befuddlement that comes from listening to the birthers, etc. and others who continue to rant in spite of the facts. When one isn't a fundamentalist, it is hard to see the world through their eyes. As Rachel's questions to him indicate, there is a desire to somehow get through to these people and it just seems like it is impossible. It boils down to: should we even try and engage these people, is a civil and democratic dialogue even possible?
September 18, 2009 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is impossible. They cannot be convinced. They only change when sometthin in their own lives shakes them to the point where they break free from the intellectual prison cell they've placed themselves in. That's the only way.
September 18, 2009 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I understand but "should we even try" already establishes an attitude going in. But again, all this "belief" nonsense is disingenious on Maddow's part because that's the last thing she's interested in. The underlying point was Obama Opposition = Crazies.
September 18, 2009 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
If an otherwise intellectually fine adult in this country continues to believe the world is 6000 years old, I think they're "crazy" (which is not the same as being clinically mentally ill). And when such a belief system, the one that is able to sustain that belief in this society, gets involved in politics, we do have an issue. Since there can be no middle ground for them, it would lead to an unraveling of their entire faith structure.
September 18, 2009 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's a perfect example of "concerned intolerance" and a desire to make everyone think the same, because creationism doesn't boil down to the age of the earth and to christianity alone. And again - this is completely irrelevant to the objective of Maddow's hackery.
September 18, 2009 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm going to guess that Rachel Maddow thought fundamentalist Christians were crazies before she'd ever heard of Barack Obama.
September 18, 2009 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, it wouldn't be perfectly fine on a reality-based level. Creationism can be taught in any school provided it is in philsophy as a metaphysic. Creationism has no scientific merit because the hypothesis is unproveable.
I am a believer, but I'll be damned if I am going to allow pseudo-mysticism to occupy a place reserved for the rigors of scientific method.
September 18, 2009 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
The trouble is that your reality is not the only one and it's not any more valid than the reality of a religious person. So yes, it would be fine to teach creationism in private schools, the constitution only prohibits endorsement of one religion over another on government level.
September 18, 2009 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not talking constitutionally or legally.
I am speaking of the nature of existence.
Until you can refute Kant or Popper and point to how intelligent design is an hypothesis proveable by scientific method (let alone reason), then let me know. Otherwise, intelligent design is infecting science with metaphysics. ID can be taught, but it should be taught in its correct context, ie, philosophy.
Your "refutation" is apologism.
September 18, 2009 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I am speaking of the nature of existence."
I know. But the best way out of the fight between "your opinion" versus "their opinion" on the nature of existence is to stick to what the constitution says.
September 18, 2009 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Creationism has no merit because it's hypothesis is provably wrong (at least in terms of anything more specific than "God created this").
September 18, 2009 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some out creationism is outright demonstrably wrong (6000 year lifespan of universe, etc.). But intelligent design is metaphysics that is no more proveable than any other cosmology. The fact that many ID afficianodos confuse appearance with proof is a symptom of an intellectual disease. That is why ID should find its home in philosophy, where it belongs.
September 18, 2009 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
What are these "issues" you keep tossing about?
September 18, 2009 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
tossing is what you do with your hands when your brain fails to come up with something original to say. which is most of the time.
September 18, 2009 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
What are his "issues"? Are they documented?
September 18, 2009 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
September 18, 2009 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
The problem is, aside from the fact that the extreme ones cultivate a systematic approach that enables them to deny facts in order to sustain their beliefs against science (and the arts), they wish to in their mind return this country back to Christ. They are fundamentally against democracy and the separation of church and state. They desire the establishment of a theocracy.
Much of the problems with the Bush administration came from the fact that DC was swarming with Liberty University graduates.
September 18, 2009 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
More hooey from you.
They are perfectly free to act on their beliefs in their own lives. That is the line of demarcation. We cannot have freedom of religion in a nation where millions of fundamentalists are trying to proscribe that freedom (including freedom from religion) with respect to others.
It's difficult to believe that you really cannot move beyond an 8th grade level understanding of what people are saying on this subject. You couldn't even win a Jr. High debate using such tactics.
September 18, 2009 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bah! You're full of it (as usual). You've convinced me over time that you're really nothing but a crank and an oppositional attention seeker.
September 18, 2009 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
"a crank and an oppositional attention seeker."
LOL. That should be lalo's handle.
September 18, 2009 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Next MSM meme:
Frank Shaeffer called all fundamentalist Christians "Village Idiots" and Rachel Maddow hates religion.
September 18, 2009 9:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
The National Academies of Science have published an excellent booklet, "Science, Evolution and Creationism" that should be distributed to all school districts.
The free .pdf of it, as well as the English and Spanish language versions of the brochure, are available at the NAS website, www.nas.edu.
The link to the page with the Science, Evolution and Creationism materials (there are additional resources for teachers) is:
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11876
Regards,
Virginia Common Sense
September 18, 2009 9:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the heads up and the link!
September 18, 2009 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
How can anyone get past Rachel Maddow's supercilious wink-wink-nudge-nudge punim long enough to actually watch the show.
Tis a puzzle.
September 18, 2009 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
A pitiful puzzle.
Speaking of village idiots...it's as if the whole show concept is: condescending schoolmarm gives simplified lectures to an audience of idiots who know only that they want to have the label of liberal, but don't know what that means, and need to learn what to believe.
September 18, 2009 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
p.s. Writing that made me realize...doh!...that she imitates Limbaugh's shtick to a T. Makes it extra pitiful, then, that someone with that education would sell out that way. It's ultra condescending, Straussian in a way (a fellow traveler of Wolfowitz et.al., perhaps, to different goals and ends, of course.)
September 18, 2009 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
AA your snobbiness is showing AGAIN -- you've kept it under control for quite a long time now, but it has reared its ugly head yet again. You have not watched either, or you could not seriously compare the two.
September 19, 2009 12:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, if believing that makes you feel better about yourself, by all means, keep believing it.
September 18, 2009 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Truly you jest!!!
September 18, 2009 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
That kind of annoys me too. I actually thought she was much better as a guest host on Countdown than on her own show (and for that matter better than Olbermann, especially now that he seems to have gone a bit off the deep end himself).
September 18, 2009 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
She does great interviews, though. When she does the voices, ugh, ugh. And has on the Ahna Marie-someone, the short-red-hairered girl who writes for Playboy? Ugh. But Rachel is smart, and it's entertainment with some smarts.
September 18, 2009 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
The smug look on Bill OReilly and Rachel Maddow is precisely the same and puke-inducing. While MSNBC tends not to make stuff up like FNC, there is little else that distinguishes either channel which relentless confuses the line between news and commentary.
You will note that both channels lauded Walter Cronkite and Don Hewitt but I doubt either channel has made those individuals proud of what had become of televised news.
September 18, 2009 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
The difference is that Rachel doesn't pretend she is in some spin-free zone. She has her slant and is very clear about her politics. It is obvious that it is commentary mixed with news. Nothing wrong with that, on either side of the aisle. OReilly just needs to be honest about his spin.
The problem comes when the viewers don't seek a broad range of news sources. It becomes a problem as well if the only news ones gets is free of commentary. At some point we do have expect that we're all adults out here. There are definitely issues with the way the MSM operates, but Rachel's show in and of itself isn't part of the big problem.
September 18, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I shouldn't have to seek a wide range of sources to hear what's going on. The biggest bias I should have to contend with on a show that isn't micro-broadcasting is what the editors decide to put on or not put on that evening.
Please don't tell me that MSNBC doesn't pretend not to spin. True, they don't say "no spin zone" but they already don't tell you to find another channel to watch to balance out their shows.
Once upon a time, someone could watch 30 minutes of Walter Cronkite, Huntley/Brinkley, whatever... and feel informed. Now? Hardly. What's worse is that often the people here feel they are better informed from having watched MSNBC or whatever other crap passes as analysis these days.
It's a shame that MSNBC doesn't have the tenor of FRONTLINE or McNeil/Lehrer or even Charlie Rose. But it doesn't.
September 18, 2009 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is very true...I switched from faux to msnbc when I realized I wasn't getting the truth from faux...It took no time at all before I realized that to a large degree the reverse was true, as well.
Most people do not have the time or the inclination to research themselves. That is part of why this county is in such a mess.
Remember Daniel Moynihan's words, "you're entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts." We are getting opinion with a few "facts" thrown in, but you can't even trust that the facts are facts because of the spin...from both sides.
September 18, 2009 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, after watching either, I usually feel a little used and sickened - like after eating too much fast food.
September 18, 2009 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now, waiiit just a minute!!
I happen to be *extremely taken by that (as you put it...)punim
*Heart broke more than once by a beautiful dyke..
September 18, 2009 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now, waiiit just a minute!!
I happen to be *extremely taken by that (as you put it...)punim
*Heart broke more than once by a beautiful dyke..
September 18, 2009 8:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
wot?
September 18, 2009 9:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
wot
Well, there was my third wife (the hooker) who was gay before me (and after, I guess.)
Thenk there was the lead singer at Meow Mix with the T-shirt "That's MR dyke to you.
Then there was the run of three different girls in a row, one in San Mateo, two in *Santa Cruz, who were otherwise interested but for whom the dealbreaker was my disinclination to be pegged. (This may mark one as a hopeless fuddy-duddy in the Bay Area but that's how I roll.)
I could go on...
*Of course...
September 18, 2009 10:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oleeb,
My only concern with your post is the blanket thrown over all fundamentalist Christians. Sweeping all under the same cover negates the facts cited in your post.
Yes, too many, under the guise and banner of being fundamentalist Christians, enjoin in the hateful and ignorant acts as cited. But, this is not all inclusive nor part of any teachings of true Christianity. I know many who do not endorse nor subscribe to the actions and words of these people.
We have to be careful not to paint with too broad a brush as that only creates more divisiveness.
Thanks.
September 18, 2009 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you live in the South? Because, I've got to say that there's a lot of truth in what he says from the perspective of someone who does. With the cowering approval of state education authorities, they have created a completely parallel school system--virtually every Baptist church of any size in this state has one attached to it--that systematically and deliberately engage in something that I can only describe as the opposite of education. They do a reasonable job of teaching them to read, to write and to do arithmatic.
But they the art and literature are so constrained that they have no possibility of acquiring even minimal cultural literacy and the history and science they teach are utterly disconnected from objective reality. Worse, the framework of the basic knowledge people need in order to make sense of the world--history, science, art, literature, current events--are so fragile, so incapable of surviving even minimal logical scrutiny, that they also quite literally teach, and even indoctrinate, their students in what can only be described as techniques for resisting critical thinking and the absorption of information that is contrary to what they've been taught. If you try to talk to them about evolution, they'll often cut you off mid-sentence and start singing little anti-evolution songs they learned in elementary school. In a larger sense, however, they've been given a sheaf of reality denial techniques that they find applicable to most facets of their life.
There are hundreds of of thousands of graduates from these schools across the South, each and every one of them thorougly conditioned to believe implicitly whatever they're told by their leaders and to block out--not even allow themselves to think about--anything that contradicts them or could potentially lead them to forbidden areas of thought.
Oddly, none of it seems to have had much impact on their sex lives. They have about as much premarital and extramarital sex as any bunch of godless, decadant New York City heatherns, though they do get more guilty about it the older they get, and their divorce rate isn't much different. But aside from that, they plain just don't process information the way other people do.
September 18, 2009 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fine commentary Steve. Really fine.
I have to keep myself from crossing that line demonizing the entire South.
But their propaganda system is so gooooooood, so thorough and has been for hundreds of years. Yet, I recall that the Abolitionists still managed to get their texts and penny papers down there; much to the chagrin of the Southern City Fathers....
Drove them nuts.
If information still makes them angry, WE ARE DOING SOMETHING RIGHT.
September 19, 2009 1:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
NCSteve,
Very interesting analysis, especially the part about the infidelity and divorce rates. My question would be, does these affairs occur only with others of their own religious persuasions within their own 'cult' so to speak? If not, then I would imagine that some amount of pillow talk with rational minds with sinful bodies that makes such talk a requirement for continued access and upkeep is in order. Perhaps their dependence on booty could be their undoing?
Or could it be that all of these unfaithful deluded types only cavort with non believers when they pay for it? I have no doubt that a vast majority frequent brothels, but could their dalliances in sin be exclusive to this domain?
September 19, 2009 5:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Aunt Sam,
There are people that have founded religions based on the Jedi principles found in Star Wars.
When I can find an unambiguous means to differentiate between the "good" and the "bad" religions (or sects), some of your comments can be addressed. Until then, who's to say what's what? No one seems to have the preferred link to a deity that will settle this once and for all.
September 18, 2009 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Honestly, I don't think that is a valid concern. You cannot paint the fundamentalists with too broad a brush. None of them are benign any longer. They are all part of the growing movement of idiocy and ignorance in the name of God and revenue for the huckster preachers who lead them. I'm sorry, but a fundamentalist is, in essense, an anti-itellectual malignancy in modern America.
September 18, 2009 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I prefer Pastafarianism myself.
September 18, 2009 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I myself am glad Schaeffer is speaking out.
The fundies have pretty much hijacked Christianity to the point where a lot of people think they ARE Christianity...That couldn't further from the truth.
There are a lot of us who abhor the mockery they are making of all we hold dear, but somewhere along the road the vocal fringe has shut out the rest of us, inserted themselves into politics and the rest of us have lost our voice. We, the more "normal" Christians, for lack of a better word, have no one in leadership speaking for us. So we slog along, trying to hold onto our faith throughout the abuse we take from those who paint us all with the same brush.
I hope more people like Schaeffer will speak out, and maybe we can get some common sense restored within the Christian community as a whole.
September 18, 2009 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stilli, et al...
I have never found attributing blanket generalities about traits and/or actions to be accurate when addressing any religious and/or ethnic group.
That said, (IMHO) those that don their faux mantle of 'Christianity' as a rallying cry and defense of their hateful destruction are especially despicable.
September 18, 2009 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's all a bit mysterious to me. I grew up in a family with no religion. They weren't atheists. Probably agnostics. I had friends (many of whom I still have decades afterwards) who were/are religious. But in the country and city I grew up in, talking about religion was kind of like talking about bowel problems - impolite unless you were talking with/to an expert. Here, and I now live in the South, it seems the vast majority wear their religion on their sleeves. When they ask you what church you go to, and you reply that you don't, a look that conflates both pity and disgust crosses their face - as if you were some bedraggled orphan that hasn't had a decent meal or a bath in years. I just don't see why a person's religion is anybody's business but their own and their spiritual guide's. And this absurd equation between spirituality and morality beats the hell out of me. And a sizable majority of atheists with whom I am familiar, including members of my family, has never even received so much as a speeding citation, let alone got into any form of trouble. I think we non-religious types get a bum rap. I'm looking forward to the day, and it may well never happen, that this country elects a President who is unafraid to say "You know what - my religion is my business."
September 18, 2009 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's particularly ironic is that the same can be said of all major western religions:
There are crazy Jews in Israel who are politically active.
There are crazy Muslims who shriek "jihad!"
It makes one wonder where the delineation is between devout and fanatic.
I think that as soon as one feels comfortable talking about a deity or their religious beliefs in any political conversation, then there is something wrong. Now, I will be skewered for saying that, I'm sure, but while one's religion may inform their sense of morality, if you can't talk politically without specific reference to that morality to justify your political goals, then a line has been crossed.
September 18, 2009 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
The last bit is from my point of view the intent behind the separation of church and state. Politically one cannot justify a policy, etc. solely based on reference to scripture, divine inspiration, etc.
September 18, 2009 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen!
There is way too much co-mingling of religious doctrine and our government 'policies'. There should be none!
Now that's a blanket statement I will sign off on!
September 18, 2009 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I pretty much agree, but the one place that I continue to have mixed feelings is that God has ALWAYS been involved in our government. Many of the traditions in our government (like swearing on the Bible before giving testimony in a trial, being sworn into office with a Bible)are deeply entrenched, and I'm not sure I want that to change.
IMHO that the framers wanted to keep religion out of the government is a myth. They wanted no one government sponsored religion, so you are free to worship however you want, or not at all...the government will not force a certain religion upon you. But they were, for the most part, Deists, and they would not have mentioned God or our "Creator" in the founding documents had they wanted Him to be kept out of the government completely.
September 18, 2009 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stilli,
We must be cognizant of the fact that the insertion of religious tenets in our government actions/policies cannot be limited to Christianity. We are a nation that supports the rights of all to practice the religion of their choice without giving 'greater sanction' to any one religion.
It's a slippery slope for any and all when any religious doctrine is used as basis for any legislation or actions of our governing entities.
September 18, 2009 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it may be that our founders could not have foreseen a day when people of non-God-based religions would live here...is that possible? So how do you now "remove" Him w/o making those who are God based go completely nuts?
September 18, 2009 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, Schaeffer's point was there isn't any way. They'll go nuts no matter how you do it, so you just do it and let them go nuts. Is he right? That's for each of us to decide.
September 18, 2009 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
You will have a hard time proving some of your statements, Stilli.
For example, the swearing in of the POTUS (Art II, Section 1) states:
Note the word "affirm"... and also note "So help me God" isn't in there.
The Pledge of Allegiance? Originally conceived to help sell flags! (Is America great or what?) And, I'm sure you already know that "under God" was added at the time of the Red Scare in the 1950s (Communists were godless heathens).
There is a tendency in this country to invoke God when needing to justify things that are hard to justify (Manifest Destiny... almost by defintion... is a religious statement.) But for the actual working ideals? God is surprisingly absent. Remember that in breaking away from Great Britain where the rule of "divine right" has recently (less than 100 years) suffered a significant set back in the "Glorious Revolution".
September 18, 2009 4:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I cited 2 examples right off the top of my head...I'm sure I could come up with more, but I think my point is made with 2. I'm just doing my usual wondering. :-)
September 18, 2009 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is where we disagree. Your "obvious" points are really not accurate. That I was able to show so easily some of the obvious points are not what they appear to be should give one serious pause about any other "obvious" points.
September 18, 2009 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
What was inaccurate? Don't President's put their hand on a Bible when they are inaugurated? And Don't witnesses put their hand on the Bible and swear to tell the truth in court?
September 18, 2009 9:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't say anything about the Pledge of Allegiance, you did, and yes, I know about the "under God" and "In God We Trust" which is why I didn't mention them...
September 18, 2009 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is nothing in the Constitution that stipulates a bible and, in fact, that's the reason the "(or affirm)" words are there. You don't have to swear to a deity if you don't want to. People do so the religious folks in the country (who are in the majority) are appeased.
Often Presidents aren't believers at all, but make a show of it. Reagan, for example, hardly ever went to church until becoming the President.
There is also nothing in the law that says you need to use a Bible when testifying. That was simply traditional English procedure centuries before the US was even formed. And the Quakers challenged even that. Today, you can simply affirm your oath without a bible at all and not have to bother any deity.
September 19, 2009 2:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't the Rev. Jim Wallis (spelling?) attempting to be the spokesman for Normal Christians? It didn't work out so well with Rick Warren...did you notice how he simply evaporated after Inauguration Day?
September 18, 2009 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Never heard of him and that is the problem. None of the "big name" Christians seem to be willing to step up to the plate and tell the people who are acting so badly to just stop...for the love of Christ, just stop.
September 19, 2009 1:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
No. Wallis is trying to carve out a liberal evangelical niche and he's trying to use that niche to reach out to the crazy evangelicals. The "normal" ones are hard to define, but I assume you mean the garden variety, mainstream Protestant churches. While Wallis would find a warm welcome among many of these denominations I don't think he represents them.
September 19, 2009 2:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
I saw that interview with Rachel. He understands them perfectly. I was very unnerved by his assessment and how entrenched in their craziness these people are. They can't wait for the end times???
Bite me!!!!
September 18, 2009 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do not want any christian fundamentalist running anything inside of our government. They have pretty much demonstrated time and again they're all one pile of grey matter short of a brain.