Tuesday, February 17, 2015 3:42:33 AM
President Obama Speaks at the National Prayer Breakfast
February 05, 2015
On February 5, 2015, President Obama delivered remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C.
*
Remarks by the President at National Prayer Breakfast
Washington Hilton
Washington, D.C.
February 05, 2015
9:13 A.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Well, good morning. Giving all praise and honor to God. It is wonderful to be back with you here. I want to thank our co-chairs, Bob and Roger. These two don’t always agree in the Senate, but in coming together and uniting us all in prayer, they embody the spirit of our gathering today.
I also want to thank everybody who helped organize this breakfast. It’s wonderful to see so many friends and faith leaders and dignitaries. And Michelle and I are truly honored to be joining you here today.
I want to offer a special welcome to a good friend, His Holiness the Dalai Lama -- who is a powerful example of what it means to practice compassion, who inspires us to speak up for the freedom and dignity of all human beings. (Applause.) I’ve been pleased to welcome him to the White House on many occasions, and we’re grateful that he’s able to join us here today. (Applause.)
There aren’t that many occasions that bring His Holiness under the same roof as NASCAR. (Laughter.) This may be the first. (Laughter.) But God works in mysterious ways. (Laughter.) And so I want to thank Darrell for that wonderful presentation. Darrell knows that when you’re going 200 miles an hour, a little prayer cannot hurt. (Laughter.) I suspect that more than once, Darrell has had the same thought as many of us have in our own lives -- Jesus, take the wheel. (Laughter.) Although I hope that you kept your hands on the wheel when you were thinking that. (Laughter.)
He and I obviously share something in having married up. And we are so grateful to Stevie for the incredible work that they’ve done together to build a ministry where the fastest drivers can slow down a little bit, and spend some time in prayer and reflection and thanks. And we certainly want to wish Darrell a happy birthday. (Applause.) Happy birthday.
I will note, though, Darrell, when you were reading that list of things folks were saying about you, I was thinking, well, you're a piker. I mean, that -- (laughter.) I mean, if you really want a list, come talk to me. (Laughter.) Because that ain’t nothing. (Laughter.) That's the best they can do in NASCAR? (Laughter.)
Slowing down and pausing for fellowship and prayer -- that's what this breakfast is about. I think it's fair to say Washington moves a lot slower than NASCAR. Certainly my agenda does sometimes. (Laughter.) But still, it’s easier to get caught up in the rush of our lives, and in the political back-and-forth that can take over this city. We get sidetracked with distractions, large and small. We can’t go 10 minutes without checking our smartphones -- and for my staff, that's every 10 seconds. And so for 63 years, this prayer tradition has brought us together, giving us the opportunity to come together in humility before the Almighty and to be reminded of what it is that we share as children of God.
And certainly for me, this is always a chance to reflect on my own faith journey. Many times as President, I’ve been reminded of a line of prayer that Eleanor Roosevelt was fond of. She said, “Keep us at tasks too hard for us that we may be driven to Thee for strength.” Keep us at tasks too hard for us that we may be driven to Thee for strength. I’ve wondered at times if maybe God was answering that prayer a little too literally. But no matter the challenge, He has been there for all of us. He’s certainly strengthened me “with the power through his Spirit,” as I’ve sought His guidance not just in my own life but in the life of our nation.
Now, over the last few months, we’ve seen a number of challenges -- certainly over the last six years. But part of what I want to touch on today is the degree to which we've seen professions of faith used both as an instrument of great good, but also twisted and misused in the name of evil.
As we speak, around the world, we see faith inspiring people to lift up one another -- to feed the hungry and care for the poor, and comfort the afflicted and make peace where there is strife. We heard the good work that Sister has done in Philadelphia, and the incredible work that Dr. Brantly and his colleagues have done. We see faith driving us to do right.
But we also see faith being twisted and distorted, used as a wedge -- or, worse, sometimes used as a weapon. From a school in Pakistan to the streets of Paris, we have seen violence and terror perpetrated by those who profess to stand up for faith, their faith, professed to stand up for Islam, but, in fact, are betraying it. We see ISIL, a brutal, vicious death cult that, in the name of religion, carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism -- terrorizing religious minorities like the Yezidis, subjecting women to rape as a weapon of war, and claiming the mantle of religious authority for such actions.
We see sectarian war in Syria, the murder of Muslims and Christians in Nigeria, religious war in the Central African Republic, a rising tide of anti-Semitism and hate crimes in Europe, so often perpetrated in the name of religion.
So how do we, as people of faith, reconcile these realities -- the profound good, the strength, the tenacity, the compassion and love that can flow from all of our faiths, operating alongside those who seek to hijack religious for their own murderous ends?
Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ. Michelle and I returned from India -- an incredible, beautiful country, full of magnificent diversity -- but a place where, in past years, religious faiths of all types have, on occasion, been targeted by other peoples of faith, simply due to their heritage and their beliefs -- acts of intolerance that would have shocked Gandhiji, the person who helped to liberate that nation.
So this is not unique to one group or one religion. There is a tendency in us, a sinful tendency that can pervert and distort our faith. In today’s world, when hate groups have their own Twitter accounts and bigotry can fester in hidden places in cyberspace, it can be even harder to counteract such intolerance. But God compels us to try. And in this mission, I believe there are a few principles that can guide us, particularly those of us who profess to believe.
And, first, we should start with some basic humility. I believe that the starting point of faith is some doubt -- not being so full of yourself and so confident that you are right and that God speaks only to us, and doesn’t speak to others, that God only cares about us and doesn’t care about others, that somehow we alone are in possession of the truth.
Our job is not to ask that God respond to our notion of truth -- our job is to be true to Him, His word, and His commandments. And we should assume humbly that we’re confused and don’t always know what we’re doing and we’re staggering and stumbling towards Him, and have some humility in that process. And that means we have to speak up against those who would misuse His name to justify oppression, or violence, or hatred with that fierce certainty. No God condones terror. No grievance justifies the taking of innocent lives, or the oppression of those who are weaker or fewer in number.
And so, as people of faith, we are summoned to push back against those who try to distort our religion -- any religion -- for their own nihilistic ends. And here at home and around the world, we will constantly reaffirm that fundamental freedom -- freedom of religion -- the right to practice our faith how we choose, to change our faith if we choose, to practice no faith at all if we choose, and to do so free of persecution and fear and discrimination.
There’s wisdom in our founders writing in those documents that help found this nation the notion of freedom of religion, because they understood the need for humility. They also understood the need to uphold freedom of speech, that there was a connection between freedom of speech and freedom of religion. For to infringe on one right under the pretext of protecting another is a betrayal of both.
But part of humility is also recognizing in modern, complicated, diverse societies, the functioning of these rights, the concern for the protection of these rights calls for each of us to exercise civility and restraint and judgment. And if, in fact, we defend the legal right of a person to insult another’s religion, we’re equally obligated to use our free speech to condemn such insults -- (applause) -- and stand shoulder-to-shoulder with religious communities, particularly religious minorities who are the targets of such attacks. Just because you have the right to say something doesn’t mean the rest of us shouldn’t question those who would insult others in the name of free speech. Because we know that our nations are stronger when people of all faiths feel that they are welcome, that they, too, are full and equal members of our countries.
So humility I think is needed. And the second thing we need is to uphold the distinction between our faith and our governments. Between church and between state. The United States is one of the most religious countries in the world -- far more religious than most Western developed countries. And one of the reasons is that our founders wisely embraced the separation of church and state. Our government does not sponsor a religion, nor does it pressure anyone to practice a particular faith, or any faith at all. And the result is a culture where people of all backgrounds and beliefs can freely and proudly worship, without fear, or coercion -- so that when you listen to Darrell talk about his faith journey you know it's real. You know he’s not saying it because it helps him advance, or because somebody told him to. It's from the heart.
That’s not the case in theocracies that restrict people’s choice of faith. It's not the case in authoritarian governments that elevate an individual leader or a political party above the people, or in some cases, above the concept of God Himself. So the freedom of religion is a value we will continue to protect here at home and stand up for around the world, and is one that we guard vigilantly here in the United States.
Last year, we joined together to pray for the release of Christian missionary Kenneth Bae, held in North Korea for two years. And today, we give thanks that Kenneth is finally back where he belongs -- home, with his family. (Applause.)
Last year, we prayed together for Pastor Saeed Abedini, detained in Iran since 2012. And I was recently in Boise, Idaho, and had the opportunity to meet with Pastor Abedini’s beautiful wife and wonderful children and to convey to them that our country has not forgotten brother Saeed and that we’re doing everything we can to bring him home. (Applause.) And then, I received an extraordinary letter from Pastor Abedini. And in it, he describes his captivity, and expressed his gratitude for my visit with his family, and thanked us all for standing in solidarity with him during his captivity.
And Pastor Abedini wrote, “Nothing is more valuable to the Body of Christ than to see how the Lord is in control, and moves ahead of countries and leadership through united prayer.” And he closed his letter by describing himself as “prisoner for Christ, who is proud to be part of this great nation of the United States of America that cares for religious freedom around the world.” (Applause.)
We’re going to keep up this work -- for Pastor Abedini and all those around the world who are unjustly held or persecuted because of their faith. And we’re grateful to our new Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom, Rabbi David Saperstein -- who has hit the ground running, and is heading to Iraq in a few days to help religious communities there address some of those challenges. Where’s David? I know he’s here somewhere. Thank you, David, for the great work you’re doing. (Applause.)
Humility; a suspicion of government getting between us and our faiths, or trying to dictate our faiths, or elevate one faith over another. And, finally, let’s remember that if there is one law that we can all be most certain of that seems to bind people of all faiths, and people who are still finding their way towards faith but have a sense of ethics and morality in them -- that one law, that Golden Rule that we should treat one another as we wish to be treated. The Torah says “Love thy neighbor as yourself.” In Islam, there is a Hadith that states: "None of you truly believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself.” The Holy Bible tells us to “put on love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony.” Put on love.
Whatever our beliefs, whatever our traditions, we must seek to be instruments of peace, and bringing light where there is darkness, and sowing love where there is hatred. And this is the loving message of His Holiness, Pope Francis. And like so many people around the world, I’ve been touched by his call to relieve suffering, and to show justice and mercy and compassion to the most vulnerable; to walk with The Lord and ask “Who am I to judge?” He challenges us to press on in what he calls our “march of living hope.” And like millions of Americans, I am very much looking forward to welcoming Pope Francis to the United States later this year. (Applause.)
His Holiness expresses that basic law: Treat thy neighbor as yourself. The Dalai Lama -- anybody who’s had an opportunity to be with him senses that same spirit. Kent Brantly expresses that same spirit. Kent was with Samaritan’s Purse, treating Ebola patients in Liberia, when he contracted the virus himself. And with world-class medical care and a deep reliance on faith -- with God’s help, Kent survived. (Applause.)
And then by donating his plasma, he helped others survive as well. And he continues to advocate for a global response in West Africa, reminding us that “our efforts needs to be on loving the people there.” And I could not have been prouder to welcome Kent and his wonderful wife Amber to the Oval Office. We are blessed to have him here today -- because he reminds us of what it means to really “love thy neighbor as thyself.” Not just words, but deeds.
Each of us has a role in fulfilling our common, greater purpose -- not merely to seek high position, but to plumb greater depths so that we may find the strength to love more fully. And this is perhaps our greatest challenge -- to see our own reflection in each other; to be our brother’s keepers and sister’s keepers, and to keep faith with one another. As children of God, let’s make that our work, together.
As children of God, let’s work to end injustice -- injustice of poverty and hunger. No one should ever suffer from such want amidst such plenty. As children of God, let’s work to eliminate the scourge of homelessness, because, as Sister Mary says, “None of us are home until all of us are home.” None of us are home until all of us are home.
As children of God, let’s stand up for the dignity and value of every woman, and man, and child, because we are all equal in His eyes, and work to send the scourge and the sin of modern-day slavery and human trafficking, and “set the oppressed free.” (Applause.)
If we are properly humble, if we drop to our knees on occasion, we will acknowledge that we never fully know God’s purpose. We can never fully fathom His amazing grace. “We see through a glass, darkly” -- grappling with the expanse of His awesome love. But even with our limits, we can heed that which is required: To do justice, and love kindness, and walk humbly with our God.
I pray that we will. And as we journey together on this “march of living hope,” I pray that, in His name, we will run and not be weary, and walk and not be faint, and we’ll heed those words and “put on love.”
May the Lord bless you and keep you, and may He bless this precious country that we love.
Thank you all very much. (Applause.)
END
9:37 A.M. EST
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/05/remarks-president-national-prayer-breakfast [also at e.g. http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/remarks-by-obama-at-the-national-prayer-breakfast/2015/02/05/e9374b70-ad53-11e4-9c91-e9d2f9fde644_story.html (with comments)]
*
http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2015/02/05/president-obama-speaks-national-prayer-breakfast , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XU7RuilNq4w [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=97217659 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=105546810 and preceding and following]
===
OBAMA INSULTS CHRISTIANS
February 5, 2015 by Bill
Filed under Latest News Releases
2015 – February Releases
Bill Donohue comments on remarks made today by President Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast:
In an attempt to deflect guilt from Muslim madmen, President Obama said, “Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.” Obama’s ignorance is astounding and his comparison is pernicious.
The Crusades were a defensive Christian reaction against Muslim madmen of the Middle Ages. Here is how Princeton scholar and Islamic expert Bernard Lewis puts it: “At the present time, the Crusades are often depicted as an early expansionist imperialism—a prefigurement of the modern European countries. To people of the time, both Muslim and Christian, they were no such thing.” So what were they? “The Crusade was a delayed response to the jihad, the holy war for Islam, and its purpose was to recover by war what had been lost by war—to free the holy places of Christendom and open them once again, without impediment, to Christian pilgrimage.”
Regarding the other fable, the Inquisition, the Catholic Church had almost nothing to do with it. The Church saw heretics as lost sheep who needed to be brought back into the fold. By contrast, secular authorities saw heresy as treason; anyone who questioned royal authority, or who challenged the idea that kingship was God-given, was guilty of a capital offense. It was they—not the Church—who burned the heretics. Indeed, secular authorities blasted the Church for its weak role in the Inquisition.
According to St. Louis University and Crusade scholar Thomas Madden, “All the Crusades met the criteria of just wars.” How many ISIS atrocities, Mr. President, have met the criteria of just wars? The ones where they buried people alive, stoned children, raped women, and crucified men? Moreover, according to Henry Kamen, the leading authority on the Inquisition, a total of 1,394 people were killed during the Inquisition. Today, Muslim madmen kill more than that in a few months.
The President should apologize for his insulting comparison.
Copyright © 2015 Catholic League
http://www.catholicleague.org/obama-insults-christians/ [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=22198799 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=70066579 and http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=70067730 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=90461361 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=94631972 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=101822027 and preceding and following]
--
Why Our President Chose to Insult Christianity and Excuse Militant Islam at the National Prayer Breakfast
The Rush Limbaugh Show
February 05, 2015
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/02/05/why_our_president_chose_to_insult_christianity_and_excuse_militant_islam_at_the_national_prayer_breakfast [transcript]
--
Fox News Can’t Believe Obama Said Christians Have Done Bad Stuff Too, For Jesus
by Kaili Joy Gray
Feb 06 3:20 pm 2015
President Obama said words again, as he is so uppity-ly wont to do, so of course the dimwitted mouth-breathers on Fox & Friends are OUTRAGED!!!! Damn you, Obama, with your word-saying.
This time, he was word-saying words at the National Prayer Breakfast, where the president is supposed to say a bunch of platitudes about the First Amendment and Jesus and God Bless America, and somehow none of that is at all contradictory, no sir.
The president, however, went off script by not just saying “praise the lord,” but also talking about some terrorism, which he refuses to call radical Islamic terrorism because of how he is a secret Kenyan Islamic Terrorist Teleprompter-reading BLACK PRESIDENT IN THE WHITE HOUSE OMG:
And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.
Well, fine, that might be fair and historically accurate. But like that matters! Here’s Steve Doocy, utterly incredulous that Obama would say historically accurate things about the the yes-this-really-did-happen violent history of Good Christians torturing and killing people, for Jesus:
While Jordan is seeking revenge on the terrorists, our president was at the National Prayer Breakfast, which happens every year in Washington DC. And essentially what he did was he said, “You know what? Yeah, ISIS is bad. But you know what? Christians were just as bad as ISIS was a couple of centuries ago.” Not making it up.
Yeah, except for how Doocy is totally making that up, because that’s not what Obama said at all, at least not in the clip Doocy instructs us to watch. But what the heck, let’s play along and pretend that those were the president’s exact words, and he did literally verbatim say that Christians were just as bad as ISIS when they crusaded all over the globe killing people in the name of Christ. Yeah? And? That would be wrong to say because … why?
Here, maybe Brian Kilmeade, the show’s brunette (for diversity!), can explain to us what A Idiot the president is for that word-saying he word-said:
The Crusades happened all those years ago, but we’re talking about — the president felt it was necessary to go back to the year 1095 and talk about 200 years of the Crusades to get some relevance for today. He’s making excuses, it seems, for ISIS’s behavior, essentially saying, “We started it.” That is so unfathomable!
Obviously, Brian did not watch the clip of the president speaking that his co-host Steve told us to watch just a minute ago, or maybe he is not aware that Jim Crow occurred after the year 1095. Or maybe he is just a total and complete moron. Nah, unfathomable!
Helpfully, Steve Doocy jumps in to clarify that Obama means “we Christians” started it, because America is a Christian nation, since the year 1095, anyway. No, we are not even going to waste our pixels explaining how some of us who are not Christians and yet somehow are Americans (weird!) get a little nervous in our “Yeah, we have heard of the Crusades and the Inquisition and the War on People Who Don’t Say Merry Xmas” bones when we hear that kind of talk.
Then Elisabeth chimes in to explain, “Christians have nothing to do with that video we saw on Wednesday of that Jordanian pilot being burned alive to the point where his jaw fell off.”
So take that, Obama, with your “context” and your “history” and your “mentioning things that have happened.” No Christian has ever done a bad thing in the name of Christ for, like, a thousand years — except for all the stuff that’s been done since then, but they had it comin’, what with their being Not Christian or Working At An Abortion Clinic or Being A Witch According To Some YouTube Videos [ http://wonkette.com/564946/silly-oklahoma-christian-you-are-supposed-to-burn-the-witch-not-behead-him ].
In conclusion, Christians are awesome and have been in every way for the last thousand years at least SHUT UP YES THEY HAVE, Obama sucks again some more forever, and it’s just another day that ends in “y” at good ol’ Fox “News.”
[Media Matters [ http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/02/06/conservative-media-bash-obama-for-mentioning-cr/202447 , http://mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2015/02/06/38538/fnc-ff-20150106-prayerbreakfast ]]
©2015 Wonkette (emphasis in original)
http://wonkette.com/575317/fox-news-cant-believe-obama-said-christians-have-done-bad-stuff-too-for-jesus [with embedded video, and comments]
--
Glenn Beck: Obama's Prayer Breakfast Speech
Published on Feb 6, 2015 by yazchat [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgiNjSACl8Y7jpV8LwSXf1g / http://www.youtube.com/user/yazchat , http://www.youtube.com/user/yazchat/videos ]
Glenn Beck responds to President Barack Obama's speech at the National Prayer Breakfast.
TheBlaze
http://www.theblaze.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0u9Hj5Jb__Y [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=28039849 and preceding and following]
--
Glenn Beck Tearfully Begs The World To Realize 'We Are Living In The 1930s All Over Again'
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Thursday, 2/5/2015 2:02 pm
Every few weeks, Glenn Beck [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/glenn-beck-0 ] invites listeners into his studio to film a television program during which he takes their questions about whatever is going on in the world. Inevitably, dozens of people eagerly flock to hear from the oracle that is Glenn Beck as he provides them with crackpot theories and tear-stained stories about how the world is about to go up in flames.
And that is exactly what he did last night, responding to a question from an audience member seeking recommendations about how Christians should be praying for an end to the violence and instability in the Middle East by breaking down in tears as he warned that "we are living in the 1930s all over again" and very soon, governments will start rounding up Jews and Christians.
"One of those things that I know God told me is to decide who your family is going to be so when they do come for people, you decide now, am I going to turn my eyes from it or will I say 'you take him, you take me too,'" he said, choking back tears.
Noting that he used to joke with some of his staffers that if they came for the Jews first, he would hide them but if they came for the Christians first, they would hide them, Beck said that they now all realize that this is no longer a joke but is actually a very real possibility.
"It is getting scary," he told his audience [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2F56xnlnjms (below, as embedded; with comments)], as he began to tear up again. "I promise you, we are living in the 1930s and it's going to sweep the entire globe. Pray for your family to wake up. Pray for you to be strong enough to stand. Just go home with honor. Just go home with honor":
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/glenn-beck-tearfully-begs-world-realize-we-are-living-1930s-all-over-again [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=102391175 and preceding and following]
--
Dr. Ben Carson dissects Obama’s Prayer Breakfast speech: ‘We’re being betrayed’
by Joe Saunders
February 8, 2015
Dr. Ben Carson had a choice response Saturday to President Obama’s incredible statements at last week’s National Prayer Breakfast comparing current Islamist atrocities to wars fought in centuries past in the name of Christianity.
“It makes me feel that perhaps we’re being betrayed,” Carson said on “Fox & Friends.” “Perhaps we don’t have a leader who feels the same about things as most of us do.”
Carson knows knows better than most how important the National Prayer Breakfast can be. His recent political fame stems largely from a speech he gave at the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast [at (near the end)/see (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=97217659 and preceding and following], when he stood only a few feet from President Obama and castigated the president’s progressive policies — including Obamacare.
It was a performance that endeared Carson to conservatives everywhere – and made the retired neurosurgeon a possible contender for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.
That kind of prominence made Obama speech at this year’s prayer breakfast particularly alarming. His dredging up of dustry history — the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades — as some sort of justification for the savagery being committed worldwide by Islamist terrorists in the contemporary world, showed a mindset alien to most Americans, Carson said.
“Well, certainly his words give us some insight into his thinking and his actions or lack thereof, and, you know, there have been atrocities committed throughout human history in the name of religion, and they’re all horrible, and to sit down and try to decide which one is worse than the other, doesn’t make any sense,” Carson said.
“We should condemn them all, give no quarter to anyone who is involved in such activities, and to try to divert the attention away from the outrage that has been focused on the radical Islamic terrorists, in this manner is rather disingenuous, I’m sure, to say the least.”
But thanks to the Founders, he said, the United States has a response to “disingenuous” politicians — and their followers.
“The good thing is, we have a system in place that has allowed us to take control. We need to observe carefully what our leaders do and what the people who support them do,” he said. ”We can’t forget who those people are, and we will have another opportunity, coming up in 2016, looking at all the senators and the congressman who rabidly support this man. Let’s make sure that they get the message.”
© Copyright 2015 BizPac Review
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/02/08/dr-ben-carson-dissects-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech-were-being-betrayed-178436 [with comments; also at http://www.teaparty.org/dr-ben-carson-dissects-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech-were-being-betrayed-82110/ (with comments)], http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9w8x8XBNTFc [with comments, as embedded; also at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73aBO4eLFhE (with comments) and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeR8mrX77JI (with comments)]
--
Judge Jeanine Pirro Opening Statement - Obama At Prayer Breakfast
Published on Feb 7, 2015 by Wake Up America [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCommoSA5so3vikKogjMxHqg / http://www.youtube.com/user/Wakethehellupamerica , http://www.youtube.com/user/Wakethehellupamerica/videos ]
Judge Jeanine Pirro Opening Statement - Obama At Prayer Breakfast
Justice with Judge Jeanine Pirro February 7, 2015 - Opening Statement and continuing with John Hagee and Col. David Hunt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSQXN8dwQMk [with comments] [just the opening statement, also at e.g. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt-St_TgPUo (with comments) and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn_Wxsa7NBE (with comments)] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=39512678 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100785304 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=103764984 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110456218 and preceding and following]
--
John Hagee: Obama's Treatment Of Benjamin Netanyahu Will Cause God To Destroy America
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Wednesday, 2/4/2015 12:38 pm
When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu comes to Washington, D.C., in March to lobby for tougher sanctions against Iran, President Obama will not be meeting with him [ http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/28/politics/obama-netanyahu-iran/ ] and several Democratic members of Congress may skip his address [ http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/democrats-might-skip-benjamin-netanyahu-speech-114891.html ].
Naturally, none of that is sitting well with John Hagee [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/john-hagee ], who warned on yesterday's "Hagee Hotline [ https://www.getv.org/Videos/Watch/5397f782-0439-4637-a213-e870b3db9c09 ]" that God will destroy America for failing to adequately support Israel.
"I am a student of world history," Hagee said, "and you can wrap up world history in 25 words or less and here it is: the nations that blessed Israel prospered and the nations that cursed Israel were destroyed by the hand of God."
The Egyptian Empire, the Babylonian Empire, and the Ottoman Empire have all been wiped out, Hagee said, and even the British Empire has been "reduced to one tiny island because, since Edward the First, they have been and remain an anti-Semitic nation."
America will face the same fate, Hagee warned [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jx_jeBTtiv8 (below, as embedded; with comments)], because God "is watching what America does as it responds to Israel. If America turns its back on Israel, God will turn his back on America. And that's a fact. It's proven by history":
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/john-hagee-obamas-treatment-benjamin-netanyahu-will-cause-god-destroy-america [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=107339023 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110829042 and preceding and following]
--
Louisiana Congressman: Obama Defended ISIS With “Unpresidential” Prayer Breakfast Speech
“Not only did he vilify Christianity, but he actually made a case to defend radical Islam, that’s killing people around the world.”
Andrew Kaczynski
BuzzFeed News Reporter
posted on Feb. 9, 2015, at 11:21 a.m.
Louisiana Republican Rep. John Fleming said President Obama’s speech to the National Prayer Breakfast last week in which he drew a historical comparison between atrocities committed by Islamic State fighters and past “terrible deeds in the name of Christ” were “unpresidential” and actually defended ISIS.
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/buzzfeedandrew/fleming-on-obama ) embedded]
“I was very disappointed, although not surprised. The president has said many things that just seem so unpresidential, and this was no exception,” said Fleming on Family Research Council’s Washington Watch radio program last week.
President Obama made references to the Crusades and the Inquisition at the National Prayer Breakfast last week when speaking about religious violence around the world.
“Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” President Obama said last week. “In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”
Fleming continued, saying the president defended ISIS with his speech.
“Not only did he vilify Christianity, but he actually made a case to defend radical Islam, that’s killing people around the world. He actually defended what they were doing, and tried to draw some sort of twisted equivalency, moral equivalency, between what they’re doing today and what Crusaders did 800 years ago. It really, it was really weird, in fact, and although we had, gosh, hundreds, maybe a thousand people there, he got very little applause. It was really quite sullen, and he really had no energy in his speech. If you’ve ever been in his presence, you know he’s a very articulate speaker and can give rousing speeches, but it really hit the floor, hard. He was flat throughout that discussion.”
The congressman also said the president was really saying ISIS fighters were just like those who fought in the American revolution
“Yeah, I mean he’s really creating a propaganda bonanza for terrorists, because what he’s really saying is ‘Well look, these are freedom fighters, just like the patriots of the Revolutionary War. And they’re no different, their service is just as honorable,’” said Fleming.
“And nothing could be further from the truth. And of course we know that everything from slavery to the Inquisitions and the Crusades happened before our lifetimes, and so what we’re dealing with today is an existential threat to our society, to our individuals. At any time, somebody can blow themselves up, and take Americans with them. They can blow up an airplane, they can crash an airplane. That’s something we have to worry about every day — we spend 40 billion dollars yearly on homeland security. That has nothing to do with Crusades, or any of that other nonsense.”
© 2015 BuzzFeed, Inc
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/louisiana-congressman-obama-defended-isis-with-unpresidentia [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110456362 and preceding and following]
--
Fox News Guest Calls Obama's Christianity Comments 'Verbal Rape'
By Jackson Connor
Posted: 02/10/2015 11:00 am EST
Despite President Barack Obama's call to end rape during the Grammy awards [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/08/obama-grammys-rape_n_6641922.html ] Sunday night, Fox News guest Star Parker believes the president is guilty of committing "verbal rape" during his National Prayer Breakfast speech [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/05/obama-crusades-christ-_n_6623962.html ] last week.
Participating in a panel discussion on "Hannity" Monday night, Parker took issue with the president asking Americans to remember that violence in the name of religion is not a phenomenon exclusive to Islam. Obama pointed to the Inquisition and the Crusades as instances in which murder was carried out in the name of Christ.
"Let me put it in context then, because I was in that room, and it was frankly verbal rape," Parker said. “We were not expecting it, nobody wanted it, it was horrible to sit through, and after it was over we all felt like crap.”
Though host Sean Hannity and Fox News senior correspondent Geraldo Rivera seemed to push back a little bit, deeming the terminology "harsh," Star was ultimately allowed to continue, suggesting that Obama's remarks would fuel further conflict in the Middle East.
"We were talking about being in that room for unity," she said. "And what he did was say, 'Don't ever forget the past, guys. Keep doing what you're doing in the Middle East.'"
On Saturday, Fox News host Eric Bolling also slammed Obama for his speech [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/09/eric-bolling-muslims-kill-in-the-name-of-religion_n_6645002.html ], calling the comments "egregious," and claiming that no other group besides Muslims kill in the name of religion.
H/T Media Matters [ http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/02/09/fox-guest-star-parker-obama-mentioning-crusades/202468 ]
Copyright ©2015 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/10/fox-news-obama-verbal-rape_n_6652546.html [with embedded video, and comments]
--
Star Parker: 'Evil' And 'Wicked' Liberals Are Waging War On America
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Tuesday, 2/10/2015 12:08 pm
Last week, Iowa-based radio host Steve Deace [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/steve-deace ] invited conservative activist Star Parker [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/star-parker ] to discuss [ http://stevedeace.com/podcast/deace-show-podcast-02-03-15/ ] her new book, “Blind Conceit,” a collection of her columns in which she argues [ http://www.amazon.com/Blind-Conceit-Politics-Polarization-Forward-ebook/dp/B00NQBN9EE ] that liberals are waging “wars against our American culture” in pursuit of “revenge and redistribution, the antithesis of Dr. King’s Dream.”
Parker told Deace that when it comes to fixing America, “the first step would be to admit that there’s good and evil”… and that the evil is progressivism.
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/star-parker-evil-and-wicked-liberals-waging-war-on-america ) embedded]
“Socialism is inconsistent with the Scripture because the 10th Commandment says don’t covet, and what we have today is covetousness,” she explained. “Somebody has something that somebody else doesn’t have, so now we’re going to hire politicians to take it from them. So now, you’ve violated a couple of commandments, because the 8th Commandment says don’t steal.”
“So, yeah, the first step is we have to recognize that there is evil, and America is at a crossroads between good and evil,” she continued. “We’ve become so secularized that we’ve got this idea of moral relativism and think that there are no natural consequences to the choices that we make.”
She outlined the “three wars on American culture” that she believes liberals are waging: a “war on religion,” a “war on marriage where they told women, you can do whatever you want to with your sexual being,” and a “war on poverty” that “began to pay people for their sin, if you will, the natural consequences of illicit sexual bad behavior.”
“In their own blind conceit, they’re so arrogant, they can’t even see how evil or wicked they are. They actually believe that progressivism and socialism in a free country is going to work,” she said.
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/star-parker-evil-and-wicked-liberals-are-waging-war-america
--
Star Parker: Obama And Secularists 'Hate America And They Hate Israel'
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Wednesday, 2/11/2015 12:16 pm
In an interview with Newsmax [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/newsmax ] today, conservative activist Star Parker — who has spent this week repeatedly [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/star-parker-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech-was-verbal-rape ] accusing [ http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/02/09/fox-guest-star-parker-obama-mentioning-crusades/202468 ] President Obama of “verbal rape” — attacked the president [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icc4h3lrxO4 ("This video is private. Sorry about that.")] for his comments [ http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/after-uproar-white-house-clarifies-obama-s-thinking-on-paris-kosher-deli-terror-20150210 ] about the attack on a Jewish deli in Paris, saying that what “the radical extreme of Muslims and this president and all secularists have in common is they hate that biblical worldview, so therefore they hate America and they hate Israel.”
Parker said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRkgCESftV0 (below, as embedded; with comments)] that the president’s actions have awakened those who “did not notice that we have been as a country taken over by extremists, by secular humanists who have a worldview in statism,” comparing the current political climate to the years before the Civil War.
“Some think the Tea Party is over and it’s not,” she said. “This is a momentum in our society that is not going to blow away any time soon, because most Americans who are the hard-working, who are the diligent, the god-fearing, understand that we’re in a very prayerful crossroads similar to an 1850s, where we can’t go on like we’ve been going for the last 50 or 60 years.”
“I believe that [Obama’s comment] builds the resolve in the American people that Israel’s values are our values, the core fundamental beliefs of America, our exceptionalism, our national allegiance, our limited role of government, our free markets, and our tradition,” she said. “This is what we have in common, and this is what secularists don’t like, and Barack Obama’s a secularist. And, in fact, it’s what he and the Muslims have in common, the radical extreme of Muslims and this president and all secularists have in common is they hate that biblical worldview, so therefore they hate America and they hate Israel.”
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/star-parker-obama-and-secularists-hate-america-and-they-hate-israel
--
Texas Congressman: I Don’t Know If President Obama Has “Got America’s Back”
Via Facebook: TXRandy14 [ https://www.facebook.com/TXRandy14/photos/pb.128891177274584.-2207520000.1423675479./186209138209454 ]
“Very few that I talked to Craig trust this guy, our commander-in-chief, to prosecute a war in an appropriate fashion.”
Andrew Kaczynski
BuzzFeed News Reporter
Megan Apper
BuzzFeed News Reporter
posted on Feb. 11, 2015, at 11:44 a.m.
Republican Rep. Randy Weber of Texas said Monday he doesn’t know if President Obama has “got America’s back.” Weber expressed the sentiment in an interview with Family Research Council’s Washington Watch radio program.
“I was at an Israeli function, uh, AIPAC function couple weekends ago,” said Weber. “One of friend’s there said, ‘Congressman Weber, we’re not sure the president has Israeli’s back.’ And I looked at him dead center Craig and said, ‘friend, we’re not sure he’s got America’s back.’”
The Texas lawmaker added earlier that “very few” people he talked to in Congress trusted President Obama to wage the war on the Islamic State in a proper way.
“Very few that I talked to Craig trust this guy, our commander-in-chief, to prosecute a war in an appropriate fashion. You know when you have someone that says that we are not at war with Islamic fanaticism and he wants to somehow justify that by dredging up things that are back in 1100, lets just say for example the crusades 1000, 1100.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/buzzfeedandrew/randy-weber-on-frc ) embedded]
Weber went further saying he “doesn’t trust” President Obama to wage the war, which would complicate fighting the Islamic State.
“So we don’t trust him to prosecute the war. Now we don’t want to seem to be anti you know, anti—not to be in favor of fighting terrorism. We understand that this is a cancer that has got to be cut out and so we have to be very diligent about how we do this but again realizing that the president apparently thinks he is the smartest man in the world. He doesn’t have to listen to his generals. He knows better than them? And so really it puts us in a quandary because really we want to go after this cancer and cut it out but then we remember who the commander-in-chief is.”
Weber is best-know for tweeting that he was upset about President Obama not attending the Paris anti-terrorism march, using a strange analogy to Hitler invading France to make his point. He previously called [ http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/hitler-for-all-the-wrong-reasons ] President Obama the “Kommandant-In-Chef” in a tweet about the State of the Union last year. He misspelled chief as “chef.”
© 2015 BuzzFeed, Inc
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/texas-congressman-i-dont-know-if-president-obama-has-got-ame [with comments]
--
Blake Farenthold: Send In Chuck Norris To Fight ISIS
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Friday, 2/13/2015 3:31 pm
Rep. Blake Farenthold [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/blake-farenthold ], Republican of Texas, stopped by Newsmax today to discuss [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EySA8TLWtwY (next below; comments disabled)]
Farenthold said that he would prefer an AUMF without restrictions on the use of ground troops because “if we’re going to go into this, we need to go all in.” But he added that he would rather put Chuck Norris in charge of the whole thing because the president isn’t “committed to the war on terror.”
“I’m not a big fan of President Obama’s, but he was elected president, so that makes him commander-in-chief, so we need to give him full authority to do what he does,” he said. “Quite frankly, I think Chuck Norris would be the one to send in, not President Obama.”
“You’ve got a president who I don’t think is committed to the war on terror, does not realize that the threat is from radical Islam and not just a few crazies out there. I don’t think he gets it and I don’t think his heart’s behind it, and that really worries me,” he added [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bayWuY7fF98 (next below, as embedded; with comments)].
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/blake-farenthold-send-chuck-norris-fight-isis [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=79360305 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=109273920 and preceding and following]
===
Is Obama the seventh king?
Correction in the Lexington Dispatch.
The Dispatch originally titled the letter “Is Obama the Antichrist?”
[ https://twitter.com/RL_Bynum/status/566048171294330880 (with comments),
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/15/obama-antichrist-correction_n_6687668.html (with comments)]
Published: Saturday, February 7, 2015 at 12:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Friday, February 6, 2015 at 12:22 p.m.
Editor: God states that seven kings must come before the rise of the Antichrist. Revelations 17:10 says the seventh king will reign for a short amount of time. Is Barack Obama the seventh king?
Obama has passed laws to kill more innocent people than anyone in the past. Obama's laws are on abortion and medication allow children to kill children and kill millions of children yearly with our tax dollars. Obama passes his own laws without any laws being enforced in the U.S. Constitution to stop his actions. Obama funds America's enemies with our money.
Obama's lifted sanctions off Iran with promises that a peace treaty will be made but does nothing to inspect Iran as they continue to make nuclear weapons. Does Obama already know Iran's actions and is helping Iran? God says Israel must be attacked by Iran to start a war between all nations before the Antichrist can rise to create a peace treaty between these nations. Everything God said is happening. The Lord can return for God's children at anytime.
Obama's releasing terrorists from Gitmo so they can go back to doing the same thing again. Obama won't call this Islamic terrorism. States also have no-go zones of Islamists teaching their followers how to attack people. Obama believes this is their religious right. This is to come also in these last days. Will this belief be used to create a one-world government?
Radical Islamists show you either follow them or be killed. Christ said only those who remain faithful and endureth until the end are saved. It's going to be this world's choice.
Obama has done nothing to help anyone unless it helps him hurt other people. Obama doesn't want to protect America and nations like Israel. Obama's given more rights unto the millions of illegal immigrants and anyone entering America than any U.S. citizen. Obama did this to divide America and other nations to make them easier for these terrorists to enter.
Who and what is Barack Obama? Obama claims nobody can stop him or change anything he's done. This evil must come to pass before the Lord's return and the rise of the Antichrist, but you better know what evil you're dealing with. Nobody is promised another minute of life upon this earth, and judgment comes at the time of your death.
Many support and stand behind Obama no matter what he does. All these people will stand with Obama in judgment also. Christ promises to spew every lukewarm soul out of his mouth. This means very few will enter heaven, because they show no faith by fighting against the sins of this world daily.
Should Christianity, God's words or all other beliefs be trusted in these last days? Many Christian beliefs today aren't God's words, because they support the sins of this world. No hypocrite will enter heaven.
Boyd W. Thomas
Welcome
Copyright © 2015 The-Dispatch.com
http://www.the-dispatch.com/article/20150207/OPINION02/302079998 [with comments]
===
Activist Publishes Book of Hate Mail from Bible Believing Christians, Bible Believers Respond By—You Guessed It
When devout fundamentalist Christians find their evangelism thwarted, all hell can break loose—along with some surprisingly nasty language.
By Valerie Tarico
Posted on February 3, 2015
Bonnie Weinstein is married to Mikey Weinstein, founder and president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF [ http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/ ]), which brings a special set of challenges to their relationship. The mission of MRFF is “to ensuring that all members of the United States Armed Forces fully receive the Constitutional guarantees of religious freedom to which they and all Americans are entitled by virtue of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.” Some people don’t like that.
They don’t like it because ensuring religious freedom in the military means among other things [ http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/about/our-mission/ ] that:
• No religion or religious philosophy may be advanced by the United States Armed Forces over any other religion or religious philosophy.
• No member of the United States Armed Forces may be compelled in any way to conform to a particular religion or religious philosophy.
• No member of the military may be compelled to endure unwanted religious proselytization, evangelization or persuasion of any sort in a military setting and/or by a military superior or civilian employee of the military.
• The full exercise of religious freedom includes the right not to subscribe to any particular religion or religious philosophy. The so-called “unchurched” cede no Constitutional rights by want of their separation from organized faith.
Why MRFF is Needed
Mikey Weinstein founded MRFF in response to rampant violations of these principles by Evangelicals and other “Great Commission [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Commission ]” Christians at the United States Air Force Academy, where their two sons (both Jewish) and future daughter-in-law and son-in law (both Christians) were cadets and, like Mikey, later graduates.
Great Commission Christians are those who think it is their responsibility to save souls by converting others to their form of belief. They typically are biblical literalists who believe the Bible is the perfect and complete word of God. Their behavior often stands in contrast to Great Commandment [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Commandment ] Christians—those who think that the prime directive of the New Testament is not evangelism and right belief, but love. Many of these Christians perceive the Bible as a human document, an imperfect record of God’s relationship to humanity and the ministry of Jesus. Because of U.S. demographics, the vast majority of MRFF’s clients are Christians of this latter type, followed by religious minorities including Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Native American spiritualists, atheists, agnostics and Wiccans. MRFF also represents 861 LGBT armed forces clients.
For years, Great Commission believers have been engaged in more and more bold attempts to convert the U.S. military into an army of Christian soldiers—pressuring subordinates to attend Bible studies; promoting Christian-themed media like Mel Gibson’s torture porn, “The Passion of the Christ;” and converting the chaplaincy into a cadre of missionaries on the public dime. And they had been getting away with it. After Weinstein—a former Air Force JAG officer and member of the Reagan administration—started making waves [ http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-10-06-airforce-lawsuit_x.htm ] and then launched MRFF, many were, not surprisingly, displeased.
Unhappy Believers
From the beginning, the Weinsteins and MRFF staff have received a barrage of hate mail filled with curses, imprecatory prayers, graphic descriptions of bodily harm, death threats [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/12/27/life-in-the-crosshairs-how-some-public-feminists-atheists-and-other-activists-cope-with-death-threats/ ], gloating promises of eternal torture and more—all in the name of Jesus and often accompanied by Bible quotations, chapter and verse. Some of the ugliest messages hone in on the fact that Bonnie and Mikey are Jewish, stating, for example that the Holocaust didn’t go far enough; that their children should be turned into skin lamps; that “their kind” are not Americans and can’t be; and that Hell will be worse than the gas chambers.
At the suggestion of appalled supporters, Bonnie Weinstein finally compiled a selection of choice missives into a book, To the Far Right Christian Hater: You can be a good speller or a hater, but you can’t be both [ http://www.amazon.com/Right-Christian-Hater-Good-Speller/dp/1940207835 ]. I was a conservative Evangelical for many years. Over that time, I imagined saying nasty things to people, and sometimes did. I imagined swearing, and sometimes did. But it never crossed my mind that a believer might combine swearing and denigration with the name of Christ. The kaleidoscope of variations found in Weinstein’s book would have been unfathomable. Even today, if I hadn’t read them myself, I wouldn’t believe it still.
“Christian Built This Country”
One might think that seeing their words in print would shame self-proclaimed guardians of God into silence. Or they might consider that such words make a mockery of their claim to moral and spiritual superiority. Or, if nothing else, they might realize that spewing hate is a poor way to win converts as directed in the Great Commission. But apparently not. Because offended believers responded by sending contents for Volume 2.
One took the time to explain why the work of MRFF is so wrongheaded as to merit the barrage: [Note: I have left all spelling and grammar as received.]
It was Christians on the wagons west and Christians who built this country of and for the Glory of Christ. Christians saved the American indians from going to hell and Christian stopped the nazis and commies from taking over the world. Christians liberated negroes from slavery and gave the jews Israel and are the only ones protecting the unborn and trying to keep marriage pure. It was even Christians whom put men on the moon. And now its Christians who die to stop the moslems from beheading us all. The common theme for you Bonnie is Christians. And do not believe that lie about ‘separation of church and state’. Not even in the constitution. Nowhere there. In America noone have to be Christian but they do have to hear and consider His Word.
What is “His Word?” For those who take the Bible as a literally perfect revelation from God, as do most of MRFF’s detractors, God’s Word is the Good Book, and that’s where things get complicated. The texts assembled in the Bible promote love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, meekness, temperance and faith—qualities that one New Testament writer calls the fruit of the spirit. By their fruits you shall know them, says another. Christians are exhorted to be a light shining on a hill, without which the world would fall into (moral) darkness. Regrettably, the Bible also endorses holy war, death to blasphemers and infidels [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/10/24/bible-vs-quran-test-your-knowledge-of-who-deserves-death-in-which-religion/ ], vengeance, and torture [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/12/30/who-when-why-10-times-the-bible-says-torture-is-ok/ ]. With these mixed messages bound together as a package, the net effect of thinking that the Bible is God’s perfect Word can be hard to predict.
Piling It On
Here are some excerpts from recent messages to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation from those who see themselves as defenders of God and goodness. The letters arrive with different fonts and tones, and from different email addresses, but the themes are painfully consistent:
• Mr. M Weinstein I am a spirit-filled ordained pastor of The Gospel from the great state of Nebraska. Stop your attack on God Almighty and His only Son our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ! Stop your attack on His holy Christian wariors in our armed military forces! My congregation includes many military from the nearby air force base. We pray as one for you to die tonight in your sleep leaving a bloody mess for your family to find at daybreak.
• To the enimy of Jesus The Christ – Let’s all watch how Jesus makes you pay for taking Him out of the Army. Your hellbound ‘religious freedom FROM religion” followers too. You all try to fool everybody and hide behind the contitution. Your afraid of the Gospel. Why is it you give a jew a chance to recrusify our Savior and he’ll do it ever time. And your the worse of jews in the world. Blood thrifty for inocent Christians bringing The Word to the Army. damn you and die. And burn for youre sins against Christ Jesus. For all time.
• For god and country and in god we trust. Maybe if the Jews fought in the revolution and wrote the constitution he would have a right too speak. Other wise shut the f up.
• When We see a jew like mikey wienstien we know that Hitler was right. Leave US soldiers alone mickey. Get you a nosejob hebe. And why not swindle someone in business? While eating a bagle and showing off your jew diamonds.
• This country was founded on the belief of God, if you and your people do not believe in the Christian God maybe you should move to Iran or Syria where your shallow thoughts will last but minutes since you will be but an infidel, soon to be stoned for your beliefs.
• Athiest jews are servents of satan. They do not deserve America. Mikey weinsteen does not deserve life any place but espcialy in the USA. He is THE leader of all which is wrong in America and all who fight Jesus Christ which is the only true God in the universe. Weinsteen will destroy our military and the whole country if he is not deported. Send him to Cuba which niger Obummer loves so much. Or send him and all the other athiests to North Korea to rot and starve.
• Eat shit and don’t die. Just keep eating shit Michael Loser Weinstein. Fun to watch you eat shit. For all time. Since you and your little family of mfrr shit eaters are nothing but shit anyway. Your only hope is to surrender to Jesus Christ. Your a stiff necked jew so you will not (Exodus 32 and verse 9). Thus you have no hope. Keep your shitty self out of Christ’s military and Christ’s nation you dirty shit bag.
• Fuck your crybaby slut ass wife and fuck your crybaby spoiled children. Who got their fancy air force academy educations all paid for by the GRACE of Amercan CHRISTIAN taxpayers. And just look what we got for our tax money. The family Whiningsteen jew traitors from HELL. Cry cry cry cause you have it so bad in a CHRISTIAN made country. You know what you all happier in North koria or back in Jewsrael. get OUT of our country! Here Jesus is KING and if you dont like it than fuck you.
• Your day will come when you have to face Our God Almighty and would not want to be in your shoes. You and your ilk think you are so intelligent and stand above the rest but you are sickening and nothing but a joke and a huge one at that. By the way, where is your stand against the muslims? you either are one like your golden idol charlatan closet muslim obama or you are afraid of them.
• Thankfully, judgment is a certainty and Mr. Weinstein’s future – and the rest of your staff – is secure. And eternity is forever.
• Our Spirit-Filled Church prays to Christ Jesus thru Psalm 109 for His Hand to curse Judas Weinstein (Matthew 27: 3-5) down as per Scripture in 2015 for sins against His Church and His armed forces and His America: We Pray Thee Lord Jesus To Lay Thy Avenging Hands (Revelation 19:11-16) on unbaptized (Mark 16:16) Michael Weinstein his evil wife and evil children (john 8:44) and all of the evil doers who work at MFRR (Revelation 21:8);
• Christ will slay Mikey Weinstein with The Sword of Righteousness. Your serpant husband will be cut down by Jesus and mutilated for his evil doings. Then him and they all will be cast wiggling and screaming into the Lake of Fire to burn for all time. See John 3:36 and Revelations 20:14. You still have time Bonnie and so do your kids. This is ‘Truth’ mail from those Christians who love you so much and your kids and grandkids too.
The writer of this last missive wanted to make sure that nobody misunderstand his intent. “This is not ‘hate mail’ Bonnie Weinstein. Do not dare to call it that! This is LOVE mail. We are showing truest Christian love.”
Hate is love. War is peace. Ignorance is strength. The outpourings from self-described Christians sound Orwellian because they are, literally. In his book, 1984, George Orwell coined the term doublethink, which has been defined as not just the ability to say that black is white, but “also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary. This demands a continuous alteration of the past, made possible by the system of thought which really embraces all the rest, and which is known in Newspeak as doublethink. Doublethink is basically the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.”
The people who wrote these letters honestly believe that they serve the God of Love and Truth. I know, because I once shared that belief as an Evangelical biblical literalist. Such conviction can be all-consuming, and blinding.
Religion that is based on authoritarian hierarchies and sacred texts has tremendous power to produce doublethink, to translate love into hate and to redirect the human moral impulse into words and actions that are patently evil. Parents who kick out their queer children think they are doing a good thing. Jihadis who murder cartoonists do so convinced that their actions are righteous, as do ordinary fundamentalist Muslims who throw acid on women, as do ordinary fundamentalist Christians who pray for the death and dismemberment of their enemies.
The Power of Belief
Beliefs are powerful, and the power of absolute belief is absolute.
Far too many well-meaning lovers of peace fail to understand this. In their desire to promote tolerance they insist that harm done in the names of gods isn’t really motivated by religion, that it is motivated by tyranny or desperation or a host of other socio-political factors. Most certainly the relationship between religion and violence is complex [ http://valerietarico.com/2015/01/16/how-religion-can-let-loose-humanitys-most-violent-impulses/ ].
But consider, if you will, the fact that the writers of these letters are not oppressed minorities, nor the victims of colonialism, nor destitute and hopeless. And consider that the only harm they experience from the work of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation is harm not to persons but to religion itself—the kind of religion that mandates evangelism and dominion.
Religion is powerful in part because it takes command of primal moral emotions including moral disgust and outrage. These emotions can get activated in the service of justice, or compassion, or fairness, or ahimsa, or love. But they also can get attached to matters that serve no purpose save that of protecting the religion itself—violations of ritual purity, or blasphemy rules, or god-ordained gender hierarchy [ http://valerietarico.com/2012/03/09/15-bible-texts-reveal-why-gods-own-party-is-at-war-with-women/ ] and rules about sex—or an army captain’s obligation to preach the gospel to his underlings.
Obligations like these can feel as morally compelling as a father’s responsibility to protect his children, and when they are obstructed, true believers can feel equally crazed. Hundreds of thousands of Chechens took to the streets [ http://news.yahoo.com/thousands-gather-protest-caricatures-russias-caucasus-083012411.html ] last month to protest blasphemy against their Prophet, which many perceive as a crime greater than mass murder.
Paths Forward
Such passion can be met only by confronting the beliefs that drive the behavior. Organizations that work to constrain specific harmful actions, like MRFF, play a critical role in maintaining secular pluralism and rule of law. But make no mistake—as devout believers seek to follow perceived moral mandates they will push to the limits, and sometimes beyond, while simultaneously working to change whatever rules or laws constrain them. That is the nature of moral certitude.
In the long run, the only solution lies in replacing harmful beliefs with those that actually serve peace and wellbeing. Secularists like me see the path forward as one that increasingly relies on science to help us understand and advance human flourishing within a complex web of life. Progressive people of faith, some of them clients or supporters [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/self-described-christians-sniping-on-email-have-forgotten-jesus-teachings-commentary/2015/01/26/ad72cf6e-a593-11e4-a162-121d06ca77f1_story.html ] of Mikey Weinstein, embrace the fabric of wisdom in ancient traditions like Christianity and Islam and believe that the best path forward is reformation from within. Either way, the inbox of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation stands as a stark reminder that this work could not be more urgent.
Valerie Tarico [ http://valerietarico.com/ ] is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington. She is the author of Trusting Doubt: A Former Evangelical Looks at Old Beliefs in a New Light [ http://astore.amazon.com/exchrisnetenc-20/detail/0977392937 ] and Deas and Other Imaginings [ http://www.theoracleinstitute.org/deas ], and the founder of http://www.wisdomcommons.org/ . Her articles about religion, reproductive health, and the role of women in society have been featured at sites including AlterNet, Salon, the Huffington Post, Grist, and Jezebel.
Copyright 2015 Valerie Tarico (emphasis in original)
http://valerietarico.com/2015/02/03/activist-publishes-book-of-hate-mail-from-bible-believing-christians-bible-believers-respond-by-you-guessed-it/ [with comments] [also at http://truth-out.org/news/item/28919-activist-publishes-book-of-hate-mail-from-bible-believing-christians-bible-believers-respond-by-you-guessed-it (with comments) and http://www.alternet.org/belief/shocking-christian-hate-mail-activists-received-challenging-religious-indoctrination-military (with comments)] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=2427568 (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=2486539 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=39632707 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=45592650 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=49466173 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=54104761 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=54904477 and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=54920645 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=58462365 and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=67193242 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=79941103 (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=81618596 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=82368351 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=88125188 (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=99315132 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=107571079 (and any future following)]
--
“By their (rotten) fruits you shall know them”
by lbwoodgate [ http://woodgatesview.com/about/ ]
February 9, 2015 ·
I no longer associate myself with the institution of the Christian Church and a belief at all that some supernatural power is in control of our lives has faded from my conscious behavior. Not that what the faith has at its core isn’t of some value to us as humans but because too many within the faith represent the worst of humanity.
Christianity today appears to be suffering an identity crisis. Perhaps it always has. Believers who claim to represent the faith do a poor job of following their own scripture. Especially those imperatives in Chapter 7 that warn against judging people too narrowly and harshly. It imparts the universal golden rule in verse 12 imploring believers to treat others as they would want to be treated. And it warns against listening to false prophets who can be identified “by their fruits”.
These are unequivocal pronouncements supposedly from the one who is recognized by believers as the bearer of “good fruit”, yet to watch and listen to many of his alleged followers today you would think he was the bearer of bad fruit. Who was Jesus and what did he represent in his life?
Was he a mean-spirited, vengeful individual who promoted death and destruction for his perceived adversaries? Was he a controlling power that sought to dominate the world by force and persecution? Is Jesus and the words attributed to him in the New Testament the influence of millions today and throughout history who killed to promote a belief system that claims to love us, even as imperfect as we are? Or was he the influence of others who are moved by the Good Samaritan parable, being led to believe that greater love has no one than he or she who lays down their life for their friend.
One affirms life through a shared humanity, the other takes it for a militant cause. The religious right in this country who claim to represent “the word of God” seems to do so in bits and pieces, omitting what comes close to kindness and generosity and highlighting instead those passages that validate a “holy war” against the unbelievers.
What would it look like for Christians today if there were no standards set for them found in Matthew Chapters 5-7 better known as “the sermon on the mount”?
Dr. Valerie Tarico, a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington [ http://valerietarico.com/ ] who writes about the conflicts between people of faith and those outside institutional religion she refers to as freethinkers labels the militant types as “Great Commission” Christians. Those who feel it is their task to evangelize to every living being on earth before the second coming of Christ. To such hardliners, this includes the practice of warring with non-believers and putting to death all those who oppose such attempts at proselytizing. In the name of Jesus European missionaries and their military cohorts wiped out entire native cultures as they conquered the new world. Will such harsh tactics be viewed as “the will of the father” Jesus referred to in Matthew 7:21?
Though such outward manifestations have not been seen on a large scale since then, there remains a shadow of this virulent Christian today who spews streams of hateful words to anyone who doesn’t accept their perception on issues dealing with abortion, homosexuality and the notion that this country was founded on biblical principles.
It is also reserved, Ms. Tarico shows us [ http://valerietarico.com/2015/02/03/activist-publishes-book-of-hate-mail-from-bible-believing-christians-bible-believers-respond-by-you-guessed-it/ (just above)], for anyone who attempts to defend the principle that affirms separation of church and state like Mikey Weinstein, founder and president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) and his wife Bonnie.
The mission of MRFF is “to ensuring that all members of the United States Armed Forces fully receive the Constitutional guarantees of religious freedom to which they and all Americans are entitled by virtue of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.”
Mikey Weinstein founded MRFF in response to rampant violations of these principles by Evangelicals and other “Great Commission” Christians at the United States Air Force Academy, where their two sons (both Jewish) and future daughter-in-law and son-in law (both Christians) were cadets and, like Mikey, later graduates.
Great Commission Christians are … typically … biblical literalists who believe the Bible is the perfect and complete word of God. Their behavior often stands in contrast to Great Commandment Christians—those who … perceive the Bible as a human document, an imperfect record of God’s relationship to humanity and the ministry of Jesus.
I have had my own experience with a “great commission christian.” She was a public school teacher in my Bible study class, back when I still called myself a Christian. Upon discovering that I considered myself a liberal Democrat she confidently asserted that it was impossible for “someone to call themselves a Christian and vote Democratic”. Democrats I found, if they were Christians, tended to be the Great Commandment types.
I would not have been surprised to see her among those self-righteous Christians outside of an abortion clinic vilifying the young women seeking to end an unwanted pregnancy. If stoning were legal today this lady would have been handing them out and casting what she couldn’t herself at these frightened young women who found little or no support among their friends and family.
She would have also likely been one of the thousands of people who wrote and emailed hateful words and death threats to the Weinsteins for attempting to prevent the military brass within the Air Force Academy from putting pressure on recruits to accept Jesus as their personal savior. These recruits were often badgered by others who willing caved to the demands of their senior officers being harassed night and day and lived under the fear that their careers would be cut short [ http://articles.latimes.com/2005/jun/23/nation/na-academy23 ].
Here are a few of the “christian” responses, the fruits of their faith if you will, to the efforts of the Weisnsteins trying to curtail these abuses at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, CO.
- Mr. M Weinstein I am a spirit-filled ordained pastor of The Gospel from the great state of Nebraska. Stop your attack on God Almighty and His only Son our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ! Stop your attack on His holy Christian wariors(sic) in our armed military forces! My congregation includes many military from the nearby air force base. We pray as one for you to die tonight in your sleep leaving a bloody mess for your family to find at daybreak.
– To the enimy(sic) of Jesus The Christ – Let’s all watch how Jesus makes you pay for taking Him out of the Army. Your hellbound ‘religious freedom FROM religion” followers too. You all try to fool everybody and hide behind the contitution.(sic) Your afraid of the Gospel. Why is it you give a jew(sic) a chance to recrusify(sic) our Savior and he’ll do it ever time. And your the worse of jews in the world. Blood thrifty for inocent(sic) Christians bringing The Word to the Army. damn you and die. And burn for youre(sic) sins against Christ Jesus. For all time.
- For god and country and in god we trust. Maybe if the Jews fought in the revolution and wrote the constitution he would have a right too speak. Other wise shut the f up.
– When We see a jew like mikey wienstien we know that Hitler was right. Leave US soldiers alone mickey. Get you a nosejob hebe. And why not swindle someone in business? While eating a bagle(sic) and showing off your jew diamonds.
– Eat shit and don’t die. Just keep eating shit Michael Loser Weinstein. Fun to watch you eat shit. For all time. Since you and your little family of mfrr shit eaters are nothing but shit anyway.-
- Your only hope is to surrender to Jesus Christ. Your a stiff necked jew so you will not (Exodus 32 and verse 9). Thus you have no hope. – Keep your shitty self out of Christ’s military and Christ’s nation you dirty shit bag.
– Fuck your crybaby slut ass wife and fuck your crybaby spoiled children. Who got their fancy air force academy educations all paid for by the GRACE of Amercan CHRISTIAN taxpayers. And just look what we got for our tax money. The family Whiningsteen jew traitors from HELL. Cry cry cry cause you have it so bad in a CHRISTIAN made country. You know what you all happier in North koria(sic) or back in Jewsrael. get OUT of our country! Here Jesus is KING and if you dont(sic) like it than fuck you.
I have also been raised in white Southern culture where Southern Baptist even to this day try to justify their views on race using scripture. The US History website [ http://www.ushistory.org/us/27f.asp ] notes:
“Defenders of slavery noted that in the Bible, Abraham had slaves. They point to the Ten Commandments, noting that “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house, … nor his manservant, nor his maidservant.” In the New Testament, Paul returned a runaway slave, Philemon, to his master, and, although slavery was widespread throughout the Roman world, Jesus never spoke out against it.”
While attending junior college in Dallas back in the early 70’s as the civil rights movement, now protected by law was expanding in the state of Texas, my Sociology 101 class was introduced in a study of cultures to a grandmotherly type woman who represented the KKK in this area. Her name, Dixie Leber, was an invention of hers that she had legally changed, with Leber being the reverse spelling of Rebel.
Of the many mind-boggling things Ms. Leber described in her view of the world was how God intended that there should be no interracial marriages when, in the creation story, he divided the night and the day. In so doing she assured us that since night is inferior to day so must the blacks be to the whites.
Historical ignorance that claims no Jews fought and died [ http://www.myjewishlearning.com/history/Modern_History/1700-1914/America_at_the_Turn_of_the_Century/Acceptance_in_the_US/Revolutionary_War.shtml ] in the American Revolution and biblical distortions like Dixie Leber’s are common among many Great Commission Christians. It is this same diminished mental state today that has a young fundamentalist school teacher asserting that Christians cannot be Democrats and that American Muslims are attempting to replace the Constitution with Sharia law.
Personally I would rejoice if I woke up tomorrow morning and found that the Christian Church and many of its followers simply vanished from the face of the Earth and all other faiths as well that practice cruel measures to convert people to their way of thinking. I don’t wish them ill will. But I do wish they would simply follow their own scriptural imperatives.
The notion that somehow humankind would spiral downward into an immoral abyss without their faith systems in place is an unfounded fear of haters raised by those who vigorously follow the Great Commission path. Humans are capable of devising and living by a moral code not associated with ethereal beings. Many of us do it today and live quite securely in that knowledge.
Science helps us figure out what others used to attribute to unseen spirits. To us the world is not a “good vs. evil” dichotomy or where life is a simple progression of black and white choices. It is a tapestry of many colors and many choices. It’s evolutionary, not predestined. One defined more by time, culture and environment than by supernatural beings.
Our purpose, if one has to feel there is a purpose to our existence, is to move beyond those premises that no longer withstand scrutiny; seeking truth for those who like to put a label on such things. This ought to keep us busy for a few more millennia if we don’t kill ourselves first.
What purpose could benefit us from remaining rigidly in a place that justifies hate and all that that entails. As human beings who share a unique habitat with other life forms in this vast Universe, our fruits should reflect how we achieve a symmetry that allows us to coexist without wanting to kill those who don’t share our views of life’s mysteries.
Copyright 2015 Larry Beck (emphasis in original)
http://woodgatesview.com/2015/02/09/by-their-rotten-fruits-you-shall-know-them/ [with comments]
--
Love Letters to Richard Dawkins
Published on Jan 21, 2015 by Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCH_zYYXkJpULueOVZTkY4Bw / http://www.youtube.com/user/richarddawkinsdotnet , http://www.youtube.com/user/richarddawkinsdotnet/videos ]
April 11th, 2014 - In a candid moment, filmmaker Eric Preston, founder and producer at Fusion Films, rolls his camera as Dr. Richard Dawkins - Author, Professor and Evolutionary Biologist - again [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhYT4vE1gvM (next below; with comments)]
Copyright 2015 Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW7607YiBso [with (over 4,000) comments]
--
Sandy Rios: 'The Real Experts' Know Evolution Has Been 'Disproven'
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Friday, 2/13/2015 1:00 pm
American Family Association [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/american-family-association ] governmental affairs director Sandy Rios [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/sandy-rios ] is upset [ https://vimeo.com/119546503 ] that media commentators like George Will are mocking [ https://twitter.com/digby56/status/566036827841114112 ] Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/scott-walker ] for refusing to say this week whether he believes in evolution. After all, Rios explained on her radio show today, “science has done nothing but disprove the theory of evolution.”
“There is no scientific evidence” to substantiate evolution, she said, at least according to “the real experts.” So why has this stunning revelation that the foundational theory behind modern biology has been refuted not percolated through the scientific community? Well, Rios explained, that’s because evolution has become a sacred, religious tenant.
“Evolution has become the religion of the elite,” Rios said. “It’s a religion to the [level of] fanaticism of what they would say was the people at the Scopes monkey trial, the Christians waving their Bibles who were not really thinking through the facts, they were just outraged because it was against God’s law. The truth of the matter is that the evolutionists like George Will, waving their evolutionary theory, have become as rabid and unreasoned as what they accuse the Scopes monkey religionists of doing to Darwin during that time. It has become a religion. Science has disproven so much of evolution…. These guys are wrong, Scott Walker is right.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/rios-evolution-disproven ) embedded]
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/sandy-rios-real-experts-know-evolution-has-been-disproven [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110487404 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110870610 (and preceding) and following]
--
Religion’s Dirty Dozen—12 Really Bad Religious Ideas That Have Made the World Worse
By Valerie Tarico
Posted on January 20, 2015
Some of humanity’s technological innovations are things we would have been better off without: the medieval rack, the atomic bomb and powdered lead potions come to mind. Religions tend to develop ideas or concepts rather than technologies, but like every other creative human enterprise, they produce some really bad ones along with the good.
My website, Wisdom Commons [ http://www.wisdomcommons.org/ ], highlights some of humanity’s best moral and spiritual concepts, ideas like the Golden Rule, and values like compassion, generosity and courage that make up our shared moral core. Here, by way of contrast, are some of the worst. These twelve dubious concepts promote conflict, cruelty, suffering and death rather than love and peace. To paraphrase Christopher Hitchens, they belong in the dustbin of history just as soon as we can get them there.
Chosen People –The term “Chosen People” typically refers to the Hebrew Bible and the ugly idea that God has given certain tribes a Promised Land (even though it is already occupied by other people). But in reality many sects endorse some version of this concept. The New Testament identifies Christians [ https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians+3%3A12&version=NRSV ] as the chosen ones. Calvinists talk about “God’s elect,” believing that they themselves are the special few who were chosen before the beginning of time. Jehovah’s witnesses believe that 144,000 souls will get a special place in the afterlife. In many cultures certain privileged and powerful bloodlines were thought to be descended directly from gods [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/12/16/its-not-rape-if-hes-a-god/ ] (in contrast to everyone else).
Religious sects are inherently tribal and divisive because they compete by making mutually exclusive truth claims and by promising blessings or afterlife rewards that no competing sect can offer. “Gang symbols” like special haircuts, attire, hand signals and jargon differentiate insiders from outsiders and subtly (or not so subtly) convey to both that insiders are inherently superior.
Heretics – Heretics, kafir, or infidels (to use the medieval Catholic term [ http://callingchristians.com/tag/why-do-muslims-use-the-word-infidel/ ]) are not just outsiders, they are morally suspect and often seen as less than fully human. In the Torah, slaves taken from among outsiders don’t merit the same protections as Hebrew slaves. Those who don’t believe in a god are corrupt, doers of abominable deeds. “There is none [among them] who does good,” says the Psalmist.
Islam teaches the concept of “dhimmitude” and provides special rules for the subjugation of religious minorities, with monotheists getting better treatment than polytheists. Christianity blurs together [ http://www.openbible.info/topics/non_believers ] the concepts of unbeliever and evildoer. Ultimately, heretics are a threat that needs to be neutralized by conversion, conquest, isolation, domination, or—in worst cases—mass murder.
Holy War – If war can be holy, anything goes. The medieval Roman Catholic Church conducted a twenty year campaign of extermination against heretical Cathar Christians in the south of France, promising their land and possessions to real Christians who signed on as crusaders. Sunni and Shia Muslims have slaughtered each other for centuries. The Hebrew scriptures recount battle after battle in which their war God, Yahweh, helps them to not only defeat but also exterminate the shepherding cultures that occupy their “Promised Land.” As in later holy wars, like the modern rise of ISIS, divine sanction let them kill the elderly and children, burn orchards, and take virgin females as sexual slaves—all while retaining a sense of moral superiority.
Blasphemy – Blasphemy is the notion that some ideas are inviolable, off limits to criticism, satire, debate, or even question. By definition, criticism of these ideas is an outrage, and it is precisely this emotion–outrage–that the crime of blasphemy evokes in believers. The Bible prescribes death [ http://valerietarico.com/2009/04/23/if-the-bible-were-law-would-you-qualify-for-the-death-penalty/ ] for blasphemers; the Quran does not [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/14/opinion/islams-problem-with-blasphemy.html ], but death-to-blasphemers became part of Shariah during medieval times.
The idea that blasphemy must be prevented or avenged has caused millions of murders over the centuries and countless other horrors. As I write, blogger Raif Badawi [ http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/flogging-raif-badawi-saudi-arabia-vicious-act-cruelty-2015-01-09 ] awaits round after round of flogging in Saudi Arabia—1000 lashes in batches of 50—while his wife and children plead from Canada for the international community to do something.
Glorified suffering – Picture secret societies of monks flogging their own backs. The image that comes to mind is probably from Dan Brown’s novel, The Da Vinci Code, but the idea isn’t one he made up. A core premise of Christianity is that righteous torture [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/12/30/who-when-why-10-times-the-bible-says-torture-is-ok/ ]—if it’s just intense and prolonged enough–can somehow fix the damage done by evil, sinful behavior. Millions of crucifixes litter the world as testaments to this belief [id.]. Shia Muslims beat themselves with lashes and chains during Aashura, a form of sanctified suffering called Matam that commemorates the death of the martyr Hussein. Self-denial in the form of asceticism and fasting is a part of both Eastern and Western religions, not only because deprivation induces altered states but also because people believe suffering somehow brings us closer to divinity.
Our ancestors lived in a world in which pain came unbidden, and people had very little power to control it. An aspirin or heating pad would have been a miracle to the writers of the Bible, Quran, or Gita. Faced with uncontrollable suffering, the best advice religion could offer was to lean in or make meaning of it. The problem, of course is that glorifying suffering—turning it into a spiritual good—has made people more willing to inflict it on not only themselves and their enemies but also those who are helpless, including the ill or dying (as in the case of Mother Teresa [ http://valerietarico.com/2013/04/29/self-flagellation-and-the-kiss-of-jesus-mother-teresas-attraction-to-pain/ ] and the American Bishops [ http://valerietarico.com/2013/05/16/will-the-catholic-bishops-decide-how-you-die-2/ ]) and children (as in the child beating Patriarchy movement [ http://valerietarico.com/2013/10/21/why-bible-believers-have-such-a-hard-time-getting-child-protection-right/ ]).
Genital mutilation – Primitive people have used scarification and other body modifications to define tribal membership for as long as history records. But genital mutilation allowed our ancestors several additional perks—if you want to call them that. In Judaism, infant circumcision serves as a sign of tribal membership, but circumcision also serves to test the commitment of adult converts. In one Bible story, a chieftain agrees to convert and submit his clan to the procedure as a show of commitment to a peace treaty. (While the men lie incapacitated, the whole town is then slain by the Israelites.)
In Islam, painful male circumcision serves as a rite of passage into manhood, initiation into a powerful club. By contrast, in some Muslim cultures cutting away or burning the female clitoris and labia ritually establishes the submission of women by reducing sexual arousal and agency. An estimated 2 million [ http://www.feminist.org/global/fgm.html ] girls annually are subjected to the procedure, with consequences including hemorrhage, infection, painful urination and death.
Blood sacrifice – In the list of religion’s worst ideas, this is the only one that appears to be in its final stages. Only some Hindus (during the Festival of Gadhimai [ http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/29/world/asia/nepal-gadhimai-ritual-slaughter/index.html ]) and some Muslims (during Eid al Adha [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eid_al-Adha#Traditions_and_practices ], Feast of the Sacrifice) continue to ritually slaughter sacrificial animals on a mass scale. Hindu scriptures including the Gita and Puranas forbid ritual killing, and most Hindus now eschew the practice based on the principle of ahimsa, but it persists as a residual of folk religion.
When our ancient ancestors slit the throats on humans and animals or cut out their hearts or sent the smoke of sacrifices heavenward, many believed that they were literally feeding supernatural beings. In time, in most religions, the rationale changed—the gods didn’t need feeding so much as they needed signs of devotion and penance. The residual child sacrifice in the Hebrew Bible (yes it is there [ http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2008/05/detestable-practice-of-divinely.html ]) typically has this function. Christianity’s persistent focus on blood atonement—the notion of Jesus as the be-all-end-all lamb without blemish, the final “propitiation” for human sin—is hopefully the last iteration of humanity’s long fascination with blood sacrifice.
Hell – Whether we are talking about Christianity, Islam [ http://www.islamicinformation.net/2008/05/hell-in-islam-jahannam.html ] or Buddhism, an afterlife filled with demons, monsters, and eternal torture was the worst suffering that Iron Age minds could conceive and medieval minds could elaborate. Invented, perhaps, as a means to satisfy the human desire for justice, the concept of Hell quickly devolved into a tool for coercing behavior and belief.
Most Buddhists see hell as a metaphor, a journey into the evil inside the self, but the descriptions of torturing monsters [ http://www.khandro.net/doctrine_hells.htm ] and levels of hell can be quite explicit. Likewise, many Muslims and Christians hasten to assure that it is a real place, full of fire and the anguish of non-believers. Some Christians have gone so far as to insist that the screams of the damned can be heard from the center of the Earth or that observing their anguish from afar will be one of the pleasures of paradise.
Karma – Like hell, the concept of karma offers a selfish incentive for good behavior—it’ll come back at you later—but it has enormous costs. Chief among these is a tremendous weight of cultural passivity in the face of harm and suffering. Secondarily, the idea of karma can sanctify [ http://www.academia.edu/2147058/Retributive_Karma_and_the_Problem_of_Blaming_the_Victim ] the broad human practice of blaming the victim. If what goes around comes around, then the disabled child or cancer patient or untouchable poor (or the hungry rabbit or mangy dog) must have done something in this or a previous life to bring their position on themselves.
Eternal Life – To our weary and unwashed ancestors, the idea of gem encrusted walls, streets of gold, the fountain of youth, or an eternity of angelic chorus (or sex with virgins) may have seemed like sheer bliss. But it doesn’t take much analysis to realize how quickly eternal paradise would become hellish [ http://valerietarico.com/2015/01/29/10-reasons-popular-versions-of-christian-heaven-would-be-hell/ ]—an endless repetition of never changing groundhog days (because how could they change if they were perfect).
The real reason that the notion of eternal life is such a bad invention, though, is the degree to which it diminishes and degrades existence on this earthly plane. With eyes lifted heavenward, we can’t see the intricate beauty beneath our feet. Devout believers put their spiritual energy into preparing for a world to come rather than cherishing and stewarding the one wild and precious world we have been given.
Male Ownership of Female Fertility – The notion of women as brood mares or children as assets likely didn’t originate with religion, but the idea that women were created for this purpose [ http://valerietarico.com/2012/03/09/15-bible-texts-reveal-why-gods-own-party-is-at-war-with-women/ ], that if a woman should die of childbearing “she was made to do it [ http://valerietarico.com/2013/07/01/mysogynistquoteschurchfathers/ ],” most certainly did. Traditional religions variously assert that men have a god-ordained right to give women in marriage, take them in war, exclude them from heaven, and kill them if the origins of their offspring can’t be assured. Hence Catholicism’s maniacal obsession [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/12/14/the-slut-shaming-sex-negative-message-in-the-christmas-story-its-worth-a-family-conversation/ ] with the virginity of Mary and female martyrs. Hence Islam’s maniacal obsession with covering the female body. Hence Evangelical promise rings, and gender segregated sidewalks in Jerusalem and orthodox Jewish women wearing wigs over shaved heads in New York.
As we approach the limits of our planetary life support system and stare dystopia in the face, defining women as breeders and children as assets becomes even more costly. We now know that resource scarcity is a conflict trigger and that demand for water and arable land is growing even as both resources decline. And yet, a pope who claims to care about the desperate poor lectures them against contraception [ http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2015/01/16/377686009/pope-on-visit-to-philippines-defends-catholic-ban-on-contraception ] while Muslim leaders ban vasectomies [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/08/12/iran-bans-vasectomies-wants-more-babies/ ] in a drive to outbreed their enemies.
Bibliolatry (aka Book Worship) – Preliterate people handed down their best guesses about gods and goodness by way of oral tradition, and they made objects of stone and wood, idols, to channel their devotion. Their notions of what was good and what was Real and how to live in moral community with each other were free to evolve as culture and technology changed. But the advent of the written word changed that. As our Iron Age ancestors recorded and compiled their ideas into sacred texts, these texts allowed their understanding of gods and goodness to become static. The sacred texts of Judaism, Christianity and Islam forbid idol worship, but over time the texts themselves became idols, and many modern believers practice—essentially—book worship, also known as bibliolatry.
“Because the faith of Islam is perfect, it does not allow for any innovations to the religion,” says one young Muslim explaining [ https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110530022221AAL5MMj ] his faith online. His statement betrays a naïve lack of information about the origins and evolution of his own dogmas. But more broadly, it sums up the challenge all religions face moving forward. Imagine if a physicist said, “Because our understanding of physics is perfect, it does not allow for any innovations to the field.”
Adherents who think their faith is perfect, are not just naïve or ill informed. They are developmentally arrested, and in the case of the world’s major religions, they are anchored to the Iron Age, a time of violence [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/10/24/bible-vs-quran-test-your-knowledge-of-who-deserves-death-in-which-religion/ ], slavery, desperation and early death.
Ironically, the mindset that our sacred texts are perfect betrays the very quest that drove our ancestors to write those texts. Each of the men who wrote part of the Bible, Quran, or Gita took his received tradition, revised it, and offered his own best articulation of what is good and real. We can honor the quest of our spiritual ancestors, or we can honor their answers, but we cannot do both.
Religious apologists often try to deny, minimize, or explain away the sins of scripture and the evils of religious history. “It wasn’t really slavery.” “That’s just the Old Testament.” “He didn’t mean it that way.” “You have to understand how bad their enemies were.” “Those people who did harm in the name of God weren’t real [Christians/Jews/Muslims].” Such platitudes may offer comfort, but denying problems doesn’t solve them. Quite the opposite, in fact. Change comes with introspection and insight, a willingness to acknowledge our faults and flaws while still embracing our strengths and potential for growth.
In a world that is teeming with humanity, armed with pipe bombs and machine guns and nuclear weapons and drones, we don’t need defenders of religion’s status quo—we need real reformation, as radical as that of the 16th Century and much, much broader. It is only by acknowledging religion’s worst ideas that we have any hope of embracing the best.
Copyright 2015 Valerie Tarico
http://valerietarico.com/2015/01/20/religions-dirty-dozen-12-really-bad-religious-ideas-that-have-made-the-world-worse/ [with comments] [also at http://www.alternet.org/belief/12-worst-ideas-religion-has-unleashed-world (with comments)] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=34991291 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110494613 and preceding and following]
===
Was Obama right about the Crusades and Islamic extremism? (ANALYSIS)
“Entr?e des crois?s ? Constantinople,” by Eugene Delacroix, circa 1885-1889, depicts the Crusaders entering Constantinople.
Photo courtesy New York Public Library.
An undated illustration shows the taking of the Greek city of Edessa in 1097 during the First Crusade.
Photo courtesy of The History Channel/Bettmann/Corbis.
Jay Michaelson
February 6, 2015
NEW YORK (RNS) The conservative Twitterverse is all riled up [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-speech-at-prayer-breakfast-called-offensive-to-christians/2015/02/05/6a15a240-ad50-11e4-ad71-7b9eba0f87d6_story.html ] because at Thursday’s (Feb. 5) National Prayer Breakfast (an event founded and run by the secretive Christian organization known as The Fellowship [ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/25/the-1-billion-a-year-right-wing-conspiracy-you-haven-t-heard-of.html ]), President Obama said that Christians, as well as Muslims, have at times committed atrocities. His words:
“Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”
This would seem to be Religious History 101, but it was nonetheless met with shock and awe.
“Hey, American Christians–Obama just threw you under the bus in order to defend Islam,” wrote shock jock Michael Graham. Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., called the comments “dangerously irresponsible.” The Catholic League’s Bill Donohue said [above]: “Obama’s ignorance is astounding and his comparison is pernicious. The Crusades were a defensive Christian reaction against Muslim madmen of the Middle Ages.”
More thoughtfully, Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, called Obama’s comments about Christianity “an unfortunate attempt at a wrongheaded moral comparison. … The evil actions that he mentioned were clearly outside the moral parameters of Christianity itself and were met with overwhelming moral opposition from Christians.”
Really?
1. The Crusades
The Crusades lasted almost 200 years, from 1095 to 1291. The initial spark came from Pope Urban II, who urged Christians to recapture the Holy Land (and especially the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem) from Muslim rule. Like the promise of eternal life given to Muslim martyrs, Crusaders were promised absolution from sin and eternal glory.
Militarily, the Crusades were at first successful, capturing Jerusalem in 1099, but eventually a disaster; Jersualem fell in 1187. Successive Crusades set far more modest goals, but eventually failed to achieve even them. The last Crusader-ruled city in the Holy Land, Acre, fell in 1291.
Along the way, the Crusaders massacred. To take but one example, the Rhineland Massacres of 1096 are remembered to this day as some of the most horrific examples of anti-Semitic violence prior to the Holocaust. (Why go to the Holy Land to fight nonbelievers, many wondered, when they live right among us?) The Jewish communities of Cologne, Speyer, Worms, and Mainz were decimated. There were more than 5,000 victims [ http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/crusades.html ].
And that was only one example. Tens of thousands of people (both soldiers and civilians) were killed in the conquest of Jerusalem. The Crusaders themselves suffered; historians estimate that only one in 20 survived to even reach the Holy Land. It is estimated that 1.7 million people died in total.
And this is all at a time in which the world population was approximately 300 million — less than 5 percent its current total. Muslim extremists would have to kill 34 million people (Muslim and non-Muslim alike) to equal that death toll today. As horrific as the Islamic State’s brutal reign of terror has been, its death toll is estimated at around 20,000.
2. The Inquisition
While most of us regard “The Inquisition” as a particular event, it actually refers to a set of institutions within the Roman Catholic Church that operated from the mid-13th century until the 19th century. One actually still survives, now known as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which was directed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger before his 2005 election as Pope Benedict XVI.
These institutions were charged with prosecuting heresy — and prosecute they did, executing and torturing thousands of suspected witches, converts from Judaism (many of whom had been forced to convert), Protestants, and all manner of suspected heretics, particularly in the 15th and 16th centuries. Historians estimate that 150,000 people were put on trial by the Inquisition, with 3,000 executed.
Arguably, the Islamic State’s methods of execution — including crucifixion, beheading, and, most recently, burning a prisoner alive — are as gruesome as the Inquistion’s, with its infamous hangings and burnings at the stake. ISIS is also committing systematic rape, which the Inquisition did not, and enslaving children.
As for torture, however, it’s hard to do worse than the Inquisition, which used torture as a method of extracting confessions. Methods included starvation, burning victims’ bodies with hot coals, forced overconsumption of water, hanging by straps, thumbscrews, metal pincers, and of course, the rack. Believe it or not, all of this was meant to be for the victim’s own good: better to confess heresy in this life, even under duress, than to be punished for it in the next.
Contrary to Moore’s statement, the Inquisition was not “outside the moral parameters of Christianity itself and … met with overwhelming moral opposition from Christians.” Though Moore may distinguish between ‘Christianity’ and the Roman Catholic Church, for all intents and purposes the Roman Catholic Church WAS Christianity at the time, or at least claimed to be.
3. Slavery and Jim Crow
“Slaves, obey your masters,” the New Testament says — three times. And indeed, Christian teaching was cited on both sides of the slavery debate, with both slaveholders and abolitionists using it [ http://www.pbs.org/wnet/slavery/experience/religion/history2.html ] to justify their actions. Segregationists also looked to the “Curse of Ham,” from the story of Noah [ https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Genesis%209:25 ], and the notion that God had separated the races on different continents. The effects were world-historic in scope: Nearly 12 million people were forced on the “Middle Passage” from Africa to the Americas [ http://bernard.pitzer.edu/~hfairchi/pdf/Blacks/MiddlePassage.pdf ].
More recently, though the vast majority of Christians abhor it, the Ku Klux Klan, to the present day, still insists that it is a “Christian organization.” There’s a reason the Klan burned crosses alongside its lynchings and acts of arson, after all.
Of course, there was also organized Christian opposition to slavery and to Jim Crow, and Christianity is at least as much the property of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., as of the segregationists and slaveholders of the Old South. But this was precisely Obama’s point: All religions have their hateful extremists, and their prophets of justice.
What about popularity? Do more Muslims support the Islamic State today than Christians supported Jim Crow in the past? No. At the height of the KKK’s popularity in the 1920s, approximately 15 percent of white male Americans were members [ http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/flood-klan/ ]. That number is eerily similar to the 12 percent of Muslims worldwide who support terrorism today [ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/10/how-to-measure-what-muslims-really-believe.html ].
In other words, not only is Obama factually correct that Christian extremism across history has been at least as bloody as Muslim extremism today, it is also factually true that such extremisms have been equally popular. True, as Rush Limbaugh points out [ http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/02/05/why_our_president_chose_to_insult_christianity_and_excuse_militant_islam_at_the_national_prayer_breakfast ], the Crusades were “a thousand years ago,” the Inquisition ended 200 years ago, and Jim Crow legally ended in the 1960s. But the president specifically noted that “humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history.”
Which is the real point. There are two narratives about radical Islamists, and indeed about enemies of any sort, that coexist in American culture. According to one, they are different from us — Muslims, Palestinians, Israelis, Communists, you name it. Thus, in the battle against Islamic extremism, Islam is, in part at least, the enemy.
The other narrative is that all peoples, all creeds, all nations contain elements of moderation and extremism. Thankfully, racist Christian extremists are today a tiny ["tiny"? - bullshit] minority within American Christianity. But only 100 years ago, they were as popular among American Christians as the Islamic State is among Muslims today. Thus, in the battle against Islamic extremism, it is extremism that is the enemy.
Hysterical commentary [ http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/02/05/president-obama-says-christians-are-just-like-isis-and-burning-people-alive-is-just-like-jim-crow/ ] notwithstanding, no one is suggesting that Christians are just like the Islamic State. But Obama did suggest that Christianity is like Islam; both faiths have the capacity to be exploited by extremists.
Christians should not be insulted by the facts of history. Rather, all of us should be inspired by them to recognize the dangers of extremism — wherever they lie.
© 2015 Religion News LLC
http://www.religionnews.com/2015/02/06/obama-right-crusades-islamic-extremism-analysis/ [with comments] [also at http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/was-obama-right-about-the-crusades-and-islamic-extremism-analysis/2015/02/06/3670628a-ae46-11e4-8876-460b1144cbc1_story.html (with comments)] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=39423407 and preceding and following]
--
Obama Was Right to Compare Christianity's Violent Past to the Islamic State
By Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig
February 6, 2015
Conservative critics are in hysterics thanks to a few short remarks made by President Barack Obama on the subject of Christian history during Thursday’s National Prayer Breakfast. Addressing religiously motivated conflict abroad, Obama said [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-speech-at-prayer-breakfast-called-offensive-to-christians/2015/02/05/6a15a240-ad50-11e4-ad71-7b9eba0f87d6_story.html ], “Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”
Naturally, conservatives were displeased with the suggestion that Christianity might be in some sense comparable to contemporary religious terrorism. At RedState, a contributor adduced Obama’s comments as further evidence of the president’s alleged fondness [ http://www.redstate.com/2015/02/05/obama-uses-national-prayer-breakfast-compare-christianity-isis/ ] for Islam, while Rush Limbaugh interpreted the remarks [ http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/02/05/why_our_president_chose_to_insult_christianity_and_excuse_militant_islam_at_the_national_prayer_breakfast ] as an insult to Christianity and a defense of radical Islam. Former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore said [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-speech-at-prayer-breakfast-called-offensive-to-christians/2015/02/05/6a15a240-ad50-11e4-ad71-7b9eba0f87d6_story.html ], “The president’s comments this morning at the prayer breakfast are the most offensive I’ve ever heard a president make in my lifetime,” adding that Obama "has offended every believing Christian in the United States. This goes further to the point that Mr. Obama does not believe in America or the values we all share.”
Critics who viewed Obama’s speech as a bold defense of Islam seem to have missed the segment wherein he labeled the Islamic State a “vicious death cult [id.],” and offered its horrific acts of terrorism as evidence of the evil that can be done in the name of (admittedly distorted) faith. The example of past Christian atrocities was given only to counterbalance the reproach aimed at religiously motivated violence committed outside the Christian world; it was not a stand-alone condemnation, and further, it did not go nearly as far as it could have.
By limiting his criticism of Christian violence to the Crusades and Inquisition, Obama kept his critique of Christian horrors to centuries past. But one need not look back so far to find more recent Christians behaving terribly in the name of Christ. The atrocities of the Bosnian War, including the systematic rape [ http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/bosnia-war-crimes-the-rapes-went-on-day-and-night-robert-fisk-in-mostar-gathers-detailed-evidence-of-the-systematic-sexual-assaults-on-muslim-women-by-serbian-white-eagle-gunmen-1471656.html ] of women and girls, was perpetrated largely by Christians against Muslims; meanwhile, many of the Christian churches of Rwanda were intimately involved in the politicking that produced the genocide of 1994, with some clergy even reported to have participated in the violence [ http://faculty.vassar.edu/tilongma/Church&Genocide.html ].
The degree to which, in retrospect, we are willing to condemn violent perversions of faith often has to do with their proximity to us. Most will now admit, however grudgingly, that the Crusades and Inquisition were efforts to carry out some construal of God’s will, however mistaken and otherwise motivated. With more recent conflicts, such as Bosnia and Rwanda, we are more apt to see Christianity as a single thread in a web of ethnic and political tensions that was ultimately only one cause among the many that ultimately culminated in brutality. And this analysis is probably right.
But it is also probably true of the terrorism perpetrated by ISIS, which has been roundly denounced as contrary to the principles of Islam by a host of Muslim leaders and clerics, most recently [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/05/world/middleeast/arab-world-unites-in-anger-after-burning-of-jordanian-pilot.html ] after the murder of Jordanian pilot Moaz al-Kasasbeh. Like war crimes and individual acts of brutality committed within the Christian world, the pattern of tensions that has produced ISIS, in all its unthinkable cruelty, seems to be broader and deeper than its self-proclaimed religious convictions. For those not searching for a source of personal offense, this is the only point Obama’s remarks on the religious violence enacted by Christians really conveys.
And it is, at last, a hopeful point: If we in the Christian world are capable of owning the monstrosities of our past, identifying their sources as multivalent and contrary to our faith, and holding one another accountable for the behavior we exhibit moving forward, then so are the members of the faiths we live alongside in the world. But accountability requires honesty, and pretending that Christians have never attributed violence to the cause of Christ is a disservice to modern peacemaking and to the victims of the past. Obama was right to take a clear-eyed view of the years that have come before, and to look hopefully to what we can do together as a multi-faith nation in the years to come.
Copyright 2015 © The New Republic
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120993/obama-national-prayer-breakfast-compares-christian-violence-isis [with comments]
--
Conservatives Have Stooped to Defending the Horrific Crusades
By Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig
February 9, 2015
After President Barack Obama noted during last week's National Prayer Breakfast that Christians have committed acts of violence [ http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120993/obama-national-prayer-breakfast-compares-christian-violence-isis (just above)] in the name of Christianity, there are a lot of directions conservatives could have gone. The sanest direction would have been to accept that Christians have done terrible things under the banner of faith—even religions we find familiar and comforting can be contorted under the right conditions. This was undoubtedly the point the president was attempting to make, in an effort to maintain some semblance of fairness as he addressed the problem of Islamic terrorism.
Instead, conservatives tried [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/07/us/obama-trying-to-add-context-to-speech-faces-backlash-over-crusades.html ] to defend the Crusades [ http://www.christiantoday.com/article/obama.the.crusades.and.the.inquisition.why.the.presidents.right.and.his.critics.are.wrong/47653.htm ]; or rather, to defend the symbol the Crusades have become as they have been imported into the American cultural lexicon. At National Review Online [ http://www.nationalreview.com/article/398030/horse-pucky-obama-jonah-goldberg ], a popular conservative blogging platform, Jonah Goldberg argued that the Crusades were essentially justified in the context of what he identifies as Muslim aggression. “For starters,” Goldberg writes, “the Crusades—despite their terrible organized cruelties—were a defensive war.” Note that the plural “Crusades” transforms by the end of the sentence into the singular “a … war”: Goldberg was closer to the mark at the start of the sentence than at the end, as there were multiple Crusades [ http://www.ducksters.com/history/middle_ages_crusades.php ], and each of them were distinct affairs. Some, for example, were initiated by the papacy; others were initiated by kings against the wishes of the Church, and some, like the Children's Crusade, now appear to be at least somewhat mythological [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_Crusade ].
More slippery is the tantalizingly italicized word “defensive,” which conservatives also periodically apply to the Civil War [ http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/05/03/1958961/incoming-nra-president-calls-civil-war-the-war-of-northern-aggression/ ] with similar intentions of historical whitewashing. As David Perry points out at The Guardian, a host of other conservative defenses of the Crusades have accompanied [ http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/07/conservatives-rewrite-history-crusades-modern-political-ends ] Goldberg’s: from spirited justifications to softer arguments. Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal’s claim [ http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/07/liberals-still-trying-to-save-obama-from-crusades-idiocy-after-jindal-slapdown/ ], for instance, was that the Crusades happened so long ago as to be irrelevant in all modern contexts, and that the time spent discussing them in Obama's speech could have been put to better use combatting ISIS.
One could interpret these bizarre defenses as evidence that, for a certain brand of Christian, the fact that Christians can and do pervert religion in the service of evil deeds is literally unbelievable. But this would seem a remarkable stretch, given that even Judas Iscariot [ http://www.ashgate.com/isbn/9780754652847 ] has a place in the Christian economy of salvation. In other words, Christians can usually fathom, when thinking rationally, the idea that terrible things are a part of our collective history.
Perhaps conservatives merely found the criticisms of the Crusades cynical, given that their historical distance makes any genuinely felt implication on the president’s behalf unlikely [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/opinion/sunday/ross-douthat-obama-the-theologian.html ]. In this case, the defense of the Crusades reads as a reflexive measure, meant to press Obama into more compromising territory, where he might have the courage to remark on a Christian atrocity he himself feels guilty about. Yet it seems unlikely to me that offering examples of more recent Christian evils—such as racism and slavery [ http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/the-foolish-historically-illiterate-incredible-response-to-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech/385246/ (below)], the conquest of the Americas, the Bosnian War, or complicity in the Rwandan Genocide—would have won Obama any points for sincerity. Each would most likely be respectively dismissed as race baiting, as anti-American, as arguably legitimate, and as irrelevant.
It’s likeliest that the conservative defense of the Crusades is directly related to their status as a touchstone of American civic religion. Pope Francis was to be accused of crusading [ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/19/on-isis-pope-francis-is-no-crusader.html ] after he nodded to the use of limited force in restraining ISIS; a look back at Ridley Scott’s 2005 Crusade epic Kingdom of Heaven [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Heaven_%28film%29 ] reveals that the film sparked a very similar debate [ http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/summer_movies/2006/06/boringus_maximus.html ] to the one we’re having now [ http://www.creationworldview.org/articles_view.asp?id=21 ], though that one was somewhat less heated.
When the Crusades are represented in American culture now, they are a symbol of Christian gusto, whether positive or negative. They resonate with the idea of a robust, aggressive Christianity, a faith with the masculine energy to face Islam head-on. This is why the Crusades occupy a special place in the conservative id, and it is why conservatives appear willing to defend them on general principle, with little regard for historicity. It is also why criticizing the Crusades is presented by some conservatives [ http://gov.louisiana.gov/index.cfm?md=newsroom&tmp=detail&articleID=4835 ] as an alternative to fighting ISIS, as though if Obama had simply omitted that remark from his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, the Islamic terror group would now be vanquished.
Of course, no remark made at that breakfast, or any other breakfast, will be sufficient to undo the brutality ISIS has already inflicted upon innocent people. Nor will feverish dreaming about a mythological Christian military history rooted in contemporary American appropriations of the past advance that goal. Obama’s remark was meant to cool interfaith hostilities by pointing out no religion has perfect adherents; his political opponents have instead decided to double down on the misuse of Christian sentiment the president intended to point out, which, if nothing else, is proof of the worthiness of his remark.
Copyright 2015 © The New Republic (emphasis in original)
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121008/obamas-crusades-remark-generates-conservative-backlash [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=22198799 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=70066579 and http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=70067730 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=90461361 and preceding and following]
--
‘The Crusades Were Great, Actually!’
Hulton Archive/Getty
The right-wing hysteria following President Obama’s remarks has revealed a shocking belief held by many Christian conservatives: that the Crusades weren’t really so bad.
Jay Michaelson
02.10.15
When I was growing up as a Nice Jewish Boy in day school, we were taught that the Crusades were one of the worst episodes in history: marauding Christian soldiers massacring everyone in sight. Especially Jews.
Most historians tend to agree that the Crusades were a dark chapter in Christian history, with extraordinary violence carried out in Christ’s name, and with Christian doctrine often a mere excuse for murder and pillage. This, no doubt, is why President Obama mentioned the Crusades as an example of heinous religious violence last week [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/was-obama-right-about-the-crusades-and-islamic-extremism-analysis/2015/02/06/3670628a-ae46-11e4-8876-460b1144cbc1_story.html ].
It would seem to be an uncontroversial claim. Historians estimate that between one and three million people died in the Crusades (including the Crusaders), at a time when the world’s population was 300 million. That’s right—up to 1 percent of the entire world population perished in the paroxysms of violence between 1095 and 1291. The equivalent of sixty million people today.
The right-wingnut controversy following Obama’s remarks, however, has laid bare a troubling trend among conservative Christians (and the politicians eager to pander to them): They are now in the business of justifying the Crusades.
You read that right. The point being made is not that Obama is wrong to compare ISIS to the Crusades because the Crusades happened long ago (this was Bobby Jindal’s cute, misleading quip), or because the historical context is different. It’s that Obama is wrong to compare ISIS to the Crusades because the Crusades were actually a good thing.
Perhaps the leading theme in this literature is that “The Crusades—despite their terrible organized cruelties—were a defensive war.” This was thusly emphasized [ http://www.nationalreview.com/article/398030/horse-pucky-obama-jonah-goldberg ] by Jonah Goldberg in the National Review. (Goldberg proceeded to quote Bernard Lewis, “the greatest living English-language historian of Islam,” apparently unaware that he is the primary target of Edward Said’s book Orientalism [ http://www.amazon.com/Orientalism-Edward-W-Said/dp/039474067X ] and has been shown, time and again, to have anti-Muslim bias.)
Ross Douthat, writing in the New York Times (which presumably continues to give him a platform in order to show that religious dogma can cloud even an intelligent mind), described [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/opinion/sunday/ross-douthat-obama-the-theologian.html ] the Crusades as an “incredibly complicated multicentury story.”
And these are the smart conservatives. Here [ http://www.goupstate.com/article/20110223/ARTICLES/102231013/1083/ARTICLES ]’s Rick Santorum:
The idea that the Crusades and the fight of Christendom against Islam is somehow an aggression on our part is absolutely anti-historical. And that is what the perception is by the American left who hates Christendom. They hate Christendom. They hate Western civilization at the core. That’s the problem.
“Somehow an aggression on our part.” The Crusades were really just defense.
Behind this sort of posturing is a bookshelf of revisionist history, most of it written by apologetic Christians—“apologetic” in the sense of an apologia, a defense, not an apology for past misdeeds. For example [ http://modernmedieval.blogspot.com/2007/06/problematic-crusades.html ], apologist Marco Meschini, a professor at a Catholic university in Milan, has written that crusades are defensive while jihad is offensive.
One of the leading debunkers of the biased misuse of history is Professor Matthew Gabriele of Virginia Tech [ http://www.rc.vt.edu/about-us/people/faculty/matthew-gabriele.html ], who has taught and published widely on the Crusades. On his blog [ http://modernmedieval.blogspot.com/2011/02/rick-santorums-crusade-nostalgia.html ], he said simply, “I call bullshit.”
In fact, as Gabriele writes [ http://modernmedieval.blogspot.com/2008/12/revisiting-crusades-with-or-without.html ], various Muslim sects had controlled Jerusalem since 732 , yet it took the Christian forces 350 years to “respond.” And only the first of eight crusades was dedicated to retaking Christian shrines; subsequent adventures in Egypt, Tunisia, and modern-day Syria and Turkey were not so motivated.
In any case, is it sensible to take the Church leadership’s rhetoric at face value? Sure, the Crusades may have been justified by religious objectives. But scholars have observed for centuries that they were at least equally motivated by the Church’s centralization of temporal power, the authority of monarchs [ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/12976/Albigensian-Crusade ] friendly to the Church, and the accretion of wealth.
Another leading theme is that violence is central to Islam, but peripheral to Christianity. Here’s Meschini again [ http://modernmedieval.blogspot.com/2007/06/problematic-crusades.html ]: “Jihad is the sixth pillar of Islam… On the contrary, there is no sacred Christian text that speaks of war in a similar way.” In response, Gabriele cited “the biblical books of Joshua, Judges, Kings, Maccabees” as well as “Augustine, Eusebius, the Pseudo-Methodius, the Tiburtine Sibyl, Adso of Montier-en-Der.”
Oh, and note that there are only five pillars of Islam, none of which is jihad. Meschini just made the “sixth pillar” stuff up.
Similarly, Notre Dame scholar Steve Weidenkopf, in a “a crash course in the Crusades [ http://www.crisismagazine.com/2012/crash-course-on-the-crusades ]” in the Catholic magazine Crisis, wrote it is a “myth” that Crusaders slaughtered all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, but in the same post, then says that it was “standard practice” to do so and “both Christians and Muslims followed this policy.”
So, they didn’t do it, but if they did, everyone did it anyway. Following the classic “No True Scotsman” fallacy, Weidenkopf then says that the Crusaders who massacred Jews—5,000 in the Rhineland massacres alone—were “brigands” and “cannot accurately be called Crusaders.”
In fact, the Crusaders massacred, massacred, and massacred some more. They massacred Jews in the Rhineland, Albigensian heretics [ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/12976/Albigensian-Crusade ] in Spain, Muslims in the Holy Land. Sometimes (as in the Rhineland) the massacres were condemned by religious authorities; other times (as in Spain) it was actively encouraged.
And then there’s the selective appropriation of Crusade historiography. Interestingly, the multiply-knighted Cambridge historian Jonathan Riley-Smith has written several revisionist books on the Crusades which are selectively quoted by conservatives. Reacting against the materialist account of the Crusades—that they were economic enterprises, motivated by early colonialism—Riley-Smith has maintained [ http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features2009/jrsmith_crusadespref_jun09.asp ] that they were religious in nature. But he also pointed out that the Crusades were not just against Muslims, and not simply reactive. And Riley-Smith’s point that the Crusades were religious enterprises actually cuts against contemporary voices who try to distance them from Christianity.
These points are omitted in popular conservative appropriations [ http://www.firstthings.com/article/2009/06/inventing-the-crusades ] of Riley-Smith, which basically take the good and leave the bad.
To be sure, radical Islamists have their own distortions of the Crusades. ISIS calls all American and European soldiers “Crusaders.” Sayyid Qutb’s iteration of “Crusaderism” (sulubiyya) is foundational to radical Islamism. Contrary to conservative rhetoric [id.], however, no one in the West is really arguing that Muslims are justified in taking revenge on the Crusaders, or that radical Islamism is a reasonable reaction to the events of a millennium ago. That’s not the point.
The point is that whitewashing of one of the most bloody periods in world history is troubling on many levels. First, it is a radical failure to ‘own’ one’s own troubling history—like the same conservatives’ claims that slavery wasn’t really so bad [ http://www.economist.com/news/books/21615864-how-slaves-built-american-capitalism-blood-cotton ] and that the Inquisition, too, was sort of a good idea. It brings to mind Santayana’s overused quote that those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it. But it’s even worse than that: This sort of revisionism tries to cover up the past and pretend it never happened.
Second, what’s the lesson here? That if Muslims attack Christians, a massive war effort that kills 1% of the world population and massacres innocents is an appropriate response? That Christians are just better people than Muslims, a la the “Clash of Civilizations?” That Christian power is the only kind of power that can’t ever be abused? None of these conclusions is defensible, or even morally tolerable.
Douthat, in his Times column, said that it’s “Niebuhrian” (as in the liberal theologian Reinhold Niebuhr) to recognize that we all have our flaws, that no civilization (and no individual) is perfect. Strange, I thought that was just Christian. But I know for sure that it’s wise.
© 2015 The Daily Beast Company LLC (emphasis in original)
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/10/the-crusades-were-great-actually.html [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=15789063 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=34514807 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=106000450 and preceding (and any future following)]
--
Why Christians can’t ignore the mote in their eye (COMMENTARY)
U.S. President Barack Obama speaks at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington on Thursday (February 5, 2015).
Photo courtesy of REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque.
Tom Ehrich
February 10, 2015
(RNS) Despite the fuming of a former Republican governor, President Obama didn’t offend “every believing Christian in the United States” when he noted at a national prayer breakfast that we, too, “committed terrible deeds” in the name of our religion.
I, for one, was pleased to have us called back from the “high horse” that Christian religionists often occupy when criticizing other faiths while ignoring the mote in our own eye.
In our pursuit of religious victory, we Christians have at times been a scourge on civilization. We have slaughtered many, and not just centuries ago in a safe and distant past but still today.
We have served as apologists for slavery, apartheid, racial segregation, white terrorism of blacks in the South, suppression of labor, and repression of the poor and immigrant. Some of our misguided brethren are declaring war now on women and on gays, as if God’s promise to love all of humanity needed to be ignored.
We have winked at our own scandals while presuming to judge our neighbors for their flaws. We have sought special favors — such as tax exemption — and used the benefits to serve ourselves. With the world around us descending into violence and intolerance, we bicker about doctrine and property ownership.
Our hands are stained. Plain and simple.
That doesn’t excuse the horrific violence being meted out now by the Islamic State or by Boko Haram, both in the name of their religion. Violence is violence, terrorism is terrorism, and religion-justified cruelty is wrong, no matter whose holy book is being waved.
Christianity won’t truly serve humanity, however, until we get honest about the ways we have done wrong and proclaim our belief that God can use even us for good. Our message should be: “We did wrong, God forgave us, and now, day by day, we try to get it right.”
That is a Gospel promise that all of humanity needs to hear. When we deny any culpability, we merely perpetuate ignorance and hubris in our own ranks and make ourselves seem dishonest and dangerous in the eyes of the world.
When we claim always to have been right because our ecclesiastical ancestor Peter once was handed the keys to God’s kingdom, we become a monster. We turn sin into the other guy’s problem and set ourselves as judges, not neighbors.
Rather than pounce on the president for knowing his history, we should be grateful for his call to honesty.
Some of the knee-jerk denunciations that followed Obama’s remarks were the usual partisan piffle that has paralyzed national and local politics. But some came from preachers who should know better. We don’t have to be medieval historians to see Christians behaving like Islamic extremists.
Yes, the Crusades and Inquisition are in our past. But until the recent papacy of Francis, the Roman Catholic Church routinely sided with repressive regimes in Latin America. Russian Orthodox hierarchs align with Vladimir Putin’s brutal kleptocracy. In the tense standoff between Islam and Christianity in sub-Saharan Africa, whichever side gets the upper hand tends to victimize the other.
I won’t presume to speak for Islam. But we Christians can find nothing in our Scripture or better natures that would justify our brutish behavior. We should be a force for good. But that won’t happen until we acknowledge our capacity for evil.
(Tom Ehrich is a writer, church consultant and Episcopal priest based in New York. He is the president of Morning Walk Media and publisher of Fresh Day online magazine. His website is http://www.morningwalkmedia.com/ . Follow Tom on Twitter https://twitter.com/tomehrich .)
© 2015 Religion News LLC
http://www.religionnews.com/2015/02/10/christians-cant-ignore-mote-eye-commentary/ [with comments]
--
The echoes of Abraham Lincoln in President Obama’s Prayer Breakfast speech (COMMENTARY)
(Left) U.S. President Barack Obama speaks at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington on Thursday (February 5, 2015).
Photo courtesy of REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque.
(Right) Abraham Lincoln portrait.
Photo courtesy of Everett Historical via Shutterstock.
John Fea
February 11, 2015
MECHANICSBURG, Pa. (RNS) President Obama’s political opponents are outraged over his remarks at last week’s National Prayer Breakfast comparing Islamic violence to historic Christian violence. Jim Gilmore, former chairman of the Republican National Committee, called the remarks “the most offensive I’ve ever heard a president make in my lifetime.”
But anyone who is angry with Obama’s speech must also express the same wrath toward one of the greatest presidential speeches in American history, Abraham Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address [ http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres32.html ], delivered 150 years ago next month.
Obama used his annual remarks at the National Prayer breakfast to condemn radical Islam (though he didn’t use the term). In the process, he made some more general comments about how religion has been used — both today and in the past — to promote violence.
What has rankled many conservatives is Obama’s statement that “during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.” He then brought his historical analogy closer to home: “In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”
Obama’s remarks about the historic links between Christianity and violence are accurate. (To be fair, he also referenced the ways that religion has been a positive force in the world.) But those who focus too much on this part of the speech miss the entire point. In fact, they are part of the very problem that Obama has diagnosed.
This is a speech rooted in Christian teaching about love, humility and compassion. I would expect nothing less from a follower of Jesus. Obama appeals to the mystery of God and, without specifically saying it, asks us to remove the speck from our own eye before we set out to remove the log from our neighbor’s eye.
In fact, no president has made such an appeal to humility and mystery since Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address.
It is a great speech, a moving speech, a Christian speech, an American speech. Obama’s remarks about how history reminds us of our sinful condition should please any Calvinist. His defense of religious freedom should please any Baptist, a tradition with a rich history of defending the separation of church and state.
Is radical Islam a threat? Of course. Must it be stopped? Yes. Does Obama want to stop it? I believe that he does. But his approach to dealing with this threat is measured by the teachings of Jesus.
When Obama tells Americans to get off their “high horses” and realize that sin has been present throughout human history, even American history, he echoes Lincoln’s words on that rainy morning on March 4, 1865.
Lincoln knew that the Confederates had killed tens of thousands of Union men and women over the course of his first term as president. Lincoln wanted the Confederacy punished for this. So did nearly every Protestant clergyman in the North. Some of them, like the popular Henry Ward Beecher, wanted God to cast the Confederates straight into the pit of hell.
Even many members of Lincoln’s own Republican Party thought the South needed to pay dearly for seceding from the Union and starting the Civil War. They became known as “Radical Republicans” and, like the Northern ministers, they were confident that they knew God’s will on the matter of the post-Civil War settlement.
But Lincoln was not so sure.
Both the North and South, he said, “read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes.”
Lincoln wanted the period of Reconstruction to be defined by “malice toward none” and “charity for all.” His Second Inaugural Address drew heavily from Jesus’ teachings in the Sermon on the Mount. Lincoln never claimed to be an orthodox Christian, but he certainly understood the spirit of Christianity.
Lincoln also turned to American history to remind his audience that both North and South were responsible for slavery, or “the bondsman’s 250 years of unrequited toil.” He wanted the people of the North to recall their past sins before they began to cast judgment on the South.
Obama, by reminding Americans about the Crusades and slavery in his Prayer Breakfast speech last week, was doing something similar.
(John Fea is a historian and chair of the history department at Messiah College in Mechanicsburg, Pa. He blogs daily at http://www.philipvickersfithian.com/ .)
© 2015 Religion News LLC
http://www.religionnews.com/2015/02/11/echoes-abraham-lincoln-president-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech-commentary/ [with comments]
--
Obama was right: It’s time for Christians to reflect
U.S. President Barack Obama speaks at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington on Thursday (February 5, 2015).
Photo courtesy of REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque.
Jonathan Merritt
Feb 12, 2015
Who knew that so few words could cause so much hysteria?
During his remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast [ http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/05/remarks-president-national-prayer-breakfast ], President Obama discussed the need to oppose militant groups that misuse religion to justify oppression or violence. But then the president said this: “And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.”
That single sentence launched conservative Christians into the stratosphere. From Bill Donahue [ http://www.catholicleague.org/obama-insults-christians/ (above)] to Franklin Graham [ https://www.facebook.com/FranklinGraham/posts/859293290793520 ], it seems like everyone is taking time to criticize the comment. Some were restrained while others—like Texas preacher Robert Jeffress who said Jesus is “incensed [ http://www.christianpost.com/news/pastor-robert-jeffress-jesus-would-be-incensed-that-obama-dare-link-christianity-to-isis-133743/ ]” over the speech—bordered on silly. But most of these denunciations ignore or even twist the facts about what the president said and clearly meant.
Some Christians argued that Obama’s comment skirted past discussing the real issue: Islamist terrorism. Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins said [ https://patriotpost.us/opinion/32945 ], “The president missed an opportunity to address the growing threat that radical Islam presents to the world.” Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, spoke of Obama’s increasingly “dangerous [ http://www.albertmohler.com/2015/02/10/the-president-at-the-prayer-breakfast/ ]” refusal to acknowledge our current challenge of “resurgent Islam.”
“President Obama would not mention Islam by name,” Mohler lamented [id.], “but he did bring judgment on the Christian past, with specific reference to the Crusades.”
But the transcript shows that the president did mention [ http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/05/remarks-president-national-prayer-breakfast (above)] “Islam” by name. Twice. He also referenced “Muslims” and “ISIL.” In fact, he referred to ISIL as a “brutal, vicious death cult that, in the name of religion, carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism.” That’s not exactly sheepish.
Other Christians went even further, arguing that the president’s comments empowered terrorists. Christian apologist Ravi Zacharias, for example, accused [ http://rzim.org/blog/a-presidential-blunder-my-response-to-obamas-address-at-the-national-prayer-breakfast ] Obama of feeding “the insatiable rage of the extremists.”
Wait, so when the president proclaims that we should oppose religiously motivated violent acts—including those perpetuated by militant Islamists—it fuels terrorism? I’m confused.
And if conservative Christians are so worried about fueling the rage of Islamist extremists, then why do many of them support torture techniques that we know fuels terrorists’ resolve? And why haven’t they apologized for providing the moral support for the Iraq War—a conflict that contributed [ http://theweek.com/articles/445054/blame-obama-evangelicals-persecution-iraqi-christians ] to the conditions that give rise to ISIS and mass Christian persecution in Iraq?
The common thread among almost all of these criticisms is the claim that Obama created a moral equivalency between the Crusades and ISIL’s current campaign. As Russell Moore of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission said [ http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/tv/2015/02/06/lead-pkg-tapper-obama-isis-crusades-comparison.cnn.html ] on CNN, “It’s almost as though Franklin Roosevelt were to say, “It’s a date that shall live in infamy, but let’s remember we surprised the British at Yorktown too.”
But if you read the president’s full remarks, it is quite clear that he wasn’t drawing a moral equivalency between these two events—a fact that even Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly recognized and admitted on air. Instead, the president simply reminded the crowd of what history tells us: that almost all religions—even the Christian kind—have been and can be misused to justify violence.
Why exactly was this so inflammatory for conservative Christians? This is neither a false nor a fringe idea. After all, many [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1616142189 ] historians [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0307957047 ] and [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1442600608 ] scholars [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/161234660X ] have written [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0812223055 ] about [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0520240111 ] the similarities in religiously motivated violence throughout history—including the Crusades and Islamist terrorism. The only explanation I can reason is that they are attempts to score political points against a president they seemingly love to hate.
But these cheap shots from the president’s critics aren’t fully honest. They have attempted to brush past the brutal violence of the Crusades with a “yeah, but…” attitude, and in some cases, are even trying to justify [ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/10/the-crusades-were-great-actually.html (above)] the brutal Christian campaigns, which wiped out up to 1 percent of the global population. Of course, the issue at hand isn’t really the Crusades but an undeniable historical pattern. Warrior popes, church-sanctioned executions of “heretics,” the enslavement of Africans, world-wide colonialism, displacement of the American Indians, abortion clinic bombings, anti-Jewish pogroms, the lynching and systemic oppression of Black Americans—these are just the headliners.
As Yale Divinity School professor Miroslav Volf writes [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1575068036 ], “Beginning at least with Constantine’s conversion, the followers of the Crucified have perpetrated gruesome acts of violence under the sign of the cross.”
When I reflect on the recurrent violence throughout Christian history, I’m reminded of the words [ http://biblehub.com/matthew/7-3.htm ] of a first century Rabbi: “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?” That was Jesus, of course, and he was reminding us that when our anger burns against others, we should pause to reflect on our own evil impulses and behaviors.
Contrary to the hot air coming from so many, it is actually quite Christian to remind ourselves of our own violent history even as we confront current evils. This posture nurtures humility rather than rage and forces us to see ourselves in the eyes of our “enemies.” It stops us from chanting “kill them all” and forces us instead to whisper “There but for the grace of God go I.”
I have deep disagreements with President Obama, and I have written of them on several occasions. But at the National Prayer Breakfast, the President was right. Sadly, many Christians participated in needless hysteria that robs them of an opportunity for honesty and humility. Perhaps if Christians learned to regularly reflect on and confess the logs in our own eyes, we would be less preoccupied with rattling sabers and more concerned with proclaiming the gospel of peace.
(Jonathan Merritt is senior columnist for Religion News Service and a regular contributor to The Week [ http://theweek.com/author/jonathan-merritt ]. He has published more than 1000 articles in outlets like USA Today, The Atlantic, and National Journal. Jonathan is author of "Jesus is Better Than You Imagined [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1455527874 ]" and "A Faith of Our Own: Following Jesus Beyond the Culture Wars [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0446557234 ].")
© 2015 Religion News LLC (emphasis in original)
http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2015/02/12/obama-right-time-christians-reflect/ [with comments]
--
Obama: Sound Theology and Smart Politics
SAUL LOEB via Getty Images
By James Zogby
President, Arab American Institute [ http://www.aaiusa.org/ ]; author, 'Arab Voices' [ http://www.amazon.com/Arab-Voices-What-Saying-Matters/dp/0230120687 ]
Posted: 02/14/2015 9:32 am EST Updated: 02/14/2015 10:59 am EST
President Obama's remarks, last week, at the annual National Prayer Breakfast were theologically sound and politically smart. In spite of this, his comments set off a storm of criticism from conservative critics who took him to task for both his theology and his politics. While I cannot read their hearts, their rhetoric was so predictable and so harsh, that I suspect some were prompted by a mixture of blind ideology and anti-Muslim animus, coupled with a tinge of racism. More to the point, the President's critics are just plain wrong-- theologically and politically.
What President Obama said was so profound, it bears repeating:
...[We] see faith being twisted and distorted, used as a wedge--or, even worse, sometimes as a weapon...We see ISIL, a brutal, vicious death cult that in the name of religion, carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism...claiming the mantle of religious authority for such actions.
Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think that this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ...
So this is not unique to one group or one religion. There is a tendency in us, a sinful tendency, that can pervert and distort our faith...
...we should [therefore] start with some basic humility...Our job is not to ask that God respond to our notion of truth...[And] we have to speak up against those who would misuse His name to justify oppression, or violence, or hatred with that fierce certainty.
The President was unwavering in his condemnation of ISIL, while at the same time recognizing that at the root of their evil ideology is the sin of blind certainty, through which this group, and those like it, attempt to validate their actions by, in effect, imposing their will on God. The antidote is humility, coupled with an understanding of our own failings--lest we, too, fall into the trap of arrogant certainty.
Theologically, all of this is quite sound. But latter-day Pharisees were outraged at the President's call for humility and his acknowledgment of the times we have failed to live up to the ideals of our faith.
In response, one Republican leader termed Obama's remarks "the most offensive I've ever heard a president make in my lifetime...He has offended every believing Christian in the United States...Mr. Obama does not believe in America and the values we all share." A Southern Baptist leader termed the President's words "an unfortunate attempt at wrong-headed moral comparison" suggesting that instead of meddling in theology what the president should do is provide "a moral framework...and a clear strategy for defeating ISIS". He continued: "The evil actions he mentioned were clearly outside the moral parameter of Christianity and were met with overwhelming moral opposition from Christians".
These criticisms were but a rehash of the GOP's talking points that were used after President Obama's Cairo speech. Then, too, he was accused of creating what his detractors called "a false moral equivalency between our enemies and us" and "insulting America", with not too subtle reminders that he "was not like us".
The President has not been without his defenders, especially those who supported his theological view. But as much as I appreciated his understanding of importance of grounding our faith in humility, the President is not "theologian in chief". He is, above all, a political leader whose role is to defend the national interest of the United States. And it is on this basis, and not on theological grounds, that I found the way President Obama framed his remarks to be not only wholly supportable, but vitally important.
The mention of the Crusades and the Inquisition was not an historical "throwaway line". Nor was it directed solely at an American audience that feels no responsibility for these ancient actions. Since these events define part of Islam's encounter with Western Christianity, acknowledging them is an important way to begin the discussion with Muslims. Just as in earlier speeches when the president noted other times when we have failed to live up to our ideals--as in our use of torture, or Guantanamo, or the crimes of Abu Ghraib--it is a way of saying to Muslims "I am hearing you, now listen to me". This is diplomacy, at its best.
Preaching at Muslims about their failings and countering this with the pretense of our perfection is not a way to begin or have a conversation or to create alliances. If we listen carefully to the discourse taking place in the Muslim world, we learn that they scoff at our claims of "upholding our values". They ask, "exactly which values do you mean": backing Israel's displacement and oppression of Palestinians; the war on Iraq; the abuses of prisoners; supporting violators of human rights when it serves your "national interests"?
If we want to have an honest discussion of how we work together to address a common threat--in this case, the danger posed by ISIL--is it not best that we begin by removing the obstacles to that discussion? For those who don't get that simple point, it's called good politics or sound diplomacy.
On the other hand, if we surrender to the President's critics, we can act like the Pharisees arrogantly feigning perfection. We can sit atop the pedestal we build for ourselves damning others, while praising ourselves. We've tried that before and found that when we did we were speaking to no one but ourselves. We may have felt self-validated, but we were very alone in a world our actions had made more dangerous.
Copyright ©2015 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-zogby/obama-sound-theology-and-smart-politics_b_6683630.html [with comments]
===
The relentless smear campaign against Obama
By Colbert I. King
April 29, 2011
During Holy Week, President Obama, for the second consecutive year, gathered several Christian clergy at the White House for an Easter Prayer Breakfast [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/georgetown-on-faith/post/obamas-easter-prayer-theres-something-about-the-resurrection/2011/04/22/AFhwSZOE_blog.html ] during which he talked about his faith and the resurrection. He mentioned Easter in his Saturday radio address [ http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/23/weekly-address-instead-subsidizing-yesterdays-energy-sources-we-need-inv ]. On Easter Sunday morning, the president and his family attended services at Shiloh Baptist Church [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-family-attend-easter-services-at-historic-shiloh-baptist-church-near-white-house/2011/04/24/AFXGUQbE_story.html ] in Washington.
The next day, Foxnews.com charged Obama [ http://nation.foxnews.com/president-obama/2011/04/25/wh-fails-release-easter-proclamation ] with failing to recognize “the national observance of Easter Sunday, Christianity’s most sacred holiday.” Two days later, Steve Doocy, host of Fox News’ “Fox and Friends,” invited Robert Jeffress [ http://www.firstdallas.org/about-us/our-pastor/ ], a conservative Baptist minister in Dallas, on the show and asked him “what do you think” about why Obama has never issued an Easter proclamation.
Given the opportunity for a gratuitous smear, Jeffress didn’t waste a second [ http://video.foxnews.com/v/4662679/no-easter-message-from-obama ]: “Steve, let’s look at what’s really going on here. On the one hand, we have a president who never met a Muslim holiday he didn’t like or at least wasn’t willing to issue a proclamation for, and on the other hand, here he is refusing to acknowledge, publicly, the most important event in Christian faith .?.?. and yet the White House is wondering, why do 20 percent of Americans believe the president is a Muslim?”
It seemed not to matter to Doocy to mention that no president in the past 20 years [ http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/38447_Wingnut_Fail_of_the_Day-_Obama_Didnt_Proclaim_Easter_%28But_Neither_Has_Any_Other_President%29 ] has issued an Easter proclamation. Doocy also didn’t acknowledge the president’s annual Easter Prayer Breakfast with clergy, though he alluded to Obama making “some comments last week regarding Easter at a breakfast.”
The charge that Obama shortchanged Easter was false. By suggesting Obama had snubbed Christianity and that he might be a closet Muslim, Fox handed its largely conservative audience yet another reason to hate the president.
The quest from the right to degrade Obama knows no bounds.
I’m looking at a photo with the faces of three chimpanzees [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/19/marilyn-davenport-califor_n_850992.html (next below)]
imposed on the bodies of a man, woman and child. The baby chimp’s face is covered with Obama’s picture. It was e-mailed in California this month with the message: “Now you know why — no birth certificate!”
The sender was Marilyn Davenport [ http://www.ocweekly.com/2011-04-21/news/moxley-confidential-marilyn-davenport-obama-chimp/ ], an elected member of the Orange County Republican Central Committee, who thought her GOP colleagues would also get a kick out of seeing the president of the United States depicted as the offspring of chimpanzees.
“I simply found it amusing regarding the character of Obama and all the questions surrounding his origins of birth,” Davenport said in a written statement [ http://www.dailynews-update.net/4296/orange-co-goper-says-obama-as-chimp-pic-was-just-a-joke-meant-for-friends/ ]. “In no way did I even consider the fact that he’s half black when I sent out the email.”
Davenport has since apologized [ http://www.theroot.com/buzz/marilyn-davenport-apologizes-president-obama-chimp-email ], after coming under fire from civil rights groups [ http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_17919397?nclick_check=1 ] and some local Republican leaders. But she’s still on the Orange County GOP Central Committee.
Why, come to think of it, should Davenport give up her official Republican position? She’s in good company. A CNN/Opinion Research poll [ http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/04/cnn-poll-quarter-doubt-president-was-born-in-u-s/ ] conducted in August showed that 41 percent of Republicans believe Obama was “probably” or “definitely” born in another country. Even after Obama released his “long form” birth certificate [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-produces-his-birth-certificate/2011/04/27/AFFISyxE_story.html ] this week, “birthers” — and political hustlers who cater to them — still cling to the “Obama is not one of us” smear.
I happen to think it was beneath Obama to respond to the “birthers,” most of all chief accuser Donald Trump, a rich, thrice-married New York show-off who got his start in business with daddy’s money and managed, through the successful operation of casinos, to get himself inducted in the Gaming Hall of Fame [ http://gaming.unlv.edu/hof/1995_trump.html ] in 2005.
It’s sickening that false claims about Obama’s place of birth and his religion have been made, fanned and believed without any evidence. Sad, too, that despite all evidence to the contrary, 34 percent of conservative Republicans [ http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1701/poll-obama-muslim-christian-church-out-of-politics-political-leaders-religious ], according to a Pew Research Center poll last August, believe Obama is a Muslim. The percentage had risen 16 points since 2009.
What’s behind all this? Why the relentless lies about Obama?
It is, simply put, a crusade to bring him down.
Make Obama out to be the “outsider” who doesn’t belong where he is. Vilify him as a cheat who, knowing he was ineligible to run for president, intentionally violated the Constitution and defrauded the American people. Marginalize him!
Marginalize his Ivy League education and Harvard Law Review presidency [ http://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/06/us/first-black-elected-to-head-harvard-s-law-review.html ]. Devalue his degrees with slurs. Insinuate that merit had nothing to do with his achievements. Accuse him of lying about his religion. Repeat over and over that he’s a socialist bent on destroying free enterprise.
Charge him with being weak. If that won’t do, denounce him as headstrong and arrogant.
But above all else, brand him unqualified and in over his head. Yeah, that’s the one. It always works. That’ll get him out of there.
© 2011 The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-relentless-smear-campaign-against-obama/2011/04/29/AFkSVyGF_story.html [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=78915505 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100630976 and following]
===
At Prayer Breakfast Obama Compares Islamic State To Jim Crow South
Feb 05, 2015
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/conncarroll/2015/02/05/at-prayer-breakfast-obama-compares-islamic-state-to-jim-crow-south-n1953304 [with embedded video, and comments (including, most recently, "Once one accepts the fact that Mr. Obama is a muslim and once one accepts the fact that Mr. Obama was born in Kenya then everything he has said and everything he has done falls into place and makes perfect sense. Wake up America,")]
--
Huckabee: Everything Obama does goes against 'what Christians stand for'
By David McCabe
February 09, 2015, 09:23 am
"Everything" President Obama does is "against what Christians stand for," former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) said in an interview Monday.
“Everything he does is against what Christians stand for, and he’s against the Jews in Israel,” Huckabee, who is considering a 2016 presidential run, said on Fox News's “Fox & Friends.” “The one group of people that can know they have his undying, unfailing support would be the Muslim community.”
The conservative former governor was commenting on Obama's speech at the National Prayer Breakfast last week, where Obama noted while discussing Islamic extremism that Christianity has been used to justify violence in the past.
"Lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ," he said. "In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ."
Huckabee took issue with the president's depiction of how Christianity had been used in the debate over civil rights.
"It was the pulpits of America — yeah, some of them were wrong — but many of them were the ones who brought the conscious of the nation to get them right," he said, noting that Christian preachers were leaders in the civil rights movement.
Conservatives have long said that Obama isn't engaging aggressively enough with the issue of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, which burned a Jordanian fighter pilot alive last week.
"He said our greatest threat was climate change,” Huckabee said of Obama. “I assure you that a beheading is much worse than a sunburn," repeating a line he used a few weeks ago at the Iowa Freedom Summit.
Huckabee has been in the news for comments he's made while promoting his book. He was criticized by many in the media, when he called Beyonce's music "mental poison" in the book. He also questioned the president's parenting for allowing his daughters to listen to the singer's music.
He has said he is considering running for president again in 2016 and will make a decision in the spring.
©2015 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/232138-huckabee-everything-obama-does-against-what-christians-stand-for [with comments], http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBIGWabg9H4 [with comments; as embedded]
--
Dumb Obama Needs Mike Huckabee To Explain Racism To Him Again
by Kaili Joy Gray
Feb 09 10:32 am 2015
Last week, President Obama committed the impeachable high crime of saying some historically accurate things at the National Prayer Breakfast about how Christians have also done some terrorism and violence and bad things in the name of spreading their faith, and they have not been perfect all the time since the first year of anno domini.
Of course Fox News was ON IT, explaining that the Crusades, and Jim Crow, happened, like, a thousand years ago, so it is totes uncool and “unfathomable” to even bring it up, and why does Obama love the terrorists so much, HUH?
That was just the beginning though. Because conservatives are so not done shaking their furious fists of fury that the president knows his history better than some idiots on the teevee. Mike Huckabee is one such idiot, and he graciously agreed to appear on Fox & Friends so they could continue being outraged about that some more.
“He never once in his speech said we are fighting against Islamic jihadists,” Huckabee said, because the new new standard for the president to prove he doesn’t not-so-secretly heart the terrorists is to call all acts of terrorism Islamic jihadist radical extremist terrorism, or else his true loyalties are unclear. But in addition to declaring his undying love for Islamic jihadists, Huckabee continued, Obama does not even know his history about Jim Crow and slavery and racism, what an idiot, has he ever even read a history book?
He also brought in Jim Crow laws, as if it was Christians who were responsible for racism in America. I think he’s forgetting that it was the Christian movement, led by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who resisted racism. And many of the most staunch voices that helped to bring this country in a whole new understanding of racial justice were voices from the pulpits, and in fact, it was the pulpits of America — yeah, some of them were wrong, but many of them were the ones who brought the conscience of the nation to get this right. And it’s the same thing with slavery. This president has a high horse himself. It’s his TelePrompter.
Hahahaha, TelePrompter jokes! That sure hasn’t gotten old yet. And it makes everything about who the real racists are so clear, doesn’t it? Once the president catches up on his daily Fox News viewing, he will undoubtedly hand-write a thank you letter to Mike Huckabee for reminding him of Dr. Martin Luther King and explaining how racism in U.S. America works, ACTUALLY.
Elisabeth Hasselbeck, who hasn’t stopped being outraged and disgusted at the president for basically pissing on the New Testament, gave Huckabee some more talking points to agree with.
“Some would say, governor, that in not naming radical Islam for what it is, it actually protects the real enemy.” Yes, some would say that. And coincidentally, they all appear regularly on Fox News. Amazing how that works. Some would also say that by naming ISIS/ISIL, Obama is actually naming the enemy pretty specifically, but they don’t work at Fox. But there is probably an excellent vague conspiracy theory to explain why the president is protecting “the real enemy.” Break it down for us, Elisabeth, won’t you?
You know, the circle of influence around the president have a lot of people concerned here. You know, he met with a group of initially unnamed Muslim leaders in the community here. Do you think that influenced his speech and why he was so protective of some but yet not of others?
Of course Hucakbee does think that yes, Obama has been influenced by unnamed Muslims, which is why he hates America and Christians so much, it is just SO OBVIOUS, isn’t it? Because, says Huckabee, “everything he does is against what Christians stand for.” Which is very important to note, because he is the president of the Unites States of Jesus. But that’s not all!
“He’s against the Jews in Israel,” Huckabee adds because in addition to being A Expert on racism, he is also A Expert on anti-Semitism, and yes, all the Jews are cribbing their thank you letters from the president on that one too.
The one group of people that can know they have his undying, unfailing support would be the Muslim community. And it doesn’t matter whether it’s the radical Muslim community or the more moderate Muslim community. He can be defensive of moderate Muslims and still be very, very clear in saying that the fanatical Muslims are the heart and soul of the war that is raging across this world.
That’s nice and gracious of Hucakbee to allow the president to defend moderate Muslims against prejudiced attacks from people like, oh, say, Mike Huckabee, isn’t it? And Elisabeth Hasselbeck, who also speaks for moderate Muslims everywhere, agrees.
“It’s disturbing,” she says, “and moderate Muslims are waiting for the president to draw the separation and line there.”
So because the president refuses to condemn “Islamic jihadists,” the moderate Muslim community is waiting for the president to agree with Fox News that most Muslims are, let’s face it, pretty bad. You can’t argue with that. Oh, you can try, but you’ll just get a headache.
[Mediaite [ http://www.mediaite.com/tv/huckabee-tears-into-obamas-prayer-speech-his-high-horse-is-the-teleprompter/ (including a non-YouTube version of the YouTube included above)]]
©2015 Wonkette (emphasis in original)
http://wonkette.com/575511/dumb-obama-needs-mike-huckabee-to-explain-racism-to-him-again [with comments], http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLco_5aN-Tw [yes, another YouTube of the same segment in the YouTube in the item just above, worth it, I thought; with comment; as embedded]
--
Huckabee Angry Obama Won't Call ISIS A 'Perversion' Of Islam After He Did Just That
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Tuesday, 2/10/2015 11:29 am
In an interview [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THaxgCrHZ2k (next below)]
“It is just unimaginable why he feels that he has to be the number one defender of all things Islam,” Huckabee said. “I’m not an anti-Islamicist, I’m not. But I feel like I can call something out for what it is."
"And there are many moderate Muslims across the world who are appalled by this," he continued. "Thank god for King Abdullah, thank God for President al-Sisi in Egypt, thank God here in America for Dr. Zuhdi Jasser and others who are willing to speak out. But they’re willing to say something that the American president won’t say, that it is Islam and that there is a perversion of it that is very deadly and dangerous, and that it isn’t Christians’ fault that people are having their heads cut off.”
President Obama and members of his administration, of course, have repeatedly stated that terrorist groups like the Islamic State distort Islam, something for which they get endlessly attacked by the Religious Right [ http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/republican_reaction_to_obama_s_prayer_breakfast_many_conservatives_don_t.single.html ].
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/huckabee-claims-obama-wont-call-isis-perversion-islam
--
The GOP's Islamophobia Problem
Brian Frank/Reuters
Will conservatives confront rising anti-Muslim rhetoric in the Republican Party?
Peter Beinart
Feb 13 2015, 7:00 AM ET
Did Craig Hicks murder Deah Shaddy Barakat, Yusor Mohammad Abu-Salha, and Razan Mohammad Abu-Salha yesterday in Chapel Hill because they were Muslim? We don’t yet know for sure.
But we know this: In America today, the level of public anti-Muslim bigotry is shockingly high. Politicians and pundits, usually on the right, say things about Muslims that they would be immediately fired for saying about Christians or Jews. And they’ll keep doing so until prominent conservatives express the same outrage when Muslims are defamed that they summon when the victims are Christians or Jews. In the 1950s, National Review founder William F. Buckley ran anti-Semites out of the conservative movement. It’s time for his successors to do the same with Islamophobes.
In 2016, for the second straight presidential election, the Republican primary field will include at least one candidate with nakedly anti-Muslim views. I’m not talking about candidates who denounce “radical Islam.” I’m not talking about Newt Gingrich, who in 2011 absurdly claimed [ http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/22/us/politics/in-shariah-gingrich-sees-mortal-threat-to-us.html?pagewanted=all ] that “Sharia is a mortal threat to the survival of freedom in the United States.” I’m not even talking about Bobby Jindal, who kept repeating the lie [ http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/bobby-jindal-no-go-zone-comments-114464.html ] that Europe contains “no-go” zones where non-Muslims are not allowed, even after it was repudiated by Fox News.
I’m talking about candidates who don’t cloak their prejudice at all. In 2012, the prime offender was Herman Cain. “I happen to side with the people in Murfreesboro,” Cain said, after the residents of that Tennessee town tried to block the building of a mosque. Cain explained that while banning churches or synagogues constitutes religious discrimination, banning mosques does not. Because “Islam is both a religion and a set of laws, Sharia law,” Cain explained [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/herman-cain-strives-for-new-levels-of-anti-muslim-buffoonery/2011/03/04/gIQAJ7WpLI_blog.html ], “that’s not discriminating based upon religion.” When asked whether he would feel “comfortable appointing a Muslim, either in your cabinet or as a federal judge?” Cain replied [ http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/03/26/153625/herman-cain-muslims/ ], “No, I will not,” because “there is this creeping attempt, there is this attempt to gradually ease Sharia law and the Muslim faith into our government.”
There’s not much subtlety here. Had Cain said communities should be able to ban churches because Christians impose their sexual morality on others, or that he would not appoint a Jew to his cabinet because Jews are loyal to Israel, he’d have been hounded from the race. But because Cain made his comments about Muslims, he felt no real pressure to drop out from his own ideological side. To the contrary, he continued to rise in the polls after he made those comments, only leaving the race in the wake of an unrelated sex scandal.
That was last time. This time, the most naked bigot in the emerging Republican field is Mike Huckabee. Earlier this week, Huckabee said [ http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/mike-huckabee-obama-muslims-115016.html ] that “Everything he [Obama] does is against what Christians stand for, and he’s against the Jews in Israel. The one group of people that can know they have his undying, unfailing support would be the Muslim community.” There’s no artifice here. Huckabee’s not condemning Obama for being soft on ISIS or even “radical Islam.” He’s condemning Obama for caring about Muslims. If you don’t see the bigotry, try flipping it around. Imagine if Huckabee had said that Obama “is against what Christians stand for, and he’s against the Muslims in the Middle East. The one group of people that can know they have his undying, unfailing support would be the Jewish community.” Republicans would be, rightly, calling for his head.
There’s a pattern here. In 2011, Huckabee said Christians shouldn’t rent space [ http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/145381-muslim-group-seeking-huckabee-apology-for-infidel-comments ] in their churches to Muslims because “Muslim group[s]” say “that Jesus Christ and all the people that follow him are a bunch of infidels who should be essentially obliterated.” Huckabee wasn’t talking about al-Qaeda. He accused ordinary American Muslims, who might need space to pray, of wanting to see Christians “obliterated.” Then, in 2013, he called Islam “a religion that promotes the most murderous mayhem on the planet in their so-called holiest days.” Not al-Qaeda or jihadists or terrorists, but Islam itself. According to Huckabee, in other words, Muslims want Christians “obliterated” and Islam promotes murder. He went on to say [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/08/mike-huckabee-muslims_n_3725678.html ] that “the Muslims will go to the mosque, and they will have their day of prayer, and they come out of there like uncorked animals—throwing rocks and burning cars.”
Uncorked animals. Not very subtle. Yet if there’s a single prominent conservative who has said Huckabee’s anti-Muslim slurs disqualify him as a presidential candidate, I haven’t come across them.
Muslims are not Latinos. They don’t have the numbers to punish Republicans for demonizing them. But that just makes the party’s moral challenge all the more stark. Tolerating Islamophobia is unlikely to hurt the GOP politically. It may even help. But it’s still a disgrace, and whether or not the murders in North Carolina were a hate crime, rhetoric like Huckabee’s and Cain’s will spawn hate crimes sooner or later. Let’s hope decent conservatives begin speaking out before it does.
Copyright © 2015 by The Atlantic Monthly Group
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2015/02/anti-islam/385463/ [with comments]
===
Yes, ISIS Burned a Man Alive: White Americans Did the Same Thing to Black People by the Many Thousands
Posted by Chauncey DeVega
Wednesday, February 4, 2015 at 2:49 PM
ISIS burned Muadh al Kasasbeh, a captured Jordian fighter pilot, to death [ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/03/isis-burns-jordanian-pilot-alive.html ]. They doused him with an accelerant. His captors set him on fire. Muadh al Kasasbeh desperately tried to put out the flames. ISIS recorded Muadh al Kasasbeh's immolation, produced a video designed to intimidate their enemies, and then circulated it online.
ISIS's burning alive of Muadh al Kasasbeh has been denounced as an act of savagery, barbarism, and wanton cruelty--one from the "dark ages" and not of the modern world.
American Exceptionalism blinds those who share its gaze to uncomfortable facts and truths about their own country.
For almost a century, the United States practiced a unique cultural ritual that was as least as gruesome as the "Medieval" punishments meted out by ISIS against its foes.
What is now known as "spectacular lynching" involved the ceremonial torture, murder--and yes, burning alive--of black Americans by whites. Like ISIS's use of digital media to circulate images of the torturous death of Muadh al Kasasbeh by fire, the spectacular lynchings of the black body [ http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5487/ ] were shared via postcards and other media.
In fact, the burned to death images of the black body were one of the most popular types of mass culture in 19th and 20th century America.
This account of the horrific murder of Sam Hose by White Americans is an even more grotesque and exaggerated version of the cruelty visited upon Muadh al Kasasbeh by ISIS:
The white-owned newspapers of the South had long gorged themselves with exaggerated or fabricated accounts of such violence. In the papers' version, the fight between Sam Hose and his boss became transformed into the most enraging crime of all: the rape of the white man's wife. White Georgians tracked Hose down and prepared for his lynching. Two thousand people gathered for the killing, some taking a special excursion train from Atlanta for the purpose. The leaders of the lynching stripped Hose, chained him to a tree, stacked wood around him, and soaked everything in kerosene. The mob cut off Hose's ears, fingers and genitals; they peeled the skin from his face. They watched, a newspaper reported, ''with unfeigning satisfaction'' as the man's veins ruptured from the heat and his blood hissed in the flames. ''Oh, my God! Oh, Jesus,'' were the only words Hose could manage. When he finally died, the crowd cut his heart and liver from his body, sharing the pieces among themselves, selling fragments of bone and tissue to those unable to attend. No one wore a disguise, no one was punished.
The murder of Jessie Washington [ http://www2.uncp.edu/home/berrys/courses/hist362/hist362_docs_waco_lynching.pdf ] is a genius work in white on black violence, far worse than the wickedness of ISIS's acts against Muadh al Kasasbeh:
“Great masses of humanity flew as swiftly as possible through the streets of the city in order to be present at the bridge when the hanging took place, but when it was learned that the Negro was being taken to the City Hall law, crowds of men, women and children turned and hastened to the lawn.”
“On the way to the scene of the burning people on every hand took a hand in showing their feelings in the matter by striking the Negro with anything obtainable, some struck him with shovels, bricks, clubs, and others stabbed him and cut him until when he was strung up his body was a solid color of red, the blood of the many wounds inflicted covered him from head to foot.”
“Dry goods boxes and all kinds of inflammable material were gathered, and it required but an instant to convert this into seething flames. When the Negro was first hoisted into the air his tongue protruded from his mouth and his face was besmeared with blood.”
“Life was not extinct within the Negro’s body, although nearly so, when another chain was placed around his neck and thrown over the limb of a tree on the lawn, everybody trying to get to the Negro and have some part in his death. The infuriated mob then leaned the Negro, who was half alive and half dead, against the tree, he having just strength enough within his limbs to support him.
As rapidly as possible the Negro was then jerked into the air at which a shout from thousands of throats went up on the morning air and dry goods boxes, excelsior, wood and every other article that would burn was then in evidence, appearing as if by magic. A huge dry goods box was then produced and filled to the top with all of the material that had been secured.
The Negro’s body was swaying in the air, and all of the time a noise as of thousands was heard and the Negro’s body was lowered into the box.” “No sooner had his body touched the box than people pressed forward, each eager to be the first to light the fire, matches were touched to the inflammable material and as smoke rapidly rose in the air, such a demonstration as of people gone mad was never heard before. Everybody pressed closer to get souvenirs of the affair. When they had finished with the Negro his body was mutilated.”
“Fingers, ears, pieces of clothing, toes and other parts of the Negro’s body were cut off by members of the mob that had crowded to the scene as if by magic when the word that the Negro had been taken in charge by the mob was heralded over the city. As the smoke rose to the heavens, the mass of people, numbering in the neighborhood of 10,000 crowding the City Hall law and overflowing the square, hanging from the windows of buildings, viewing the scene from the tops of buildings and trees, set up a shout that was heard blocks away.”
Many thousands of black Americans were killed by white lynchers in the United States.
The spectacular lynching was a ceremony [ http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/lynching/lynching_2.html ] (it was not something random or spontaneous; the acts of a few out for black blood possessed insane white people), with distinct practices, that symbolically purged the black body from the white polity in an era of formal white supremacy:
The actual process of lynching was morbid and incredibly violent. Lynching does not necessarily mean hanging. It often included humiliation, torture, burning, dismemberment and castration. Victims were beaten and whipped, many times in front of large crowds that sometimes numbered in the thousands. Coal tar was frequently used to douse the unfortunate victim prior to setting him afire.
Onlookers sometimes fired rifles and handguns hundreds of times into the corpse while people cheered and children played during the festivities. Pieces of the corpse were taken by onlookers as souvenirs of the event [5]. Such was the case when James Irwin was lynched on January 31, 1930. Irwin was accused of the murder of a white girl in the town of Ocilla, Georgia. Taken into custody by a rampaging mob, his fingers and toes were cut off, his teeth pulled out by pliers and finally he was castrated. It still wasn't enough. Irwin was then burned alive in front of hundreds of onlookers (Brundage, p. 42).
No one was ever punished for this barbaric killing. Black victims were hacked to death, dragged behind cars [6], burned, beaten, whipped, sometimes shot thousands of times, mutilated; the savagery was astonishing. How could ordinary people participate in such brutality?
The rendering of spectacular violence against non-whites paid a psychological wage to white people that helped to create a type of social cement for White America, one that covered up its own intra-group tensions of class, religion, and gender. This racial logic continues in the present with a racially discriminatory criminal justice system, the murder by police of black and brown people, and how white Americans support such unfair treatment [ http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/08/racial_bias_in_criminal_justice_whites_don_t_want_to_reform_laws_that_harm.html ].
American politicians and other opinion leaders have denounced ISIS and the death by fire meted out to Muadh al Kasasbeh.
Would they apply the same standards to white Americans who committed mass violence against African-Americans through lynchings, racial pogroms, and other like deeds?
Would white folks, on both sides of the ideological divide, condemn their ancestors who participated in such types of violence?
Would they support reparations as a material gesture of apology for such crimes?
Will White America ever be willing to fully own its historic ISIS-like behavior against African-Americans and other people of color, and how such violence created the present, where neighborhoods are hyper-segregated, there exists a huge wage and income gap along the color line, and by almost every measure, black and brown Americans have significantly diminished life chances relative to white people?
Violence is a human trait. ISIS's burning alive of Muadh al Kasasbeh is an act of barbarism.
However, we cannot overlook how the United States has conducted master classes in violence and barbarism both before, during, and since its founding...and yes, much of this violence was against people of color whose labor, lives, land, and freedom were stolen to create American empire.
Copyright 2015 Chauncey DeVega
http://www.chaunceydevega.com/2015/02/a-history-of-violence-isis-burning-man.html [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=85212960 and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=91559070 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=102001887 and preceding and following]
--
The Foolish, Historically Illiterate, Incredible Response to Obama's Prayer Breakfast Speech
Wikimedia
Using religion to brutalize other people is not a Muslim invention, nor is it foreign to the American experience.
Ta-Nehisi Coates
Feb 6 2015, 1:00 PM ET
People who wonder why the president does not talk more about race would do well to examine the recent blow-up over his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast. Inveighing against the barbarism of ISIS, the president pointed out that it would be foolish to blame Islam, at large, for its atrocities. To make this point he noted that using religion to brutalize other people is neither a Muslim invention nor, in America, a foreign one:
Lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.
The "all too often" could just as well be "almost always." There were a fair number of pretexts given for slavery and Jim Crow, but Christianity provided the moral justification. On the cusp of plunging his country into a war that would cost some 750,000 lives, Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens paused to offer some explanation [ http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/corner-stone-speech-excerpt/ ]. His justification was not secular. The Confederacy was to be:
[T]he first government ever instituted upon the principles in strict conformity to nature, and the ordination of Providence, in furnishing the materials of human society ... With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system. The architect, in the construction of buildings, lays the foundation with the proper material-the granite; then comes the brick or the marble. The substratum of our society is made of the material fitted by nature for it, and by experience we know that it is best, not only for the superior, but for the inferior race, that it should be so.
It is, indeed, in conformity with the ordinance of the Creator. It is not for us to inquire into the wisdom of His ordinances, or to question them. For His own purposes, He has made one race to differ from another, as He has made "one star to differ from another star in glory." The great objects of humanity are best attained when there is conformity to His laws and decrees, in the formation of governments as well as in all things else. Our confederacy is founded upon principles in strict conformity with these laws.
Stephens went on to argue that the "Christianization of the barbarous tribes of Africa" could only be accomplished through enslavement. And enslavement was not made possible through Robert's Rules of Order, but through a 250-year reign of mass torture, industrialized murder, and normalized rape—tactics which ISIS would find familiar. Its moral justification was not "because I said so," it was "Providence," "the curse against Canaan," "the Creator," "and Christianization." In just five years, 750,000 Americans died because of this peculiar mission of "Christianization." Many more died before, and many more died after. In his "Segregation Now [ http://web.utk.edu/~mfitzge1/docs/374/wallace_seg63.pdf ]" speech, George Wallace invokes God 27 times and calls the federal government opposing him "a system that is the very opposite of Christ."
Now, Christianity did not "cause" slavery, anymore than Christianity "caused" the civil-rights movement. The interest in power is almost always accompanied by the need to sanctify that power. That is what the Muslim terrorists in ISIS are seeking to do today, and that is what Christian enslavers and Christian terrorists did for the lion's share of American history.
That this relatively mild, and correct, point cannot be made without the comments being dubbed, "the most offensive I’ve ever heard a president make in my lifetime,” by a former Virginia governor [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-speech-at-prayer-breakfast-called-offensive-to-christians/2015/02/05/6a15a240-ad50-11e4-ad71-7b9eba0f87d6_story.html ] gives you some sense of the limited tolerance for any honest conversation around racism in our politics. And it gives you something much more. My colleague Jim Fallows recently wrote [ http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/12/the-tragedy-of-the-american-military/383516/ ] about the need to, at once, infantilize and deify our military. Perhaps related to that is the need to infantilize and deify our history. Pointing out that Americans have done, on their own soil, in the name of their own God, something similar to what ISIS is doing now does not make ISIS any less barbaric, or any more correct. That is unless you view the entire discussion as a kind of religious one-upmanship, in which the goal is to prove that Christianity is "the awesomest."
Obama seemed to be going for something more—faith leavened by “some doubt.” If you are truly appalled by the brutality of ISIS, then a wise and essential step is understanding the lure of brutality, and recalling how easily your own society can be, and how often it has been, pulled over the brink.
Copyright © 2015 by The Atlantic Monthly Group
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/the-foolish-historically-illiterate-incredible-response-to-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech/385246/ [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=39512352 and preceding and following]
--
No Escape From History
Statue of Godfrey of Bouillon in Brussels
(Er&Red/Wikimedia)
Ross Douthat accuses Obama of singling out the crusades, but they are part of the president's own Christian heritage.
Ta-Nehisi Coates
Feb 10 2015, 2:56 PM ET
My old colleague Ross Douthat has offered [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/opinion/sunday/ross-douthat-obama-the-theologian.html ] a response to Barack Obama's speech at the National Prayer Breakfast. It does not damn Ross with faint praise to say he has, at least, avoided the drunk festival of ideas—American racism was actually pioneered by Gozer the Gozerian, Jim Crow was "a thousand years ago [ http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/republican_reaction_to_obama_s_prayer_breakfast_many_conservatives_don_t.2.html ]"—presently circulating. But if Ross's argument enjoys the virtue of sobriety, it is still injured by the vice of being wrong.
Ross is disturbed to see the president drawing an "implied equivalence" between the barbarism of ISIS and the "the incredibly complicated multi-century story of medieval Christendom's conflict with Islam." This will not do. The present conflict in the Middle East is also an "incredibly complicated multi-century story." And yet that fact does not (and should not) prevent Ross from drawing conclusions about the morality of burning a man to death in the name of God. The president's comments are no different: "During the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ." This is a manifestly true statement—just as true as: "During the Middle East conflict, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Allah." The first Crusade was anointed with a pogrom against the Jews of the Rhineland. The Spanish Inquisition included the executions of thousands, and led to the expulsion of Jewish communities from the country. I do not believe one needs a degree in medieval studies to deplore pogroms and ethnic cleansing, any more than one needs a degree in Middle Eastern studies to deplore the taking or beheading of hostages.
Beneath Ross’s claim of “incredible” complication is a plea for context and nuance on behalf of the murderers of Jews—one he does not make on behalf of ISIS. Either way, Ross does not think Obama should be in the business of self-criticism at all because it fails as a matter of policy. "Self-criticism doesn’t necessarily serve the cause of foreign policy outreach quite as well as Obama once seemed to believe it would," writes Ross. Maybe. Maybe not. The implicit logic here holds that an American president should only speak forthrightly when some mean, tangible, and immediate benefit is obvious. Whatever one thinks of that claim, it is at war with the rest of Ross's column. He cites Dwight D. Eisenhower's parting speech on the military-industrial complex as an example to Obama, but by Ross's lights that speech was a failure since it effected no real change in the pace of military build-up.
But Ross believes it makes a great example for Obama because it features Eisenhower criticizing his own party. Unlike Ike, Obama is a partisan attacking "crimes he doesn’t feel particularly implicated in ... and the sins of groups he disagrees with anyway (Republican Cold Warriors, the religious right, white conservative Southerners)." Ross thinks Obama would be better served by criticizing groups to which he is sympathetic. In fact Obama has spent [ http://www.chron.com/life/article/Pookie-keeps-popping-up-in-Obama-s-speeches-1788973.php ] much of his presidency criticizing [ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/5852209/Barack-Obama-delivers-tough-love-message-to-black-community.html ] the most loyal sector [ http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/08/on-the-death-of-dreams/279157/ ] of his party [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e50Tt9qJRQk (next below)],
More importantly, Jim Crow and slavery were not merely the sins of Southerners and the religious right, but the sins of America, itself. Enslavement was not merely a boon for the South, but for the country as a whole. (During the Civil War, New York City was a hotbed of secessionist sympathy mostly because of its economic ties to the South.) And there is simply no way to understand segregation in this country without understanding [ http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/05/the-case-for-reparations/361631/ ] the housing policies of Democratic president Franklin D. Roosevelt and the G.I. Bill signed by Democratic president Harry Truman. Barack Obama is a Christian and the president of the United States and thus the inheritor of the full legacy of that grand office. He is neither, as Ross tries to position him, an outsider to American sin nor Christian sin. It’s his heritage too, and Obama is wise enough to know that he can’t simply charge off the bad parts of that heritage to intransigent Southern bigots.
It has been enlightening to watch this entire spectacle play out over the past week. There are now intelligent people going on television to tell us that the president should not use the word "crusade" to describe ... The Crusades [ http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/andrea-mitchell-obama-crusades-breakfast ]. The problem is history. Or rather the problem is that there is no version of history that can award the West a stable moral high-ground. Some of the most prominent Christian leaders in this country used their authority to burnish [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/sites/default/files/falwell-safrica.pdf ] the credentials [ http://www.nytimes.com/1988/02/13/us/robertson-comments-on-south-africa-unrest.html ] of South Africa's racist regime—not in the 1960s, in the 1980s. At this very moment, there are reports that Uganda's attempt to make sex between men a capital offense is tied to the very sponsors [ http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=120746516 ] of the Prayer Breakfast where Obama spoke. In such a world, a certainty about which "side" is always good and which "side" is forever evil doesn't really exist. And in an uncertain world, Obama is making a wise appeal for vigilance—vigilance against the death cult of ISIS, and vigilance against the allure of death cults period—even those inaugurated in the name of one's preferred God.
Copyright © 2015 by The Atlantic Monthly Group
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/no-escape-from-history/385352/ [no comments, comments closed] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=42479824 and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=60232115 and following]
--
History of Lynchings in the South Documents Nearly 4,000 Names
Kirvin, Tex., where three black men accused of killing a white woman were set on fire in 1922 before a crowd of hundreds.
Credit Brandon Thibodeaux for The New York Times
Map of 73 Years of Lynchings
The most recent data on lynching, compiled by the Equal Justice Initiative, shows premeditated murders carried out by at least three people from 1877 to 1950 in 12 Southern states. The killers claimed to be enforcing some form of social justice. The alleged offenses that prompted the lynchings included political activism and testifying in court.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/02/10/us/map-of-73-years-of-lynching.html
Bryan Stevenson, executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative, in front of the building, then a courthouse, where the lynching began.
Credit Brandon Thibodeaux for The New York Times
Downtown Dallas in 1910, when Allen Brooks, a black man, was hanged from a telephone pole.
Credit via Dallas Public Library/Dallas History Archives Division
By CAMPBELL ROBERTSON
FEB. 10, 2015
DALLAS — A block from the tourist-swarmed headquarters of the former Texas School Book Depository sits the old county courthouse, now a museum. In 1910, a group of men rushed into the courthouse, threw a rope around the neck of a black man accused of sexually assaulting a 3-year-old white girl, and threw the other end of the rope out a window. A mob outside yanked the man, Allen Brooks, to the ground and strung him up at a ceremonial arch a few blocks down Main Street.
South of the city, past the Trinity River bottoms, a black man named W. R. Taylor was hanged by a mob in 1889. Farther south still is the community of Streetman, where 25-year-old George Gay was hanged from a tree and shot hundreds of times in 1922.
And just beyond that is Kirvin, where three black men, two of them almost certainly innocent, were accused of killing a white woman and, under the gaze of hundreds of soda-drinking spectators, were castrated, stabbed, beaten, tied to a plow and set afire in the spring of 1922.
The killing of Mr. Brooks is noted in the museum. The sites of the other killings, like those of nearly every lynching in the United States, are not marked. Bryan Stevenson believes this should change.
On Tuesday, the organization he founded and runs, the Equal Justice Initiative in Montgomery, Ala., released a report [ http://eji.org/node/1037 , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Lynching%20in%20America%20SUMMARY.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/Lynching%20in%20America%20SUPPLEMENT%20By%20County.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Press%20Release%20February%2010%202015.pdf ] on the history of lynchings in the United States, the result of five years of research and 160 visits to sites around the South. The authors of the report compiled an inventory of 3,959 victims of “racial terror lynchings” in 12 Southern states from 1877 to 1950.
Next comes the process of selecting lynching sites where the organization plans to erect markers and memorials, which will involve significant fund-raising, negotiations with distrustful landowners and, almost undoubtedly, intense controversy.
The process is intended, Mr. Stevenson said, to force people to reckon with the narrative through-line of the country’s vicious racial history, rather than thinking of that history in a short-range, piecemeal way.
“Lynching and the terror era shaped the geography, politics, economics and social characteristics of being black in America during the 20th century,” Mr. Stevenson said, arguing that many participants in the great migration from the South should be thought of as refugees fleeing terrorism rather than people simply seeking work.
The lynching report is part of a longer project Mr. Stevenson began several years ago. One phase involved the erection of historical markers [ http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/01/us/university-of-mississippi-commemorates-integration.html ] about the extensive slave markets in Montgomery. The city and state governments were not welcoming of the markers, despite the abundance of Civil War and civil rights movement memorials in Montgomery, but Mr. Stevenson is planning to do the same thing elsewhere.
Around the country, there are only a few markers noting the sites of lynchings. In several of those places, like Newnan, Ga., attempts to erect markers were met with local resistance. But in most places, no one has tried to put up a marker.
Efforts to count the number of lynchings in the country go back at least to 1882, when The Chicago Tribune began publishing each January a list of all executions and lynchings in the previous year. The Tuskegee Institute began releasing a list in 1912, and in 1919, the N.A.A.C.P. published what its researchers said was a comprehensive list of lynchings in the previous three decades. In 1995, the sociologists Stewart Tolnay and E. M. Beck researched the existing lists, eliminated errors and duplicates, and compiled what many consider the most accurate inventory to that time.
The report released Tuesday says that the new inventory has 700 names that are not on any of these previous lists, many of which Mr. Stevenson said were discovered during the compilation of the report.
Professor Beck, who teaches at the University of Georgia, has not reviewed the new list. But he pointed out that, with racial violence so extensive and carried out in so many different ways, compilers of lists may differ on what constitutes a lynching; the new list, as opposed to some previous ones, includes one-time massacres of large numbers of African-Americans, such as occurred in Arkansas in 1919 and in Louisiana in 1887.
“If you’re trying to make a point that the amount of racial violence is underestimated, well then, there’s no doubt about it,” Professor Beck said. “What people don’t realize here is just how many there were, and how close. Places they drive by every day.”
Among Professor Beck’s findings were that the number of lynchings did not rise or fall in proportion to the number of state-sanctioned executions, underscoring what Mr. Stevenson said was a crucial point: that these brutal deaths were not about administering popular justice, but terrorizing a community.
“Many of these lynchings were not executing people for crimes but executing people for violating the racial hierarchy,” he said, meaning offenses such as bumping up against a white woman or wearing an Army uniform.
But, he continued, even when a major crime was alleged, the refusal to grant a black man a trial — despite the justice system’s near certain outcome — and the public extravagance of a lynching were clearly intended as a message to other African-Americans.
The bloody history of Paris, Tex., about 100 miles northeast of Dallas, is well known if rarely brought up, said Thelma Dangerfield, the treasurer of the local N.A.A.C.P. chapter. Thousands of people came in 1893 to see Henry Smith, a black teenager accused of murder, carried around town on a float, then tortured and burned to death on a scaffold.
Until recently, some longtime residents still remembered when the two Arthur brothers were tied to a flagpole and set on fire at the city fairgrounds in 1920.
“There were two or three blacks who were actually around during that time, but you couldn’t get them to talk about it,” Ms. Dangerfield said.
She helped set up an exhibit in the county historical museum, the only commemoration of the lynchings she knows of in a town with prominent public memorials to the Confederacy. The prospect of a permanent marker had not occurred to her.
“It would be a fight,” she said. “Someone is going to have some resistance to it. But you know, I think it wouldn’t hurt to try it.”
© 2015 The New York Times Company
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/10/us/history-of-lynchings-in-the-south-documents-nearly-4000-names.html [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=105163814 and preceding and following]
--
Christian Soldiers
A Ku Klux Klan rally in Frederick, Maryland, in 1980.
Photo by MPI/Getty Images
The lynching and torture of blacks in the Jim Crow South weren’t just acts of racism. They were religious rituals.
By Jamelle Bouie
Feb. 10 2015 5:33 PM
The cliché is that Americans have a short memory, but since Saturday, a number of us have been arguing over [ http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/republican_reaction_to_obama_s_prayer_breakfast_many_conservatives_don_t.html ] medieval religious wars and whether they have any lessons for today’s violence in the Middle East.
For those still unaware, this debate comes after President Obama’s comments [ http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/05/remarks-president-national-prayer-breakfast (above)] at the annual National Prayer Breakfast, where—after condemning Islamic radical group ISIS as a “death cult”—he offered a moderating thought. “Lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ … So this is not unique to one group or one religion. There is a tendency in us, a sinful tendency that can pervert and distort our faith.”
It’s a straightforward point—“no faith has a particular monopoly on religious arrogance”—that’s become a partisan flashpoint, as conservatives harangue [ http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/republican_reaction_to_obama_s_prayer_breakfast_many_conservatives_don_t.html ] the president for “equating” crusading Christians to Islamic radicals, accuse him of anti-Christian beliefs, and wonder why he would mention a centuries-old conflict, even if it has some analogies to the present day.
What we have missed in the argument over the Crusades, however, is Obama’s mention of slavery and Jim Crow. At the Atlantic, Ta-Nehisi Coates puts his focus [ http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/the-foolish-historically-illiterate-incredible-response-to-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech/385246/ (above)] on religious justifications for American bondage, and it’s worth doing the same for its post-bellum successor. And since we’re thinking in terms of religious violence, our eyes should turn toward the most brutal spectacle of Jim Crow’s reign, the lynching.
For most of the century between the two Reconstructions, the bulk of the white South condoned and sanctioned terrorist violence against black Americans. In a new report [ http://eji.org/node/1037 , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Lynching%20in%20America%20SUMMARY.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/Lynching%20in%20America%20SUPPLEMENT%20By%20County.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Press%20Release%20February%2010%202015.pdf ], the Alabama-based Equal Justice Initiative documents nearly 4,000 lynchings of black people in 12 Southern states—Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia—between 1877 and 1950, which the group notes is “at least 700 more lynchings in these states than previously reported.”
For his victims, “Judge Lynch”—journalist Ida B. Wells [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ida_B._Wells ]’ name for the lynch mob—was capricious, merciless, and barbaric. C.J. Miller, falsely accused of killing two teenaged white sisters in western Kentucky, was “dragged through the streets to a crude platform of old barrel staves and other kindling,” writes historian Philip Dray in At the Hands of Persons Unknown: The Lynching of Black America [ http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000XUBEKC ]. His assailants hanged him from a telephone pole, and while “the first fall broke his neck … the body was repeatedly raised and lowered while the crowd peppered it with small-arms fire.” For two hours his corpse hung above the street, during which he was photographed and mutilated by onlookers. Finally, he was cut down and burned.
More savage was the lynching of Mary Turner and her unborn child, killed for protesting her husband’s murder. “[B]efore a crowd that included women and children,” writes Dray, “Mary was stripped, hung upside down by the ankles, soaked with gasoline, and roasted to death. In the midst of this torment, a white man opened her swollen belly with a hunting knife and her infant fell to the ground, gave a cry, and was stomped to death.”
These lynchings weren’t just vigilante punishments or, as the Equal Justice Initiative notes, “celebratory acts of racial control and domination.” They were rituals. And specifically, they were rituals of Southern evangelicalism and its then-dogma of purity, literalism, and white supremacy. “Christianity was the primary lens through which most southerners conceptualized and made sense of suffering and death of any sort,” writes historian Amy Louise Wood in Lynching and Spectacle: Witnessing Racial Violence in America, 1890–1940 [ http://www.amazon.com/dp/B004LE912O ]. “It would be inconceivable that they could inflict pain and torment on the bodies of black men without imagining that violence as a religious act, laden with Christian symbolism and significance.”
The God of the white South demanded purity—embodied by the white woman. White southerners would build the barrier with segregation. But when it was breached, lynching was the way they would mend the fence and affirm their freedom from the moral contamination, represented by blacks and black men in particular. (Although, not limited to them. Leo Frank [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Frank ], lynched in 1915, was Jewish.) The perceived breach was frequently sexual, defined by the myth of the black rapist, a “demon” and “beast” who set out to defile the Christian purity of white womanhood. In his narrative of the lynching of Henry Smith—killed for the alleged rape and murder of 3-year-old Myrtle Vance—writer P.L. James recounted how the energy of an entire city and country was turned toward the apprehension of the demon who had devastated a home and polluted an innocent life.”
James wasn’t alone. Many other defenders of lynching understood their acts as a Christian duty, consecrated as God’s will against racial transgression. “After Smith’s lynching,” Wood notes, “another defender wrote, ‘It was nothing but the vengeance of an outraged God, meted out to him, through the instrumentality of the people that caused the cremation.’ ” As UNC–Chapel Hill Professor Emeritus Donald G. Mathews writes in the Journal of Southern Religion [ http://jsr.fsu.edu/mathews3.htm ], “Religion permeated communal lynching because the act occurred within the context of a sacred order designed to sustain holiness.” The “sacred order” was white supremacy and the “holiness” was white virtue.
I should emphasize that blacks of the era understood lynching as rooted in the Christian practice of white southerners. “It is exceedingly doubtful if lynching could possibly exist under any other religion than Christianity,” wrote NAACP leader Walter White in 1929, “No person who is familiar with the Bible-beating, acrobatic, fanatical preachers of hell-fire in the South, and who has seen the orgies of emotion created by them, can doubt for a moment that dangerous passions are released which contribute to emotional instability and play a part in lynching.” And while some church leaders condemned the practice as contrary to the Gospel of Christ—“Religion and lynching; Christianity and crushing, burning and blessing, savagery and national sanity cannot go together in this country,” declared one 1904 editorial—the overwhelming consent of the white South confirmed White’s view.
The only Southern Christianity united in its opposition to lynching was that of black Americans, who tried to recontextualize the onslaught as a kind of crucifixion and its victims as martyrs, flipping the script and making blacks the true inheritors of Christian salvation and redemption. It’s that last point which should highlight how none of this was intrinsic to Christianity: It was a question of power, and of the need of the powerful to sanctify their actions.
Still, we can’t deny that lynching—in all of its grotesque brutality—was an act of religious significance justified by the Christianity of the day. It was also political: an act of terror and social control, and the province of private citizens, public officials, and powerful lawmakers. Sen. Ben Tillman of South Carolina defended lynching [ http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/55/ ] on the floor of the U.S. Senate, and President Woodrow Wilson applauded a film [ http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/stories_events_birth.html ] that celebrated Judge Lynch and his disciples.
Which is all to say that President Obama was right. The vastly different environments of pre–civil rights America and the modern-day Middle East belies the substantive similarities between the fairly recent religious violence of our white supremacist forebears and that of our contemporary enemies. And the present divide between moderate Muslims and their fanatical opponents has an analogue in our past divide between northern Christianity and its southern counterpart.
This isn’t relativism as much as it’s a clear-eyed view of our common vulnerability, of the truth that the seeds of violence and autocracy can sprout anywhere, and of the fact that our present position on the moral high ground isn’t evidence of some intrinsic superiority.
© 2015 The Slate Group LLC
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/jim_crow_south_s_lynching_of_blacks_and_christianity_the_terror_inflicted.html [ http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/jim_crow_south_s_lynching_of_blacks_and_christianity_the_terror_inflicted.single.html ] [with comments]
--
Lynching as Racial Terrorism
A crowd at a lynching in Excelsior Springs, Missouri, in 1925.
Credit Bettmann/Corbis
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
FEB. 11, 2015
It is important to remember that the hangings, burnings and dismemberments of black American men, women and children that were relatively common in this country between the Civil War and World War II were often public events. They were sometimes advertised in newspapers and drew hundreds and even thousands of white spectators, including elected officials and leading citizens who were so swept up in the carnivals of death that they posed with their children for keepsake photographs within arm’s length of mutilated black corpses.
These episodes of horrific, communitywide violence [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/10/us/history-of-lynchings-in-the-south-documents-nearly-4000-names.html (above)] have been erased from civic memory in lynching-belt states like Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, Florida and Mississippi. But that will change if Bryan Stevenson [ http://blogs.law.nyu.edu/magazine/2007/bryan-stevenson%E2%80%99s-death-defying-acts/ ], a civil rights attorney, succeeds in his mission to build markers and memorials at lynching sites throughout the South as a way of forcing communities and the country to confront an era of racial terror directly and recognize the role that it played in shaping the current racial landscape.
Mr. Stevenson’s organization [ http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/12/opinion/sunday/nicholas-kristof-when-whites-just-dont-get-it-part-3.html ], the Equal Justice Initiative [ http://www.eji.org/ ], took a step in that direction on Tuesday when it released a report [ http://eji.org/node/1037 , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Lynching%20in%20America%20SUMMARY.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/Lynching%20in%20America%20SUPPLEMENT%20By%20County.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Press%20Release%20February%2010%202015.pdf ] that chronicles nearly 4,000 lynchings of black people in 12 Southern states from 1877 to 1950. The report focuses on what it describes as “racial terror lynchings,” which were used to enforce Jim Crow laws and racial segregation. Victims in these cases were often murdered without being accused of actual crimes but for minor social transgressions that included talking back to whites or insisting on fairness and basic rights.
The report is the result of five years of hard work. Researchers reviewed local newspapers, historical archives and court records; interviewed local historians, survivors and victims’ descendants; and scrutinized contemporaneously published articles in African-American newspapers, which took a closer interest in these matters than the white press. In the end, researchers found at least 700 more lynchings in the 12 states than were previously reported, suggesting that “racial terror lynching” was far more common than was generally believed.
The report argues compellingly that the threat of death by lynching was far more influential in shaping present-day racial reality than contemporary Americans typically understand. It argues that The Great Migration from the South, in which millions of African-Americans moved North and West, was partly a forced migration in which black people fled the threat of murder at the hands of white mobs.
It sees lynching as the precursor of modern-day racial bias in the criminal justice system. The researchers argue, for example, that lynching declined as a mechanism of social control as the Southern states shifted to a capital punishment strategy, in which blacks began more frequently to be executed after expedited trials. The legacy of lynching was apparent in that public executions were still being used to mollify mobs in the 1930s even after such executions were legally banned.
Despite playing a powerful role in the shaping of Southern society, the lynching era has practically disappeared from public discourse. As the report notes: “Most Southern terror lynching victims were killed on sites that remain unmarked and unrecognized. The Southern landscape is cluttered with plaques, statues and monuments that record, celebrate and lionize generations of American defenders of white supremacy, including public officials and private citizens who perpetrated violent crimes against black citizens during the era of racial terror.”
Mr. Stevenson’s group makes the persuasive argument that this history needs to be properly commemorated and more widely discussed before the United States can fully understand the causes and origins of the racial injustice that hobbles the country to this day.
© 2015 The New York Times Company
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/11/opinion/lynching-as-racial-terrorism.html [with comments]
--
Lynching and the Jefferson Davis Highway
by Robert Parry
February 12, 2015 - 10:55am
A new study of Southern lynching of blacks, sharply raising the total to nearly 4,000 victims, adds some context to the decision in 1920 to attach the name of Confederate President Jefferson Davis to parts of Route One, including stretches near and through African-American neighborhoods. That period was a time when the number of lynchings surged across the South and whites were reasserting their impunity.
According to the study [ http://eji.org/node/1037 , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Lynching%20in%20America%20SUMMARY.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/Lynching%20in%20America%20SUPPLEMENT%20By%20County.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Press%20Release%20February%2010%202015.pdf ] by the Equal Justice Initiative, the use of lynching – mob killings and mutilations of blacks by hanging, burning alive, castration, torture and other means – was nearly as high around 1920 as it was in the latter part of the Nineteenth Century. There was a gradual decline in lynchings in the early Twentieth Century, but the pattern reversed and the use of lynching surged to about 500 during a five-year period heading into 1920.
That period also marked a determination by many Southern whites to reaffirm the rightness of the Confederate cause and to reassert white supremacy. Thus, in 1920, to drive home the point of who was in charge, the Daughters of the Confederacy had Southern states name portions of Route One after Jefferson Davis, who was hailed as the “champion of a slave society” when he was chosen to lead the Confederacy in 1861.
Besides honoring a dyed-in-the-wool white supremacist who favored keeping African-Americans in chains forever, the Daughters of the Confederacy saw these designations of Route One as a counterpoint to plans in the North for a Lincoln Highway in honor of assassinated President Abraham Lincoln.
But bestowing this honor on Jefferson Davis was also a political message of pro-Confederate defiance that was not limited to the brutal era of 1920. The Jefferson Davis designation was extended to parts of Route 110 near the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, in 1964 as Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Movement were pressing for landmark civil rights legislation to end segregation and as white Virginian politicians were vowing to resist integration at all costs.
A year or so ago, I wrote to the five members of the Arlington County Board and urged them to seek an end to this grotesque honor bestowed on a notorious white racist. When my letter went public, it was treated with some amusement by the local paper, the Sun-Gazette, which described me as “rankled,” and prompted some hate mail.
One letter from an Arlington resident declared that it was now her turn to be “RANKLED by outsiders like Mr. Parry who want to change history because it is not to his liking. … I am very proud of my Commonwealth’s history, but not of the current times, as I’m sure many others are.”
I was also confronted by a senior Democratic county official at a meeting about a different topic and urged to desist in my proposal to give the highway a new name because the idea would alienate state politicians in Richmond who would think that Arlington County was crazy.
But the new study on the terrorism of lynching reminds us that attaching Jefferson Davis’s name to roadways wasn’t just some romantic gesture to honor an historical figure beloved by Southern whites who in 1920 still pined for the ante-bellum days when they could own black people and do to them whatever they wished.
The years around 1920 marked a violent revival of the carnival-like scenes in which whites treated the lynching of blacks as a moment for community hilarity and celebration, often posing with their children for photographs next to the mutilated corpses. Stamping Jefferson Davis’s name on a highway that passed near and through black neighborhoods was another way to send a chilling message to African-Americans.
In my 37 years living in Virginia, I have always been struck by the curious victimhood of many Southern whites. Because of the Civil War, which some still call “the War of Northern Aggression,” and the Civil Rights Movement, which finally ended segregation, they have been nursing grievances, seeing themselves as the real victims here.
Not the African-Americans who were held in the unspeakable conditions of bondage until slavery was finally ended in the 1860s and who then suffered the cruelties of white terrorism and the humiliation of segregation for another century. No, the whites who lorded over them were the real “victims” because the federal government finally intervened to stop these practices.
Yet, while some white Virginians remain “very proud” of that history, there has been a studied neglect of other more honorable aspects of Arlington’s history, including the role played by Columbia Pike as an African-American Freedom Trail where thousands of former slaves, freed by Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, traveled north to escape slavery.
Many were given refuge in Freedman’s Village, a semi-permanent refugee camp along Columbia Pike on land that now includes the Pentagon and the Air Force Memorial. Some of the men joined the U.S. Colored Troops training at nearby Camp Casey before returning to the South to fight for freedom, to end the scourge of slavery once and for all.
As blacks joined the Union Army, Confederate President Jefferson Davis ratified a policy that refused to treat black men as soldiers but rather as slaves in a state of insurrection, so they could be executed upon capture or sold into slavery.
In accordance with this Confederate policy, U.S. Colored Troops faced summary executions [ http://encyclopediavirginia.org/United_States_Colored_Troops_The ] when captured in battle. For instance, when a Union garrison at Fort Pillow, Tennessee, was overrun by Confederate forces on April 12, 1864, black soldiers were shot down as they surrendered. Similar atrocities occurred at the Battle of Poison Springs, Arkansas, in April 1864, and the Battle of the Crater in Virginia. Scores of black prisoners were executed in Saltville, Virginia, on Oct. 2, 1864.
Yet, while Jefferson Davis’s name remains on roadways through Arlington — and as the Confederate president is effectively honored whenever people have to use his name — there is still no commemoration of Freedom’s Village (though something is supposedly being planned) and no one apparently even knows the precise location of Camp Casey, arguably one of Arlington’s most significant and noble historical sites. (Camp Casey is believed to have been located close to where today’s Pentagon now is, an area that in the 1860s was called Alexandria County before being renamed Arlington County in the Twentieth Century.)
Apparently, recognizing the place where free African-Americans were trained and armed to defeat the Confederacy and end slavery might “rankle” some white Arlington residents.
© 2015 Smirking Chimp Media
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-parry/60936/lynching-and-the-jefferson-davis-highway [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=44219890 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64096475 and preceding and following]
===
A Vision about Obama
Published on Nov 11, 2013 by childofyahvh [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCv8oHq3VQbNuPnPcgW0xgUg / http://www.youtube.com/user/childofyahvh , http://www.youtube.com/user/childofyahvh/videos ]
A dream that trun into a Vision about Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Eui5X5_wg4 [with comments]
===
Beck: Anti-Vaxxers Are Being Persecuted, Just Like Galileo
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Tuesday, 2/3/2015 2:42 pm
Last year, when Glenn Beck learned that outbreaks of diseases like whooping cough and measles were on the rise due to an increasing number of parents who are refusing to have their children vaccinated, he reacted by literally standing up and applauding [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/glenn-beck-literally-stands-and-applauds-parents-who-are-refusing-have-their-children-vaccin ] those parents.
Now that the issue of vaccinations [ http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/02/03/chris-christie-rand-paul-under-fire-for-vaccine-remarks/ ] has worked its way into the 2016 presidential campaign, Beck returned to the topic today on his radio show [ http://www.glennbeck.com/2015/02/03/glenn-people-are-being-destroyed-by-political-correctness/ ], declaring that opposing vaccinations is an issue on which activists on the Right and on the Left ought to be able to find common ground and work together.
"I'm interested in moving to common sense. I'm interested in moving in the direction of freedom," Beck said. "And so when it comes to these measles vaccinations, we have a lot in common with the left ... and we have to reach out to allies."
While declaring that nobody wants children to get measles, Beck asserted that "there's something happening" with the measles vaccine and the rise of children being diagnosed with forms of autism that should make people cautious about getting their children vaccinated.
"God gave me a brain. God gave me personal choice and responsibility for those choices," he said. "I'm going to say no to those vaccines because I've done my homework."
Beck then went on to declare that people who oppose vaccines are now being persecuted, just as Galileo was persecuted by the Catholic Church.
"Here's another group of people that are now being rounded-up and pointed at and called morons and idiots and crackpots and crazies," he said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRU4ZgyZ2bA (below, as embedded; with comments)]. "Just totally discredited ... Where is anybody saying 'my gosh, we're living in the days of Galileo'? The church has become the state and if you don't practice their religion exactly the way they tell you to practice it, you're done."
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/beck-anti-vaxxers-are-being-persecuted-just-galileo [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110576255 and preceding and following]
--
'Oh Wow': Glenn Beck Says People Are Starting To Realize That Everything He Warned About Is All Coming True
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Wednesday, 2/4/2015 2:14 pm
Disturbed by footage of ISIS militants burning alive [ http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/03/reports-islamic-state-video-appears-to-show-jordanian-pilot-being-burned-alive/ ] a Jordanian pilot, as well as by recent comments [ http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/04/jesse-ventura-on-american-sniper-chris-kyle-do-you-think-the-nazis-have-heroes/ ] made by Jesse Ventura and a bizarre video [ http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/03/award-winning-independence-day-actor-goes-on-unhinged-rant-against-rupert-murdoch-in-bizarre-video/ ] released by actor Randy Quaid, Glenn Beck said on his radio program today [ http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/04/what-prompted-glenn-beck-to-say-the-world-has-gone-absolutely-stark-raving-mad/ ] that people are starting to open their eyes and admit that "the world has gone absolutely stark raving mad" because everything Beck has been warning about for years is all now coming true.
Beck said that while he has felt "lost" for the last several years, he knows that "there's something big left to do ... I think we're at the beginning. I think it has begun."
And Beck is confident that he will be the one to show us all the way forward because people are finally beginning to realize that "everything that I warned against" is now happening.
"I had that period in my life where I was the clarion call of wake up, this is what is going to come," he said. "Now it's all here. ... Now people can begin to say, 'Oh, wait a minute, wow, there is a caliphate. Oh wow, they are going to try to kill all of us. Oh wow, fascism and Nazism and communism is coming back, the hatreds of the 1930s. Oh wow, there are people talking about killing the Jews. Oh wow, they are leaving Europe in droves and going to Israel for protection. Oh wow, they are printing money.'"
"I think," Beck concluded [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMdTy4yIJMc (below, as embedded; with comments)], "we're at the beginning of our globe radically changing":
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/oh-wow-glenn-beck-says-people-are-starting-realize-everything-he-warned-about-all-coming-tru [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110581235 and preceding and following]
--
Michael Savage: Obama Committing 'Medical Genocide' Through Measles Outbreak
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Thursday, 2/5/2015 3:55 pm
Conservative talk show host Michael Savage [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/michael-savage ] claimed yesterday that the recent Disneyland measles outbreak is just a “clever way for the Alinsky crowd to shift the subject from their failed war on terror to their war on anti-vaccinators.” These left-wing Alinskyites, according to Savage, are controlled by the “medical-pharmaceutical complex” and want to bring about a McCarthy-style witch hunt against people who don’t vaccinate their children.
But this is all just the tip of the iceberg, Savage said. He went on to push the completely baseless conspiracy theory [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/conservative-pundits-blame-immigrants-california-measles-outbreak ] that undocumented immigrant children brought measles to America and said President Obama is responsible for a “crime against humanity” and “medical genocide.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/savage-obama-using-measles-to-commit-medical-genocide ) embedded]
“I was asked about the origins of the measles outbreak in America and it’s pretty clear to me that it came in with the illegals,” Savage said. “We know that Obama committed a crime against humanity by dumping many, many, many, many ill people, mothers and children primarily, on us this summer unscreened, many of them brought in a killer virus, measles, tuberculosis and other illnesses.”
“Whoever has permitted this, and that would be the stooge at the CDC, the stooge at the NIS and Obama himself, are committing a form of medical genocide,” Savage added.
Despite Savage’s claim, the Central American children who fled to the southern border this summer mainly came from countries with higher vaccination rates [ http://www.texasobserver.org/disease-threat-immigrant-children-wildly-overstated/ (at/see {linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=104254370 and preceding and following)] than the U.S.
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/michael-savage-obama-committing-medical-genocide-through-measles-outbreak
--
Glenn Beck: The Measles Outbreak Is A 'Hoax' Meant To Convince People To 'Obey The Government'
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Friday, 2/6/2015 11:35 am
There is a fundamental irony that lies at the heart of Glenn Beck's media empire, in that it operates under the banner "Truth [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/glenn-becks-perfect-demonstration-how-take-things-out-context ] Lives [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/beck-its-plausible-john-brennan-converted-islam-and-reasonable-ask-questions ] Here [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/how-glenn-becks-conspiracy-theories-are-born ]" while Beck himself continues to be a regular source of misinformation and falsehoods.
Nothing better demonstrates this fact that the opening of Beck's radio program yesterday where he declared that the current measles outbreak is a "hoax" designed increase government control, which he "proved" by reading from a piece posted on 21st Century Wire [ http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/02/04/us-measles-hoax-cdc-who-merck-documents-proves-vaccinated-are-spreading-virus/ ].
As Beck told it, "if you look at the 102 children in California who have been detected with measles, you look at where they came from, you see that the two cases came from 1) an Amish community and 2) a group of travelers who entered the U.S. from the Philippines. If you eliminate those two sources, there is no uptrend in measles."
Beck and co-host Pat Gray then went on to assert that even though immigrants from the Philippines are responsible for the measles outbreak, the media won't report that because their intention is "to make the case that you've got to obey the government" and get vaccinated. "Do everything you can just to obey the government," Beck said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VY90ri9H_oA (next below, as embedded; with comments)]:
As usual, apparently nobody within Beck's entire company could find five minutes to do some basic research on these claims, because if they had, they would have quickly realized that Beck's assertions were entirely wrong.
As the CDC explained [ http://www.cdc.gov/measles/cases-outbreaks.html ], there was a large outbreak of measles "among unvaccinated Amish communities in Ohio" in 2014, but that outbreak started [ http://www.dailynews.com/health/20150204/disneyland-measles-outbreak-dwarfed-by-2014s-in-ohios-amish-country ] when "unvaccinated Amish missionaries traveled to the Philippines and returned with the virus."
The current measles outbreak has literally nothing to do with this 2014 incident and Beck's assertion that the current outbreak can be tied to "this Filipino family or group of travelers" is entirely false as it was not Filipino tourists who brought the disease into the U.S. but rather unvaccinated Amish missionaries who brought it back to the U.S. from the Philippines in April of last year [ http://www.vox.com/2015/1/29/7929791/measles-outbreak-2014 ]!
Nothing better exemplifies the true absurdity of Beck's media empire than the fact that he opened his radio program yesterday by spreading utterly false information while alleging some sort of government conspiracy all while operating under the banner of "Truth Lives Here."
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/glenn-beck-measles-outbreak-hoax-meant-convince-people-obey-government [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110701265 and preceding (and any future following)]
--
GOP Presidential Hopefuls And Members Of Congress Appear In New Anti-Gay 'Documentary'
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Thursday, 2/5/2015 12:48 pm
Update: Porter has also released a trailer [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/sen-rand-paul-and-gop-congressmen-appear-new-trailer-anti-gay-documentary (next below)] featuring Rand Paul and several GOP congressmen.
Today, Faith 2 Action [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/faith-2-action ]'s Janet Porter [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/janet-porter-n%C3%A9e-folger ] sent out an email [ http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?ca=92504120-888b-4166-ba02-ff4ff94669b2&c ] to activists excitedly announcing that she is finishing up editing a new anti-gay [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/topics/anti-gay ] documentary that she intends to release at the National Religious Broadcaster's Convention in Nashville at the end of this month.
Porter, who was a longtime Religious Right activist and radio host [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/republican-leaders-join-anti-gay-extremists-insane-documentary ] until she lost her program [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/vcy-drops-porters-radio-program-over-dominion-theology ] due to her increasing radicalism only to re-emerge as an anti-abortion activist [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/janet-porter-will-appeal-heaven-passage-her-heartbeat-bill ] and right-wing social media entrepreneur [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/get-ready-reaganbook-facebook-patriots ], has brought together a who's who of hardline anti-gay activists, members of Congress, and presidential hopefuls for her film entitled "Light Wins: How To Overcome The Criminalization Of Christianity."
Among the participants are Rep. Steve King [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/steve-king ], Rep. Trent Franks [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/trent-franks ], Rep. Louie Gohmert [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/louie-gohmert ], Rep. Tim Huelskamp [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/tim-huelskamp ], Sen. Rand Paul [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/rand-paul-0 ], Mike Huckabee [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/mike-huckabee ], David Barton [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/david-barton ], James Dobson [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/james-dobson ], Mat Staver [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/mat-staver ], Phyllis Schlafly [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/phyllis-schlafly ], Scott Lively [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/scott-lively ], Alveda King [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/alveda-king ], Brian Camenker [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/brian-camenker ], Frank Pavone [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/frank-pavone ], Robert Knight [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/robert-knight ], John Stemberger [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/john-stemberger ], and, of course, Porter herself, who can been seen walking around in the woods with a lantern, warning that gay activists are seeking to turn Christians into criminals [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFIctFKnZKQ (below, as embedded; with comments)]:
Porter released a separate preview [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPQzabna5kg (below, as embedded; comments disabled)] of the film today, featuring a clip in which she blasts the Boy Scouts for having "needlessly caved to a dark sexual agenda" by allowing gay Scouts to join the organization while Knight and Stemberger warn that, as a result, the Boy Scouts will soon face "homosexual scandals" just like Penn State and the Catholic Church:
While it might come as a bit of a surprise to see someone like Rand Paul listed as appearing in this documentary, Mike Huckabee's participation should come as no surprise at all, as he has had close ties to Porter for years [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/huckabee-i-answer-janet-porter ], even having named her as co-chair of his Faith and Family Values Coalition [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/right-rallies-round-huckabee ] when he ran for president in 2008 [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/religious-right-debate-organizer-declares-huckabee-anointed-one ].
Predictably, Huckabee has nothing but praise [ http://www.ambassadorspeakers.com/ACP/speakers.aspx?speaker=270 ] for Porter's film:
"Light Wins" reveals the frightening trend not to simply ignore Christian believers, but to rid society of us altogether. This ground breaking, eye opening film will awaken viewers to the fact that being a spectator is no longer an option. One will be part of the solution or part of the problem, and I hope this riveting documentary will cause believers to take notice."
For more info on Porter's long history of making insane claims, see this round-up [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/republican-leaders-join-anti-gay-extremists-insane-documentary ].
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/gop-presidential-hopefuls-and-members-congress-appear-new-anti-gay-documentary [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=95666631 and preceding and following]
--
Sen. Rand Paul And GOP Congressmen Appear In New Trailer For Anti-Gay Documentary
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Wednesday, 2/11/2015 4:42 pm
Last week, we noted that fringe [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/republican-leaders-join-anti-gay-extremists-insane-documentary ] Religious Right activist Janet Porter was readying the release of a new anti-gay documentary she produced called "Light Wins: How To Overcome The Criminalization Of Christianity" that was reported [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/gop-presidential-hopefuls-and-members-congress-appear-new-anti-gay-documentary (just above)] to feature a variety of members of Congress and Republican presidential hopefuls.
At the time, there were only two clips from the movie available and the only political figure shown in either was Mike Huckabee. Today, Porter released another preview of her film [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jGMTdnNr6g (below, as embedded; comments disabled)], which contains footage of interviews she conducted with several anti-gay activists as well as with Rep. Louie Gohmert, Rep. Tim Huelskamp, Rep. Trent Franks, and Sen. Rand Paul, all attacking the Supreme Court for striking down the Defense of Marriage Act and for threatening to utterly destroy the institution of marriage entirely by legalizing gay marriage:
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/sen-rand-paul-and-gop-congressmen-appear-new-trailer-anti-gay-documentary [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=93675334 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=98128173 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110674811 and preceding (and any future following)]
--
David Horowitz: 'Racist' Obama Lets 'All Aggressors Of Color Get To Be Victims'
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Tuesday, 2/10/2015 12:55 pm
David Horowitz [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/david-horowitz , http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/david-horowitz-freedom-center ] was invited to Newsmax [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baumO71pzA4 ("This video is private. Sorry about that.")] today to discuss a new DHS information service [ http://www.dhs.gov/immigration-information-and-assistance ] for people with questions about the implementation of President Obama’s executive actions on deportation relief, which he said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cYsTsXPZAU (below, as embedded; with comments)] showed that “we let all aggressors of color get to be victims.”
“I mean, it’s not just the immigration [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/topics/immigration-0 ] issue,” he continued. “It’s the race issue, too. We had a lynch mob out there in Ferguson [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/topics/ferguson ] for months that spread then to the rest of the country, and they were called protesters, and it’s like there was some hurt inflicted on them. What is the hurt in taking down a criminal like Michael Brown, who’s assaulting a police officer?”
“So the left has successfully changed the equation so that if you’re here illegally, somehow we should be sympathetic to you, and somehow you have rights, and somehow we want to heed your complaints. This is suicidal,” he said.
Later in the interview, Horowitz declared that “the president of the United States is a racist” and claimed that President Obama had appointed Rev. Al Sharpton, the “chief racist” and “chief lynch-mob leader in the country,” as his “race relations advisor.” The president is “backing these lynch mobs,” he added.
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/david-horowitz-racist-obama-lets-all-aggressors-color-get-be-victims
--
Fischer: Roy Moore Is A Modern Day Martin Luther King, Jr.
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Tuesday, 2/10/2015 3:33 pm
On his radio program today [ http://vimeo.com/119269646 ], Bryan Fischer [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/bryan-fischer ] hailed Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/roy-moore ] as a modern-day Martin Luther King, Jr. for his order to state probate judges not to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples after a federal judge struck down the state's gay marriage ban.
Fischer laughably asserted that it is the federal judge, not Moore, "who is standing in the courthouse doorway ... in defiance of both the law and the Constitution," before praising Moore and the probate judges who are refusing to grant marriage licenses to gay couples as the heirs of MLK.
"What Judge Moore and these probate judges are doing is in the finest tradition of Martin Luther King, Jr.," he said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4AiprbrYO4 (below, as embedded; with comments)]. "They are waging the civil rights battle of this decade, using nonviolent protest to do it":
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/fischer-roy-moore-modern-day-martin-luther-king-jr [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=103100000 and preceding and following]
--
Rick Santorum: 'Sexual Activity' Rights Encroaching On Religious Rights
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Wednesday, 2/11/2015 2:45 pm
On his radio show yesterday, Steve Deace played clips [ http://stevedeace.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/deace_hour1_021015.mp3 ] of interviews he held recently with likely presidential candidates on whether “the sexual revolution trumps the American Revolution,” or if “someone’s erotic liberty trumps your religious liberty.”
The Iowa talk radio host directed these questions at potential presidential candidates Mike Huckabee, Ted Cruz [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/ted-cruz , http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/ted-cruz/ted-cruz ], Ben Carson [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/ben-carson ], Scott Walker and Rick Santorum [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/rick-santorum ], along with consistent non-candidate Donald Trump [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/donald-trump ].
All six Republican politicians agreed that no, “erotic liberty” does not trump religious liberty. Santorum stressed that freedom of religion takes precedence over “the newfound freedom to do whatever you want to do from a sexual orientation — not a sexual orientation — a sexual activity point of view, that to me is a much lower freedom because is an activity, it is not at the heart of who you are.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/santorum-sexual-activity-rights-encroach-on-religious-rights ) embedded]
Deace also discussed new claims [ http://chicago.suntimes.com/lynn-sweet-politics/7/71/360811/obama-denies-axelrod-account-switching-support-gay-marriage-political-gain ] that President Obama reversed his previous support for same-sex marriage as a presidential candidate in 2008 because he feared upsetting African American voters [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/02/11/what-david-axelrod-got-wrong-about-gay-marriage-and-the-black-church/ ], asserting that Obama only hid his real stance on marriage equality in order to become “America’s first champion for sodomy in the White House.”
“There is a word we typically use to describe those who mislead their own tribe, mislead their own peer group, commit acts of treachery like this to manipulate them: this is traitorous, absolutely traitorous,” Deace said.
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/deace-obama-is-first-champion-for-sodomy ) embedded]
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/rick-santorum-sexual-activity-rights-encroaching-religious-rights [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=109057017 and preceding and following]
--
Michael Savage Cites Fake Quote To Blast Obama As 'Jew-Hater In The White House'
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Wednesday, 2/11/2015 3:35 pm
Michael Savage is positively outraged about President Obama’s remarks [ http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/after-uproar-white-house-clarifies-obama-s-thinking-on-paris-kosher-deli-terror-20150210 ] about the terrorist attack at a kosher deli in Paris, railing against Obama as “the Jew-hater in the White House.”
“How can the Jewish people ever vote for this man who hates Israel and hates the Jews?” Savage asked on his radio show today [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFV2Yb9WNC0 (next below; with comments)].
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/savage-obamas-a-jew-hater ) embedded]
The right-wing talk show host went on to cite a fake quote [ http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/jarrettislam.asp ] from Valerie Jarrett, in which she “says” that she wants to make America a “more Islamic country,” in order to prove his point that Obama is a secret Muslim who seeks to “attack Jews.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/savage-uses-fake-quote-to-suggest-obama-jarrett-are-muslims ) embedded]
Savage’s meltdown continued as he called White House spokesman Josh Earnest a “piece of human garbage,” a “filthy double-talking piece of—” and a “lying, simpering, inhuman thing” who is “a shame to his mother and father and a shame to his entire genealogy, he has just disgraced his entire gene pool.”
“This thing has to go, this creep, this creep, this lowlife creep spokesmouth for Obama just did something that Goebbels wouldn’t have dared do,” Savage said. “If there really is a God in Heaven and a Judgment Day, man, I want to be there, I want to be there when this character who talks for Obama like this goes before whoever does the prejudging for God. I’d like to be in the audience, I’d like to see what the punishment would be, because there will be punishment for this man in his own life, he will get sick from his own words.”
He then called out Steven Spielberg, Jeffrey Katzenberg, David Geffen and Michael Bloomberg as part a modern-day Sanhedrin [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhedrin ] run by the “Jews of Hollywood” that backs the “Fuhrer” Obama.
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/savage-has-meltdown ) embedded]
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/michael-savage-cites-fake-quote-blast-obama-jew-hater-white-house [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=19878797 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=35675436 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=41427048 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=43516185 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=56691256 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=73013825 and preceding (and any future following)]
--
Fischer: Obama's Support For Gay Marriage Was A Declaration That He Is No Longer A Christian
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Wednesday, 2/11/2015 3:36 pm
On his radio program today [ http://vimeo.com/119372711 ], Bryan Fischer discussed David Axelrod's claim [ http://news.yahoo.com/obama-disputes-aide-david-axelrods-gay-marriage-085901692--politics.html ] in his new book that President Obama concealed his support for gay marriage when running for office for political reasons, a claim which Obama disputes [ http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-02-11/obama-axelrod-mixed-up-on-my-gay-marriage-views ].
Fischer's main takeaway from the whole episode, of course, is that what President Obama [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/topics/president-barack-obama ] was really doing in eventually announcing his support for gay marriage was declaring that he was not a Christian.
"Think about this for a second," Fischer said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuutiwM89Fo (below, as embedded; with comments)]. "President Obama said several times, 'The reason I believe that marriage is a union of one man and one woman is because I am a Christian.' So what does it mean, what are the implications when President Obama says, 'I no longer believe that marriage is a union of one man and one woman'? The implication is, 'I'm no longer a Christian. Christianity teaches marriage is a union of one man and one woman, I used to be one of those, I used to be a Christian, I used to believe in a Christian view of marriage. I don't any longer' ... If you press what Obama's saying there, he would be saying 'look, I'm no longer a Christian'":
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/fischer-obamas-support-gay-marriage-was-declaration-he-no-longer-christian
--
Mississippi KKK Chapter Backs Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore In Anti-Gay Marriage Fight
WASHINGTON - JUNE 8: Roy Moore, former Chief Justice of The Alabama Supreme Court, testifies at a Senate Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights Subcommittee hearing, entitled 'Beyond the Pledge of Allegiance: Hostility to Religious Expression in the Public Square.' on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC June 8, 2004. Moore was removed from office for refusing to take down a public display of the Ten Commandments in the courthouse.
(Photo by Matthew Cavanaugh/Getty Images)
[ http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/02/roy_moore_mississippi_kkk_gay.html (with comments),
(more at) http://photos.al.com/4558/gallery/roy_moore_toons/index.html#/0 (no comments yet)]
By Paige Lavender
Posted: 02/12/2015 10:46 am EST Updated: 02/12/2015 8:59 pm EST
Imperial Wizard Brent Waller of the United Dixie White Knights, a Mississippi branch of the Ku Klux Klan located near the border of Alabama, shared the group's support for Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore in a statement published on the UDWK's website [ https://sites.google.com/site/uniteddixiewhiteknights/words-from-the-wizard ] and the white supremacist forum Stormfront [ https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1087840/ ] on Tuesday.
"The Mississippi Klan salutes Alabama's chief justice Roy Moore, for refusing to bow to the yoke of Federal tyranny," Waller wrote. "The Feds have no authority over individual States marriage laws. The fudgepackers from Hollywood and all major news networks are in shock that the good people from the heart of Dixie are resisting their Imperialist, Communist Homosexual agenda!"
Waller urged Klansmen and other white nationalists to support "the Christian community's protests that are surly [sic] coming against tyranical [sic] Federal judges," but asked them to leave out "any insignia, colors, shirts" that represent the KKK. In an email to HuffPost, Waller said Alabama members of the KKK brought the gay marriage story to the UDWK's attention.
Earlier this week, Moore made a last-minute attempt [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/09/alabama-gay-marriage_n_6642622.html ] to block same-sex marriages from taking place in Alabama, ordering state probate judges to refuse to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. The Supreme Court allowed same-sex marriages to begin in the state on Monday, though some counties still refused [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/10/alabama-gay-marriage-refu_n_6657654.html ] to issue gay marriage licenses.
H/T [ http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/02/mississippi_kkk_salutes_alabam.html ] AL.com
Copyright ©2015 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/12/kkk-roy-moore_n_6669734.html [with embedded video report, and comments]
--
Roy Moore's Showdown With The Courts Over Gay Marriage Tied To The Work Of Neo-Confederate Leader
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Thursday, 2/12/2015 1:30 pm
Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore threw his state into turmoil this week when he ordered probate judges to defy a federal judge’s ruling striking down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage and refuse to issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples. Moore, who has a history [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/alabamas-notorious-anti-gay-chief-justice-wants-state-defy-federal-courts-marriage ] of making extreme anti-gay statements [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/roy-moore-2002-homosexuality-evil-abhorrent-and-destructive-criminal-lifestyle ], insists that the federal judge is the one who is really breaking the law since she violated [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/roy-moore-supporter-lgbt-rights-advocates-are-real-anarchists-because-they-defy-gods-law ] divine [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/roy-moore-institution-marriage-god-ordained-under-sustained-attack-federal-judges ] law [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/alabamas-notorious-anti-gay-chief-justice-wants-state-defy-federal-courts-marriage ] by ruling for marriage equality.
Moore’s call for statewide defiance of the federal judiciary’s “tyranny” stems from a belief that the Constitution was made to protect biblical commandments, so that anything that goes against his personal interpretation of the Bible is therefore in violation of the Constitution.
Moore shares that belief with a powerful ally: Michael Peroutka [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/michael-peroutka ], a neo-Confederate activist who is also one of the most influential behind-the-scenes figures in the Religious Right’s reimagining of American law.
Peroutka, who once held [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/michael-peroutka-leaves-league-south-shocked-discover-racism-neo-confederate-group ] a leadership position in the neo-Confederate League of the South [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/league-of-the-south ] and remained a member of the group until it hampered his run for a local office in Maryland last year, promotes this theocratic view of the law through his group the Institute on the Constitution [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/institute-constitution ]. Speaking at an event at the Institute in 2011, Moore gushed [ http://religiondispatches.org/close-encounters-with-roy-moore/ ] that Peroutka would help lead America to a “glorious triumph” over the federal government’s “tyranny.”
But Peroutka is more than a friend and ideological ally to Moore [ https://www.au.org/church-state/september-2007-church-state/featured/roy-moore-in-exile ]: he has funded Moore’s activism for more than a decade, and in 2012 bankrolled [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/ten-commandments-and-4300-year-old-dinosaur-michael-peroutka-s-web-christian-nation-influenc ] Moore’s successful campaign for the top seat on the Alabama Supreme Court.
After Moore was removed from his original position on Alabama’s high court in 2003 for defying a federal court order to remove a monument of the Ten Commandments from the state judicial building, Peroutka paid for the ousted judge to go [id.] on a national speaking tour to build support for his cause. He also funded [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/ten-commandments-and-4300-year-old-dinosaur-michael-peroutka-s-web-christian-nation-influenc ] a group that held rallies in support of Moore.
Over the nine years, Peroutka contributed [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/ten-commandments-and-4300-year-old-dinosaur-michael-peroutka-s-web-christian-nation-influenc ] over a quarter of a million dollars to two groups founded by Moore, the Foundation for Moral Law [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/foundation-for-moral-law ] (which is now run by Moore’s wife Kayla) and the now-defunct Coalition to Restore America.
In 2004, the far-right Constitution Party [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/constitution-party ] tried to recruit Moore to run for president on its ticket. When he declined, Peroutka stepped in to run in his place.
This neo-Confederate leader [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/maryland-goper-michael-peroutka-leads-dixie-national-anthem-southern-secessionist-conference ] helped to lay the ideological groundwork for Moore’s current standoff with the federal courts, a standoff which many commentators have compared to Alabama Gov. George Wallace’s decision to defy federal law on desegregation.
Peroutka thinks states should defy and ignore federal rulings on gay rights [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/deace-and-peroutka-compare-gay-marriage-bank-robbery-urge-kentuckians-ignore-marriage-equali ] since federal judges have “no authority [id.]” to rule in marriage cases, because marriage was already defined by God and the Constitution was designed to enforce such divine arrangements.
Peroutka said last year that such rulings would “coerce” state officials to “declare that which is sinful and immoral” to be “valid and right,” even forcing them to “participate in it.” Such “evil” decisions, according to Peroutka [id.], must be “resisted at every level of government, even the lower levels of government, most especially the lower levels of government,” since local governments are the true “protectors against those who would force these things on us tyrannically from above.”
For example, after a federal judge struck down Kentucky’s ban on same-sex marriage last year, Peroutka insisted that Sen. Rand Paul [id.] move to impeach the judge who made the decision, defund the court, and press for his state to defy the ruling: “He should use every influence he has in Kentucky to have people not obey this; the Kentucky legislature, the Kentucky courts, should not obey this, this is not lawful.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/peroutka-gay-marriage-debate-a ) embedded]
Peroutka also believes that local officials should defy their state legislatures on issues like marriage equality [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/topics/marriage-equality ]. After Maryland’s general assembly voted in 2012 to legalize same-sex marriage in the state, Peroutka declared that the assembly’s decision to “violate God’s laws” effectively invalidated its legal authority [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/michael-peroutka-explains-how-marriage-equality-invalidated-all-maryland-laws ], since any law that contradicts divine law does “not constitute a law – even if it were enacted and signed.”
Using an argument similar to the one Moore is now making in Alabama, Peroutka said [id.; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMsjV5S2KRA (below, as embedded; with comments)] that lower-level officials could ignore not only the marriage equality law but any law passed by the state’s general assembly, since it had invalidated itself by breaking biblical decrees: “Is it possible that those who are sworn to uphold the law, such as police and sheriffs and judges and prosecutors, may soon come to the conclusion that the enactments of this body should be ignored because they are based not in law, but in lawlessness?”
For the same reasons, Peroutka believes Roe v. Wade is invalid [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/new-anti-choice-group-launches-michael-peroutka-lecture-how-roe-v-wade-isnt-actually-law ] and supports religious tests for public office [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/institute-constitution-course-there-should-be-religious-test-public-office ], since atheists and non-Christians do not believe in the basis of constitutional law…the Bible. He also deems the teaching of evolution [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/michael-peroutka-promotion-evolution-act-disloyalty-america ] in schools to be “anti-American” because evolution challenges what his reading of the Bible says about the origins of humankind. “The promotion of evolution is an act of disloyalty to America,” he once declared [id.].
In Peroutka’s view, anything that breaks the “organic law,” or biblical law, is automatically unconstitutional.
Peroutka believes [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/how-unions-victory-civil-war-led-gay-marriage ] that America needs to “go back to what God called marriage, not what the state has perverted the definition to be, but what God called marriage.” Since biblical law doesn’t permit same-sex marriage in his view, then civil law can’t either: “There is no way we are ever going to validate homo- or sodomite-‘unmarriage’ because God defined marriage as between a man and a woman once and forever.”
“I always go back to these two standards: What does God say and what does the Constitution say?” Peroutka explained [id.] in 2013.
He added that the United States will have a small, limited government as long as it adheres to biblical standards. But he believes that the Union’s victory in the Civil War — or as he calls it, “The War Between the States” — enabled the federal government to greatly expand its powers, thus undermining the authority of biblical law and leading to such evils as same-sex marriage.
“Ever since then, there’s been this huge black hole of centralized power that’s formed in Washington, D.C.” he said. “People sometimes talk about ‘The War Between the States’ as being about the issue of slavery. I believe that history is written by the winners, it wasn’t about that at all. What it was about was consolidating power into the hands of a few people.”
“[T]he real effect of the war and the Reconstruction after the war was to take the very foundation of our understanding of our rights away from us, that is to say that they come from God, and put them in the hands of men and say that they come from the Supreme Court or they come from the legislature or they come from the executive,” he added [id.].
The end of the Civil War, Peroutka claims [ https://www.au.org/church-state/september-2007-church-state/featured/roy-moore-in-exile ], produced an “evil anti-God, anti-Christian revolution” that led to a “tyrannical consolidation of power” in Washington, D.C., undermining the “biblical worldview that acknowledges Christ’s authority over all things.”
Peroutka also contends that the gay rights movement isn’t just “federalizing homosexuality” but “federalizing perversion,” even claiming that the federal government violated the Constitution [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/peroutka-enda-will-ultimately-force-people-be-gay ] by imposing civil rights laws on the states.
“[T]he so-called civil rights laws are not law,” he said in 2013. “They never should’ve been passed. They’re not law now, they weren’t law then. They aren’t law now because there is no such thing as a civil right.”
Since Peroutka believes [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/peroutka-s-mlk-day-message-martin-luther-king-didn-t-actually-support-civil-rights ] “rights come from God” and not civil government, he argues that all civil rights laws are illegitimate since “the term ‘civil rights’ is kind of an oxymoron. There’s no ‘right’ in the sense of a permanent, fixed, thing that you have, that can be defended, if in fact it comes from the civil government.”
Now Moore is once again putting Peroutka’s words into action, threatening state judges who lawfully issue a marriage licenses to a same-sex couples. Because in the eyes of Moore and Peroutka, their personal reading of the Bible takes precedence over the law of the land.
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/roy-moores-showdown-courts-over-gay-marriage-tied-work-neo-confederate-leader
--
Bryan Fischer: 'Gay Gestapo' Forcing Alabama Judges Into 'Slavery'
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Thursday, 2/12/2015 3:36 pm
Bryan Fischer is outraged that a federal judge may order [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/13/us/alabama-same-sex-marriage-ruling.html ] the dozens of Alabama probate judges who are refusing to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples to back down. On his American Family Radio [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/american-family-radio ] program today [ https://vimeo.com/119478608 ], Fischer said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUtHe3NXnFQ (below, as embedded; with comments)] that such an order would be tantamount to “tyranny” and “slavery” enforced by the “gay gestapo.”
“There’s a court hearing today before the federal judge, and she may order these probate judges to violate their own conscience and their own religious scruples,” he said. “She may order them to violate their conscience. You know what that is, ladies and gentlemen? You are ordered by an agent of the government to violate your conscience? That is tyranny.”
“When you are ordered by an agent of the government to violate your own conscience in something that you do, that is slavery. If you are forced to violate your conscience to do work, that is tyranny, that’s Tammy Bruce, that’s the gay gestapo. Tammy Bruce is the one that coined the term ‘gay gestapo.’ That’s the gay gestapo at work. You either do what we tell you or you’re going to get punished.”
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/bryan-fischer-gay-gestapo-forcing-alabama-judges-slavery
--
Alabama GOP chief says gay marriage will incur God's wrath, but state is already hellbound
[ http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/02/gay_marriage_has_alabama_truck.html (with comments)]
By John Archibald
on February 12, 2015 at 4:30 PM, updated February 12, 2015 at 5:20 PM
Bill Armistead is on that virtual street corner again, holding up the placard that reads "The End of the World is Nigh!"
"The State of Alabama and the United States of America will reap God's wrath if we embrace and condone things that are abhorrent to God, such as redefining marriage as anything other than a union between one man and one woman," the head of Alabama's Republican Party wrote in a column this week [ http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/02/alabama_gop_chairman_bill_armi.html ].
Repent Alabama! Build an ark! Because doom -- thanks to the gays -- is upon us!
Sorry, Bill, but you're too late. The doom is already on us, the end of our world is guaranteed. Look at the state of our state, the state of our people and politics, and you'll see that Alabama might as well go ahead and change its car tags to say Heart of the Hellbound.
Go to that Bible you thump if you don't believe it, Bill.
Proverbs says "put a knife to your throat if you are given to appetite." Been to the Golden Corral lately?
It goes on to say "be not among drunkards or among gluttonous eaters of meat."
But Alabama is the second fattest state in a fat America. The U.S. is second only to Luxembourg in the amount of meat it shovels in. Think about it, the average American eats 271 pounds of meat a year - roughly the mass of Alabama defensive lineman Da'Shawn Hand.
We're eating our way to hell. And it gets worse.
Jesus warned in Matthew that "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God." But Alabama lawmakers' whole platform involves making themselves, and the rich, even richer.
Shoot. He even said "If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor." But we won't even get into that.
Jesus went on to say "I was a stranger and you did not welcome me," but we build whole political campaigns on ridding the U.S. of immigrants.
He said he was "sick and in prison and you did not visit me," but we will not expand Medicaid to help the poor and the helpless. Our prisons are ugly and overcrowded, but we wait for the federal government to act because we are not, as a state, moved to care.
This stuff is hard, if you really want to take it literally. Keep reading Matthew.
"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart."
Oh snap. Half the population - and more than half the Legislature - is going to burn in hell for that one.
1st Corinthians says your body is a temple, but we don't care. Lung cancer rates in Alabama are among the highest in America, and our cigarette tax is among the lowest.
And then there's this one:
"Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery."
Look around, Bill Armistead.
Matthew tells us "Judge not, that you be not judged," but we don't practice that either.
And of course there is the hard one. Jesus in Matthew said "Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."
But here in Alabama we'll punch you square in both cheeks. We're so proud of that fact that we made it our motto: "We dare defend our rights."
We just don't give a damn about yours.
And that, Bill Armistead, is the real reason we need to repent.
© 2015 Alabama Media Group
http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/02/alabama_gop_chief_says_gay_mar.html [with comments]
--
Bryan Fischer: 'Sexual Immorality' And Abortion Will Cause God To Drive Americans From Our Land
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Friday, 2/13/2015 9:57 am
A few months ago, Bryan Fischer justified the forcible removal [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/bryan-fischer-suggests-native-americans-were-justifiably-removed-their-land ] of Native Americans from their land by citing the biblical story of the Amorites, who he said “lapsed into superstition and paganism and idolatry and sexual immorality and savagery” and were therefore justly removed by God.
On his American Family Radio program yesterday [ https://vimeo.com/119482708 ], Fischer cited [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItUX6tjYoG4 (below, as embedded; with comments)] the same story to warn that the United States is similarly in danger of “forfeiting our moral authority to maintain governance of this piece of land” because of legal abortion, a “turning away from Christianity” and, of course, “sexual immorality.”
“Again, the same principle of people can become morally disqualified to exercise sovereign authority over land by their savagery (think about the blood we’ve shed in abortion); by their superstition (think about our turning away from Christianity and from the God of the scriptures); and sexual immorality, I mean that’s an obvious problem in our culture,” he said.
“If that principle is true that God will displace a nation that lapses into unrepentant savagery, sexual immorality and superstition, then we are in danger, I believe, of forfeiting our moral authority to maintain governance of this piece of land, maintain sovereignty,” he warned. “Something that ought to be a concern to all of us, something that ought to take us to our knees in prayer and repentance for our land.”
Fischer didn’t specify who he believed God would empower to drive Americans from their land, although last year he cited some of the same scriptural passages [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/fischer-god-will-use-isis-punish-america-gay-rights ] to claim that God is using radical Islamic groups like ISIS to inflict his judgment on America for gay rights.
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/bryan-fischer-sexual-immorality-and-abortion-will-cause-god-drive-americans-our-land
--
GOP Rep.: Gay Marriage Harms Children, Economy And Society
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Friday, 2/13/2015 10:50 am
Yesterday on “Washington Watch [ http://www.frc.org/wwlivewithtonyperkins/david-christensen-tim-huelskamp-penny-nance-matt-salmon ],” Rep. Tim Huelskamp called on Congress to hold a vote on his Marriage Protection Amendment, which would impose a national ban on same-sex marriage, as a way to pressure the Supreme Court against deciding in favor of marriage equality. The Kansas Republican told Family Research Council [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/family-research-council ] President Tony Perkins [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/tony-perkins ] that federal courts created “chaos” by striking down bans on same-sex marriage and now “folks are confused about what a marriage is.”
Huelskamp said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDzGFS9oK9c (below, as embedded; with comments)] that if “we don’t protect the traditional basis for marriage, it harms everyone, particularly our young children.” He also agreed with Perkins that legalizing gay marriage will “discourage family formation” and undermine the black community.
“So now is the time when the courts are trying to rule and might decide to redefine or undefine marriage, it is critical not just for individuals and for families but for society as a whole,” Huelskamp said. “At the end of the day, it’s children that are hurt.”
The congressman lamented [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsaraWho6c0 (below, as embedded; with comments)] that “our founders never envisioned a society which would reject a basic understanding of nature” and warned that marriage equality will harm America’s “economic wellbeing.”
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/gop-rep-gay-marriage-harms-children-economy-and-society
--
Robert Knight: Stop Gay Marriage By Impeaching Judges Who Rule For Equality
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Friday, 2/13/2015 11:31 am
Washington Times [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/washington-times ] columnist Robert Knight [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/robert-knight ] joined Steve Deace on his radio program [ http://stevedeace.com/podcast/deace-show-podcast-02-12-15/ ] yesterday to discuss the showdown in Alabama over a federal court ruling striking down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage.
Knight lamented that “judges have gotten out of control” because state and federal lawmakers have failed to bring them “to heel” by impeaching judges who rule in favor of marriage equality.
“The reason judges have gotten out of control is because legislators have not protected their turf, they have not used the constitutional means to bring these judges to heel,” he said. “One of them is impeachment. At the federal level and at the state level, there are many ways judges can be removed. In Massachusetts, it would have been easy to remove the Supreme Court judges who found a right to gay marriage in the Massachusetts Constitution in 2004, but that would have taken Gov. Mitt Romney to go ahead and get the process going and he refused.”
He also blamed the “pro-family movement” for failing to address why homosexuality is “bad for people” and neglecting to lift up the stories of people “who have recovered and become straight.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/knight-impeach-judges-who-rule-for-marriage-equality ) embedded]
Deace told Knight that Republicans who think a Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality would help them by putting aside a contentious issue are wrong, and that the ensuing national debate would “make Roe v. Wade look like a picnic.”
“This is going to go DEFCON 1, DEFCON subterranean, because now we’re going to be in an issue where the other side of the argument now thinks they are empowered and emboldened to unleash the full coercive power of government to force believers nationwide all the way to the church door to change their belief system,” he said.
“This is going to escalate if the court goes Roe v. Wade on this in the summer,” he warned. “It won’t diminish it at all. It will take this from a largely provincial state-by-state issue into a national debate that I think’s going to make Roe v. Wade look like a picnic.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/deace-scotus-marriage-ruling-would-make-roe-v-wade-look-like-a-picnic ) embedded]
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/robert-knight-stop-gay-marriage-impeaching-judges-who-rule-equality
--
Mat Staver: Homosexuality Is 'Very Deadly And Damaging'
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Friday, 2/13/2015 12:10 pm
Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/liberty-counsel ] stopped by VCY America [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/voice-christian-youth-america-vcy-america ]’s “Crosstalk [ http://www.vcyamerica.org/blog/2015/02/12/marriage-under-attack-alabama-supreme-court-justice-stands-up ]” yesterday to discuss his group’s attempt to stop judges from issuing marriage licenses [ http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14102&AlertID=1883 ] to same-sex couples in Alabama. Staver praised Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore for flouting the ruling of a federal court on the matter and lashed out at the Supreme Court for rejecting [ http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-02-09/gay-marriage-cleared-by-u-s-supreme-court-to-start-in-alabama ] Alabama’s appeal of the marriage case, saying that Alabama “does not have to obey” any future Supreme Court ruling “that there’s some invented right to same-sex marriage and therefore you can’t have marriage as a union of a man and a woman.”
“That is so far off the beaten path, so far removed from the Constitution that it is no rule of law,” Staver said. “There is a limit to what the court can do, there is a limit to what the people can stomach. If that court were to say, the laws of gravity were fine for the founders but we have progressed, we’re a progressive society and we think they have changed, you would say, ‘That’s nuts, have they lost their mind?’ The question is: Have they lost their mind by saying there’s a constitutional right for same-sex marriage?”
“Have they literally lost their mind?” he asked.
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/staver-justices-have-literally-lost-their-minds ) embedded]
Staver added that legalizing same-sex marriage is “harmful” to children because it tells them that “your moms and dads are absolutely meaningless.”
“Why would we take a relationship of same-sex unions, same-sex sexual activity, protect it and elevate it when we know that it’s a very harmful and it’s a very deadly and damaging relationship?” Staver asked. “Why would we elevate some kind of bad relationship, bad activity, dangerous and harmful, unhealthy activity to a protected status?”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/staver-homosexuality-is-deadly ) embedded]
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/mat-staver-homosexuality-very-deadly-and-damaging
===
'50 Shades' a hit in religious right's backyard
The Rachel Maddow Show
02/12/15
Rachel Maddow reports that the movie "50 Shades of Grey" is particularly popular in Southern, Bible Belt states, and especially so in Tupelo, Mississippi, the backyard of the very disapproving religious right group, The American Family Association.
©2015 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/50-shades-a-hit-in-religious-rights-home-398477891837 [with comments] [show links at http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/citations-the-february-12-2015-trms (with comment)] [the above YouTube of the segment at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWp9wRjGJSA (with comments)]
--
Des Moines kink community welcomes 'Fifty Shades'
Dominatrix Ms. Robin stands in the basement dungeon of her West Des Moines home Tuesday, Feb. 10, 2015.
(Photo: Zach Boyden-Holmes/The Register)
Courtney Crowder
10:45 a.m. CST February 13, 2015
While other 6-year-old girls were brushing their Barbies' hair and dressing them up for convertible rides with Ken, Ms. Robin was hogtying hers.
"I saw cartoons like 'Mighty Mouse' where they tied up the heroine," Ms. Robin said recently, sitting on a chair in her West Des Moines home, "and in my mind I tied these women up, because it's what I liked. It's who I am."
It was the first inkling that Ms. Robin was interested in a different kind of life from her peers, the kind of life that involved hogtying — professionally.
Ms. Robin, 60, is a dominatrix and has been for almost a decade. She's a grandmother of three and an expert in bondage, flogging, caning, spanking and medical play.
She lives in an unassuming house on an unassuming block — with a dungeon in her basement replete with stocks, a rack, a jail cell, a Robospanker and a wall of countless props, including whips, chains and masks. She watches "The Bachelor" on Monday nights, but spends other evenings intricately binding clients and suspending them in her garage.
Ms. Robin, who asked to be identified by her professional name, is part of the kink community that is experiencing exponential growth locally and nationally because of the popularity of E.L. James' best-selling erotic romance series "Fifty Shades of Grey."
The trilogy and accompanying movie, which opens in theaters Friday, have more people seeking out information on the BDSM lifestyle, local kinksters said. And although some in the kink community have qualms about the story and its stereotypes, many welcome the publicity as a way to draw more people into the fold.
"'Fifty Shades of Grey' came out and we just exploded," said Jay, a founder of local BDSM group Central Iowa Power Exchange (CIPEX) who requested to be referred to by his first name. "We are growing left and right."
A pop phenomenon, "Fifty Shades" centers on college student Anastasia Steele and her complicated relationship with Christian Grey, a 27-year-old CEO and kink enthusiast with dominant tendencies. The movie is Fandango's fastest selling R-rated title, according to the company, and the YouTube trailer has been viewed more than 50 million times.
"I am expecting to have another big spike (in members) after the movie," Jay said. "When the book came out we were nervous we were going to get men saying 'I'm dominant, bow to my needs,' but we didn't get that. Instead, we got a lot of people who were curious and wanted to learn."
Kink defined
BDSM is short for bondage and discipline, dominance and submission, sadism and masochism. But tying down what exactly that means is like herding cats. Simply, to those in the BDSM community, it means what you want it to mean.
"It's about stimulating other parts of the body and the mind and the heart," said Susan Wright, founder of the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, an advocacy group for the kink community. "... For some people, it's not a sexual thing at all. It's a spiritual response, a cathartic response. For other people, it's an endorphin rush, like a runner's high. For other people, though, it's sex and it's how they have sex."
For Ms. Robin, domination is about the skill, not the sex. "I, myself, am always clothed," she said of her client sessions.
Unlike the popular image of the leather bustier-wearing, stiletto-healed, foul-mouthed dominatrix, Ms. Robin is merely a free-spirited craftswoman. She spent five years apprenticing with dominatrixes across the country before turning pro. Now she speaks at conferences and colleges nationwide.
"I'm the most monogamous person, (and) I'm pretty straight-laced in some ways," said Ms. Robin, who lives with a partner. "But I'm very open and accepting of people and their kinks."
She was 40 when she entered the BDSM lifestyle. After a divorce, she dated a man who pointed out that her natural sexual penchants were dominatrix-like. She didn't know what the word was, but a quick Internet search introduced her to the culture.
Many people come into the kink community in a similar way: Someone tries something, they like it, they seek out people with similar interests.
It's like quilting, but with whips.
'Fifty Shades' of kink
At its core, "Fifty Shades" is a love story. Strip away the kink, and you're left with the bumpy, beautiful story of two people stumbling through life to find their happy ending.
And that depiction of a couple working together to create a sex life they're both comfortable with fits with the reality of kink culture, said Susan Wright, founder of the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, an advocacy group for the kink community.
"In the books, it's clear that part of (Anastasia) likes (kink), and part of her doesn't like it, which can happen," Wright said. "You can be inconsistent about things like 'I don't know if I want to try that, but I am going to try that.' ... You have to go through the process in order to figure it out."
As for the actual descriptions of sex: "Very close, and very erotic," Ms. Robin said.
Yet, it's not a BDSM how-to manual, Wright said. The trilogy's most dangerous misconception is the implication that Christian Grey's childhood abuse fuels his need for kink, BDSM advocates said.
"That is not the norm in the lifestyle," Ms. Robin said. "We are highly intelligent, high-functioning people. We don't drink. We don't do drugs. We are normal and boring. ... We just have a more elaborate sex life."
Despite such flaws, Wright contended: The book "brought kink into the mainstream, and we're talking about it with nuance."
"There are lots of kinky people standing up and saying ('Fifty Shades') is fantasy, if you want to learn the reality come here and we will help you," she said. "That's helping many kinky people realize they can express their sexuality, that they are OK, they are not alone."
Local kink
In Des Moines, kink culture has changed drastically over the years. When CIPEX started two decades ago, participants were afraid of persecution, Jay said.
"Back in the day, when I hosted a play party at my home, I would invite 20 or 30 people, and I would tell people, if the police come to the door, immediately untie each other, do not hit each other and let me talk to them," Jay said. "Now, I have a policeman in my group."
Jay estimates that more than 500 people claim to be regular members of CIPEX, and half of the 100 people who showed up at his last event hadn't been there before.
He said a regular play party on a Saturday night draws people from Cedar Rapids, Cedar Falls, Mason City and Omaha and Lincoln, Neb.
What once was taboo is now on the coffee table, Jay said.
"It's opening doors (and saying) there is something else out there," Jay said. "This is not an abusive lifestyle, it's kinky. Hey, people get tired of vanilla ice cream, and sometimes they want to try chocolate."
Jay and his wife are planning a Valentine's Day outing to "Fifty Shades," and Wright said she will see it this weekend as well. Ms. Robin's partner, too, answered with an enthusiastic "yes" when asked if they were going.
"Well," Ms. Robin said, pausing as a wide smile spread across her face. "I'll have to see if I have a session first."
© 2015 www.desmoinesregister.com
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/life/2015/02/12/dominatrix-fifty-shades-grey-grandmother/23326407/ [with embedded video with Ms. Robin and her dungeon and gear, and comments]
===
in addition to (linked in) the post to which this is a reply and preceding and (any future other) following, see also (linked in):
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110748556 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110749365 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110752764 and preceding (and any future following),
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110753907 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110775173 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110782665 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110784507 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110806218 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110821686 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110825010 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110828638 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110834634 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110860914 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110860986 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110870404 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110870610 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110876468 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110879726 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110885203 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110889515 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110901479 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110908577 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110911745 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110912373 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110912566 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110921138 and preceding (and any future following)
February 05, 2015
On February 5, 2015, President Obama delivered remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C.
*
Remarks by the President at National Prayer Breakfast
Washington Hilton
Washington, D.C.
February 05, 2015
9:13 A.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Well, good morning. Giving all praise and honor to God. It is wonderful to be back with you here. I want to thank our co-chairs, Bob and Roger. These two don’t always agree in the Senate, but in coming together and uniting us all in prayer, they embody the spirit of our gathering today.
I also want to thank everybody who helped organize this breakfast. It’s wonderful to see so many friends and faith leaders and dignitaries. And Michelle and I are truly honored to be joining you here today.
I want to offer a special welcome to a good friend, His Holiness the Dalai Lama -- who is a powerful example of what it means to practice compassion, who inspires us to speak up for the freedom and dignity of all human beings. (Applause.) I’ve been pleased to welcome him to the White House on many occasions, and we’re grateful that he’s able to join us here today. (Applause.)
There aren’t that many occasions that bring His Holiness under the same roof as NASCAR. (Laughter.) This may be the first. (Laughter.) But God works in mysterious ways. (Laughter.) And so I want to thank Darrell for that wonderful presentation. Darrell knows that when you’re going 200 miles an hour, a little prayer cannot hurt. (Laughter.) I suspect that more than once, Darrell has had the same thought as many of us have in our own lives -- Jesus, take the wheel. (Laughter.) Although I hope that you kept your hands on the wheel when you were thinking that. (Laughter.)
He and I obviously share something in having married up. And we are so grateful to Stevie for the incredible work that they’ve done together to build a ministry where the fastest drivers can slow down a little bit, and spend some time in prayer and reflection and thanks. And we certainly want to wish Darrell a happy birthday. (Applause.) Happy birthday.
I will note, though, Darrell, when you were reading that list of things folks were saying about you, I was thinking, well, you're a piker. I mean, that -- (laughter.) I mean, if you really want a list, come talk to me. (Laughter.) Because that ain’t nothing. (Laughter.) That's the best they can do in NASCAR? (Laughter.)
Slowing down and pausing for fellowship and prayer -- that's what this breakfast is about. I think it's fair to say Washington moves a lot slower than NASCAR. Certainly my agenda does sometimes. (Laughter.) But still, it’s easier to get caught up in the rush of our lives, and in the political back-and-forth that can take over this city. We get sidetracked with distractions, large and small. We can’t go 10 minutes without checking our smartphones -- and for my staff, that's every 10 seconds. And so for 63 years, this prayer tradition has brought us together, giving us the opportunity to come together in humility before the Almighty and to be reminded of what it is that we share as children of God.
And certainly for me, this is always a chance to reflect on my own faith journey. Many times as President, I’ve been reminded of a line of prayer that Eleanor Roosevelt was fond of. She said, “Keep us at tasks too hard for us that we may be driven to Thee for strength.” Keep us at tasks too hard for us that we may be driven to Thee for strength. I’ve wondered at times if maybe God was answering that prayer a little too literally. But no matter the challenge, He has been there for all of us. He’s certainly strengthened me “with the power through his Spirit,” as I’ve sought His guidance not just in my own life but in the life of our nation.
Now, over the last few months, we’ve seen a number of challenges -- certainly over the last six years. But part of what I want to touch on today is the degree to which we've seen professions of faith used both as an instrument of great good, but also twisted and misused in the name of evil.
As we speak, around the world, we see faith inspiring people to lift up one another -- to feed the hungry and care for the poor, and comfort the afflicted and make peace where there is strife. We heard the good work that Sister has done in Philadelphia, and the incredible work that Dr. Brantly and his colleagues have done. We see faith driving us to do right.
But we also see faith being twisted and distorted, used as a wedge -- or, worse, sometimes used as a weapon. From a school in Pakistan to the streets of Paris, we have seen violence and terror perpetrated by those who profess to stand up for faith, their faith, professed to stand up for Islam, but, in fact, are betraying it. We see ISIL, a brutal, vicious death cult that, in the name of religion, carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism -- terrorizing religious minorities like the Yezidis, subjecting women to rape as a weapon of war, and claiming the mantle of religious authority for such actions.
We see sectarian war in Syria, the murder of Muslims and Christians in Nigeria, religious war in the Central African Republic, a rising tide of anti-Semitism and hate crimes in Europe, so often perpetrated in the name of religion.
So how do we, as people of faith, reconcile these realities -- the profound good, the strength, the tenacity, the compassion and love that can flow from all of our faiths, operating alongside those who seek to hijack religious for their own murderous ends?
Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ. Michelle and I returned from India -- an incredible, beautiful country, full of magnificent diversity -- but a place where, in past years, religious faiths of all types have, on occasion, been targeted by other peoples of faith, simply due to their heritage and their beliefs -- acts of intolerance that would have shocked Gandhiji, the person who helped to liberate that nation.
So this is not unique to one group or one religion. There is a tendency in us, a sinful tendency that can pervert and distort our faith. In today’s world, when hate groups have their own Twitter accounts and bigotry can fester in hidden places in cyberspace, it can be even harder to counteract such intolerance. But God compels us to try. And in this mission, I believe there are a few principles that can guide us, particularly those of us who profess to believe.
And, first, we should start with some basic humility. I believe that the starting point of faith is some doubt -- not being so full of yourself and so confident that you are right and that God speaks only to us, and doesn’t speak to others, that God only cares about us and doesn’t care about others, that somehow we alone are in possession of the truth.
Our job is not to ask that God respond to our notion of truth -- our job is to be true to Him, His word, and His commandments. And we should assume humbly that we’re confused and don’t always know what we’re doing and we’re staggering and stumbling towards Him, and have some humility in that process. And that means we have to speak up against those who would misuse His name to justify oppression, or violence, or hatred with that fierce certainty. No God condones terror. No grievance justifies the taking of innocent lives, or the oppression of those who are weaker or fewer in number.
And so, as people of faith, we are summoned to push back against those who try to distort our religion -- any religion -- for their own nihilistic ends. And here at home and around the world, we will constantly reaffirm that fundamental freedom -- freedom of religion -- the right to practice our faith how we choose, to change our faith if we choose, to practice no faith at all if we choose, and to do so free of persecution and fear and discrimination.
There’s wisdom in our founders writing in those documents that help found this nation the notion of freedom of religion, because they understood the need for humility. They also understood the need to uphold freedom of speech, that there was a connection between freedom of speech and freedom of religion. For to infringe on one right under the pretext of protecting another is a betrayal of both.
But part of humility is also recognizing in modern, complicated, diverse societies, the functioning of these rights, the concern for the protection of these rights calls for each of us to exercise civility and restraint and judgment. And if, in fact, we defend the legal right of a person to insult another’s religion, we’re equally obligated to use our free speech to condemn such insults -- (applause) -- and stand shoulder-to-shoulder with religious communities, particularly religious minorities who are the targets of such attacks. Just because you have the right to say something doesn’t mean the rest of us shouldn’t question those who would insult others in the name of free speech. Because we know that our nations are stronger when people of all faiths feel that they are welcome, that they, too, are full and equal members of our countries.
So humility I think is needed. And the second thing we need is to uphold the distinction between our faith and our governments. Between church and between state. The United States is one of the most religious countries in the world -- far more religious than most Western developed countries. And one of the reasons is that our founders wisely embraced the separation of church and state. Our government does not sponsor a religion, nor does it pressure anyone to practice a particular faith, or any faith at all. And the result is a culture where people of all backgrounds and beliefs can freely and proudly worship, without fear, or coercion -- so that when you listen to Darrell talk about his faith journey you know it's real. You know he’s not saying it because it helps him advance, or because somebody told him to. It's from the heart.
That’s not the case in theocracies that restrict people’s choice of faith. It's not the case in authoritarian governments that elevate an individual leader or a political party above the people, or in some cases, above the concept of God Himself. So the freedom of religion is a value we will continue to protect here at home and stand up for around the world, and is one that we guard vigilantly here in the United States.
Last year, we joined together to pray for the release of Christian missionary Kenneth Bae, held in North Korea for two years. And today, we give thanks that Kenneth is finally back where he belongs -- home, with his family. (Applause.)
Last year, we prayed together for Pastor Saeed Abedini, detained in Iran since 2012. And I was recently in Boise, Idaho, and had the opportunity to meet with Pastor Abedini’s beautiful wife and wonderful children and to convey to them that our country has not forgotten brother Saeed and that we’re doing everything we can to bring him home. (Applause.) And then, I received an extraordinary letter from Pastor Abedini. And in it, he describes his captivity, and expressed his gratitude for my visit with his family, and thanked us all for standing in solidarity with him during his captivity.
And Pastor Abedini wrote, “Nothing is more valuable to the Body of Christ than to see how the Lord is in control, and moves ahead of countries and leadership through united prayer.” And he closed his letter by describing himself as “prisoner for Christ, who is proud to be part of this great nation of the United States of America that cares for religious freedom around the world.” (Applause.)
We’re going to keep up this work -- for Pastor Abedini and all those around the world who are unjustly held or persecuted because of their faith. And we’re grateful to our new Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom, Rabbi David Saperstein -- who has hit the ground running, and is heading to Iraq in a few days to help religious communities there address some of those challenges. Where’s David? I know he’s here somewhere. Thank you, David, for the great work you’re doing. (Applause.)
Humility; a suspicion of government getting between us and our faiths, or trying to dictate our faiths, or elevate one faith over another. And, finally, let’s remember that if there is one law that we can all be most certain of that seems to bind people of all faiths, and people who are still finding their way towards faith but have a sense of ethics and morality in them -- that one law, that Golden Rule that we should treat one another as we wish to be treated. The Torah says “Love thy neighbor as yourself.” In Islam, there is a Hadith that states: "None of you truly believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself.” The Holy Bible tells us to “put on love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony.” Put on love.
Whatever our beliefs, whatever our traditions, we must seek to be instruments of peace, and bringing light where there is darkness, and sowing love where there is hatred. And this is the loving message of His Holiness, Pope Francis. And like so many people around the world, I’ve been touched by his call to relieve suffering, and to show justice and mercy and compassion to the most vulnerable; to walk with The Lord and ask “Who am I to judge?” He challenges us to press on in what he calls our “march of living hope.” And like millions of Americans, I am very much looking forward to welcoming Pope Francis to the United States later this year. (Applause.)
His Holiness expresses that basic law: Treat thy neighbor as yourself. The Dalai Lama -- anybody who’s had an opportunity to be with him senses that same spirit. Kent Brantly expresses that same spirit. Kent was with Samaritan’s Purse, treating Ebola patients in Liberia, when he contracted the virus himself. And with world-class medical care and a deep reliance on faith -- with God’s help, Kent survived. (Applause.)
And then by donating his plasma, he helped others survive as well. And he continues to advocate for a global response in West Africa, reminding us that “our efforts needs to be on loving the people there.” And I could not have been prouder to welcome Kent and his wonderful wife Amber to the Oval Office. We are blessed to have him here today -- because he reminds us of what it means to really “love thy neighbor as thyself.” Not just words, but deeds.
Each of us has a role in fulfilling our common, greater purpose -- not merely to seek high position, but to plumb greater depths so that we may find the strength to love more fully. And this is perhaps our greatest challenge -- to see our own reflection in each other; to be our brother’s keepers and sister’s keepers, and to keep faith with one another. As children of God, let’s make that our work, together.
As children of God, let’s work to end injustice -- injustice of poverty and hunger. No one should ever suffer from such want amidst such plenty. As children of God, let’s work to eliminate the scourge of homelessness, because, as Sister Mary says, “None of us are home until all of us are home.” None of us are home until all of us are home.
As children of God, let’s stand up for the dignity and value of every woman, and man, and child, because we are all equal in His eyes, and work to send the scourge and the sin of modern-day slavery and human trafficking, and “set the oppressed free.” (Applause.)
If we are properly humble, if we drop to our knees on occasion, we will acknowledge that we never fully know God’s purpose. We can never fully fathom His amazing grace. “We see through a glass, darkly” -- grappling with the expanse of His awesome love. But even with our limits, we can heed that which is required: To do justice, and love kindness, and walk humbly with our God.
I pray that we will. And as we journey together on this “march of living hope,” I pray that, in His name, we will run and not be weary, and walk and not be faint, and we’ll heed those words and “put on love.”
May the Lord bless you and keep you, and may He bless this precious country that we love.
Thank you all very much. (Applause.)
END
9:37 A.M. EST
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/05/remarks-president-national-prayer-breakfast [also at e.g. http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/remarks-by-obama-at-the-national-prayer-breakfast/2015/02/05/e9374b70-ad53-11e4-9c91-e9d2f9fde644_story.html (with comments)]
*
http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2015/02/05/president-obama-speaks-national-prayer-breakfast , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XU7RuilNq4w [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=97217659 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=105546810 and preceding and following]
===
OBAMA INSULTS CHRISTIANS
February 5, 2015 by Bill
Filed under Latest News Releases
2015 – February Releases
Bill Donohue comments on remarks made today by President Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast:
In an attempt to deflect guilt from Muslim madmen, President Obama said, “Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.” Obama’s ignorance is astounding and his comparison is pernicious.
The Crusades were a defensive Christian reaction against Muslim madmen of the Middle Ages. Here is how Princeton scholar and Islamic expert Bernard Lewis puts it: “At the present time, the Crusades are often depicted as an early expansionist imperialism—a prefigurement of the modern European countries. To people of the time, both Muslim and Christian, they were no such thing.” So what were they? “The Crusade was a delayed response to the jihad, the holy war for Islam, and its purpose was to recover by war what had been lost by war—to free the holy places of Christendom and open them once again, without impediment, to Christian pilgrimage.”
Regarding the other fable, the Inquisition, the Catholic Church had almost nothing to do with it. The Church saw heretics as lost sheep who needed to be brought back into the fold. By contrast, secular authorities saw heresy as treason; anyone who questioned royal authority, or who challenged the idea that kingship was God-given, was guilty of a capital offense. It was they—not the Church—who burned the heretics. Indeed, secular authorities blasted the Church for its weak role in the Inquisition.
According to St. Louis University and Crusade scholar Thomas Madden, “All the Crusades met the criteria of just wars.” How many ISIS atrocities, Mr. President, have met the criteria of just wars? The ones where they buried people alive, stoned children, raped women, and crucified men? Moreover, according to Henry Kamen, the leading authority on the Inquisition, a total of 1,394 people were killed during the Inquisition. Today, Muslim madmen kill more than that in a few months.
The President should apologize for his insulting comparison.
Copyright © 2015 Catholic League
http://www.catholicleague.org/obama-insults-christians/ [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=22198799 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=70066579 and http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=70067730 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=90461361 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=94631972 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=101822027 and preceding and following]
--
Why Our President Chose to Insult Christianity and Excuse Militant Islam at the National Prayer Breakfast
The Rush Limbaugh Show
February 05, 2015
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/02/05/why_our_president_chose_to_insult_christianity_and_excuse_militant_islam_at_the_national_prayer_breakfast [transcript]
--
Fox News Can’t Believe Obama Said Christians Have Done Bad Stuff Too, For Jesus
by Kaili Joy Gray
Feb 06 3:20 pm 2015
President Obama said words again, as he is so uppity-ly wont to do, so of course the dimwitted mouth-breathers on Fox & Friends are OUTRAGED!!!! Damn you, Obama, with your word-saying.
This time, he was word-saying words at the National Prayer Breakfast, where the president is supposed to say a bunch of platitudes about the First Amendment and Jesus and God Bless America, and somehow none of that is at all contradictory, no sir.
The president, however, went off script by not just saying “praise the lord,” but also talking about some terrorism, which he refuses to call radical Islamic terrorism because of how he is a secret Kenyan Islamic Terrorist Teleprompter-reading BLACK PRESIDENT IN THE WHITE HOUSE OMG:
And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.
Well, fine, that might be fair and historically accurate. But like that matters! Here’s Steve Doocy, utterly incredulous that Obama would say historically accurate things about the the yes-this-really-did-happen violent history of Good Christians torturing and killing people, for Jesus:
While Jordan is seeking revenge on the terrorists, our president was at the National Prayer Breakfast, which happens every year in Washington DC. And essentially what he did was he said, “You know what? Yeah, ISIS is bad. But you know what? Christians were just as bad as ISIS was a couple of centuries ago.” Not making it up.
Yeah, except for how Doocy is totally making that up, because that’s not what Obama said at all, at least not in the clip Doocy instructs us to watch. But what the heck, let’s play along and pretend that those were the president’s exact words, and he did literally verbatim say that Christians were just as bad as ISIS when they crusaded all over the globe killing people in the name of Christ. Yeah? And? That would be wrong to say because … why?
Here, maybe Brian Kilmeade, the show’s brunette (for diversity!), can explain to us what A Idiot the president is for that word-saying he word-said:
The Crusades happened all those years ago, but we’re talking about — the president felt it was necessary to go back to the year 1095 and talk about 200 years of the Crusades to get some relevance for today. He’s making excuses, it seems, for ISIS’s behavior, essentially saying, “We started it.” That is so unfathomable!
Obviously, Brian did not watch the clip of the president speaking that his co-host Steve told us to watch just a minute ago, or maybe he is not aware that Jim Crow occurred after the year 1095. Or maybe he is just a total and complete moron. Nah, unfathomable!
Helpfully, Steve Doocy jumps in to clarify that Obama means “we Christians” started it, because America is a Christian nation, since the year 1095, anyway. No, we are not even going to waste our pixels explaining how some of us who are not Christians and yet somehow are Americans (weird!) get a little nervous in our “Yeah, we have heard of the Crusades and the Inquisition and the War on People Who Don’t Say Merry Xmas” bones when we hear that kind of talk.
Then Elisabeth chimes in to explain, “Christians have nothing to do with that video we saw on Wednesday of that Jordanian pilot being burned alive to the point where his jaw fell off.”
So take that, Obama, with your “context” and your “history” and your “mentioning things that have happened.” No Christian has ever done a bad thing in the name of Christ for, like, a thousand years — except for all the stuff that’s been done since then, but they had it comin’, what with their being Not Christian or Working At An Abortion Clinic or Being A Witch According To Some YouTube Videos [ http://wonkette.com/564946/silly-oklahoma-christian-you-are-supposed-to-burn-the-witch-not-behead-him ].
In conclusion, Christians are awesome and have been in every way for the last thousand years at least SHUT UP YES THEY HAVE, Obama sucks again some more forever, and it’s just another day that ends in “y” at good ol’ Fox “News.”
[Media Matters [ http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/02/06/conservative-media-bash-obama-for-mentioning-cr/202447 , http://mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2015/02/06/38538/fnc-ff-20150106-prayerbreakfast ]]
©2015 Wonkette (emphasis in original)
http://wonkette.com/575317/fox-news-cant-believe-obama-said-christians-have-done-bad-stuff-too-for-jesus [with embedded video, and comments]
--
Glenn Beck: Obama's Prayer Breakfast Speech
Published on Feb 6, 2015 by yazchat [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgiNjSACl8Y7jpV8LwSXf1g / http://www.youtube.com/user/yazchat , http://www.youtube.com/user/yazchat/videos ]
Glenn Beck responds to President Barack Obama's speech at the National Prayer Breakfast.
TheBlaze
http://www.theblaze.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0u9Hj5Jb__Y [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=28039849 and preceding and following]
--
Glenn Beck Tearfully Begs The World To Realize 'We Are Living In The 1930s All Over Again'
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Thursday, 2/5/2015 2:02 pm
Every few weeks, Glenn Beck [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/glenn-beck-0 ] invites listeners into his studio to film a television program during which he takes their questions about whatever is going on in the world. Inevitably, dozens of people eagerly flock to hear from the oracle that is Glenn Beck as he provides them with crackpot theories and tear-stained stories about how the world is about to go up in flames.
And that is exactly what he did last night, responding to a question from an audience member seeking recommendations about how Christians should be praying for an end to the violence and instability in the Middle East by breaking down in tears as he warned that "we are living in the 1930s all over again" and very soon, governments will start rounding up Jews and Christians.
"One of those things that I know God told me is to decide who your family is going to be so when they do come for people, you decide now, am I going to turn my eyes from it or will I say 'you take him, you take me too,'" he said, choking back tears.
Noting that he used to joke with some of his staffers that if they came for the Jews first, he would hide them but if they came for the Christians first, they would hide them, Beck said that they now all realize that this is no longer a joke but is actually a very real possibility.
"It is getting scary," he told his audience [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2F56xnlnjms (below, as embedded; with comments)], as he began to tear up again. "I promise you, we are living in the 1930s and it's going to sweep the entire globe. Pray for your family to wake up. Pray for you to be strong enough to stand. Just go home with honor. Just go home with honor":
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/glenn-beck-tearfully-begs-world-realize-we-are-living-1930s-all-over-again [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=102391175 and preceding and following]
--
Dr. Ben Carson dissects Obama’s Prayer Breakfast speech: ‘We’re being betrayed’
by Joe Saunders
February 8, 2015
Dr. Ben Carson had a choice response Saturday to President Obama’s incredible statements at last week’s National Prayer Breakfast comparing current Islamist atrocities to wars fought in centuries past in the name of Christianity.
“It makes me feel that perhaps we’re being betrayed,” Carson said on “Fox & Friends.” “Perhaps we don’t have a leader who feels the same about things as most of us do.”
Carson knows knows better than most how important the National Prayer Breakfast can be. His recent political fame stems largely from a speech he gave at the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast [at (near the end)/see (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=97217659 and preceding and following], when he stood only a few feet from President Obama and castigated the president’s progressive policies — including Obamacare.
It was a performance that endeared Carson to conservatives everywhere – and made the retired neurosurgeon a possible contender for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.
That kind of prominence made Obama speech at this year’s prayer breakfast particularly alarming. His dredging up of dustry history — the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades — as some sort of justification for the savagery being committed worldwide by Islamist terrorists in the contemporary world, showed a mindset alien to most Americans, Carson said.
“Well, certainly his words give us some insight into his thinking and his actions or lack thereof, and, you know, there have been atrocities committed throughout human history in the name of religion, and they’re all horrible, and to sit down and try to decide which one is worse than the other, doesn’t make any sense,” Carson said.
“We should condemn them all, give no quarter to anyone who is involved in such activities, and to try to divert the attention away from the outrage that has been focused on the radical Islamic terrorists, in this manner is rather disingenuous, I’m sure, to say the least.”
But thanks to the Founders, he said, the United States has a response to “disingenuous” politicians — and their followers.
“The good thing is, we have a system in place that has allowed us to take control. We need to observe carefully what our leaders do and what the people who support them do,” he said. ”We can’t forget who those people are, and we will have another opportunity, coming up in 2016, looking at all the senators and the congressman who rabidly support this man. Let’s make sure that they get the message.”
© Copyright 2015 BizPac Review
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/02/08/dr-ben-carson-dissects-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech-were-being-betrayed-178436 [with comments; also at http://www.teaparty.org/dr-ben-carson-dissects-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech-were-being-betrayed-82110/ (with comments)], http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9w8x8XBNTFc [with comments, as embedded; also at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73aBO4eLFhE (with comments) and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeR8mrX77JI (with comments)]
--
Judge Jeanine Pirro Opening Statement - Obama At Prayer Breakfast
Published on Feb 7, 2015 by Wake Up America [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCommoSA5so3vikKogjMxHqg / http://www.youtube.com/user/Wakethehellupamerica , http://www.youtube.com/user/Wakethehellupamerica/videos ]
Judge Jeanine Pirro Opening Statement - Obama At Prayer Breakfast
Justice with Judge Jeanine Pirro February 7, 2015 - Opening Statement and continuing with John Hagee and Col. David Hunt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSQXN8dwQMk [with comments] [just the opening statement, also at e.g. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt-St_TgPUo (with comments) and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn_Wxsa7NBE (with comments)] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=39512678 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100785304 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=103764984 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110456218 and preceding and following]
--
John Hagee: Obama's Treatment Of Benjamin Netanyahu Will Cause God To Destroy America
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Wednesday, 2/4/2015 12:38 pm
When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu comes to Washington, D.C., in March to lobby for tougher sanctions against Iran, President Obama will not be meeting with him [ http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/28/politics/obama-netanyahu-iran/ ] and several Democratic members of Congress may skip his address [ http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/democrats-might-skip-benjamin-netanyahu-speech-114891.html ].
Naturally, none of that is sitting well with John Hagee [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/john-hagee ], who warned on yesterday's "Hagee Hotline [ https://www.getv.org/Videos/Watch/5397f782-0439-4637-a213-e870b3db9c09 ]" that God will destroy America for failing to adequately support Israel.
"I am a student of world history," Hagee said, "and you can wrap up world history in 25 words or less and here it is: the nations that blessed Israel prospered and the nations that cursed Israel were destroyed by the hand of God."
The Egyptian Empire, the Babylonian Empire, and the Ottoman Empire have all been wiped out, Hagee said, and even the British Empire has been "reduced to one tiny island because, since Edward the First, they have been and remain an anti-Semitic nation."
America will face the same fate, Hagee warned [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jx_jeBTtiv8 (below, as embedded; with comments)], because God "is watching what America does as it responds to Israel. If America turns its back on Israel, God will turn his back on America. And that's a fact. It's proven by history":
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/john-hagee-obamas-treatment-benjamin-netanyahu-will-cause-god-destroy-america [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=107339023 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110829042 and preceding and following]
--
Louisiana Congressman: Obama Defended ISIS With “Unpresidential” Prayer Breakfast Speech
“Not only did he vilify Christianity, but he actually made a case to defend radical Islam, that’s killing people around the world.”
Andrew Kaczynski
BuzzFeed News Reporter
posted on Feb. 9, 2015, at 11:21 a.m.
Louisiana Republican Rep. John Fleming said President Obama’s speech to the National Prayer Breakfast last week in which he drew a historical comparison between atrocities committed by Islamic State fighters and past “terrible deeds in the name of Christ” were “unpresidential” and actually defended ISIS.
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/buzzfeedandrew/fleming-on-obama ) embedded]
“I was very disappointed, although not surprised. The president has said many things that just seem so unpresidential, and this was no exception,” said Fleming on Family Research Council’s Washington Watch radio program last week.
President Obama made references to the Crusades and the Inquisition at the National Prayer Breakfast last week when speaking about religious violence around the world.
“Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” President Obama said last week. “In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”
Fleming continued, saying the president defended ISIS with his speech.
“Not only did he vilify Christianity, but he actually made a case to defend radical Islam, that’s killing people around the world. He actually defended what they were doing, and tried to draw some sort of twisted equivalency, moral equivalency, between what they’re doing today and what Crusaders did 800 years ago. It really, it was really weird, in fact, and although we had, gosh, hundreds, maybe a thousand people there, he got very little applause. It was really quite sullen, and he really had no energy in his speech. If you’ve ever been in his presence, you know he’s a very articulate speaker and can give rousing speeches, but it really hit the floor, hard. He was flat throughout that discussion.”
The congressman also said the president was really saying ISIS fighters were just like those who fought in the American revolution
“Yeah, I mean he’s really creating a propaganda bonanza for terrorists, because what he’s really saying is ‘Well look, these are freedom fighters, just like the patriots of the Revolutionary War. And they’re no different, their service is just as honorable,’” said Fleming.
“And nothing could be further from the truth. And of course we know that everything from slavery to the Inquisitions and the Crusades happened before our lifetimes, and so what we’re dealing with today is an existential threat to our society, to our individuals. At any time, somebody can blow themselves up, and take Americans with them. They can blow up an airplane, they can crash an airplane. That’s something we have to worry about every day — we spend 40 billion dollars yearly on homeland security. That has nothing to do with Crusades, or any of that other nonsense.”
© 2015 BuzzFeed, Inc
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/louisiana-congressman-obama-defended-isis-with-unpresidentia [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110456362 and preceding and following]
--
Fox News Guest Calls Obama's Christianity Comments 'Verbal Rape'
By Jackson Connor
Posted: 02/10/2015 11:00 am EST
Despite President Barack Obama's call to end rape during the Grammy awards [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/08/obama-grammys-rape_n_6641922.html ] Sunday night, Fox News guest Star Parker believes the president is guilty of committing "verbal rape" during his National Prayer Breakfast speech [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/05/obama-crusades-christ-_n_6623962.html ] last week.
Participating in a panel discussion on "Hannity" Monday night, Parker took issue with the president asking Americans to remember that violence in the name of religion is not a phenomenon exclusive to Islam. Obama pointed to the Inquisition and the Crusades as instances in which murder was carried out in the name of Christ.
"Let me put it in context then, because I was in that room, and it was frankly verbal rape," Parker said. “We were not expecting it, nobody wanted it, it was horrible to sit through, and after it was over we all felt like crap.”
Though host Sean Hannity and Fox News senior correspondent Geraldo Rivera seemed to push back a little bit, deeming the terminology "harsh," Star was ultimately allowed to continue, suggesting that Obama's remarks would fuel further conflict in the Middle East.
"We were talking about being in that room for unity," she said. "And what he did was say, 'Don't ever forget the past, guys. Keep doing what you're doing in the Middle East.'"
On Saturday, Fox News host Eric Bolling also slammed Obama for his speech [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/09/eric-bolling-muslims-kill-in-the-name-of-religion_n_6645002.html ], calling the comments "egregious," and claiming that no other group besides Muslims kill in the name of religion.
H/T Media Matters [ http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/02/09/fox-guest-star-parker-obama-mentioning-crusades/202468 ]
Copyright ©2015 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/10/fox-news-obama-verbal-rape_n_6652546.html [with embedded video, and comments]
--
Star Parker: 'Evil' And 'Wicked' Liberals Are Waging War On America
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Tuesday, 2/10/2015 12:08 pm
Last week, Iowa-based radio host Steve Deace [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/steve-deace ] invited conservative activist Star Parker [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/star-parker ] to discuss [ http://stevedeace.com/podcast/deace-show-podcast-02-03-15/ ] her new book, “Blind Conceit,” a collection of her columns in which she argues [ http://www.amazon.com/Blind-Conceit-Politics-Polarization-Forward-ebook/dp/B00NQBN9EE ] that liberals are waging “wars against our American culture” in pursuit of “revenge and redistribution, the antithesis of Dr. King’s Dream.”
Parker told Deace that when it comes to fixing America, “the first step would be to admit that there’s good and evil”… and that the evil is progressivism.
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/star-parker-evil-and-wicked-liberals-waging-war-on-america ) embedded]
“Socialism is inconsistent with the Scripture because the 10th Commandment says don’t covet, and what we have today is covetousness,” she explained. “Somebody has something that somebody else doesn’t have, so now we’re going to hire politicians to take it from them. So now, you’ve violated a couple of commandments, because the 8th Commandment says don’t steal.”
“So, yeah, the first step is we have to recognize that there is evil, and America is at a crossroads between good and evil,” she continued. “We’ve become so secularized that we’ve got this idea of moral relativism and think that there are no natural consequences to the choices that we make.”
She outlined the “three wars on American culture” that she believes liberals are waging: a “war on religion,” a “war on marriage where they told women, you can do whatever you want to with your sexual being,” and a “war on poverty” that “began to pay people for their sin, if you will, the natural consequences of illicit sexual bad behavior.”
“In their own blind conceit, they’re so arrogant, they can’t even see how evil or wicked they are. They actually believe that progressivism and socialism in a free country is going to work,” she said.
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/star-parker-evil-and-wicked-liberals-are-waging-war-america
--
Star Parker: Obama And Secularists 'Hate America And They Hate Israel'
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Wednesday, 2/11/2015 12:16 pm
In an interview with Newsmax [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/newsmax ] today, conservative activist Star Parker — who has spent this week repeatedly [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/star-parker-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech-was-verbal-rape ] accusing [ http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/02/09/fox-guest-star-parker-obama-mentioning-crusades/202468 ] President Obama of “verbal rape” — attacked the president [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icc4h3lrxO4 ("This video is private. Sorry about that.")] for his comments [ http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/after-uproar-white-house-clarifies-obama-s-thinking-on-paris-kosher-deli-terror-20150210 ] about the attack on a Jewish deli in Paris, saying that what “the radical extreme of Muslims and this president and all secularists have in common is they hate that biblical worldview, so therefore they hate America and they hate Israel.”
Parker said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRkgCESftV0 (below, as embedded; with comments)] that the president’s actions have awakened those who “did not notice that we have been as a country taken over by extremists, by secular humanists who have a worldview in statism,” comparing the current political climate to the years before the Civil War.
“Some think the Tea Party is over and it’s not,” she said. “This is a momentum in our society that is not going to blow away any time soon, because most Americans who are the hard-working, who are the diligent, the god-fearing, understand that we’re in a very prayerful crossroads similar to an 1850s, where we can’t go on like we’ve been going for the last 50 or 60 years.”
“I believe that [Obama’s comment] builds the resolve in the American people that Israel’s values are our values, the core fundamental beliefs of America, our exceptionalism, our national allegiance, our limited role of government, our free markets, and our tradition,” she said. “This is what we have in common, and this is what secularists don’t like, and Barack Obama’s a secularist. And, in fact, it’s what he and the Muslims have in common, the radical extreme of Muslims and this president and all secularists have in common is they hate that biblical worldview, so therefore they hate America and they hate Israel.”
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/star-parker-obama-and-secularists-hate-america-and-they-hate-israel
--
Texas Congressman: I Don’t Know If President Obama Has “Got America’s Back”
Via Facebook: TXRandy14 [ https://www.facebook.com/TXRandy14/photos/pb.128891177274584.-2207520000.1423675479./186209138209454 ]
“Very few that I talked to Craig trust this guy, our commander-in-chief, to prosecute a war in an appropriate fashion.”
Andrew Kaczynski
BuzzFeed News Reporter
Megan Apper
BuzzFeed News Reporter
posted on Feb. 11, 2015, at 11:44 a.m.
Republican Rep. Randy Weber of Texas said Monday he doesn’t know if President Obama has “got America’s back.” Weber expressed the sentiment in an interview with Family Research Council’s Washington Watch radio program.
“I was at an Israeli function, uh, AIPAC function couple weekends ago,” said Weber. “One of friend’s there said, ‘Congressman Weber, we’re not sure the president has Israeli’s back.’ And I looked at him dead center Craig and said, ‘friend, we’re not sure he’s got America’s back.’”
The Texas lawmaker added earlier that “very few” people he talked to in Congress trusted President Obama to wage the war on the Islamic State in a proper way.
“Very few that I talked to Craig trust this guy, our commander-in-chief, to prosecute a war in an appropriate fashion. You know when you have someone that says that we are not at war with Islamic fanaticism and he wants to somehow justify that by dredging up things that are back in 1100, lets just say for example the crusades 1000, 1100.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/buzzfeedandrew/randy-weber-on-frc ) embedded]
Weber went further saying he “doesn’t trust” President Obama to wage the war, which would complicate fighting the Islamic State.
“So we don’t trust him to prosecute the war. Now we don’t want to seem to be anti you know, anti—not to be in favor of fighting terrorism. We understand that this is a cancer that has got to be cut out and so we have to be very diligent about how we do this but again realizing that the president apparently thinks he is the smartest man in the world. He doesn’t have to listen to his generals. He knows better than them? And so really it puts us in a quandary because really we want to go after this cancer and cut it out but then we remember who the commander-in-chief is.”
Weber is best-know for tweeting that he was upset about President Obama not attending the Paris anti-terrorism march, using a strange analogy to Hitler invading France to make his point. He previously called [ http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/hitler-for-all-the-wrong-reasons ] President Obama the “Kommandant-In-Chef” in a tweet about the State of the Union last year. He misspelled chief as “chef.”
© 2015 BuzzFeed, Inc
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/texas-congressman-i-dont-know-if-president-obama-has-got-ame [with comments]
--
Blake Farenthold: Send In Chuck Norris To Fight ISIS
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Friday, 2/13/2015 3:31 pm
Rep. Blake Farenthold [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/blake-farenthold ], Republican of Texas, stopped by Newsmax today to discuss [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EySA8TLWtwY (next below; comments disabled)]
President Obama’s request that Congress approve an Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) in the fight against the so-called Islamic State.
Farenthold said that he would prefer an AUMF without restrictions on the use of ground troops because “if we’re going to go into this, we need to go all in.” But he added that he would rather put Chuck Norris in charge of the whole thing because the president isn’t “committed to the war on terror.”
“I’m not a big fan of President Obama’s, but he was elected president, so that makes him commander-in-chief, so we need to give him full authority to do what he does,” he said. “Quite frankly, I think Chuck Norris would be the one to send in, not President Obama.”
“You’ve got a president who I don’t think is committed to the war on terror, does not realize that the threat is from radical Islam and not just a few crazies out there. I don’t think he gets it and I don’t think his heart’s behind it, and that really worries me,” he added [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bayWuY7fF98 (next below, as embedded; with comments)].
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/blake-farenthold-send-chuck-norris-fight-isis [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=79360305 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=109273920 and preceding and following]
===
Is Obama the seventh king?
Correction in the Lexington Dispatch.
The Dispatch originally titled the letter “Is Obama the Antichrist?”
[ https://twitter.com/RL_Bynum/status/566048171294330880 (with comments),
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/15/obama-antichrist-correction_n_6687668.html (with comments)]
Published: Saturday, February 7, 2015 at 12:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Friday, February 6, 2015 at 12:22 p.m.
Editor: God states that seven kings must come before the rise of the Antichrist. Revelations 17:10 says the seventh king will reign for a short amount of time. Is Barack Obama the seventh king?
Obama has passed laws to kill more innocent people than anyone in the past. Obama's laws are on abortion and medication allow children to kill children and kill millions of children yearly with our tax dollars. Obama passes his own laws without any laws being enforced in the U.S. Constitution to stop his actions. Obama funds America's enemies with our money.
Obama's lifted sanctions off Iran with promises that a peace treaty will be made but does nothing to inspect Iran as they continue to make nuclear weapons. Does Obama already know Iran's actions and is helping Iran? God says Israel must be attacked by Iran to start a war between all nations before the Antichrist can rise to create a peace treaty between these nations. Everything God said is happening. The Lord can return for God's children at anytime.
Obama's releasing terrorists from Gitmo so they can go back to doing the same thing again. Obama won't call this Islamic terrorism. States also have no-go zones of Islamists teaching their followers how to attack people. Obama believes this is their religious right. This is to come also in these last days. Will this belief be used to create a one-world government?
Radical Islamists show you either follow them or be killed. Christ said only those who remain faithful and endureth until the end are saved. It's going to be this world's choice.
Obama has done nothing to help anyone unless it helps him hurt other people. Obama doesn't want to protect America and nations like Israel. Obama's given more rights unto the millions of illegal immigrants and anyone entering America than any U.S. citizen. Obama did this to divide America and other nations to make them easier for these terrorists to enter.
Who and what is Barack Obama? Obama claims nobody can stop him or change anything he's done. This evil must come to pass before the Lord's return and the rise of the Antichrist, but you better know what evil you're dealing with. Nobody is promised another minute of life upon this earth, and judgment comes at the time of your death.
Many support and stand behind Obama no matter what he does. All these people will stand with Obama in judgment also. Christ promises to spew every lukewarm soul out of his mouth. This means very few will enter heaven, because they show no faith by fighting against the sins of this world daily.
Should Christianity, God's words or all other beliefs be trusted in these last days? Many Christian beliefs today aren't God's words, because they support the sins of this world. No hypocrite will enter heaven.
Boyd W. Thomas
Welcome
Copyright © 2015 The-Dispatch.com
http://www.the-dispatch.com/article/20150207/OPINION02/302079998 [with comments]
===
Activist Publishes Book of Hate Mail from Bible Believing Christians, Bible Believers Respond By—You Guessed It
When devout fundamentalist Christians find their evangelism thwarted, all hell can break loose—along with some surprisingly nasty language.
By Valerie Tarico
Posted on February 3, 2015
Bonnie Weinstein is married to Mikey Weinstein, founder and president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF [ http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/ ]), which brings a special set of challenges to their relationship. The mission of MRFF is “to ensuring that all members of the United States Armed Forces fully receive the Constitutional guarantees of religious freedom to which they and all Americans are entitled by virtue of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.” Some people don’t like that.
They don’t like it because ensuring religious freedom in the military means among other things [ http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/about/our-mission/ ] that:
• No religion or religious philosophy may be advanced by the United States Armed Forces over any other religion or religious philosophy.
• No member of the United States Armed Forces may be compelled in any way to conform to a particular religion or religious philosophy.
• No member of the military may be compelled to endure unwanted religious proselytization, evangelization or persuasion of any sort in a military setting and/or by a military superior or civilian employee of the military.
• The full exercise of religious freedom includes the right not to subscribe to any particular religion or religious philosophy. The so-called “unchurched” cede no Constitutional rights by want of their separation from organized faith.
Why MRFF is Needed
Mikey Weinstein founded MRFF in response to rampant violations of these principles by Evangelicals and other “Great Commission [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Commission ]” Christians at the United States Air Force Academy, where their two sons (both Jewish) and future daughter-in-law and son-in law (both Christians) were cadets and, like Mikey, later graduates.
Great Commission Christians are those who think it is their responsibility to save souls by converting others to their form of belief. They typically are biblical literalists who believe the Bible is the perfect and complete word of God. Their behavior often stands in contrast to Great Commandment [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Commandment ] Christians—those who think that the prime directive of the New Testament is not evangelism and right belief, but love. Many of these Christians perceive the Bible as a human document, an imperfect record of God’s relationship to humanity and the ministry of Jesus. Because of U.S. demographics, the vast majority of MRFF’s clients are Christians of this latter type, followed by religious minorities including Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Native American spiritualists, atheists, agnostics and Wiccans. MRFF also represents 861 LGBT armed forces clients.
For years, Great Commission believers have been engaged in more and more bold attempts to convert the U.S. military into an army of Christian soldiers—pressuring subordinates to attend Bible studies; promoting Christian-themed media like Mel Gibson’s torture porn, “The Passion of the Christ;” and converting the chaplaincy into a cadre of missionaries on the public dime. And they had been getting away with it. After Weinstein—a former Air Force JAG officer and member of the Reagan administration—started making waves [ http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-10-06-airforce-lawsuit_x.htm ] and then launched MRFF, many were, not surprisingly, displeased.
Unhappy Believers
From the beginning, the Weinsteins and MRFF staff have received a barrage of hate mail filled with curses, imprecatory prayers, graphic descriptions of bodily harm, death threats [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/12/27/life-in-the-crosshairs-how-some-public-feminists-atheists-and-other-activists-cope-with-death-threats/ ], gloating promises of eternal torture and more—all in the name of Jesus and often accompanied by Bible quotations, chapter and verse. Some of the ugliest messages hone in on the fact that Bonnie and Mikey are Jewish, stating, for example that the Holocaust didn’t go far enough; that their children should be turned into skin lamps; that “their kind” are not Americans and can’t be; and that Hell will be worse than the gas chambers.
At the suggestion of appalled supporters, Bonnie Weinstein finally compiled a selection of choice missives into a book, To the Far Right Christian Hater: You can be a good speller or a hater, but you can’t be both [ http://www.amazon.com/Right-Christian-Hater-Good-Speller/dp/1940207835 ]. I was a conservative Evangelical for many years. Over that time, I imagined saying nasty things to people, and sometimes did. I imagined swearing, and sometimes did. But it never crossed my mind that a believer might combine swearing and denigration with the name of Christ. The kaleidoscope of variations found in Weinstein’s book would have been unfathomable. Even today, if I hadn’t read them myself, I wouldn’t believe it still.
“Christian Built This Country”
One might think that seeing their words in print would shame self-proclaimed guardians of God into silence. Or they might consider that such words make a mockery of their claim to moral and spiritual superiority. Or, if nothing else, they might realize that spewing hate is a poor way to win converts as directed in the Great Commission. But apparently not. Because offended believers responded by sending contents for Volume 2.
One took the time to explain why the work of MRFF is so wrongheaded as to merit the barrage: [Note: I have left all spelling and grammar as received.]
It was Christians on the wagons west and Christians who built this country of and for the Glory of Christ. Christians saved the American indians from going to hell and Christian stopped the nazis and commies from taking over the world. Christians liberated negroes from slavery and gave the jews Israel and are the only ones protecting the unborn and trying to keep marriage pure. It was even Christians whom put men on the moon. And now its Christians who die to stop the moslems from beheading us all. The common theme for you Bonnie is Christians. And do not believe that lie about ‘separation of church and state’. Not even in the constitution. Nowhere there. In America noone have to be Christian but they do have to hear and consider His Word.
What is “His Word?” For those who take the Bible as a literally perfect revelation from God, as do most of MRFF’s detractors, God’s Word is the Good Book, and that’s where things get complicated. The texts assembled in the Bible promote love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, meekness, temperance and faith—qualities that one New Testament writer calls the fruit of the spirit. By their fruits you shall know them, says another. Christians are exhorted to be a light shining on a hill, without which the world would fall into (moral) darkness. Regrettably, the Bible also endorses holy war, death to blasphemers and infidels [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/10/24/bible-vs-quran-test-your-knowledge-of-who-deserves-death-in-which-religion/ ], vengeance, and torture [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/12/30/who-when-why-10-times-the-bible-says-torture-is-ok/ ]. With these mixed messages bound together as a package, the net effect of thinking that the Bible is God’s perfect Word can be hard to predict.
Piling It On
Here are some excerpts from recent messages to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation from those who see themselves as defenders of God and goodness. The letters arrive with different fonts and tones, and from different email addresses, but the themes are painfully consistent:
• Mr. M Weinstein I am a spirit-filled ordained pastor of The Gospel from the great state of Nebraska. Stop your attack on God Almighty and His only Son our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ! Stop your attack on His holy Christian wariors in our armed military forces! My congregation includes many military from the nearby air force base. We pray as one for you to die tonight in your sleep leaving a bloody mess for your family to find at daybreak.
• To the enimy of Jesus The Christ – Let’s all watch how Jesus makes you pay for taking Him out of the Army. Your hellbound ‘religious freedom FROM religion” followers too. You all try to fool everybody and hide behind the contitution. Your afraid of the Gospel. Why is it you give a jew a chance to recrusify our Savior and he’ll do it ever time. And your the worse of jews in the world. Blood thrifty for inocent Christians bringing The Word to the Army. damn you and die. And burn for youre sins against Christ Jesus. For all time.
• For god and country and in god we trust. Maybe if the Jews fought in the revolution and wrote the constitution he would have a right too speak. Other wise shut the f up.
• When We see a jew like mikey wienstien we know that Hitler was right. Leave US soldiers alone mickey. Get you a nosejob hebe. And why not swindle someone in business? While eating a bagle and showing off your jew diamonds.
• This country was founded on the belief of God, if you and your people do not believe in the Christian God maybe you should move to Iran or Syria where your shallow thoughts will last but minutes since you will be but an infidel, soon to be stoned for your beliefs.
• Athiest jews are servents of satan. They do not deserve America. Mikey weinsteen does not deserve life any place but espcialy in the USA. He is THE leader of all which is wrong in America and all who fight Jesus Christ which is the only true God in the universe. Weinsteen will destroy our military and the whole country if he is not deported. Send him to Cuba which niger Obummer loves so much. Or send him and all the other athiests to North Korea to rot and starve.
• Eat shit and don’t die. Just keep eating shit Michael Loser Weinstein. Fun to watch you eat shit. For all time. Since you and your little family of mfrr shit eaters are nothing but shit anyway. Your only hope is to surrender to Jesus Christ. Your a stiff necked jew so you will not (Exodus 32 and verse 9). Thus you have no hope. Keep your shitty self out of Christ’s military and Christ’s nation you dirty shit bag.
• Fuck your crybaby slut ass wife and fuck your crybaby spoiled children. Who got their fancy air force academy educations all paid for by the GRACE of Amercan CHRISTIAN taxpayers. And just look what we got for our tax money. The family Whiningsteen jew traitors from HELL. Cry cry cry cause you have it so bad in a CHRISTIAN made country. You know what you all happier in North koria or back in Jewsrael. get OUT of our country! Here Jesus is KING and if you dont like it than fuck you.
• Your day will come when you have to face Our God Almighty and would not want to be in your shoes. You and your ilk think you are so intelligent and stand above the rest but you are sickening and nothing but a joke and a huge one at that. By the way, where is your stand against the muslims? you either are one like your golden idol charlatan closet muslim obama or you are afraid of them.
• Thankfully, judgment is a certainty and Mr. Weinstein’s future – and the rest of your staff – is secure. And eternity is forever.
• Our Spirit-Filled Church prays to Christ Jesus thru Psalm 109 for His Hand to curse Judas Weinstein (Matthew 27: 3-5) down as per Scripture in 2015 for sins against His Church and His armed forces and His America: We Pray Thee Lord Jesus To Lay Thy Avenging Hands (Revelation 19:11-16) on unbaptized (Mark 16:16) Michael Weinstein his evil wife and evil children (john 8:44) and all of the evil doers who work at MFRR (Revelation 21:8);
• Christ will slay Mikey Weinstein with The Sword of Righteousness. Your serpant husband will be cut down by Jesus and mutilated for his evil doings. Then him and they all will be cast wiggling and screaming into the Lake of Fire to burn for all time. See John 3:36 and Revelations 20:14. You still have time Bonnie and so do your kids. This is ‘Truth’ mail from those Christians who love you so much and your kids and grandkids too.
The writer of this last missive wanted to make sure that nobody misunderstand his intent. “This is not ‘hate mail’ Bonnie Weinstein. Do not dare to call it that! This is LOVE mail. We are showing truest Christian love.”
Hate is love. War is peace. Ignorance is strength. The outpourings from self-described Christians sound Orwellian because they are, literally. In his book, 1984, George Orwell coined the term doublethink, which has been defined as not just the ability to say that black is white, but “also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary. This demands a continuous alteration of the past, made possible by the system of thought which really embraces all the rest, and which is known in Newspeak as doublethink. Doublethink is basically the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.”
The people who wrote these letters honestly believe that they serve the God of Love and Truth. I know, because I once shared that belief as an Evangelical biblical literalist. Such conviction can be all-consuming, and blinding.
Religion that is based on authoritarian hierarchies and sacred texts has tremendous power to produce doublethink, to translate love into hate and to redirect the human moral impulse into words and actions that are patently evil. Parents who kick out their queer children think they are doing a good thing. Jihadis who murder cartoonists do so convinced that their actions are righteous, as do ordinary fundamentalist Muslims who throw acid on women, as do ordinary fundamentalist Christians who pray for the death and dismemberment of their enemies.
The Power of Belief
Beliefs are powerful, and the power of absolute belief is absolute.
Far too many well-meaning lovers of peace fail to understand this. In their desire to promote tolerance they insist that harm done in the names of gods isn’t really motivated by religion, that it is motivated by tyranny or desperation or a host of other socio-political factors. Most certainly the relationship between religion and violence is complex [ http://valerietarico.com/2015/01/16/how-religion-can-let-loose-humanitys-most-violent-impulses/ ].
But consider, if you will, the fact that the writers of these letters are not oppressed minorities, nor the victims of colonialism, nor destitute and hopeless. And consider that the only harm they experience from the work of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation is harm not to persons but to religion itself—the kind of religion that mandates evangelism and dominion.
Religion is powerful in part because it takes command of primal moral emotions including moral disgust and outrage. These emotions can get activated in the service of justice, or compassion, or fairness, or ahimsa, or love. But they also can get attached to matters that serve no purpose save that of protecting the religion itself—violations of ritual purity, or blasphemy rules, or god-ordained gender hierarchy [ http://valerietarico.com/2012/03/09/15-bible-texts-reveal-why-gods-own-party-is-at-war-with-women/ ] and rules about sex—or an army captain’s obligation to preach the gospel to his underlings.
Obligations like these can feel as morally compelling as a father’s responsibility to protect his children, and when they are obstructed, true believers can feel equally crazed. Hundreds of thousands of Chechens took to the streets [ http://news.yahoo.com/thousands-gather-protest-caricatures-russias-caucasus-083012411.html ] last month to protest blasphemy against their Prophet, which many perceive as a crime greater than mass murder.
Paths Forward
Such passion can be met only by confronting the beliefs that drive the behavior. Organizations that work to constrain specific harmful actions, like MRFF, play a critical role in maintaining secular pluralism and rule of law. But make no mistake—as devout believers seek to follow perceived moral mandates they will push to the limits, and sometimes beyond, while simultaneously working to change whatever rules or laws constrain them. That is the nature of moral certitude.
In the long run, the only solution lies in replacing harmful beliefs with those that actually serve peace and wellbeing. Secularists like me see the path forward as one that increasingly relies on science to help us understand and advance human flourishing within a complex web of life. Progressive people of faith, some of them clients or supporters [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/self-described-christians-sniping-on-email-have-forgotten-jesus-teachings-commentary/2015/01/26/ad72cf6e-a593-11e4-a162-121d06ca77f1_story.html ] of Mikey Weinstein, embrace the fabric of wisdom in ancient traditions like Christianity and Islam and believe that the best path forward is reformation from within. Either way, the inbox of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation stands as a stark reminder that this work could not be more urgent.
Valerie Tarico [ http://valerietarico.com/ ] is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington. She is the author of Trusting Doubt: A Former Evangelical Looks at Old Beliefs in a New Light [ http://astore.amazon.com/exchrisnetenc-20/detail/0977392937 ] and Deas and Other Imaginings [ http://www.theoracleinstitute.org/deas ], and the founder of http://www.wisdomcommons.org/ . Her articles about religion, reproductive health, and the role of women in society have been featured at sites including AlterNet, Salon, the Huffington Post, Grist, and Jezebel.
Copyright 2015 Valerie Tarico (emphasis in original)
http://valerietarico.com/2015/02/03/activist-publishes-book-of-hate-mail-from-bible-believing-christians-bible-believers-respond-by-you-guessed-it/ [with comments] [also at http://truth-out.org/news/item/28919-activist-publishes-book-of-hate-mail-from-bible-believing-christians-bible-believers-respond-by-you-guessed-it (with comments) and http://www.alternet.org/belief/shocking-christian-hate-mail-activists-received-challenging-religious-indoctrination-military (with comments)] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=2427568 (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=2486539 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=39632707 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=45592650 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=49466173 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=54104761 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=54904477 and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=54920645 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=58462365 and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=67193242 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=79941103 (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=81618596 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=82368351 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=88125188 (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=99315132 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=107571079 (and any future following)]
--
“By their (rotten) fruits you shall know them”
by lbwoodgate [ http://woodgatesview.com/about/ ]
February 9, 2015 ·
I no longer associate myself with the institution of the Christian Church and a belief at all that some supernatural power is in control of our lives has faded from my conscious behavior. Not that what the faith has at its core isn’t of some value to us as humans but because too many within the faith represent the worst of humanity.
Christianity today appears to be suffering an identity crisis. Perhaps it always has. Believers who claim to represent the faith do a poor job of following their own scripture. Especially those imperatives in Chapter 7 that warn against judging people too narrowly and harshly. It imparts the universal golden rule in verse 12 imploring believers to treat others as they would want to be treated. And it warns against listening to false prophets who can be identified “by their fruits”.
These are unequivocal pronouncements supposedly from the one who is recognized by believers as the bearer of “good fruit”, yet to watch and listen to many of his alleged followers today you would think he was the bearer of bad fruit. Who was Jesus and what did he represent in his life?
Was he a mean-spirited, vengeful individual who promoted death and destruction for his perceived adversaries? Was he a controlling power that sought to dominate the world by force and persecution? Is Jesus and the words attributed to him in the New Testament the influence of millions today and throughout history who killed to promote a belief system that claims to love us, even as imperfect as we are? Or was he the influence of others who are moved by the Good Samaritan parable, being led to believe that greater love has no one than he or she who lays down their life for their friend.
One affirms life through a shared humanity, the other takes it for a militant cause. The religious right in this country who claim to represent “the word of God” seems to do so in bits and pieces, omitting what comes close to kindness and generosity and highlighting instead those passages that validate a “holy war” against the unbelievers.
What would it look like for Christians today if there were no standards set for them found in Matthew Chapters 5-7 better known as “the sermon on the mount”?
Dr. Valerie Tarico, a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington [ http://valerietarico.com/ ] who writes about the conflicts between people of faith and those outside institutional religion she refers to as freethinkers labels the militant types as “Great Commission” Christians. Those who feel it is their task to evangelize to every living being on earth before the second coming of Christ. To such hardliners, this includes the practice of warring with non-believers and putting to death all those who oppose such attempts at proselytizing. In the name of Jesus European missionaries and their military cohorts wiped out entire native cultures as they conquered the new world. Will such harsh tactics be viewed as “the will of the father” Jesus referred to in Matthew 7:21?
Though such outward manifestations have not been seen on a large scale since then, there remains a shadow of this virulent Christian today who spews streams of hateful words to anyone who doesn’t accept their perception on issues dealing with abortion, homosexuality and the notion that this country was founded on biblical principles.
It is also reserved, Ms. Tarico shows us [ http://valerietarico.com/2015/02/03/activist-publishes-book-of-hate-mail-from-bible-believing-christians-bible-believers-respond-by-you-guessed-it/ (just above)], for anyone who attempts to defend the principle that affirms separation of church and state like Mikey Weinstein, founder and president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) and his wife Bonnie.
The mission of MRFF is “to ensuring that all members of the United States Armed Forces fully receive the Constitutional guarantees of religious freedom to which they and all Americans are entitled by virtue of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.”
Mikey Weinstein founded MRFF in response to rampant violations of these principles by Evangelicals and other “Great Commission” Christians at the United States Air Force Academy, where their two sons (both Jewish) and future daughter-in-law and son-in law (both Christians) were cadets and, like Mikey, later graduates.
Great Commission Christians are … typically … biblical literalists who believe the Bible is the perfect and complete word of God. Their behavior often stands in contrast to Great Commandment Christians—those who … perceive the Bible as a human document, an imperfect record of God’s relationship to humanity and the ministry of Jesus.
I have had my own experience with a “great commission christian.” She was a public school teacher in my Bible study class, back when I still called myself a Christian. Upon discovering that I considered myself a liberal Democrat she confidently asserted that it was impossible for “someone to call themselves a Christian and vote Democratic”. Democrats I found, if they were Christians, tended to be the Great Commandment types.
I would not have been surprised to see her among those self-righteous Christians outside of an abortion clinic vilifying the young women seeking to end an unwanted pregnancy. If stoning were legal today this lady would have been handing them out and casting what she couldn’t herself at these frightened young women who found little or no support among their friends and family.
She would have also likely been one of the thousands of people who wrote and emailed hateful words and death threats to the Weinsteins for attempting to prevent the military brass within the Air Force Academy from putting pressure on recruits to accept Jesus as their personal savior. These recruits were often badgered by others who willing caved to the demands of their senior officers being harassed night and day and lived under the fear that their careers would be cut short [ http://articles.latimes.com/2005/jun/23/nation/na-academy23 ].
Here are a few of the “christian” responses, the fruits of their faith if you will, to the efforts of the Weisnsteins trying to curtail these abuses at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, CO.
- Mr. M Weinstein I am a spirit-filled ordained pastor of The Gospel from the great state of Nebraska. Stop your attack on God Almighty and His only Son our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ! Stop your attack on His holy Christian wariors(sic) in our armed military forces! My congregation includes many military from the nearby air force base. We pray as one for you to die tonight in your sleep leaving a bloody mess for your family to find at daybreak.
– To the enimy(sic) of Jesus The Christ – Let’s all watch how Jesus makes you pay for taking Him out of the Army. Your hellbound ‘religious freedom FROM religion” followers too. You all try to fool everybody and hide behind the contitution.(sic) Your afraid of the Gospel. Why is it you give a jew(sic) a chance to recrusify(sic) our Savior and he’ll do it ever time. And your the worse of jews in the world. Blood thrifty for inocent(sic) Christians bringing The Word to the Army. damn you and die. And burn for youre(sic) sins against Christ Jesus. For all time.
- For god and country and in god we trust. Maybe if the Jews fought in the revolution and wrote the constitution he would have a right too speak. Other wise shut the f up.
– When We see a jew like mikey wienstien we know that Hitler was right. Leave US soldiers alone mickey. Get you a nosejob hebe. And why not swindle someone in business? While eating a bagle(sic) and showing off your jew diamonds.
– Eat shit and don’t die. Just keep eating shit Michael Loser Weinstein. Fun to watch you eat shit. For all time. Since you and your little family of mfrr shit eaters are nothing but shit anyway.-
- Your only hope is to surrender to Jesus Christ. Your a stiff necked jew so you will not (Exodus 32 and verse 9). Thus you have no hope. – Keep your shitty self out of Christ’s military and Christ’s nation you dirty shit bag.
– Fuck your crybaby slut ass wife and fuck your crybaby spoiled children. Who got their fancy air force academy educations all paid for by the GRACE of Amercan CHRISTIAN taxpayers. And just look what we got for our tax money. The family Whiningsteen jew traitors from HELL. Cry cry cry cause you have it so bad in a CHRISTIAN made country. You know what you all happier in North koria(sic) or back in Jewsrael. get OUT of our country! Here Jesus is KING and if you dont(sic) like it than fuck you.
I have also been raised in white Southern culture where Southern Baptist even to this day try to justify their views on race using scripture. The US History website [ http://www.ushistory.org/us/27f.asp ] notes:
“Defenders of slavery noted that in the Bible, Abraham had slaves. They point to the Ten Commandments, noting that “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house, … nor his manservant, nor his maidservant.” In the New Testament, Paul returned a runaway slave, Philemon, to his master, and, although slavery was widespread throughout the Roman world, Jesus never spoke out against it.”
While attending junior college in Dallas back in the early 70’s as the civil rights movement, now protected by law was expanding in the state of Texas, my Sociology 101 class was introduced in a study of cultures to a grandmotherly type woman who represented the KKK in this area. Her name, Dixie Leber, was an invention of hers that she had legally changed, with Leber being the reverse spelling of Rebel.
Of the many mind-boggling things Ms. Leber described in her view of the world was how God intended that there should be no interracial marriages when, in the creation story, he divided the night and the day. In so doing she assured us that since night is inferior to day so must the blacks be to the whites.
Historical ignorance that claims no Jews fought and died [ http://www.myjewishlearning.com/history/Modern_History/1700-1914/America_at_the_Turn_of_the_Century/Acceptance_in_the_US/Revolutionary_War.shtml ] in the American Revolution and biblical distortions like Dixie Leber’s are common among many Great Commission Christians. It is this same diminished mental state today that has a young fundamentalist school teacher asserting that Christians cannot be Democrats and that American Muslims are attempting to replace the Constitution with Sharia law.
Personally I would rejoice if I woke up tomorrow morning and found that the Christian Church and many of its followers simply vanished from the face of the Earth and all other faiths as well that practice cruel measures to convert people to their way of thinking. I don’t wish them ill will. But I do wish they would simply follow their own scriptural imperatives.
The notion that somehow humankind would spiral downward into an immoral abyss without their faith systems in place is an unfounded fear of haters raised by those who vigorously follow the Great Commission path. Humans are capable of devising and living by a moral code not associated with ethereal beings. Many of us do it today and live quite securely in that knowledge.
Science helps us figure out what others used to attribute to unseen spirits. To us the world is not a “good vs. evil” dichotomy or where life is a simple progression of black and white choices. It is a tapestry of many colors and many choices. It’s evolutionary, not predestined. One defined more by time, culture and environment than by supernatural beings.
Our purpose, if one has to feel there is a purpose to our existence, is to move beyond those premises that no longer withstand scrutiny; seeking truth for those who like to put a label on such things. This ought to keep us busy for a few more millennia if we don’t kill ourselves first.
What purpose could benefit us from remaining rigidly in a place that justifies hate and all that that entails. As human beings who share a unique habitat with other life forms in this vast Universe, our fruits should reflect how we achieve a symmetry that allows us to coexist without wanting to kill those who don’t share our views of life’s mysteries.
Copyright 2015 Larry Beck (emphasis in original)
http://woodgatesview.com/2015/02/09/by-their-rotten-fruits-you-shall-know-them/ [with comments]
--
Love Letters to Richard Dawkins
Published on Jan 21, 2015 by Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCH_zYYXkJpULueOVZTkY4Bw / http://www.youtube.com/user/richarddawkinsdotnet , http://www.youtube.com/user/richarddawkinsdotnet/videos ]
April 11th, 2014 - In a candid moment, filmmaker Eric Preston, founder and producer at Fusion Films, rolls his camera as Dr. Richard Dawkins - Author, Professor and Evolutionary Biologist - again [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhYT4vE1gvM (next below; with comments)]
reads "fan mail" he has received from some of his not-so-great admirers. (Parental Discretion is Advised!)
Copyright 2015 Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW7607YiBso [with (over 4,000) comments]
--
Sandy Rios: 'The Real Experts' Know Evolution Has Been 'Disproven'
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Friday, 2/13/2015 1:00 pm
American Family Association [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/american-family-association ] governmental affairs director Sandy Rios [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/sandy-rios ] is upset [ https://vimeo.com/119546503 ] that media commentators like George Will are mocking [ https://twitter.com/digby56/status/566036827841114112 ] Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/scott-walker ] for refusing to say this week whether he believes in evolution. After all, Rios explained on her radio show today, “science has done nothing but disprove the theory of evolution.”
“There is no scientific evidence” to substantiate evolution, she said, at least according to “the real experts.” So why has this stunning revelation that the foundational theory behind modern biology has been refuted not percolated through the scientific community? Well, Rios explained, that’s because evolution has become a sacred, religious tenant.
“Evolution has become the religion of the elite,” Rios said. “It’s a religion to the [level of] fanaticism of what they would say was the people at the Scopes monkey trial, the Christians waving their Bibles who were not really thinking through the facts, they were just outraged because it was against God’s law. The truth of the matter is that the evolutionists like George Will, waving their evolutionary theory, have become as rabid and unreasoned as what they accuse the Scopes monkey religionists of doing to Darwin during that time. It has become a religion. Science has disproven so much of evolution…. These guys are wrong, Scott Walker is right.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/rios-evolution-disproven ) embedded]
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/sandy-rios-real-experts-know-evolution-has-been-disproven [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110487404 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110870610 (and preceding) and following]
--
Religion’s Dirty Dozen—12 Really Bad Religious Ideas That Have Made the World Worse
By Valerie Tarico
Posted on January 20, 2015
Some of humanity’s technological innovations are things we would have been better off without: the medieval rack, the atomic bomb and powdered lead potions come to mind. Religions tend to develop ideas or concepts rather than technologies, but like every other creative human enterprise, they produce some really bad ones along with the good.
My website, Wisdom Commons [ http://www.wisdomcommons.org/ ], highlights some of humanity’s best moral and spiritual concepts, ideas like the Golden Rule, and values like compassion, generosity and courage that make up our shared moral core. Here, by way of contrast, are some of the worst. These twelve dubious concepts promote conflict, cruelty, suffering and death rather than love and peace. To paraphrase Christopher Hitchens, they belong in the dustbin of history just as soon as we can get them there.
Chosen People –The term “Chosen People” typically refers to the Hebrew Bible and the ugly idea that God has given certain tribes a Promised Land (even though it is already occupied by other people). But in reality many sects endorse some version of this concept. The New Testament identifies Christians [ https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians+3%3A12&version=NRSV ] as the chosen ones. Calvinists talk about “God’s elect,” believing that they themselves are the special few who were chosen before the beginning of time. Jehovah’s witnesses believe that 144,000 souls will get a special place in the afterlife. In many cultures certain privileged and powerful bloodlines were thought to be descended directly from gods [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/12/16/its-not-rape-if-hes-a-god/ ] (in contrast to everyone else).
Religious sects are inherently tribal and divisive because they compete by making mutually exclusive truth claims and by promising blessings or afterlife rewards that no competing sect can offer. “Gang symbols” like special haircuts, attire, hand signals and jargon differentiate insiders from outsiders and subtly (or not so subtly) convey to both that insiders are inherently superior.
Heretics – Heretics, kafir, or infidels (to use the medieval Catholic term [ http://callingchristians.com/tag/why-do-muslims-use-the-word-infidel/ ]) are not just outsiders, they are morally suspect and often seen as less than fully human. In the Torah, slaves taken from among outsiders don’t merit the same protections as Hebrew slaves. Those who don’t believe in a god are corrupt, doers of abominable deeds. “There is none [among them] who does good,” says the Psalmist.
Islam teaches the concept of “dhimmitude” and provides special rules for the subjugation of religious minorities, with monotheists getting better treatment than polytheists. Christianity blurs together [ http://www.openbible.info/topics/non_believers ] the concepts of unbeliever and evildoer. Ultimately, heretics are a threat that needs to be neutralized by conversion, conquest, isolation, domination, or—in worst cases—mass murder.
Holy War – If war can be holy, anything goes. The medieval Roman Catholic Church conducted a twenty year campaign of extermination against heretical Cathar Christians in the south of France, promising their land and possessions to real Christians who signed on as crusaders. Sunni and Shia Muslims have slaughtered each other for centuries. The Hebrew scriptures recount battle after battle in which their war God, Yahweh, helps them to not only defeat but also exterminate the shepherding cultures that occupy their “Promised Land.” As in later holy wars, like the modern rise of ISIS, divine sanction let them kill the elderly and children, burn orchards, and take virgin females as sexual slaves—all while retaining a sense of moral superiority.
Blasphemy – Blasphemy is the notion that some ideas are inviolable, off limits to criticism, satire, debate, or even question. By definition, criticism of these ideas is an outrage, and it is precisely this emotion–outrage–that the crime of blasphemy evokes in believers. The Bible prescribes death [ http://valerietarico.com/2009/04/23/if-the-bible-were-law-would-you-qualify-for-the-death-penalty/ ] for blasphemers; the Quran does not [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/14/opinion/islams-problem-with-blasphemy.html ], but death-to-blasphemers became part of Shariah during medieval times.
The idea that blasphemy must be prevented or avenged has caused millions of murders over the centuries and countless other horrors. As I write, blogger Raif Badawi [ http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/flogging-raif-badawi-saudi-arabia-vicious-act-cruelty-2015-01-09 ] awaits round after round of flogging in Saudi Arabia—1000 lashes in batches of 50—while his wife and children plead from Canada for the international community to do something.
Glorified suffering – Picture secret societies of monks flogging their own backs. The image that comes to mind is probably from Dan Brown’s novel, The Da Vinci Code, but the idea isn’t one he made up. A core premise of Christianity is that righteous torture [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/12/30/who-when-why-10-times-the-bible-says-torture-is-ok/ ]—if it’s just intense and prolonged enough–can somehow fix the damage done by evil, sinful behavior. Millions of crucifixes litter the world as testaments to this belief [id.]. Shia Muslims beat themselves with lashes and chains during Aashura, a form of sanctified suffering called Matam that commemorates the death of the martyr Hussein. Self-denial in the form of asceticism and fasting is a part of both Eastern and Western religions, not only because deprivation induces altered states but also because people believe suffering somehow brings us closer to divinity.
Our ancestors lived in a world in which pain came unbidden, and people had very little power to control it. An aspirin or heating pad would have been a miracle to the writers of the Bible, Quran, or Gita. Faced with uncontrollable suffering, the best advice religion could offer was to lean in or make meaning of it. The problem, of course is that glorifying suffering—turning it into a spiritual good—has made people more willing to inflict it on not only themselves and their enemies but also those who are helpless, including the ill or dying (as in the case of Mother Teresa [ http://valerietarico.com/2013/04/29/self-flagellation-and-the-kiss-of-jesus-mother-teresas-attraction-to-pain/ ] and the American Bishops [ http://valerietarico.com/2013/05/16/will-the-catholic-bishops-decide-how-you-die-2/ ]) and children (as in the child beating Patriarchy movement [ http://valerietarico.com/2013/10/21/why-bible-believers-have-such-a-hard-time-getting-child-protection-right/ ]).
Genital mutilation – Primitive people have used scarification and other body modifications to define tribal membership for as long as history records. But genital mutilation allowed our ancestors several additional perks—if you want to call them that. In Judaism, infant circumcision serves as a sign of tribal membership, but circumcision also serves to test the commitment of adult converts. In one Bible story, a chieftain agrees to convert and submit his clan to the procedure as a show of commitment to a peace treaty. (While the men lie incapacitated, the whole town is then slain by the Israelites.)
In Islam, painful male circumcision serves as a rite of passage into manhood, initiation into a powerful club. By contrast, in some Muslim cultures cutting away or burning the female clitoris and labia ritually establishes the submission of women by reducing sexual arousal and agency. An estimated 2 million [ http://www.feminist.org/global/fgm.html ] girls annually are subjected to the procedure, with consequences including hemorrhage, infection, painful urination and death.
Blood sacrifice – In the list of religion’s worst ideas, this is the only one that appears to be in its final stages. Only some Hindus (during the Festival of Gadhimai [ http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/29/world/asia/nepal-gadhimai-ritual-slaughter/index.html ]) and some Muslims (during Eid al Adha [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eid_al-Adha#Traditions_and_practices ], Feast of the Sacrifice) continue to ritually slaughter sacrificial animals on a mass scale. Hindu scriptures including the Gita and Puranas forbid ritual killing, and most Hindus now eschew the practice based on the principle of ahimsa, but it persists as a residual of folk religion.
When our ancient ancestors slit the throats on humans and animals or cut out their hearts or sent the smoke of sacrifices heavenward, many believed that they were literally feeding supernatural beings. In time, in most religions, the rationale changed—the gods didn’t need feeding so much as they needed signs of devotion and penance. The residual child sacrifice in the Hebrew Bible (yes it is there [ http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2008/05/detestable-practice-of-divinely.html ]) typically has this function. Christianity’s persistent focus on blood atonement—the notion of Jesus as the be-all-end-all lamb without blemish, the final “propitiation” for human sin—is hopefully the last iteration of humanity’s long fascination with blood sacrifice.
Hell – Whether we are talking about Christianity, Islam [ http://www.islamicinformation.net/2008/05/hell-in-islam-jahannam.html ] or Buddhism, an afterlife filled with demons, monsters, and eternal torture was the worst suffering that Iron Age minds could conceive and medieval minds could elaborate. Invented, perhaps, as a means to satisfy the human desire for justice, the concept of Hell quickly devolved into a tool for coercing behavior and belief.
Most Buddhists see hell as a metaphor, a journey into the evil inside the self, but the descriptions of torturing monsters [ http://www.khandro.net/doctrine_hells.htm ] and levels of hell can be quite explicit. Likewise, many Muslims and Christians hasten to assure that it is a real place, full of fire and the anguish of non-believers. Some Christians have gone so far as to insist that the screams of the damned can be heard from the center of the Earth or that observing their anguish from afar will be one of the pleasures of paradise.
Karma – Like hell, the concept of karma offers a selfish incentive for good behavior—it’ll come back at you later—but it has enormous costs. Chief among these is a tremendous weight of cultural passivity in the face of harm and suffering. Secondarily, the idea of karma can sanctify [ http://www.academia.edu/2147058/Retributive_Karma_and_the_Problem_of_Blaming_the_Victim ] the broad human practice of blaming the victim. If what goes around comes around, then the disabled child or cancer patient or untouchable poor (or the hungry rabbit or mangy dog) must have done something in this or a previous life to bring their position on themselves.
Eternal Life – To our weary and unwashed ancestors, the idea of gem encrusted walls, streets of gold, the fountain of youth, or an eternity of angelic chorus (or sex with virgins) may have seemed like sheer bliss. But it doesn’t take much analysis to realize how quickly eternal paradise would become hellish [ http://valerietarico.com/2015/01/29/10-reasons-popular-versions-of-christian-heaven-would-be-hell/ ]—an endless repetition of never changing groundhog days (because how could they change if they were perfect).
The real reason that the notion of eternal life is such a bad invention, though, is the degree to which it diminishes and degrades existence on this earthly plane. With eyes lifted heavenward, we can’t see the intricate beauty beneath our feet. Devout believers put their spiritual energy into preparing for a world to come rather than cherishing and stewarding the one wild and precious world we have been given.
Male Ownership of Female Fertility – The notion of women as brood mares or children as assets likely didn’t originate with religion, but the idea that women were created for this purpose [ http://valerietarico.com/2012/03/09/15-bible-texts-reveal-why-gods-own-party-is-at-war-with-women/ ], that if a woman should die of childbearing “she was made to do it [ http://valerietarico.com/2013/07/01/mysogynistquoteschurchfathers/ ],” most certainly did. Traditional religions variously assert that men have a god-ordained right to give women in marriage, take them in war, exclude them from heaven, and kill them if the origins of their offspring can’t be assured. Hence Catholicism’s maniacal obsession [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/12/14/the-slut-shaming-sex-negative-message-in-the-christmas-story-its-worth-a-family-conversation/ ] with the virginity of Mary and female martyrs. Hence Islam’s maniacal obsession with covering the female body. Hence Evangelical promise rings, and gender segregated sidewalks in Jerusalem and orthodox Jewish women wearing wigs over shaved heads in New York.
As we approach the limits of our planetary life support system and stare dystopia in the face, defining women as breeders and children as assets becomes even more costly. We now know that resource scarcity is a conflict trigger and that demand for water and arable land is growing even as both resources decline. And yet, a pope who claims to care about the desperate poor lectures them against contraception [ http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2015/01/16/377686009/pope-on-visit-to-philippines-defends-catholic-ban-on-contraception ] while Muslim leaders ban vasectomies [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/08/12/iran-bans-vasectomies-wants-more-babies/ ] in a drive to outbreed their enemies.
Bibliolatry (aka Book Worship) – Preliterate people handed down their best guesses about gods and goodness by way of oral tradition, and they made objects of stone and wood, idols, to channel their devotion. Their notions of what was good and what was Real and how to live in moral community with each other were free to evolve as culture and technology changed. But the advent of the written word changed that. As our Iron Age ancestors recorded and compiled their ideas into sacred texts, these texts allowed their understanding of gods and goodness to become static. The sacred texts of Judaism, Christianity and Islam forbid idol worship, but over time the texts themselves became idols, and many modern believers practice—essentially—book worship, also known as bibliolatry.
“Because the faith of Islam is perfect, it does not allow for any innovations to the religion,” says one young Muslim explaining [ https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110530022221AAL5MMj ] his faith online. His statement betrays a naïve lack of information about the origins and evolution of his own dogmas. But more broadly, it sums up the challenge all religions face moving forward. Imagine if a physicist said, “Because our understanding of physics is perfect, it does not allow for any innovations to the field.”
Adherents who think their faith is perfect, are not just naïve or ill informed. They are developmentally arrested, and in the case of the world’s major religions, they are anchored to the Iron Age, a time of violence [ http://valerietarico.com/2014/10/24/bible-vs-quran-test-your-knowledge-of-who-deserves-death-in-which-religion/ ], slavery, desperation and early death.
Ironically, the mindset that our sacred texts are perfect betrays the very quest that drove our ancestors to write those texts. Each of the men who wrote part of the Bible, Quran, or Gita took his received tradition, revised it, and offered his own best articulation of what is good and real. We can honor the quest of our spiritual ancestors, or we can honor their answers, but we cannot do both.
Religious apologists often try to deny, minimize, or explain away the sins of scripture and the evils of religious history. “It wasn’t really slavery.” “That’s just the Old Testament.” “He didn’t mean it that way.” “You have to understand how bad their enemies were.” “Those people who did harm in the name of God weren’t real [Christians/Jews/Muslims].” Such platitudes may offer comfort, but denying problems doesn’t solve them. Quite the opposite, in fact. Change comes with introspection and insight, a willingness to acknowledge our faults and flaws while still embracing our strengths and potential for growth.
In a world that is teeming with humanity, armed with pipe bombs and machine guns and nuclear weapons and drones, we don’t need defenders of religion’s status quo—we need real reformation, as radical as that of the 16th Century and much, much broader. It is only by acknowledging religion’s worst ideas that we have any hope of embracing the best.
Copyright 2015 Valerie Tarico
http://valerietarico.com/2015/01/20/religions-dirty-dozen-12-really-bad-religious-ideas-that-have-made-the-world-worse/ [with comments] [also at http://www.alternet.org/belief/12-worst-ideas-religion-has-unleashed-world (with comments)] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=34991291 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110494613 and preceding and following]
===
Was Obama right about the Crusades and Islamic extremism? (ANALYSIS)
“Entr?e des crois?s ? Constantinople,” by Eugene Delacroix, circa 1885-1889, depicts the Crusaders entering Constantinople.
Photo courtesy New York Public Library.
An undated illustration shows the taking of the Greek city of Edessa in 1097 during the First Crusade.
Photo courtesy of The History Channel/Bettmann/Corbis.
Jay Michaelson
February 6, 2015
NEW YORK (RNS) The conservative Twitterverse is all riled up [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-speech-at-prayer-breakfast-called-offensive-to-christians/2015/02/05/6a15a240-ad50-11e4-ad71-7b9eba0f87d6_story.html ] because at Thursday’s (Feb. 5) National Prayer Breakfast (an event founded and run by the secretive Christian organization known as The Fellowship [ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/25/the-1-billion-a-year-right-wing-conspiracy-you-haven-t-heard-of.html ]), President Obama said that Christians, as well as Muslims, have at times committed atrocities. His words:
“Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”
This would seem to be Religious History 101, but it was nonetheless met with shock and awe.
“Hey, American Christians–Obama just threw you under the bus in order to defend Islam,” wrote shock jock Michael Graham. Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., called the comments “dangerously irresponsible.” The Catholic League’s Bill Donohue said [above]: “Obama’s ignorance is astounding and his comparison is pernicious. The Crusades were a defensive Christian reaction against Muslim madmen of the Middle Ages.”
More thoughtfully, Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, called Obama’s comments about Christianity “an unfortunate attempt at a wrongheaded moral comparison. … The evil actions that he mentioned were clearly outside the moral parameters of Christianity itself and were met with overwhelming moral opposition from Christians.”
Really?
1. The Crusades
The Crusades lasted almost 200 years, from 1095 to 1291. The initial spark came from Pope Urban II, who urged Christians to recapture the Holy Land (and especially the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem) from Muslim rule. Like the promise of eternal life given to Muslim martyrs, Crusaders were promised absolution from sin and eternal glory.
Militarily, the Crusades were at first successful, capturing Jerusalem in 1099, but eventually a disaster; Jersualem fell in 1187. Successive Crusades set far more modest goals, but eventually failed to achieve even them. The last Crusader-ruled city in the Holy Land, Acre, fell in 1291.
Along the way, the Crusaders massacred. To take but one example, the Rhineland Massacres of 1096 are remembered to this day as some of the most horrific examples of anti-Semitic violence prior to the Holocaust. (Why go to the Holy Land to fight nonbelievers, many wondered, when they live right among us?) The Jewish communities of Cologne, Speyer, Worms, and Mainz were decimated. There were more than 5,000 victims [ http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/crusades.html ].
And that was only one example. Tens of thousands of people (both soldiers and civilians) were killed in the conquest of Jerusalem. The Crusaders themselves suffered; historians estimate that only one in 20 survived to even reach the Holy Land. It is estimated that 1.7 million people died in total.
And this is all at a time in which the world population was approximately 300 million — less than 5 percent its current total. Muslim extremists would have to kill 34 million people (Muslim and non-Muslim alike) to equal that death toll today. As horrific as the Islamic State’s brutal reign of terror has been, its death toll is estimated at around 20,000.
2. The Inquisition
While most of us regard “The Inquisition” as a particular event, it actually refers to a set of institutions within the Roman Catholic Church that operated from the mid-13th century until the 19th century. One actually still survives, now known as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which was directed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger before his 2005 election as Pope Benedict XVI.
These institutions were charged with prosecuting heresy — and prosecute they did, executing and torturing thousands of suspected witches, converts from Judaism (many of whom had been forced to convert), Protestants, and all manner of suspected heretics, particularly in the 15th and 16th centuries. Historians estimate that 150,000 people were put on trial by the Inquisition, with 3,000 executed.
Arguably, the Islamic State’s methods of execution — including crucifixion, beheading, and, most recently, burning a prisoner alive — are as gruesome as the Inquistion’s, with its infamous hangings and burnings at the stake. ISIS is also committing systematic rape, which the Inquisition did not, and enslaving children.
As for torture, however, it’s hard to do worse than the Inquisition, which used torture as a method of extracting confessions. Methods included starvation, burning victims’ bodies with hot coals, forced overconsumption of water, hanging by straps, thumbscrews, metal pincers, and of course, the rack. Believe it or not, all of this was meant to be for the victim’s own good: better to confess heresy in this life, even under duress, than to be punished for it in the next.
Contrary to Moore’s statement, the Inquisition was not “outside the moral parameters of Christianity itself and … met with overwhelming moral opposition from Christians.” Though Moore may distinguish between ‘Christianity’ and the Roman Catholic Church, for all intents and purposes the Roman Catholic Church WAS Christianity at the time, or at least claimed to be.
3. Slavery and Jim Crow
“Slaves, obey your masters,” the New Testament says — three times. And indeed, Christian teaching was cited on both sides of the slavery debate, with both slaveholders and abolitionists using it [ http://www.pbs.org/wnet/slavery/experience/religion/history2.html ] to justify their actions. Segregationists also looked to the “Curse of Ham,” from the story of Noah [ https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Genesis%209:25 ], and the notion that God had separated the races on different continents. The effects were world-historic in scope: Nearly 12 million people were forced on the “Middle Passage” from Africa to the Americas [ http://bernard.pitzer.edu/~hfairchi/pdf/Blacks/MiddlePassage.pdf ].
More recently, though the vast majority of Christians abhor it, the Ku Klux Klan, to the present day, still insists that it is a “Christian organization.” There’s a reason the Klan burned crosses alongside its lynchings and acts of arson, after all.
Of course, there was also organized Christian opposition to slavery and to Jim Crow, and Christianity is at least as much the property of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., as of the segregationists and slaveholders of the Old South. But this was precisely Obama’s point: All religions have their hateful extremists, and their prophets of justice.
What about popularity? Do more Muslims support the Islamic State today than Christians supported Jim Crow in the past? No. At the height of the KKK’s popularity in the 1920s, approximately 15 percent of white male Americans were members [ http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/flood-klan/ ]. That number is eerily similar to the 12 percent of Muslims worldwide who support terrorism today [ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/10/how-to-measure-what-muslims-really-believe.html ].
In other words, not only is Obama factually correct that Christian extremism across history has been at least as bloody as Muslim extremism today, it is also factually true that such extremisms have been equally popular. True, as Rush Limbaugh points out [ http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/02/05/why_our_president_chose_to_insult_christianity_and_excuse_militant_islam_at_the_national_prayer_breakfast ], the Crusades were “a thousand years ago,” the Inquisition ended 200 years ago, and Jim Crow legally ended in the 1960s. But the president specifically noted that “humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history.”
Which is the real point. There are two narratives about radical Islamists, and indeed about enemies of any sort, that coexist in American culture. According to one, they are different from us — Muslims, Palestinians, Israelis, Communists, you name it. Thus, in the battle against Islamic extremism, Islam is, in part at least, the enemy.
The other narrative is that all peoples, all creeds, all nations contain elements of moderation and extremism. Thankfully, racist Christian extremists are today a tiny ["tiny"? - bullshit] minority within American Christianity. But only 100 years ago, they were as popular among American Christians as the Islamic State is among Muslims today. Thus, in the battle against Islamic extremism, it is extremism that is the enemy.
Hysterical commentary [ http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/02/05/president-obama-says-christians-are-just-like-isis-and-burning-people-alive-is-just-like-jim-crow/ ] notwithstanding, no one is suggesting that Christians are just like the Islamic State. But Obama did suggest that Christianity is like Islam; both faiths have the capacity to be exploited by extremists.
Christians should not be insulted by the facts of history. Rather, all of us should be inspired by them to recognize the dangers of extremism — wherever they lie.
© 2015 Religion News LLC
http://www.religionnews.com/2015/02/06/obama-right-crusades-islamic-extremism-analysis/ [with comments] [also at http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/was-obama-right-about-the-crusades-and-islamic-extremism-analysis/2015/02/06/3670628a-ae46-11e4-8876-460b1144cbc1_story.html (with comments)] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=39423407 and preceding and following]
--
Obama Was Right to Compare Christianity's Violent Past to the Islamic State
By Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig
February 6, 2015
Conservative critics are in hysterics thanks to a few short remarks made by President Barack Obama on the subject of Christian history during Thursday’s National Prayer Breakfast. Addressing religiously motivated conflict abroad, Obama said [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-speech-at-prayer-breakfast-called-offensive-to-christians/2015/02/05/6a15a240-ad50-11e4-ad71-7b9eba0f87d6_story.html ], “Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”
Naturally, conservatives were displeased with the suggestion that Christianity might be in some sense comparable to contemporary religious terrorism. At RedState, a contributor adduced Obama’s comments as further evidence of the president’s alleged fondness [ http://www.redstate.com/2015/02/05/obama-uses-national-prayer-breakfast-compare-christianity-isis/ ] for Islam, while Rush Limbaugh interpreted the remarks [ http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/02/05/why_our_president_chose_to_insult_christianity_and_excuse_militant_islam_at_the_national_prayer_breakfast ] as an insult to Christianity and a defense of radical Islam. Former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore said [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-speech-at-prayer-breakfast-called-offensive-to-christians/2015/02/05/6a15a240-ad50-11e4-ad71-7b9eba0f87d6_story.html ], “The president’s comments this morning at the prayer breakfast are the most offensive I’ve ever heard a president make in my lifetime,” adding that Obama "has offended every believing Christian in the United States. This goes further to the point that Mr. Obama does not believe in America or the values we all share.”
Critics who viewed Obama’s speech as a bold defense of Islam seem to have missed the segment wherein he labeled the Islamic State a “vicious death cult [id.],” and offered its horrific acts of terrorism as evidence of the evil that can be done in the name of (admittedly distorted) faith. The example of past Christian atrocities was given only to counterbalance the reproach aimed at religiously motivated violence committed outside the Christian world; it was not a stand-alone condemnation, and further, it did not go nearly as far as it could have.
By limiting his criticism of Christian violence to the Crusades and Inquisition, Obama kept his critique of Christian horrors to centuries past. But one need not look back so far to find more recent Christians behaving terribly in the name of Christ. The atrocities of the Bosnian War, including the systematic rape [ http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/bosnia-war-crimes-the-rapes-went-on-day-and-night-robert-fisk-in-mostar-gathers-detailed-evidence-of-the-systematic-sexual-assaults-on-muslim-women-by-serbian-white-eagle-gunmen-1471656.html ] of women and girls, was perpetrated largely by Christians against Muslims; meanwhile, many of the Christian churches of Rwanda were intimately involved in the politicking that produced the genocide of 1994, with some clergy even reported to have participated in the violence [ http://faculty.vassar.edu/tilongma/Church&Genocide.html ].
The degree to which, in retrospect, we are willing to condemn violent perversions of faith often has to do with their proximity to us. Most will now admit, however grudgingly, that the Crusades and Inquisition were efforts to carry out some construal of God’s will, however mistaken and otherwise motivated. With more recent conflicts, such as Bosnia and Rwanda, we are more apt to see Christianity as a single thread in a web of ethnic and political tensions that was ultimately only one cause among the many that ultimately culminated in brutality. And this analysis is probably right.
But it is also probably true of the terrorism perpetrated by ISIS, which has been roundly denounced as contrary to the principles of Islam by a host of Muslim leaders and clerics, most recently [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/05/world/middleeast/arab-world-unites-in-anger-after-burning-of-jordanian-pilot.html ] after the murder of Jordanian pilot Moaz al-Kasasbeh. Like war crimes and individual acts of brutality committed within the Christian world, the pattern of tensions that has produced ISIS, in all its unthinkable cruelty, seems to be broader and deeper than its self-proclaimed religious convictions. For those not searching for a source of personal offense, this is the only point Obama’s remarks on the religious violence enacted by Christians really conveys.
And it is, at last, a hopeful point: If we in the Christian world are capable of owning the monstrosities of our past, identifying their sources as multivalent and contrary to our faith, and holding one another accountable for the behavior we exhibit moving forward, then so are the members of the faiths we live alongside in the world. But accountability requires honesty, and pretending that Christians have never attributed violence to the cause of Christ is a disservice to modern peacemaking and to the victims of the past. Obama was right to take a clear-eyed view of the years that have come before, and to look hopefully to what we can do together as a multi-faith nation in the years to come.
Copyright 2015 © The New Republic
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120993/obama-national-prayer-breakfast-compares-christian-violence-isis [with comments]
--
Conservatives Have Stooped to Defending the Horrific Crusades
By Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig
February 9, 2015
After President Barack Obama noted during last week's National Prayer Breakfast that Christians have committed acts of violence [ http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120993/obama-national-prayer-breakfast-compares-christian-violence-isis (just above)] in the name of Christianity, there are a lot of directions conservatives could have gone. The sanest direction would have been to accept that Christians have done terrible things under the banner of faith—even religions we find familiar and comforting can be contorted under the right conditions. This was undoubtedly the point the president was attempting to make, in an effort to maintain some semblance of fairness as he addressed the problem of Islamic terrorism.
Instead, conservatives tried [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/07/us/obama-trying-to-add-context-to-speech-faces-backlash-over-crusades.html ] to defend the Crusades [ http://www.christiantoday.com/article/obama.the.crusades.and.the.inquisition.why.the.presidents.right.and.his.critics.are.wrong/47653.htm ]; or rather, to defend the symbol the Crusades have become as they have been imported into the American cultural lexicon. At National Review Online [ http://www.nationalreview.com/article/398030/horse-pucky-obama-jonah-goldberg ], a popular conservative blogging platform, Jonah Goldberg argued that the Crusades were essentially justified in the context of what he identifies as Muslim aggression. “For starters,” Goldberg writes, “the Crusades—despite their terrible organized cruelties—were a defensive war.” Note that the plural “Crusades” transforms by the end of the sentence into the singular “a … war”: Goldberg was closer to the mark at the start of the sentence than at the end, as there were multiple Crusades [ http://www.ducksters.com/history/middle_ages_crusades.php ], and each of them were distinct affairs. Some, for example, were initiated by the papacy; others were initiated by kings against the wishes of the Church, and some, like the Children's Crusade, now appear to be at least somewhat mythological [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_Crusade ].
More slippery is the tantalizingly italicized word “defensive,” which conservatives also periodically apply to the Civil War [ http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/05/03/1958961/incoming-nra-president-calls-civil-war-the-war-of-northern-aggression/ ] with similar intentions of historical whitewashing. As David Perry points out at The Guardian, a host of other conservative defenses of the Crusades have accompanied [ http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/07/conservatives-rewrite-history-crusades-modern-political-ends ] Goldberg’s: from spirited justifications to softer arguments. Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal’s claim [ http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/07/liberals-still-trying-to-save-obama-from-crusades-idiocy-after-jindal-slapdown/ ], for instance, was that the Crusades happened so long ago as to be irrelevant in all modern contexts, and that the time spent discussing them in Obama's speech could have been put to better use combatting ISIS.
One could interpret these bizarre defenses as evidence that, for a certain brand of Christian, the fact that Christians can and do pervert religion in the service of evil deeds is literally unbelievable. But this would seem a remarkable stretch, given that even Judas Iscariot [ http://www.ashgate.com/isbn/9780754652847 ] has a place in the Christian economy of salvation. In other words, Christians can usually fathom, when thinking rationally, the idea that terrible things are a part of our collective history.
Perhaps conservatives merely found the criticisms of the Crusades cynical, given that their historical distance makes any genuinely felt implication on the president’s behalf unlikely [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/opinion/sunday/ross-douthat-obama-the-theologian.html ]. In this case, the defense of the Crusades reads as a reflexive measure, meant to press Obama into more compromising territory, where he might have the courage to remark on a Christian atrocity he himself feels guilty about. Yet it seems unlikely to me that offering examples of more recent Christian evils—such as racism and slavery [ http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/the-foolish-historically-illiterate-incredible-response-to-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech/385246/ (below)], the conquest of the Americas, the Bosnian War, or complicity in the Rwandan Genocide—would have won Obama any points for sincerity. Each would most likely be respectively dismissed as race baiting, as anti-American, as arguably legitimate, and as irrelevant.
It’s likeliest that the conservative defense of the Crusades is directly related to their status as a touchstone of American civic religion. Pope Francis was to be accused of crusading [ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/19/on-isis-pope-francis-is-no-crusader.html ] after he nodded to the use of limited force in restraining ISIS; a look back at Ridley Scott’s 2005 Crusade epic Kingdom of Heaven [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Heaven_%28film%29 ] reveals that the film sparked a very similar debate [ http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/summer_movies/2006/06/boringus_maximus.html ] to the one we’re having now [ http://www.creationworldview.org/articles_view.asp?id=21 ], though that one was somewhat less heated.
When the Crusades are represented in American culture now, they are a symbol of Christian gusto, whether positive or negative. They resonate with the idea of a robust, aggressive Christianity, a faith with the masculine energy to face Islam head-on. This is why the Crusades occupy a special place in the conservative id, and it is why conservatives appear willing to defend them on general principle, with little regard for historicity. It is also why criticizing the Crusades is presented by some conservatives [ http://gov.louisiana.gov/index.cfm?md=newsroom&tmp=detail&articleID=4835 ] as an alternative to fighting ISIS, as though if Obama had simply omitted that remark from his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, the Islamic terror group would now be vanquished.
Of course, no remark made at that breakfast, or any other breakfast, will be sufficient to undo the brutality ISIS has already inflicted upon innocent people. Nor will feverish dreaming about a mythological Christian military history rooted in contemporary American appropriations of the past advance that goal. Obama’s remark was meant to cool interfaith hostilities by pointing out no religion has perfect adherents; his political opponents have instead decided to double down on the misuse of Christian sentiment the president intended to point out, which, if nothing else, is proof of the worthiness of his remark.
Copyright 2015 © The New Republic (emphasis in original)
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121008/obamas-crusades-remark-generates-conservative-backlash [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=22198799 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=70066579 and http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=70067730 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=90461361 and preceding and following]
--
‘The Crusades Were Great, Actually!’
Hulton Archive/Getty
The right-wing hysteria following President Obama’s remarks has revealed a shocking belief held by many Christian conservatives: that the Crusades weren’t really so bad.
Jay Michaelson
02.10.15
When I was growing up as a Nice Jewish Boy in day school, we were taught that the Crusades were one of the worst episodes in history: marauding Christian soldiers massacring everyone in sight. Especially Jews.
Most historians tend to agree that the Crusades were a dark chapter in Christian history, with extraordinary violence carried out in Christ’s name, and with Christian doctrine often a mere excuse for murder and pillage. This, no doubt, is why President Obama mentioned the Crusades as an example of heinous religious violence last week [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/was-obama-right-about-the-crusades-and-islamic-extremism-analysis/2015/02/06/3670628a-ae46-11e4-8876-460b1144cbc1_story.html ].
It would seem to be an uncontroversial claim. Historians estimate that between one and three million people died in the Crusades (including the Crusaders), at a time when the world’s population was 300 million. That’s right—up to 1 percent of the entire world population perished in the paroxysms of violence between 1095 and 1291. The equivalent of sixty million people today.
The right-wingnut controversy following Obama’s remarks, however, has laid bare a troubling trend among conservative Christians (and the politicians eager to pander to them): They are now in the business of justifying the Crusades.
You read that right. The point being made is not that Obama is wrong to compare ISIS to the Crusades because the Crusades happened long ago (this was Bobby Jindal’s cute, misleading quip), or because the historical context is different. It’s that Obama is wrong to compare ISIS to the Crusades because the Crusades were actually a good thing.
Perhaps the leading theme in this literature is that “The Crusades—despite their terrible organized cruelties—were a defensive war.” This was thusly emphasized [ http://www.nationalreview.com/article/398030/horse-pucky-obama-jonah-goldberg ] by Jonah Goldberg in the National Review. (Goldberg proceeded to quote Bernard Lewis, “the greatest living English-language historian of Islam,” apparently unaware that he is the primary target of Edward Said’s book Orientalism [ http://www.amazon.com/Orientalism-Edward-W-Said/dp/039474067X ] and has been shown, time and again, to have anti-Muslim bias.)
Ross Douthat, writing in the New York Times (which presumably continues to give him a platform in order to show that religious dogma can cloud even an intelligent mind), described [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/opinion/sunday/ross-douthat-obama-the-theologian.html ] the Crusades as an “incredibly complicated multicentury story.”
And these are the smart conservatives. Here [ http://www.goupstate.com/article/20110223/ARTICLES/102231013/1083/ARTICLES ]’s Rick Santorum:
The idea that the Crusades and the fight of Christendom against Islam is somehow an aggression on our part is absolutely anti-historical. And that is what the perception is by the American left who hates Christendom. They hate Christendom. They hate Western civilization at the core. That’s the problem.
“Somehow an aggression on our part.” The Crusades were really just defense.
Behind this sort of posturing is a bookshelf of revisionist history, most of it written by apologetic Christians—“apologetic” in the sense of an apologia, a defense, not an apology for past misdeeds. For example [ http://modernmedieval.blogspot.com/2007/06/problematic-crusades.html ], apologist Marco Meschini, a professor at a Catholic university in Milan, has written that crusades are defensive while jihad is offensive.
One of the leading debunkers of the biased misuse of history is Professor Matthew Gabriele of Virginia Tech [ http://www.rc.vt.edu/about-us/people/faculty/matthew-gabriele.html ], who has taught and published widely on the Crusades. On his blog [ http://modernmedieval.blogspot.com/2011/02/rick-santorums-crusade-nostalgia.html ], he said simply, “I call bullshit.”
In fact, as Gabriele writes [ http://modernmedieval.blogspot.com/2008/12/revisiting-crusades-with-or-without.html ], various Muslim sects had controlled Jerusalem since 732 , yet it took the Christian forces 350 years to “respond.” And only the first of eight crusades was dedicated to retaking Christian shrines; subsequent adventures in Egypt, Tunisia, and modern-day Syria and Turkey were not so motivated.
In any case, is it sensible to take the Church leadership’s rhetoric at face value? Sure, the Crusades may have been justified by religious objectives. But scholars have observed for centuries that they were at least equally motivated by the Church’s centralization of temporal power, the authority of monarchs [ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/12976/Albigensian-Crusade ] friendly to the Church, and the accretion of wealth.
Another leading theme is that violence is central to Islam, but peripheral to Christianity. Here’s Meschini again [ http://modernmedieval.blogspot.com/2007/06/problematic-crusades.html ]: “Jihad is the sixth pillar of Islam… On the contrary, there is no sacred Christian text that speaks of war in a similar way.” In response, Gabriele cited “the biblical books of Joshua, Judges, Kings, Maccabees” as well as “Augustine, Eusebius, the Pseudo-Methodius, the Tiburtine Sibyl, Adso of Montier-en-Der.”
Oh, and note that there are only five pillars of Islam, none of which is jihad. Meschini just made the “sixth pillar” stuff up.
Similarly, Notre Dame scholar Steve Weidenkopf, in a “a crash course in the Crusades [ http://www.crisismagazine.com/2012/crash-course-on-the-crusades ]” in the Catholic magazine Crisis, wrote it is a “myth” that Crusaders slaughtered all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, but in the same post, then says that it was “standard practice” to do so and “both Christians and Muslims followed this policy.”
So, they didn’t do it, but if they did, everyone did it anyway. Following the classic “No True Scotsman” fallacy, Weidenkopf then says that the Crusaders who massacred Jews—5,000 in the Rhineland massacres alone—were “brigands” and “cannot accurately be called Crusaders.”
In fact, the Crusaders massacred, massacred, and massacred some more. They massacred Jews in the Rhineland, Albigensian heretics [ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/12976/Albigensian-Crusade ] in Spain, Muslims in the Holy Land. Sometimes (as in the Rhineland) the massacres were condemned by religious authorities; other times (as in Spain) it was actively encouraged.
And then there’s the selective appropriation of Crusade historiography. Interestingly, the multiply-knighted Cambridge historian Jonathan Riley-Smith has written several revisionist books on the Crusades which are selectively quoted by conservatives. Reacting against the materialist account of the Crusades—that they were economic enterprises, motivated by early colonialism—Riley-Smith has maintained [ http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features2009/jrsmith_crusadespref_jun09.asp ] that they were religious in nature. But he also pointed out that the Crusades were not just against Muslims, and not simply reactive. And Riley-Smith’s point that the Crusades were religious enterprises actually cuts against contemporary voices who try to distance them from Christianity.
These points are omitted in popular conservative appropriations [ http://www.firstthings.com/article/2009/06/inventing-the-crusades ] of Riley-Smith, which basically take the good and leave the bad.
To be sure, radical Islamists have their own distortions of the Crusades. ISIS calls all American and European soldiers “Crusaders.” Sayyid Qutb’s iteration of “Crusaderism” (sulubiyya) is foundational to radical Islamism. Contrary to conservative rhetoric [id.], however, no one in the West is really arguing that Muslims are justified in taking revenge on the Crusaders, or that radical Islamism is a reasonable reaction to the events of a millennium ago. That’s not the point.
The point is that whitewashing of one of the most bloody periods in world history is troubling on many levels. First, it is a radical failure to ‘own’ one’s own troubling history—like the same conservatives’ claims that slavery wasn’t really so bad [ http://www.economist.com/news/books/21615864-how-slaves-built-american-capitalism-blood-cotton ] and that the Inquisition, too, was sort of a good idea. It brings to mind Santayana’s overused quote that those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it. But it’s even worse than that: This sort of revisionism tries to cover up the past and pretend it never happened.
Second, what’s the lesson here? That if Muslims attack Christians, a massive war effort that kills 1% of the world population and massacres innocents is an appropriate response? That Christians are just better people than Muslims, a la the “Clash of Civilizations?” That Christian power is the only kind of power that can’t ever be abused? None of these conclusions is defensible, or even morally tolerable.
Douthat, in his Times column, said that it’s “Niebuhrian” (as in the liberal theologian Reinhold Niebuhr) to recognize that we all have our flaws, that no civilization (and no individual) is perfect. Strange, I thought that was just Christian. But I know for sure that it’s wise.
© 2015 The Daily Beast Company LLC (emphasis in original)
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/10/the-crusades-were-great-actually.html [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=15789063 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=34514807 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=106000450 and preceding (and any future following)]
--
Why Christians can’t ignore the mote in their eye (COMMENTARY)
U.S. President Barack Obama speaks at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington on Thursday (February 5, 2015).
Photo courtesy of REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque.
Tom Ehrich
February 10, 2015
(RNS) Despite the fuming of a former Republican governor, President Obama didn’t offend “every believing Christian in the United States” when he noted at a national prayer breakfast that we, too, “committed terrible deeds” in the name of our religion.
I, for one, was pleased to have us called back from the “high horse” that Christian religionists often occupy when criticizing other faiths while ignoring the mote in our own eye.
In our pursuit of religious victory, we Christians have at times been a scourge on civilization. We have slaughtered many, and not just centuries ago in a safe and distant past but still today.
We have served as apologists for slavery, apartheid, racial segregation, white terrorism of blacks in the South, suppression of labor, and repression of the poor and immigrant. Some of our misguided brethren are declaring war now on women and on gays, as if God’s promise to love all of humanity needed to be ignored.
We have winked at our own scandals while presuming to judge our neighbors for their flaws. We have sought special favors — such as tax exemption — and used the benefits to serve ourselves. With the world around us descending into violence and intolerance, we bicker about doctrine and property ownership.
Our hands are stained. Plain and simple.
That doesn’t excuse the horrific violence being meted out now by the Islamic State or by Boko Haram, both in the name of their religion. Violence is violence, terrorism is terrorism, and religion-justified cruelty is wrong, no matter whose holy book is being waved.
Christianity won’t truly serve humanity, however, until we get honest about the ways we have done wrong and proclaim our belief that God can use even us for good. Our message should be: “We did wrong, God forgave us, and now, day by day, we try to get it right.”
That is a Gospel promise that all of humanity needs to hear. When we deny any culpability, we merely perpetuate ignorance and hubris in our own ranks and make ourselves seem dishonest and dangerous in the eyes of the world.
When we claim always to have been right because our ecclesiastical ancestor Peter once was handed the keys to God’s kingdom, we become a monster. We turn sin into the other guy’s problem and set ourselves as judges, not neighbors.
Rather than pounce on the president for knowing his history, we should be grateful for his call to honesty.
Some of the knee-jerk denunciations that followed Obama’s remarks were the usual partisan piffle that has paralyzed national and local politics. But some came from preachers who should know better. We don’t have to be medieval historians to see Christians behaving like Islamic extremists.
Yes, the Crusades and Inquisition are in our past. But until the recent papacy of Francis, the Roman Catholic Church routinely sided with repressive regimes in Latin America. Russian Orthodox hierarchs align with Vladimir Putin’s brutal kleptocracy. In the tense standoff between Islam and Christianity in sub-Saharan Africa, whichever side gets the upper hand tends to victimize the other.
I won’t presume to speak for Islam. But we Christians can find nothing in our Scripture or better natures that would justify our brutish behavior. We should be a force for good. But that won’t happen until we acknowledge our capacity for evil.
(Tom Ehrich is a writer, church consultant and Episcopal priest based in New York. He is the president of Morning Walk Media and publisher of Fresh Day online magazine. His website is http://www.morningwalkmedia.com/ . Follow Tom on Twitter https://twitter.com/tomehrich .)
© 2015 Religion News LLC
http://www.religionnews.com/2015/02/10/christians-cant-ignore-mote-eye-commentary/ [with comments]
--
The echoes of Abraham Lincoln in President Obama’s Prayer Breakfast speech (COMMENTARY)
(Left) U.S. President Barack Obama speaks at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington on Thursday (February 5, 2015).
Photo courtesy of REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque.
(Right) Abraham Lincoln portrait.
Photo courtesy of Everett Historical via Shutterstock.
John Fea
February 11, 2015
MECHANICSBURG, Pa. (RNS) President Obama’s political opponents are outraged over his remarks at last week’s National Prayer Breakfast comparing Islamic violence to historic Christian violence. Jim Gilmore, former chairman of the Republican National Committee, called the remarks “the most offensive I’ve ever heard a president make in my lifetime.”
But anyone who is angry with Obama’s speech must also express the same wrath toward one of the greatest presidential speeches in American history, Abraham Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address [ http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres32.html ], delivered 150 years ago next month.
Obama used his annual remarks at the National Prayer breakfast to condemn radical Islam (though he didn’t use the term). In the process, he made some more general comments about how religion has been used — both today and in the past — to promote violence.
What has rankled many conservatives is Obama’s statement that “during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.” He then brought his historical analogy closer to home: “In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”
Obama’s remarks about the historic links between Christianity and violence are accurate. (To be fair, he also referenced the ways that religion has been a positive force in the world.) But those who focus too much on this part of the speech miss the entire point. In fact, they are part of the very problem that Obama has diagnosed.
This is a speech rooted in Christian teaching about love, humility and compassion. I would expect nothing less from a follower of Jesus. Obama appeals to the mystery of God and, without specifically saying it, asks us to remove the speck from our own eye before we set out to remove the log from our neighbor’s eye.
In fact, no president has made such an appeal to humility and mystery since Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address.
It is a great speech, a moving speech, a Christian speech, an American speech. Obama’s remarks about how history reminds us of our sinful condition should please any Calvinist. His defense of religious freedom should please any Baptist, a tradition with a rich history of defending the separation of church and state.
Is radical Islam a threat? Of course. Must it be stopped? Yes. Does Obama want to stop it? I believe that he does. But his approach to dealing with this threat is measured by the teachings of Jesus.
When Obama tells Americans to get off their “high horses” and realize that sin has been present throughout human history, even American history, he echoes Lincoln’s words on that rainy morning on March 4, 1865.
Lincoln knew that the Confederates had killed tens of thousands of Union men and women over the course of his first term as president. Lincoln wanted the Confederacy punished for this. So did nearly every Protestant clergyman in the North. Some of them, like the popular Henry Ward Beecher, wanted God to cast the Confederates straight into the pit of hell.
Even many members of Lincoln’s own Republican Party thought the South needed to pay dearly for seceding from the Union and starting the Civil War. They became known as “Radical Republicans” and, like the Northern ministers, they were confident that they knew God’s will on the matter of the post-Civil War settlement.
But Lincoln was not so sure.
Both the North and South, he said, “read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes.”
Lincoln wanted the period of Reconstruction to be defined by “malice toward none” and “charity for all.” His Second Inaugural Address drew heavily from Jesus’ teachings in the Sermon on the Mount. Lincoln never claimed to be an orthodox Christian, but he certainly understood the spirit of Christianity.
Lincoln also turned to American history to remind his audience that both North and South were responsible for slavery, or “the bondsman’s 250 years of unrequited toil.” He wanted the people of the North to recall their past sins before they began to cast judgment on the South.
Obama, by reminding Americans about the Crusades and slavery in his Prayer Breakfast speech last week, was doing something similar.
(John Fea is a historian and chair of the history department at Messiah College in Mechanicsburg, Pa. He blogs daily at http://www.philipvickersfithian.com/ .)
© 2015 Religion News LLC
http://www.religionnews.com/2015/02/11/echoes-abraham-lincoln-president-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech-commentary/ [with comments]
--
Obama was right: It’s time for Christians to reflect
U.S. President Barack Obama speaks at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington on Thursday (February 5, 2015).
Photo courtesy of REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque.
Jonathan Merritt
Feb 12, 2015
Who knew that so few words could cause so much hysteria?
During his remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast [ http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/05/remarks-president-national-prayer-breakfast ], President Obama discussed the need to oppose militant groups that misuse religion to justify oppression or violence. But then the president said this: “And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.”
That single sentence launched conservative Christians into the stratosphere. From Bill Donahue [ http://www.catholicleague.org/obama-insults-christians/ (above)] to Franklin Graham [ https://www.facebook.com/FranklinGraham/posts/859293290793520 ], it seems like everyone is taking time to criticize the comment. Some were restrained while others—like Texas preacher Robert Jeffress who said Jesus is “incensed [ http://www.christianpost.com/news/pastor-robert-jeffress-jesus-would-be-incensed-that-obama-dare-link-christianity-to-isis-133743/ ]” over the speech—bordered on silly. But most of these denunciations ignore or even twist the facts about what the president said and clearly meant.
Some Christians argued that Obama’s comment skirted past discussing the real issue: Islamist terrorism. Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins said [ https://patriotpost.us/opinion/32945 ], “The president missed an opportunity to address the growing threat that radical Islam presents to the world.” Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, spoke of Obama’s increasingly “dangerous [ http://www.albertmohler.com/2015/02/10/the-president-at-the-prayer-breakfast/ ]” refusal to acknowledge our current challenge of “resurgent Islam.”
“President Obama would not mention Islam by name,” Mohler lamented [id.], “but he did bring judgment on the Christian past, with specific reference to the Crusades.”
But the transcript shows that the president did mention [ http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/05/remarks-president-national-prayer-breakfast (above)] “Islam” by name. Twice. He also referenced “Muslims” and “ISIL.” In fact, he referred to ISIL as a “brutal, vicious death cult that, in the name of religion, carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism.” That’s not exactly sheepish.
Other Christians went even further, arguing that the president’s comments empowered terrorists. Christian apologist Ravi Zacharias, for example, accused [ http://rzim.org/blog/a-presidential-blunder-my-response-to-obamas-address-at-the-national-prayer-breakfast ] Obama of feeding “the insatiable rage of the extremists.”
Wait, so when the president proclaims that we should oppose religiously motivated violent acts—including those perpetuated by militant Islamists—it fuels terrorism? I’m confused.
And if conservative Christians are so worried about fueling the rage of Islamist extremists, then why do many of them support torture techniques that we know fuels terrorists’ resolve? And why haven’t they apologized for providing the moral support for the Iraq War—a conflict that contributed [ http://theweek.com/articles/445054/blame-obama-evangelicals-persecution-iraqi-christians ] to the conditions that give rise to ISIS and mass Christian persecution in Iraq?
The common thread among almost all of these criticisms is the claim that Obama created a moral equivalency between the Crusades and ISIL’s current campaign. As Russell Moore of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission said [ http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/tv/2015/02/06/lead-pkg-tapper-obama-isis-crusades-comparison.cnn.html ] on CNN, “It’s almost as though Franklin Roosevelt were to say, “It’s a date that shall live in infamy, but let’s remember we surprised the British at Yorktown too.”
But if you read the president’s full remarks, it is quite clear that he wasn’t drawing a moral equivalency between these two events—a fact that even Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly recognized and admitted on air. Instead, the president simply reminded the crowd of what history tells us: that almost all religions—even the Christian kind—have been and can be misused to justify violence.
Why exactly was this so inflammatory for conservative Christians? This is neither a false nor a fringe idea. After all, many [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1616142189 ] historians [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0307957047 ] and [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1442600608 ] scholars [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/161234660X ] have written [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0812223055 ] about [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0520240111 ] the similarities in religiously motivated violence throughout history—including the Crusades and Islamist terrorism. The only explanation I can reason is that they are attempts to score political points against a president they seemingly love to hate.
But these cheap shots from the president’s critics aren’t fully honest. They have attempted to brush past the brutal violence of the Crusades with a “yeah, but…” attitude, and in some cases, are even trying to justify [ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/10/the-crusades-were-great-actually.html (above)] the brutal Christian campaigns, which wiped out up to 1 percent of the global population. Of course, the issue at hand isn’t really the Crusades but an undeniable historical pattern. Warrior popes, church-sanctioned executions of “heretics,” the enslavement of Africans, world-wide colonialism, displacement of the American Indians, abortion clinic bombings, anti-Jewish pogroms, the lynching and systemic oppression of Black Americans—these are just the headliners.
As Yale Divinity School professor Miroslav Volf writes [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1575068036 ], “Beginning at least with Constantine’s conversion, the followers of the Crucified have perpetrated gruesome acts of violence under the sign of the cross.”
When I reflect on the recurrent violence throughout Christian history, I’m reminded of the words [ http://biblehub.com/matthew/7-3.htm ] of a first century Rabbi: “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?” That was Jesus, of course, and he was reminding us that when our anger burns against others, we should pause to reflect on our own evil impulses and behaviors.
Contrary to the hot air coming from so many, it is actually quite Christian to remind ourselves of our own violent history even as we confront current evils. This posture nurtures humility rather than rage and forces us to see ourselves in the eyes of our “enemies.” It stops us from chanting “kill them all” and forces us instead to whisper “There but for the grace of God go I.”
I have deep disagreements with President Obama, and I have written of them on several occasions. But at the National Prayer Breakfast, the President was right. Sadly, many Christians participated in needless hysteria that robs them of an opportunity for honesty and humility. Perhaps if Christians learned to regularly reflect on and confess the logs in our own eyes, we would be less preoccupied with rattling sabers and more concerned with proclaiming the gospel of peace.
(Jonathan Merritt is senior columnist for Religion News Service and a regular contributor to The Week [ http://theweek.com/author/jonathan-merritt ]. He has published more than 1000 articles in outlets like USA Today, The Atlantic, and National Journal. Jonathan is author of "Jesus is Better Than You Imagined [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1455527874 ]" and "A Faith of Our Own: Following Jesus Beyond the Culture Wars [ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0446557234 ].")
© 2015 Religion News LLC (emphasis in original)
http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2015/02/12/obama-right-time-christians-reflect/ [with comments]
--
Obama: Sound Theology and Smart Politics
SAUL LOEB via Getty Images
By James Zogby
President, Arab American Institute [ http://www.aaiusa.org/ ]; author, 'Arab Voices' [ http://www.amazon.com/Arab-Voices-What-Saying-Matters/dp/0230120687 ]
Posted: 02/14/2015 9:32 am EST Updated: 02/14/2015 10:59 am EST
President Obama's remarks, last week, at the annual National Prayer Breakfast were theologically sound and politically smart. In spite of this, his comments set off a storm of criticism from conservative critics who took him to task for both his theology and his politics. While I cannot read their hearts, their rhetoric was so predictable and so harsh, that I suspect some were prompted by a mixture of blind ideology and anti-Muslim animus, coupled with a tinge of racism. More to the point, the President's critics are just plain wrong-- theologically and politically.
What President Obama said was so profound, it bears repeating:
...[We] see faith being twisted and distorted, used as a wedge--or, even worse, sometimes as a weapon...We see ISIL, a brutal, vicious death cult that in the name of religion, carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism...claiming the mantle of religious authority for such actions.
Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think that this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ...
So this is not unique to one group or one religion. There is a tendency in us, a sinful tendency, that can pervert and distort our faith...
...we should [therefore] start with some basic humility...Our job is not to ask that God respond to our notion of truth...[And] we have to speak up against those who would misuse His name to justify oppression, or violence, or hatred with that fierce certainty.
The President was unwavering in his condemnation of ISIL, while at the same time recognizing that at the root of their evil ideology is the sin of blind certainty, through which this group, and those like it, attempt to validate their actions by, in effect, imposing their will on God. The antidote is humility, coupled with an understanding of our own failings--lest we, too, fall into the trap of arrogant certainty.
Theologically, all of this is quite sound. But latter-day Pharisees were outraged at the President's call for humility and his acknowledgment of the times we have failed to live up to the ideals of our faith.
In response, one Republican leader termed Obama's remarks "the most offensive I've ever heard a president make in my lifetime...He has offended every believing Christian in the United States...Mr. Obama does not believe in America and the values we all share." A Southern Baptist leader termed the President's words "an unfortunate attempt at wrong-headed moral comparison" suggesting that instead of meddling in theology what the president should do is provide "a moral framework...and a clear strategy for defeating ISIS". He continued: "The evil actions he mentioned were clearly outside the moral parameter of Christianity and were met with overwhelming moral opposition from Christians".
These criticisms were but a rehash of the GOP's talking points that were used after President Obama's Cairo speech. Then, too, he was accused of creating what his detractors called "a false moral equivalency between our enemies and us" and "insulting America", with not too subtle reminders that he "was not like us".
The President has not been without his defenders, especially those who supported his theological view. But as much as I appreciated his understanding of importance of grounding our faith in humility, the President is not "theologian in chief". He is, above all, a political leader whose role is to defend the national interest of the United States. And it is on this basis, and not on theological grounds, that I found the way President Obama framed his remarks to be not only wholly supportable, but vitally important.
The mention of the Crusades and the Inquisition was not an historical "throwaway line". Nor was it directed solely at an American audience that feels no responsibility for these ancient actions. Since these events define part of Islam's encounter with Western Christianity, acknowledging them is an important way to begin the discussion with Muslims. Just as in earlier speeches when the president noted other times when we have failed to live up to our ideals--as in our use of torture, or Guantanamo, or the crimes of Abu Ghraib--it is a way of saying to Muslims "I am hearing you, now listen to me". This is diplomacy, at its best.
Preaching at Muslims about their failings and countering this with the pretense of our perfection is not a way to begin or have a conversation or to create alliances. If we listen carefully to the discourse taking place in the Muslim world, we learn that they scoff at our claims of "upholding our values". They ask, "exactly which values do you mean": backing Israel's displacement and oppression of Palestinians; the war on Iraq; the abuses of prisoners; supporting violators of human rights when it serves your "national interests"?
If we want to have an honest discussion of how we work together to address a common threat--in this case, the danger posed by ISIL--is it not best that we begin by removing the obstacles to that discussion? For those who don't get that simple point, it's called good politics or sound diplomacy.
On the other hand, if we surrender to the President's critics, we can act like the Pharisees arrogantly feigning perfection. We can sit atop the pedestal we build for ourselves damning others, while praising ourselves. We've tried that before and found that when we did we were speaking to no one but ourselves. We may have felt self-validated, but we were very alone in a world our actions had made more dangerous.
Copyright ©2015 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-zogby/obama-sound-theology-and-smart-politics_b_6683630.html [with comments]
===
The relentless smear campaign against Obama
By Colbert I. King
April 29, 2011
During Holy Week, President Obama, for the second consecutive year, gathered several Christian clergy at the White House for an Easter Prayer Breakfast [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/georgetown-on-faith/post/obamas-easter-prayer-theres-something-about-the-resurrection/2011/04/22/AFhwSZOE_blog.html ] during which he talked about his faith and the resurrection. He mentioned Easter in his Saturday radio address [ http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/23/weekly-address-instead-subsidizing-yesterdays-energy-sources-we-need-inv ]. On Easter Sunday morning, the president and his family attended services at Shiloh Baptist Church [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-family-attend-easter-services-at-historic-shiloh-baptist-church-near-white-house/2011/04/24/AFXGUQbE_story.html ] in Washington.
The next day, Foxnews.com charged Obama [ http://nation.foxnews.com/president-obama/2011/04/25/wh-fails-release-easter-proclamation ] with failing to recognize “the national observance of Easter Sunday, Christianity’s most sacred holiday.” Two days later, Steve Doocy, host of Fox News’ “Fox and Friends,” invited Robert Jeffress [ http://www.firstdallas.org/about-us/our-pastor/ ], a conservative Baptist minister in Dallas, on the show and asked him “what do you think” about why Obama has never issued an Easter proclamation.
Given the opportunity for a gratuitous smear, Jeffress didn’t waste a second [ http://video.foxnews.com/v/4662679/no-easter-message-from-obama ]: “Steve, let’s look at what’s really going on here. On the one hand, we have a president who never met a Muslim holiday he didn’t like or at least wasn’t willing to issue a proclamation for, and on the other hand, here he is refusing to acknowledge, publicly, the most important event in Christian faith .?.?. and yet the White House is wondering, why do 20 percent of Americans believe the president is a Muslim?”
It seemed not to matter to Doocy to mention that no president in the past 20 years [ http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/38447_Wingnut_Fail_of_the_Day-_Obama_Didnt_Proclaim_Easter_%28But_Neither_Has_Any_Other_President%29 ] has issued an Easter proclamation. Doocy also didn’t acknowledge the president’s annual Easter Prayer Breakfast with clergy, though he alluded to Obama making “some comments last week regarding Easter at a breakfast.”
The charge that Obama shortchanged Easter was false. By suggesting Obama had snubbed Christianity and that he might be a closet Muslim, Fox handed its largely conservative audience yet another reason to hate the president.
The quest from the right to degrade Obama knows no bounds.
I’m looking at a photo with the faces of three chimpanzees [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/19/marilyn-davenport-califor_n_850992.html (next below)]
imposed on the bodies of a man, woman and child. The baby chimp’s face is covered with Obama’s picture. It was e-mailed in California this month with the message: “Now you know why — no birth certificate!”
The sender was Marilyn Davenport [ http://www.ocweekly.com/2011-04-21/news/moxley-confidential-marilyn-davenport-obama-chimp/ ], an elected member of the Orange County Republican Central Committee, who thought her GOP colleagues would also get a kick out of seeing the president of the United States depicted as the offspring of chimpanzees.
“I simply found it amusing regarding the character of Obama and all the questions surrounding his origins of birth,” Davenport said in a written statement [ http://www.dailynews-update.net/4296/orange-co-goper-says-obama-as-chimp-pic-was-just-a-joke-meant-for-friends/ ]. “In no way did I even consider the fact that he’s half black when I sent out the email.”
Davenport has since apologized [ http://www.theroot.com/buzz/marilyn-davenport-apologizes-president-obama-chimp-email ], after coming under fire from civil rights groups [ http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_17919397?nclick_check=1 ] and some local Republican leaders. But she’s still on the Orange County GOP Central Committee.
Why, come to think of it, should Davenport give up her official Republican position? She’s in good company. A CNN/Opinion Research poll [ http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/04/cnn-poll-quarter-doubt-president-was-born-in-u-s/ ] conducted in August showed that 41 percent of Republicans believe Obama was “probably” or “definitely” born in another country. Even after Obama released his “long form” birth certificate [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-produces-his-birth-certificate/2011/04/27/AFFISyxE_story.html ] this week, “birthers” — and political hustlers who cater to them — still cling to the “Obama is not one of us” smear.
I happen to think it was beneath Obama to respond to the “birthers,” most of all chief accuser Donald Trump, a rich, thrice-married New York show-off who got his start in business with daddy’s money and managed, through the successful operation of casinos, to get himself inducted in the Gaming Hall of Fame [ http://gaming.unlv.edu/hof/1995_trump.html ] in 2005.
It’s sickening that false claims about Obama’s place of birth and his religion have been made, fanned and believed without any evidence. Sad, too, that despite all evidence to the contrary, 34 percent of conservative Republicans [ http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1701/poll-obama-muslim-christian-church-out-of-politics-political-leaders-religious ], according to a Pew Research Center poll last August, believe Obama is a Muslim. The percentage had risen 16 points since 2009.
What’s behind all this? Why the relentless lies about Obama?
It is, simply put, a crusade to bring him down.
Make Obama out to be the “outsider” who doesn’t belong where he is. Vilify him as a cheat who, knowing he was ineligible to run for president, intentionally violated the Constitution and defrauded the American people. Marginalize him!
Marginalize his Ivy League education and Harvard Law Review presidency [ http://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/06/us/first-black-elected-to-head-harvard-s-law-review.html ]. Devalue his degrees with slurs. Insinuate that merit had nothing to do with his achievements. Accuse him of lying about his religion. Repeat over and over that he’s a socialist bent on destroying free enterprise.
Charge him with being weak. If that won’t do, denounce him as headstrong and arrogant.
But above all else, brand him unqualified and in over his head. Yeah, that’s the one. It always works. That’ll get him out of there.
© 2011 The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-relentless-smear-campaign-against-obama/2011/04/29/AFkSVyGF_story.html [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=78915505 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100630976 and following]
===
At Prayer Breakfast Obama Compares Islamic State To Jim Crow South
Feb 05, 2015
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/conncarroll/2015/02/05/at-prayer-breakfast-obama-compares-islamic-state-to-jim-crow-south-n1953304 [with embedded video, and comments (including, most recently, "Once one accepts the fact that Mr. Obama is a muslim and once one accepts the fact that Mr. Obama was born in Kenya then everything he has said and everything he has done falls into place and makes perfect sense. Wake up America,")]
--
Huckabee: Everything Obama does goes against 'what Christians stand for'
By David McCabe
February 09, 2015, 09:23 am
"Everything" President Obama does is "against what Christians stand for," former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) said in an interview Monday.
“Everything he does is against what Christians stand for, and he’s against the Jews in Israel,” Huckabee, who is considering a 2016 presidential run, said on Fox News's “Fox & Friends.” “The one group of people that can know they have his undying, unfailing support would be the Muslim community.”
The conservative former governor was commenting on Obama's speech at the National Prayer Breakfast last week, where Obama noted while discussing Islamic extremism that Christianity has been used to justify violence in the past.
"Lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ," he said. "In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ."
Huckabee took issue with the president's depiction of how Christianity had been used in the debate over civil rights.
"It was the pulpits of America — yeah, some of them were wrong — but many of them were the ones who brought the conscious of the nation to get them right," he said, noting that Christian preachers were leaders in the civil rights movement.
Conservatives have long said that Obama isn't engaging aggressively enough with the issue of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, which burned a Jordanian fighter pilot alive last week.
"He said our greatest threat was climate change,” Huckabee said of Obama. “I assure you that a beheading is much worse than a sunburn," repeating a line he used a few weeks ago at the Iowa Freedom Summit.
Huckabee has been in the news for comments he's made while promoting his book. He was criticized by many in the media, when he called Beyonce's music "mental poison" in the book. He also questioned the president's parenting for allowing his daughters to listen to the singer's music.
He has said he is considering running for president again in 2016 and will make a decision in the spring.
©2015 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/232138-huckabee-everything-obama-does-against-what-christians-stand-for [with comments], http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBIGWabg9H4 [with comments; as embedded]
--
Dumb Obama Needs Mike Huckabee To Explain Racism To Him Again
by Kaili Joy Gray
Feb 09 10:32 am 2015
Last week, President Obama committed the impeachable high crime of saying some historically accurate things at the National Prayer Breakfast about how Christians have also done some terrorism and violence and bad things in the name of spreading their faith, and they have not been perfect all the time since the first year of anno domini.
Of course Fox News was ON IT, explaining that the Crusades, and Jim Crow, happened, like, a thousand years ago, so it is totes uncool and “unfathomable” to even bring it up, and why does Obama love the terrorists so much, HUH?
That was just the beginning though. Because conservatives are so not done shaking their furious fists of fury that the president knows his history better than some idiots on the teevee. Mike Huckabee is one such idiot, and he graciously agreed to appear on Fox & Friends so they could continue being outraged about that some more.
“He never once in his speech said we are fighting against Islamic jihadists,” Huckabee said, because the new new standard for the president to prove he doesn’t not-so-secretly heart the terrorists is to call all acts of terrorism Islamic jihadist radical extremist terrorism, or else his true loyalties are unclear. But in addition to declaring his undying love for Islamic jihadists, Huckabee continued, Obama does not even know his history about Jim Crow and slavery and racism, what an idiot, has he ever even read a history book?
He also brought in Jim Crow laws, as if it was Christians who were responsible for racism in America. I think he’s forgetting that it was the Christian movement, led by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who resisted racism. And many of the most staunch voices that helped to bring this country in a whole new understanding of racial justice were voices from the pulpits, and in fact, it was the pulpits of America — yeah, some of them were wrong, but many of them were the ones who brought the conscience of the nation to get this right. And it’s the same thing with slavery. This president has a high horse himself. It’s his TelePrompter.
Hahahaha, TelePrompter jokes! That sure hasn’t gotten old yet. And it makes everything about who the real racists are so clear, doesn’t it? Once the president catches up on his daily Fox News viewing, he will undoubtedly hand-write a thank you letter to Mike Huckabee for reminding him of Dr. Martin Luther King and explaining how racism in U.S. America works, ACTUALLY.
Elisabeth Hasselbeck, who hasn’t stopped being outraged and disgusted at the president for basically pissing on the New Testament, gave Huckabee some more talking points to agree with.
“Some would say, governor, that in not naming radical Islam for what it is, it actually protects the real enemy.” Yes, some would say that. And coincidentally, they all appear regularly on Fox News. Amazing how that works. Some would also say that by naming ISIS/ISIL, Obama is actually naming the enemy pretty specifically, but they don’t work at Fox. But there is probably an excellent vague conspiracy theory to explain why the president is protecting “the real enemy.” Break it down for us, Elisabeth, won’t you?
You know, the circle of influence around the president have a lot of people concerned here. You know, he met with a group of initially unnamed Muslim leaders in the community here. Do you think that influenced his speech and why he was so protective of some but yet not of others?
Of course Hucakbee does think that yes, Obama has been influenced by unnamed Muslims, which is why he hates America and Christians so much, it is just SO OBVIOUS, isn’t it? Because, says Huckabee, “everything he does is against what Christians stand for.” Which is very important to note, because he is the president of the Unites States of Jesus. But that’s not all!
“He’s against the Jews in Israel,” Huckabee adds because in addition to being A Expert on racism, he is also A Expert on anti-Semitism, and yes, all the Jews are cribbing their thank you letters from the president on that one too.
The one group of people that can know they have his undying, unfailing support would be the Muslim community. And it doesn’t matter whether it’s the radical Muslim community or the more moderate Muslim community. He can be defensive of moderate Muslims and still be very, very clear in saying that the fanatical Muslims are the heart and soul of the war that is raging across this world.
That’s nice and gracious of Hucakbee to allow the president to defend moderate Muslims against prejudiced attacks from people like, oh, say, Mike Huckabee, isn’t it? And Elisabeth Hasselbeck, who also speaks for moderate Muslims everywhere, agrees.
“It’s disturbing,” she says, “and moderate Muslims are waiting for the president to draw the separation and line there.”
So because the president refuses to condemn “Islamic jihadists,” the moderate Muslim community is waiting for the president to agree with Fox News that most Muslims are, let’s face it, pretty bad. You can’t argue with that. Oh, you can try, but you’ll just get a headache.
[Mediaite [ http://www.mediaite.com/tv/huckabee-tears-into-obamas-prayer-speech-his-high-horse-is-the-teleprompter/ (including a non-YouTube version of the YouTube included above)]]
©2015 Wonkette (emphasis in original)
http://wonkette.com/575511/dumb-obama-needs-mike-huckabee-to-explain-racism-to-him-again [with comments], http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLco_5aN-Tw [yes, another YouTube of the same segment in the YouTube in the item just above, worth it, I thought; with comment; as embedded]
--
Huckabee Angry Obama Won't Call ISIS A 'Perversion' Of Islam After He Did Just That
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Tuesday, 2/10/2015 11:29 am
In an interview [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THaxgCrHZ2k (next below)]
on Newsmax today, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/mike-huckabee ] complained about President Obama’s National Prayer Breakfast speech — in which he said [ http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/05/remarks-president-national-prayer-breakfast (above)] that groups like the so-called Islamic State “pervert and distort” the Muslim faith — by claiming that the president refuses to say that the Islamic State's ideology is a “perversion” of Islam, and implying that the president has blamed Christians for the group's violence [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcxLR-hq3wI (next below, as embedded)].
“It is just unimaginable why he feels that he has to be the number one defender of all things Islam,” Huckabee said. “I’m not an anti-Islamicist, I’m not. But I feel like I can call something out for what it is."
"And there are many moderate Muslims across the world who are appalled by this," he continued. "Thank god for King Abdullah, thank God for President al-Sisi in Egypt, thank God here in America for Dr. Zuhdi Jasser and others who are willing to speak out. But they’re willing to say something that the American president won’t say, that it is Islam and that there is a perversion of it that is very deadly and dangerous, and that it isn’t Christians’ fault that people are having their heads cut off.”
President Obama and members of his administration, of course, have repeatedly stated that terrorist groups like the Islamic State distort Islam, something for which they get endlessly attacked by the Religious Right [ http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/republican_reaction_to_obama_s_prayer_breakfast_many_conservatives_don_t.single.html ].
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/huckabee-claims-obama-wont-call-isis-perversion-islam
--
The GOP's Islamophobia Problem
Brian Frank/Reuters
Will conservatives confront rising anti-Muslim rhetoric in the Republican Party?
Peter Beinart
Feb 13 2015, 7:00 AM ET
Did Craig Hicks murder Deah Shaddy Barakat, Yusor Mohammad Abu-Salha, and Razan Mohammad Abu-Salha yesterday in Chapel Hill because they were Muslim? We don’t yet know for sure.
But we know this: In America today, the level of public anti-Muslim bigotry is shockingly high. Politicians and pundits, usually on the right, say things about Muslims that they would be immediately fired for saying about Christians or Jews. And they’ll keep doing so until prominent conservatives express the same outrage when Muslims are defamed that they summon when the victims are Christians or Jews. In the 1950s, National Review founder William F. Buckley ran anti-Semites out of the conservative movement. It’s time for his successors to do the same with Islamophobes.
In 2016, for the second straight presidential election, the Republican primary field will include at least one candidate with nakedly anti-Muslim views. I’m not talking about candidates who denounce “radical Islam.” I’m not talking about Newt Gingrich, who in 2011 absurdly claimed [ http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/22/us/politics/in-shariah-gingrich-sees-mortal-threat-to-us.html?pagewanted=all ] that “Sharia is a mortal threat to the survival of freedom in the United States.” I’m not even talking about Bobby Jindal, who kept repeating the lie [ http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/bobby-jindal-no-go-zone-comments-114464.html ] that Europe contains “no-go” zones where non-Muslims are not allowed, even after it was repudiated by Fox News.
I’m talking about candidates who don’t cloak their prejudice at all. In 2012, the prime offender was Herman Cain. “I happen to side with the people in Murfreesboro,” Cain said, after the residents of that Tennessee town tried to block the building of a mosque. Cain explained that while banning churches or synagogues constitutes religious discrimination, banning mosques does not. Because “Islam is both a religion and a set of laws, Sharia law,” Cain explained [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/herman-cain-strives-for-new-levels-of-anti-muslim-buffoonery/2011/03/04/gIQAJ7WpLI_blog.html ], “that’s not discriminating based upon religion.” When asked whether he would feel “comfortable appointing a Muslim, either in your cabinet or as a federal judge?” Cain replied [ http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/03/26/153625/herman-cain-muslims/ ], “No, I will not,” because “there is this creeping attempt, there is this attempt to gradually ease Sharia law and the Muslim faith into our government.”
There’s not much subtlety here. Had Cain said communities should be able to ban churches because Christians impose their sexual morality on others, or that he would not appoint a Jew to his cabinet because Jews are loyal to Israel, he’d have been hounded from the race. But because Cain made his comments about Muslims, he felt no real pressure to drop out from his own ideological side. To the contrary, he continued to rise in the polls after he made those comments, only leaving the race in the wake of an unrelated sex scandal.
That was last time. This time, the most naked bigot in the emerging Republican field is Mike Huckabee. Earlier this week, Huckabee said [ http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/mike-huckabee-obama-muslims-115016.html ] that “Everything he [Obama] does is against what Christians stand for, and he’s against the Jews in Israel. The one group of people that can know they have his undying, unfailing support would be the Muslim community.” There’s no artifice here. Huckabee’s not condemning Obama for being soft on ISIS or even “radical Islam.” He’s condemning Obama for caring about Muslims. If you don’t see the bigotry, try flipping it around. Imagine if Huckabee had said that Obama “is against what Christians stand for, and he’s against the Muslims in the Middle East. The one group of people that can know they have his undying, unfailing support would be the Jewish community.” Republicans would be, rightly, calling for his head.
There’s a pattern here. In 2011, Huckabee said Christians shouldn’t rent space [ http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/145381-muslim-group-seeking-huckabee-apology-for-infidel-comments ] in their churches to Muslims because “Muslim group[s]” say “that Jesus Christ and all the people that follow him are a bunch of infidels who should be essentially obliterated.” Huckabee wasn’t talking about al-Qaeda. He accused ordinary American Muslims, who might need space to pray, of wanting to see Christians “obliterated.” Then, in 2013, he called Islam “a religion that promotes the most murderous mayhem on the planet in their so-called holiest days.” Not al-Qaeda or jihadists or terrorists, but Islam itself. According to Huckabee, in other words, Muslims want Christians “obliterated” and Islam promotes murder. He went on to say [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/08/mike-huckabee-muslims_n_3725678.html ] that “the Muslims will go to the mosque, and they will have their day of prayer, and they come out of there like uncorked animals—throwing rocks and burning cars.”
Uncorked animals. Not very subtle. Yet if there’s a single prominent conservative who has said Huckabee’s anti-Muslim slurs disqualify him as a presidential candidate, I haven’t come across them.
Muslims are not Latinos. They don’t have the numbers to punish Republicans for demonizing them. But that just makes the party’s moral challenge all the more stark. Tolerating Islamophobia is unlikely to hurt the GOP politically. It may even help. But it’s still a disgrace, and whether or not the murders in North Carolina were a hate crime, rhetoric like Huckabee’s and Cain’s will spawn hate crimes sooner or later. Let’s hope decent conservatives begin speaking out before it does.
Copyright © 2015 by The Atlantic Monthly Group
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2015/02/anti-islam/385463/ [with comments]
===
Yes, ISIS Burned a Man Alive: White Americans Did the Same Thing to Black People by the Many Thousands
Posted by Chauncey DeVega
Wednesday, February 4, 2015 at 2:49 PM
ISIS burned Muadh al Kasasbeh, a captured Jordian fighter pilot, to death [ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/03/isis-burns-jordanian-pilot-alive.html ]. They doused him with an accelerant. His captors set him on fire. Muadh al Kasasbeh desperately tried to put out the flames. ISIS recorded Muadh al Kasasbeh's immolation, produced a video designed to intimidate their enemies, and then circulated it online.
ISIS's burning alive of Muadh al Kasasbeh has been denounced as an act of savagery, barbarism, and wanton cruelty--one from the "dark ages" and not of the modern world.
American Exceptionalism blinds those who share its gaze to uncomfortable facts and truths about their own country.
For almost a century, the United States practiced a unique cultural ritual that was as least as gruesome as the "Medieval" punishments meted out by ISIS against its foes.
What is now known as "spectacular lynching" involved the ceremonial torture, murder--and yes, burning alive--of black Americans by whites. Like ISIS's use of digital media to circulate images of the torturous death of Muadh al Kasasbeh by fire, the spectacular lynchings of the black body [ http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5487/ ] were shared via postcards and other media.
In fact, the burned to death images of the black body were one of the most popular types of mass culture in 19th and 20th century America.
This account of the horrific murder of Sam Hose by White Americans is an even more grotesque and exaggerated version of the cruelty visited upon Muadh al Kasasbeh by ISIS:
The white-owned newspapers of the South had long gorged themselves with exaggerated or fabricated accounts of such violence. In the papers' version, the fight between Sam Hose and his boss became transformed into the most enraging crime of all: the rape of the white man's wife. White Georgians tracked Hose down and prepared for his lynching. Two thousand people gathered for the killing, some taking a special excursion train from Atlanta for the purpose. The leaders of the lynching stripped Hose, chained him to a tree, stacked wood around him, and soaked everything in kerosene. The mob cut off Hose's ears, fingers and genitals; they peeled the skin from his face. They watched, a newspaper reported, ''with unfeigning satisfaction'' as the man's veins ruptured from the heat and his blood hissed in the flames. ''Oh, my God! Oh, Jesus,'' were the only words Hose could manage. When he finally died, the crowd cut his heart and liver from his body, sharing the pieces among themselves, selling fragments of bone and tissue to those unable to attend. No one wore a disguise, no one was punished.
The murder of Jessie Washington [ http://www2.uncp.edu/home/berrys/courses/hist362/hist362_docs_waco_lynching.pdf ] is a genius work in white on black violence, far worse than the wickedness of ISIS's acts against Muadh al Kasasbeh:
“Great masses of humanity flew as swiftly as possible through the streets of the city in order to be present at the bridge when the hanging took place, but when it was learned that the Negro was being taken to the City Hall law, crowds of men, women and children turned and hastened to the lawn.”
“On the way to the scene of the burning people on every hand took a hand in showing their feelings in the matter by striking the Negro with anything obtainable, some struck him with shovels, bricks, clubs, and others stabbed him and cut him until when he was strung up his body was a solid color of red, the blood of the many wounds inflicted covered him from head to foot.”
“Dry goods boxes and all kinds of inflammable material were gathered, and it required but an instant to convert this into seething flames. When the Negro was first hoisted into the air his tongue protruded from his mouth and his face was besmeared with blood.”
“Life was not extinct within the Negro’s body, although nearly so, when another chain was placed around his neck and thrown over the limb of a tree on the lawn, everybody trying to get to the Negro and have some part in his death. The infuriated mob then leaned the Negro, who was half alive and half dead, against the tree, he having just strength enough within his limbs to support him.
As rapidly as possible the Negro was then jerked into the air at which a shout from thousands of throats went up on the morning air and dry goods boxes, excelsior, wood and every other article that would burn was then in evidence, appearing as if by magic. A huge dry goods box was then produced and filled to the top with all of the material that had been secured.
The Negro’s body was swaying in the air, and all of the time a noise as of thousands was heard and the Negro’s body was lowered into the box.” “No sooner had his body touched the box than people pressed forward, each eager to be the first to light the fire, matches were touched to the inflammable material and as smoke rapidly rose in the air, such a demonstration as of people gone mad was never heard before. Everybody pressed closer to get souvenirs of the affair. When they had finished with the Negro his body was mutilated.”
“Fingers, ears, pieces of clothing, toes and other parts of the Negro’s body were cut off by members of the mob that had crowded to the scene as if by magic when the word that the Negro had been taken in charge by the mob was heralded over the city. As the smoke rose to the heavens, the mass of people, numbering in the neighborhood of 10,000 crowding the City Hall law and overflowing the square, hanging from the windows of buildings, viewing the scene from the tops of buildings and trees, set up a shout that was heard blocks away.”
Many thousands of black Americans were killed by white lynchers in the United States.
The spectacular lynching was a ceremony [ http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/lynching/lynching_2.html ] (it was not something random or spontaneous; the acts of a few out for black blood possessed insane white people), with distinct practices, that symbolically purged the black body from the white polity in an era of formal white supremacy:
The actual process of lynching was morbid and incredibly violent. Lynching does not necessarily mean hanging. It often included humiliation, torture, burning, dismemberment and castration. Victims were beaten and whipped, many times in front of large crowds that sometimes numbered in the thousands. Coal tar was frequently used to douse the unfortunate victim prior to setting him afire.
Onlookers sometimes fired rifles and handguns hundreds of times into the corpse while people cheered and children played during the festivities. Pieces of the corpse were taken by onlookers as souvenirs of the event [5]. Such was the case when James Irwin was lynched on January 31, 1930. Irwin was accused of the murder of a white girl in the town of Ocilla, Georgia. Taken into custody by a rampaging mob, his fingers and toes were cut off, his teeth pulled out by pliers and finally he was castrated. It still wasn't enough. Irwin was then burned alive in front of hundreds of onlookers (Brundage, p. 42).
No one was ever punished for this barbaric killing. Black victims were hacked to death, dragged behind cars [6], burned, beaten, whipped, sometimes shot thousands of times, mutilated; the savagery was astonishing. How could ordinary people participate in such brutality?
The rendering of spectacular violence against non-whites paid a psychological wage to white people that helped to create a type of social cement for White America, one that covered up its own intra-group tensions of class, religion, and gender. This racial logic continues in the present with a racially discriminatory criminal justice system, the murder by police of black and brown people, and how white Americans support such unfair treatment [ http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/08/racial_bias_in_criminal_justice_whites_don_t_want_to_reform_laws_that_harm.html ].
American politicians and other opinion leaders have denounced ISIS and the death by fire meted out to Muadh al Kasasbeh.
Would they apply the same standards to white Americans who committed mass violence against African-Americans through lynchings, racial pogroms, and other like deeds?
Would white folks, on both sides of the ideological divide, condemn their ancestors who participated in such types of violence?
Would they support reparations as a material gesture of apology for such crimes?
Will White America ever be willing to fully own its historic ISIS-like behavior against African-Americans and other people of color, and how such violence created the present, where neighborhoods are hyper-segregated, there exists a huge wage and income gap along the color line, and by almost every measure, black and brown Americans have significantly diminished life chances relative to white people?
Violence is a human trait. ISIS's burning alive of Muadh al Kasasbeh is an act of barbarism.
However, we cannot overlook how the United States has conducted master classes in violence and barbarism both before, during, and since its founding...and yes, much of this violence was against people of color whose labor, lives, land, and freedom were stolen to create American empire.
Copyright 2015 Chauncey DeVega
http://www.chaunceydevega.com/2015/02/a-history-of-violence-isis-burning-man.html [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=85212960 and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=91559070 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=102001887 and preceding and following]
--
The Foolish, Historically Illiterate, Incredible Response to Obama's Prayer Breakfast Speech
Wikimedia
Using religion to brutalize other people is not a Muslim invention, nor is it foreign to the American experience.
Ta-Nehisi Coates
Feb 6 2015, 1:00 PM ET
People who wonder why the president does not talk more about race would do well to examine the recent blow-up over his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast. Inveighing against the barbarism of ISIS, the president pointed out that it would be foolish to blame Islam, at large, for its atrocities. To make this point he noted that using religion to brutalize other people is neither a Muslim invention nor, in America, a foreign one:
Lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.
The "all too often" could just as well be "almost always." There were a fair number of pretexts given for slavery and Jim Crow, but Christianity provided the moral justification. On the cusp of plunging his country into a war that would cost some 750,000 lives, Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens paused to offer some explanation [ http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/corner-stone-speech-excerpt/ ]. His justification was not secular. The Confederacy was to be:
[T]he first government ever instituted upon the principles in strict conformity to nature, and the ordination of Providence, in furnishing the materials of human society ... With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system. The architect, in the construction of buildings, lays the foundation with the proper material-the granite; then comes the brick or the marble. The substratum of our society is made of the material fitted by nature for it, and by experience we know that it is best, not only for the superior, but for the inferior race, that it should be so.
It is, indeed, in conformity with the ordinance of the Creator. It is not for us to inquire into the wisdom of His ordinances, or to question them. For His own purposes, He has made one race to differ from another, as He has made "one star to differ from another star in glory." The great objects of humanity are best attained when there is conformity to His laws and decrees, in the formation of governments as well as in all things else. Our confederacy is founded upon principles in strict conformity with these laws.
Stephens went on to argue that the "Christianization of the barbarous tribes of Africa" could only be accomplished through enslavement. And enslavement was not made possible through Robert's Rules of Order, but through a 250-year reign of mass torture, industrialized murder, and normalized rape—tactics which ISIS would find familiar. Its moral justification was not "because I said so," it was "Providence," "the curse against Canaan," "the Creator," "and Christianization." In just five years, 750,000 Americans died because of this peculiar mission of "Christianization." Many more died before, and many more died after. In his "Segregation Now [ http://web.utk.edu/~mfitzge1/docs/374/wallace_seg63.pdf ]" speech, George Wallace invokes God 27 times and calls the federal government opposing him "a system that is the very opposite of Christ."
Now, Christianity did not "cause" slavery, anymore than Christianity "caused" the civil-rights movement. The interest in power is almost always accompanied by the need to sanctify that power. That is what the Muslim terrorists in ISIS are seeking to do today, and that is what Christian enslavers and Christian terrorists did for the lion's share of American history.
That this relatively mild, and correct, point cannot be made without the comments being dubbed, "the most offensive I’ve ever heard a president make in my lifetime,” by a former Virginia governor [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-speech-at-prayer-breakfast-called-offensive-to-christians/2015/02/05/6a15a240-ad50-11e4-ad71-7b9eba0f87d6_story.html ] gives you some sense of the limited tolerance for any honest conversation around racism in our politics. And it gives you something much more. My colleague Jim Fallows recently wrote [ http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/12/the-tragedy-of-the-american-military/383516/ ] about the need to, at once, infantilize and deify our military. Perhaps related to that is the need to infantilize and deify our history. Pointing out that Americans have done, on their own soil, in the name of their own God, something similar to what ISIS is doing now does not make ISIS any less barbaric, or any more correct. That is unless you view the entire discussion as a kind of religious one-upmanship, in which the goal is to prove that Christianity is "the awesomest."
Obama seemed to be going for something more—faith leavened by “some doubt.” If you are truly appalled by the brutality of ISIS, then a wise and essential step is understanding the lure of brutality, and recalling how easily your own society can be, and how often it has been, pulled over the brink.
Copyright © 2015 by The Atlantic Monthly Group
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/the-foolish-historically-illiterate-incredible-response-to-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech/385246/ [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=39512352 and preceding and following]
--
No Escape From History
Statue of Godfrey of Bouillon in Brussels
(Er&Red/Wikimedia)
Ross Douthat accuses Obama of singling out the crusades, but they are part of the president's own Christian heritage.
Ta-Nehisi Coates
Feb 10 2015, 2:56 PM ET
My old colleague Ross Douthat has offered [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/opinion/sunday/ross-douthat-obama-the-theologian.html ] a response to Barack Obama's speech at the National Prayer Breakfast. It does not damn Ross with faint praise to say he has, at least, avoided the drunk festival of ideas—American racism was actually pioneered by Gozer the Gozerian, Jim Crow was "a thousand years ago [ http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/republican_reaction_to_obama_s_prayer_breakfast_many_conservatives_don_t.2.html ]"—presently circulating. But if Ross's argument enjoys the virtue of sobriety, it is still injured by the vice of being wrong.
Ross is disturbed to see the president drawing an "implied equivalence" between the barbarism of ISIS and the "the incredibly complicated multi-century story of medieval Christendom's conflict with Islam." This will not do. The present conflict in the Middle East is also an "incredibly complicated multi-century story." And yet that fact does not (and should not) prevent Ross from drawing conclusions about the morality of burning a man to death in the name of God. The president's comments are no different: "During the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ." This is a manifestly true statement—just as true as: "During the Middle East conflict, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Allah." The first Crusade was anointed with a pogrom against the Jews of the Rhineland. The Spanish Inquisition included the executions of thousands, and led to the expulsion of Jewish communities from the country. I do not believe one needs a degree in medieval studies to deplore pogroms and ethnic cleansing, any more than one needs a degree in Middle Eastern studies to deplore the taking or beheading of hostages.
Beneath Ross’s claim of “incredible” complication is a plea for context and nuance on behalf of the murderers of Jews—one he does not make on behalf of ISIS. Either way, Ross does not think Obama should be in the business of self-criticism at all because it fails as a matter of policy. "Self-criticism doesn’t necessarily serve the cause of foreign policy outreach quite as well as Obama once seemed to believe it would," writes Ross. Maybe. Maybe not. The implicit logic here holds that an American president should only speak forthrightly when some mean, tangible, and immediate benefit is obvious. Whatever one thinks of that claim, it is at war with the rest of Ross's column. He cites Dwight D. Eisenhower's parting speech on the military-industrial complex as an example to Obama, but by Ross's lights that speech was a failure since it effected no real change in the pace of military build-up.
But Ross believes it makes a great example for Obama because it features Eisenhower criticizing his own party. Unlike Ike, Obama is a partisan attacking "crimes he doesn’t feel particularly implicated in ... and the sins of groups he disagrees with anyway (Republican Cold Warriors, the religious right, white conservative Southerners)." Ross thinks Obama would be better served by criticizing groups to which he is sympathetic. In fact Obama has spent [ http://www.chron.com/life/article/Pookie-keeps-popping-up-in-Obama-s-speeches-1788973.php ] much of his presidency criticizing [ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/5852209/Barack-Obama-delivers-tough-love-message-to-black-community.html ] the most loyal sector [ http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/08/on-the-death-of-dreams/279157/ ] of his party [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e50Tt9qJRQk (next below)],
and often doing [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hj1hCDjwG6M (next below)]
it in church [ http://observer.com/2008/01/obama-addresses-homophobia-antisemitism-and-xenophobia-among-black-americans/ ]. I have, with some vehemence, argued that much of this criticism is bunk. But Ross is condemning Obama for failing to do something which has, in fact, been one of the most remarkable and consistent features of his presidential rhetoric.
More importantly, Jim Crow and slavery were not merely the sins of Southerners and the religious right, but the sins of America, itself. Enslavement was not merely a boon for the South, but for the country as a whole. (During the Civil War, New York City was a hotbed of secessionist sympathy mostly because of its economic ties to the South.) And there is simply no way to understand segregation in this country without understanding [ http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/05/the-case-for-reparations/361631/ ] the housing policies of Democratic president Franklin D. Roosevelt and the G.I. Bill signed by Democratic president Harry Truman. Barack Obama is a Christian and the president of the United States and thus the inheritor of the full legacy of that grand office. He is neither, as Ross tries to position him, an outsider to American sin nor Christian sin. It’s his heritage too, and Obama is wise enough to know that he can’t simply charge off the bad parts of that heritage to intransigent Southern bigots.
It has been enlightening to watch this entire spectacle play out over the past week. There are now intelligent people going on television to tell us that the president should not use the word "crusade" to describe ... The Crusades [ http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/andrea-mitchell-obama-crusades-breakfast ]. The problem is history. Or rather the problem is that there is no version of history that can award the West a stable moral high-ground. Some of the most prominent Christian leaders in this country used their authority to burnish [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/sites/default/files/falwell-safrica.pdf ] the credentials [ http://www.nytimes.com/1988/02/13/us/robertson-comments-on-south-africa-unrest.html ] of South Africa's racist regime—not in the 1960s, in the 1980s. At this very moment, there are reports that Uganda's attempt to make sex between men a capital offense is tied to the very sponsors [ http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=120746516 ] of the Prayer Breakfast where Obama spoke. In such a world, a certainty about which "side" is always good and which "side" is forever evil doesn't really exist. And in an uncertain world, Obama is making a wise appeal for vigilance—vigilance against the death cult of ISIS, and vigilance against the allure of death cults period—even those inaugurated in the name of one's preferred God.
Copyright © 2015 by The Atlantic Monthly Group
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/no-escape-from-history/385352/ [no comments, comments closed] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=42479824 and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=60232115 and following]
--
History of Lynchings in the South Documents Nearly 4,000 Names
Kirvin, Tex., where three black men accused of killing a white woman were set on fire in 1922 before a crowd of hundreds.
Credit Brandon Thibodeaux for The New York Times
Map of 73 Years of Lynchings
The most recent data on lynching, compiled by the Equal Justice Initiative, shows premeditated murders carried out by at least three people from 1877 to 1950 in 12 Southern states. The killers claimed to be enforcing some form of social justice. The alleged offenses that prompted the lynchings included political activism and testifying in court.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/02/10/us/map-of-73-years-of-lynching.html
Bryan Stevenson, executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative, in front of the building, then a courthouse, where the lynching began.
Credit Brandon Thibodeaux for The New York Times
Downtown Dallas in 1910, when Allen Brooks, a black man, was hanged from a telephone pole.
Credit via Dallas Public Library/Dallas History Archives Division
By CAMPBELL ROBERTSON
FEB. 10, 2015
DALLAS — A block from the tourist-swarmed headquarters of the former Texas School Book Depository sits the old county courthouse, now a museum. In 1910, a group of men rushed into the courthouse, threw a rope around the neck of a black man accused of sexually assaulting a 3-year-old white girl, and threw the other end of the rope out a window. A mob outside yanked the man, Allen Brooks, to the ground and strung him up at a ceremonial arch a few blocks down Main Street.
South of the city, past the Trinity River bottoms, a black man named W. R. Taylor was hanged by a mob in 1889. Farther south still is the community of Streetman, where 25-year-old George Gay was hanged from a tree and shot hundreds of times in 1922.
And just beyond that is Kirvin, where three black men, two of them almost certainly innocent, were accused of killing a white woman and, under the gaze of hundreds of soda-drinking spectators, were castrated, stabbed, beaten, tied to a plow and set afire in the spring of 1922.
The killing of Mr. Brooks is noted in the museum. The sites of the other killings, like those of nearly every lynching in the United States, are not marked. Bryan Stevenson believes this should change.
On Tuesday, the organization he founded and runs, the Equal Justice Initiative in Montgomery, Ala., released a report [ http://eji.org/node/1037 , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Lynching%20in%20America%20SUMMARY.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/Lynching%20in%20America%20SUPPLEMENT%20By%20County.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Press%20Release%20February%2010%202015.pdf ] on the history of lynchings in the United States, the result of five years of research and 160 visits to sites around the South. The authors of the report compiled an inventory of 3,959 victims of “racial terror lynchings” in 12 Southern states from 1877 to 1950.
Next comes the process of selecting lynching sites where the organization plans to erect markers and memorials, which will involve significant fund-raising, negotiations with distrustful landowners and, almost undoubtedly, intense controversy.
The process is intended, Mr. Stevenson said, to force people to reckon with the narrative through-line of the country’s vicious racial history, rather than thinking of that history in a short-range, piecemeal way.
“Lynching and the terror era shaped the geography, politics, economics and social characteristics of being black in America during the 20th century,” Mr. Stevenson said, arguing that many participants in the great migration from the South should be thought of as refugees fleeing terrorism rather than people simply seeking work.
The lynching report is part of a longer project Mr. Stevenson began several years ago. One phase involved the erection of historical markers [ http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/01/us/university-of-mississippi-commemorates-integration.html ] about the extensive slave markets in Montgomery. The city and state governments were not welcoming of the markers, despite the abundance of Civil War and civil rights movement memorials in Montgomery, but Mr. Stevenson is planning to do the same thing elsewhere.
Around the country, there are only a few markers noting the sites of lynchings. In several of those places, like Newnan, Ga., attempts to erect markers were met with local resistance. But in most places, no one has tried to put up a marker.
Efforts to count the number of lynchings in the country go back at least to 1882, when The Chicago Tribune began publishing each January a list of all executions and lynchings in the previous year. The Tuskegee Institute began releasing a list in 1912, and in 1919, the N.A.A.C.P. published what its researchers said was a comprehensive list of lynchings in the previous three decades. In 1995, the sociologists Stewart Tolnay and E. M. Beck researched the existing lists, eliminated errors and duplicates, and compiled what many consider the most accurate inventory to that time.
The report released Tuesday says that the new inventory has 700 names that are not on any of these previous lists, many of which Mr. Stevenson said were discovered during the compilation of the report.
Professor Beck, who teaches at the University of Georgia, has not reviewed the new list. But he pointed out that, with racial violence so extensive and carried out in so many different ways, compilers of lists may differ on what constitutes a lynching; the new list, as opposed to some previous ones, includes one-time massacres of large numbers of African-Americans, such as occurred in Arkansas in 1919 and in Louisiana in 1887.
“If you’re trying to make a point that the amount of racial violence is underestimated, well then, there’s no doubt about it,” Professor Beck said. “What people don’t realize here is just how many there were, and how close. Places they drive by every day.”
Among Professor Beck’s findings were that the number of lynchings did not rise or fall in proportion to the number of state-sanctioned executions, underscoring what Mr. Stevenson said was a crucial point: that these brutal deaths were not about administering popular justice, but terrorizing a community.
“Many of these lynchings were not executing people for crimes but executing people for violating the racial hierarchy,” he said, meaning offenses such as bumping up against a white woman or wearing an Army uniform.
But, he continued, even when a major crime was alleged, the refusal to grant a black man a trial — despite the justice system’s near certain outcome — and the public extravagance of a lynching were clearly intended as a message to other African-Americans.
The bloody history of Paris, Tex., about 100 miles northeast of Dallas, is well known if rarely brought up, said Thelma Dangerfield, the treasurer of the local N.A.A.C.P. chapter. Thousands of people came in 1893 to see Henry Smith, a black teenager accused of murder, carried around town on a float, then tortured and burned to death on a scaffold.
Until recently, some longtime residents still remembered when the two Arthur brothers were tied to a flagpole and set on fire at the city fairgrounds in 1920.
“There were two or three blacks who were actually around during that time, but you couldn’t get them to talk about it,” Ms. Dangerfield said.
She helped set up an exhibit in the county historical museum, the only commemoration of the lynchings she knows of in a town with prominent public memorials to the Confederacy. The prospect of a permanent marker had not occurred to her.
“It would be a fight,” she said. “Someone is going to have some resistance to it. But you know, I think it wouldn’t hurt to try it.”
© 2015 The New York Times Company
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/10/us/history-of-lynchings-in-the-south-documents-nearly-4000-names.html [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=105163814 and preceding and following]
--
Christian Soldiers
A Ku Klux Klan rally in Frederick, Maryland, in 1980.
Photo by MPI/Getty Images
The lynching and torture of blacks in the Jim Crow South weren’t just acts of racism. They were religious rituals.
By Jamelle Bouie
Feb. 10 2015 5:33 PM
The cliché is that Americans have a short memory, but since Saturday, a number of us have been arguing over [ http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/republican_reaction_to_obama_s_prayer_breakfast_many_conservatives_don_t.html ] medieval religious wars and whether they have any lessons for today’s violence in the Middle East.
For those still unaware, this debate comes after President Obama’s comments [ http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/05/remarks-president-national-prayer-breakfast (above)] at the annual National Prayer Breakfast, where—after condemning Islamic radical group ISIS as a “death cult”—he offered a moderating thought. “Lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ … So this is not unique to one group or one religion. There is a tendency in us, a sinful tendency that can pervert and distort our faith.”
It’s a straightforward point—“no faith has a particular monopoly on religious arrogance”—that’s become a partisan flashpoint, as conservatives harangue [ http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/republican_reaction_to_obama_s_prayer_breakfast_many_conservatives_don_t.html ] the president for “equating” crusading Christians to Islamic radicals, accuse him of anti-Christian beliefs, and wonder why he would mention a centuries-old conflict, even if it has some analogies to the present day.
What we have missed in the argument over the Crusades, however, is Obama’s mention of slavery and Jim Crow. At the Atlantic, Ta-Nehisi Coates puts his focus [ http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/the-foolish-historically-illiterate-incredible-response-to-obamas-prayer-breakfast-speech/385246/ (above)] on religious justifications for American bondage, and it’s worth doing the same for its post-bellum successor. And since we’re thinking in terms of religious violence, our eyes should turn toward the most brutal spectacle of Jim Crow’s reign, the lynching.
For most of the century between the two Reconstructions, the bulk of the white South condoned and sanctioned terrorist violence against black Americans. In a new report [ http://eji.org/node/1037 , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Lynching%20in%20America%20SUMMARY.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/Lynching%20in%20America%20SUPPLEMENT%20By%20County.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Press%20Release%20February%2010%202015.pdf ], the Alabama-based Equal Justice Initiative documents nearly 4,000 lynchings of black people in 12 Southern states—Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia—between 1877 and 1950, which the group notes is “at least 700 more lynchings in these states than previously reported.”
For his victims, “Judge Lynch”—journalist Ida B. Wells [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ida_B._Wells ]’ name for the lynch mob—was capricious, merciless, and barbaric. C.J. Miller, falsely accused of killing two teenaged white sisters in western Kentucky, was “dragged through the streets to a crude platform of old barrel staves and other kindling,” writes historian Philip Dray in At the Hands of Persons Unknown: The Lynching of Black America [ http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000XUBEKC ]. His assailants hanged him from a telephone pole, and while “the first fall broke his neck … the body was repeatedly raised and lowered while the crowd peppered it with small-arms fire.” For two hours his corpse hung above the street, during which he was photographed and mutilated by onlookers. Finally, he was cut down and burned.
More savage was the lynching of Mary Turner and her unborn child, killed for protesting her husband’s murder. “[B]efore a crowd that included women and children,” writes Dray, “Mary was stripped, hung upside down by the ankles, soaked with gasoline, and roasted to death. In the midst of this torment, a white man opened her swollen belly with a hunting knife and her infant fell to the ground, gave a cry, and was stomped to death.”
These lynchings weren’t just vigilante punishments or, as the Equal Justice Initiative notes, “celebratory acts of racial control and domination.” They were rituals. And specifically, they were rituals of Southern evangelicalism and its then-dogma of purity, literalism, and white supremacy. “Christianity was the primary lens through which most southerners conceptualized and made sense of suffering and death of any sort,” writes historian Amy Louise Wood in Lynching and Spectacle: Witnessing Racial Violence in America, 1890–1940 [ http://www.amazon.com/dp/B004LE912O ]. “It would be inconceivable that they could inflict pain and torment on the bodies of black men without imagining that violence as a religious act, laden with Christian symbolism and significance.”
The God of the white South demanded purity—embodied by the white woman. White southerners would build the barrier with segregation. But when it was breached, lynching was the way they would mend the fence and affirm their freedom from the moral contamination, represented by blacks and black men in particular. (Although, not limited to them. Leo Frank [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Frank ], lynched in 1915, was Jewish.) The perceived breach was frequently sexual, defined by the myth of the black rapist, a “demon” and “beast” who set out to defile the Christian purity of white womanhood. In his narrative of the lynching of Henry Smith—killed for the alleged rape and murder of 3-year-old Myrtle Vance—writer P.L. James recounted how the energy of an entire city and country was turned toward the apprehension of the demon who had devastated a home and polluted an innocent life.”
James wasn’t alone. Many other defenders of lynching understood their acts as a Christian duty, consecrated as God’s will against racial transgression. “After Smith’s lynching,” Wood notes, “another defender wrote, ‘It was nothing but the vengeance of an outraged God, meted out to him, through the instrumentality of the people that caused the cremation.’ ” As UNC–Chapel Hill Professor Emeritus Donald G. Mathews writes in the Journal of Southern Religion [ http://jsr.fsu.edu/mathews3.htm ], “Religion permeated communal lynching because the act occurred within the context of a sacred order designed to sustain holiness.” The “sacred order” was white supremacy and the “holiness” was white virtue.
I should emphasize that blacks of the era understood lynching as rooted in the Christian practice of white southerners. “It is exceedingly doubtful if lynching could possibly exist under any other religion than Christianity,” wrote NAACP leader Walter White in 1929, “No person who is familiar with the Bible-beating, acrobatic, fanatical preachers of hell-fire in the South, and who has seen the orgies of emotion created by them, can doubt for a moment that dangerous passions are released which contribute to emotional instability and play a part in lynching.” And while some church leaders condemned the practice as contrary to the Gospel of Christ—“Religion and lynching; Christianity and crushing, burning and blessing, savagery and national sanity cannot go together in this country,” declared one 1904 editorial—the overwhelming consent of the white South confirmed White’s view.
The only Southern Christianity united in its opposition to lynching was that of black Americans, who tried to recontextualize the onslaught as a kind of crucifixion and its victims as martyrs, flipping the script and making blacks the true inheritors of Christian salvation and redemption. It’s that last point which should highlight how none of this was intrinsic to Christianity: It was a question of power, and of the need of the powerful to sanctify their actions.
Still, we can’t deny that lynching—in all of its grotesque brutality—was an act of religious significance justified by the Christianity of the day. It was also political: an act of terror and social control, and the province of private citizens, public officials, and powerful lawmakers. Sen. Ben Tillman of South Carolina defended lynching [ http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/55/ ] on the floor of the U.S. Senate, and President Woodrow Wilson applauded a film [ http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/stories_events_birth.html ] that celebrated Judge Lynch and his disciples.
Which is all to say that President Obama was right. The vastly different environments of pre–civil rights America and the modern-day Middle East belies the substantive similarities between the fairly recent religious violence of our white supremacist forebears and that of our contemporary enemies. And the present divide between moderate Muslims and their fanatical opponents has an analogue in our past divide between northern Christianity and its southern counterpart.
This isn’t relativism as much as it’s a clear-eyed view of our common vulnerability, of the truth that the seeds of violence and autocracy can sprout anywhere, and of the fact that our present position on the moral high ground isn’t evidence of some intrinsic superiority.
© 2015 The Slate Group LLC
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/jim_crow_south_s_lynching_of_blacks_and_christianity_the_terror_inflicted.html [ http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/jim_crow_south_s_lynching_of_blacks_and_christianity_the_terror_inflicted.single.html ] [with comments]
--
Lynching as Racial Terrorism
A crowd at a lynching in Excelsior Springs, Missouri, in 1925.
Credit Bettmann/Corbis
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
FEB. 11, 2015
It is important to remember that the hangings, burnings and dismemberments of black American men, women and children that were relatively common in this country between the Civil War and World War II were often public events. They were sometimes advertised in newspapers and drew hundreds and even thousands of white spectators, including elected officials and leading citizens who were so swept up in the carnivals of death that they posed with their children for keepsake photographs within arm’s length of mutilated black corpses.
These episodes of horrific, communitywide violence [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/10/us/history-of-lynchings-in-the-south-documents-nearly-4000-names.html (above)] have been erased from civic memory in lynching-belt states like Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, Florida and Mississippi. But that will change if Bryan Stevenson [ http://blogs.law.nyu.edu/magazine/2007/bryan-stevenson%E2%80%99s-death-defying-acts/ ], a civil rights attorney, succeeds in his mission to build markers and memorials at lynching sites throughout the South as a way of forcing communities and the country to confront an era of racial terror directly and recognize the role that it played in shaping the current racial landscape.
Mr. Stevenson’s organization [ http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/12/opinion/sunday/nicholas-kristof-when-whites-just-dont-get-it-part-3.html ], the Equal Justice Initiative [ http://www.eji.org/ ], took a step in that direction on Tuesday when it released a report [ http://eji.org/node/1037 , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Lynching%20in%20America%20SUMMARY.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/Lynching%20in%20America%20SUPPLEMENT%20By%20County.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Press%20Release%20February%2010%202015.pdf ] that chronicles nearly 4,000 lynchings of black people in 12 Southern states from 1877 to 1950. The report focuses on what it describes as “racial terror lynchings,” which were used to enforce Jim Crow laws and racial segregation. Victims in these cases were often murdered without being accused of actual crimes but for minor social transgressions that included talking back to whites or insisting on fairness and basic rights.
The report is the result of five years of hard work. Researchers reviewed local newspapers, historical archives and court records; interviewed local historians, survivors and victims’ descendants; and scrutinized contemporaneously published articles in African-American newspapers, which took a closer interest in these matters than the white press. In the end, researchers found at least 700 more lynchings in the 12 states than were previously reported, suggesting that “racial terror lynching” was far more common than was generally believed.
The report argues compellingly that the threat of death by lynching was far more influential in shaping present-day racial reality than contemporary Americans typically understand. It argues that The Great Migration from the South, in which millions of African-Americans moved North and West, was partly a forced migration in which black people fled the threat of murder at the hands of white mobs.
It sees lynching as the precursor of modern-day racial bias in the criminal justice system. The researchers argue, for example, that lynching declined as a mechanism of social control as the Southern states shifted to a capital punishment strategy, in which blacks began more frequently to be executed after expedited trials. The legacy of lynching was apparent in that public executions were still being used to mollify mobs in the 1930s even after such executions were legally banned.
Despite playing a powerful role in the shaping of Southern society, the lynching era has practically disappeared from public discourse. As the report notes: “Most Southern terror lynching victims were killed on sites that remain unmarked and unrecognized. The Southern landscape is cluttered with plaques, statues and monuments that record, celebrate and lionize generations of American defenders of white supremacy, including public officials and private citizens who perpetrated violent crimes against black citizens during the era of racial terror.”
Mr. Stevenson’s group makes the persuasive argument that this history needs to be properly commemorated and more widely discussed before the United States can fully understand the causes and origins of the racial injustice that hobbles the country to this day.
© 2015 The New York Times Company
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/11/opinion/lynching-as-racial-terrorism.html [with comments]
--
Lynching and the Jefferson Davis Highway
by Robert Parry
February 12, 2015 - 10:55am
A new study of Southern lynching of blacks, sharply raising the total to nearly 4,000 victims, adds some context to the decision in 1920 to attach the name of Confederate President Jefferson Davis to parts of Route One, including stretches near and through African-American neighborhoods. That period was a time when the number of lynchings surged across the South and whites were reasserting their impunity.
According to the study [ http://eji.org/node/1037 , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Lynching%20in%20America%20SUMMARY.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/Lynching%20in%20America%20SUPPLEMENT%20By%20County.pdf , http://www.eji.org/files/EJI%20Press%20Release%20February%2010%202015.pdf ] by the Equal Justice Initiative, the use of lynching – mob killings and mutilations of blacks by hanging, burning alive, castration, torture and other means – was nearly as high around 1920 as it was in the latter part of the Nineteenth Century. There was a gradual decline in lynchings in the early Twentieth Century, but the pattern reversed and the use of lynching surged to about 500 during a five-year period heading into 1920.
That period also marked a determination by many Southern whites to reaffirm the rightness of the Confederate cause and to reassert white supremacy. Thus, in 1920, to drive home the point of who was in charge, the Daughters of the Confederacy had Southern states name portions of Route One after Jefferson Davis, who was hailed as the “champion of a slave society” when he was chosen to lead the Confederacy in 1861.
Besides honoring a dyed-in-the-wool white supremacist who favored keeping African-Americans in chains forever, the Daughters of the Confederacy saw these designations of Route One as a counterpoint to plans in the North for a Lincoln Highway in honor of assassinated President Abraham Lincoln.
But bestowing this honor on Jefferson Davis was also a political message of pro-Confederate defiance that was not limited to the brutal era of 1920. The Jefferson Davis designation was extended to parts of Route 110 near the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, in 1964 as Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Movement were pressing for landmark civil rights legislation to end segregation and as white Virginian politicians were vowing to resist integration at all costs.
A year or so ago, I wrote to the five members of the Arlington County Board and urged them to seek an end to this grotesque honor bestowed on a notorious white racist. When my letter went public, it was treated with some amusement by the local paper, the Sun-Gazette, which described me as “rankled,” and prompted some hate mail.
One letter from an Arlington resident declared that it was now her turn to be “RANKLED by outsiders like Mr. Parry who want to change history because it is not to his liking. … I am very proud of my Commonwealth’s history, but not of the current times, as I’m sure many others are.”
I was also confronted by a senior Democratic county official at a meeting about a different topic and urged to desist in my proposal to give the highway a new name because the idea would alienate state politicians in Richmond who would think that Arlington County was crazy.
But the new study on the terrorism of lynching reminds us that attaching Jefferson Davis’s name to roadways wasn’t just some romantic gesture to honor an historical figure beloved by Southern whites who in 1920 still pined for the ante-bellum days when they could own black people and do to them whatever they wished.
The years around 1920 marked a violent revival of the carnival-like scenes in which whites treated the lynching of blacks as a moment for community hilarity and celebration, often posing with their children for photographs next to the mutilated corpses. Stamping Jefferson Davis’s name on a highway that passed near and through black neighborhoods was another way to send a chilling message to African-Americans.
In my 37 years living in Virginia, I have always been struck by the curious victimhood of many Southern whites. Because of the Civil War, which some still call “the War of Northern Aggression,” and the Civil Rights Movement, which finally ended segregation, they have been nursing grievances, seeing themselves as the real victims here.
Not the African-Americans who were held in the unspeakable conditions of bondage until slavery was finally ended in the 1860s and who then suffered the cruelties of white terrorism and the humiliation of segregation for another century. No, the whites who lorded over them were the real “victims” because the federal government finally intervened to stop these practices.
Yet, while some white Virginians remain “very proud” of that history, there has been a studied neglect of other more honorable aspects of Arlington’s history, including the role played by Columbia Pike as an African-American Freedom Trail where thousands of former slaves, freed by Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, traveled north to escape slavery.
Many were given refuge in Freedman’s Village, a semi-permanent refugee camp along Columbia Pike on land that now includes the Pentagon and the Air Force Memorial. Some of the men joined the U.S. Colored Troops training at nearby Camp Casey before returning to the South to fight for freedom, to end the scourge of slavery once and for all.
As blacks joined the Union Army, Confederate President Jefferson Davis ratified a policy that refused to treat black men as soldiers but rather as slaves in a state of insurrection, so they could be executed upon capture or sold into slavery.
In accordance with this Confederate policy, U.S. Colored Troops faced summary executions [ http://encyclopediavirginia.org/United_States_Colored_Troops_The ] when captured in battle. For instance, when a Union garrison at Fort Pillow, Tennessee, was overrun by Confederate forces on April 12, 1864, black soldiers were shot down as they surrendered. Similar atrocities occurred at the Battle of Poison Springs, Arkansas, in April 1864, and the Battle of the Crater in Virginia. Scores of black prisoners were executed in Saltville, Virginia, on Oct. 2, 1864.
Yet, while Jefferson Davis’s name remains on roadways through Arlington — and as the Confederate president is effectively honored whenever people have to use his name — there is still no commemoration of Freedom’s Village (though something is supposedly being planned) and no one apparently even knows the precise location of Camp Casey, arguably one of Arlington’s most significant and noble historical sites. (Camp Casey is believed to have been located close to where today’s Pentagon now is, an area that in the 1860s was called Alexandria County before being renamed Arlington County in the Twentieth Century.)
Apparently, recognizing the place where free African-Americans were trained and armed to defeat the Confederacy and end slavery might “rankle” some white Arlington residents.
© 2015 Smirking Chimp Media
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-parry/60936/lynching-and-the-jefferson-davis-highway [with comments] [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=44219890 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64096475 and preceding and following]
===
A Vision about Obama
Published on Nov 11, 2013 by childofyahvh [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCv8oHq3VQbNuPnPcgW0xgUg / http://www.youtube.com/user/childofyahvh , http://www.youtube.com/user/childofyahvh/videos ]
A dream that trun into a Vision about Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Eui5X5_wg4 [with comments]
===
Beck: Anti-Vaxxers Are Being Persecuted, Just Like Galileo
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Tuesday, 2/3/2015 2:42 pm
Last year, when Glenn Beck learned that outbreaks of diseases like whooping cough and measles were on the rise due to an increasing number of parents who are refusing to have their children vaccinated, he reacted by literally standing up and applauding [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/glenn-beck-literally-stands-and-applauds-parents-who-are-refusing-have-their-children-vaccin ] those parents.
Now that the issue of vaccinations [ http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/02/03/chris-christie-rand-paul-under-fire-for-vaccine-remarks/ ] has worked its way into the 2016 presidential campaign, Beck returned to the topic today on his radio show [ http://www.glennbeck.com/2015/02/03/glenn-people-are-being-destroyed-by-political-correctness/ ], declaring that opposing vaccinations is an issue on which activists on the Right and on the Left ought to be able to find common ground and work together.
"I'm interested in moving to common sense. I'm interested in moving in the direction of freedom," Beck said. "And so when it comes to these measles vaccinations, we have a lot in common with the left ... and we have to reach out to allies."
While declaring that nobody wants children to get measles, Beck asserted that "there's something happening" with the measles vaccine and the rise of children being diagnosed with forms of autism that should make people cautious about getting their children vaccinated.
"God gave me a brain. God gave me personal choice and responsibility for those choices," he said. "I'm going to say no to those vaccines because I've done my homework."
Beck then went on to declare that people who oppose vaccines are now being persecuted, just as Galileo was persecuted by the Catholic Church.
"Here's another group of people that are now being rounded-up and pointed at and called morons and idiots and crackpots and crazies," he said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRU4ZgyZ2bA (below, as embedded; with comments)]. "Just totally discredited ... Where is anybody saying 'my gosh, we're living in the days of Galileo'? The church has become the state and if you don't practice their religion exactly the way they tell you to practice it, you're done."
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/beck-anti-vaxxers-are-being-persecuted-just-galileo [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110576255 and preceding and following]
--
'Oh Wow': Glenn Beck Says People Are Starting To Realize That Everything He Warned About Is All Coming True
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Wednesday, 2/4/2015 2:14 pm
Disturbed by footage of ISIS militants burning alive [ http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/03/reports-islamic-state-video-appears-to-show-jordanian-pilot-being-burned-alive/ ] a Jordanian pilot, as well as by recent comments [ http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/04/jesse-ventura-on-american-sniper-chris-kyle-do-you-think-the-nazis-have-heroes/ ] made by Jesse Ventura and a bizarre video [ http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/03/award-winning-independence-day-actor-goes-on-unhinged-rant-against-rupert-murdoch-in-bizarre-video/ ] released by actor Randy Quaid, Glenn Beck said on his radio program today [ http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/04/what-prompted-glenn-beck-to-say-the-world-has-gone-absolutely-stark-raving-mad/ ] that people are starting to open their eyes and admit that "the world has gone absolutely stark raving mad" because everything Beck has been warning about for years is all now coming true.
Beck said that while he has felt "lost" for the last several years, he knows that "there's something big left to do ... I think we're at the beginning. I think it has begun."
And Beck is confident that he will be the one to show us all the way forward because people are finally beginning to realize that "everything that I warned against" is now happening.
"I had that period in my life where I was the clarion call of wake up, this is what is going to come," he said. "Now it's all here. ... Now people can begin to say, 'Oh, wait a minute, wow, there is a caliphate. Oh wow, they are going to try to kill all of us. Oh wow, fascism and Nazism and communism is coming back, the hatreds of the 1930s. Oh wow, there are people talking about killing the Jews. Oh wow, they are leaving Europe in droves and going to Israel for protection. Oh wow, they are printing money.'"
"I think," Beck concluded [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMdTy4yIJMc (below, as embedded; with comments)], "we're at the beginning of our globe radically changing":
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/oh-wow-glenn-beck-says-people-are-starting-realize-everything-he-warned-about-all-coming-tru [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110581235 and preceding and following]
--
Michael Savage: Obama Committing 'Medical Genocide' Through Measles Outbreak
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Thursday, 2/5/2015 3:55 pm
Conservative talk show host Michael Savage [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/michael-savage ] claimed yesterday that the recent Disneyland measles outbreak is just a “clever way for the Alinsky crowd to shift the subject from their failed war on terror to their war on anti-vaccinators.” These left-wing Alinskyites, according to Savage, are controlled by the “medical-pharmaceutical complex” and want to bring about a McCarthy-style witch hunt against people who don’t vaccinate their children.
But this is all just the tip of the iceberg, Savage said. He went on to push the completely baseless conspiracy theory [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/conservative-pundits-blame-immigrants-california-measles-outbreak ] that undocumented immigrant children brought measles to America and said President Obama is responsible for a “crime against humanity” and “medical genocide.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/savage-obama-using-measles-to-commit-medical-genocide ) embedded]
“I was asked about the origins of the measles outbreak in America and it’s pretty clear to me that it came in with the illegals,” Savage said. “We know that Obama committed a crime against humanity by dumping many, many, many, many ill people, mothers and children primarily, on us this summer unscreened, many of them brought in a killer virus, measles, tuberculosis and other illnesses.”
“Whoever has permitted this, and that would be the stooge at the CDC, the stooge at the NIS and Obama himself, are committing a form of medical genocide,” Savage added.
Despite Savage’s claim, the Central American children who fled to the southern border this summer mainly came from countries with higher vaccination rates [ http://www.texasobserver.org/disease-threat-immigrant-children-wildly-overstated/ (at/see {linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=104254370 and preceding and following)] than the U.S.
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/michael-savage-obama-committing-medical-genocide-through-measles-outbreak
--
Glenn Beck: The Measles Outbreak Is A 'Hoax' Meant To Convince People To 'Obey The Government'
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Friday, 2/6/2015 11:35 am
There is a fundamental irony that lies at the heart of Glenn Beck's media empire, in that it operates under the banner "Truth [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/glenn-becks-perfect-demonstration-how-take-things-out-context ] Lives [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/beck-its-plausible-john-brennan-converted-islam-and-reasonable-ask-questions ] Here [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/how-glenn-becks-conspiracy-theories-are-born ]" while Beck himself continues to be a regular source of misinformation and falsehoods.
Nothing better demonstrates this fact that the opening of Beck's radio program yesterday where he declared that the current measles outbreak is a "hoax" designed increase government control, which he "proved" by reading from a piece posted on 21st Century Wire [ http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/02/04/us-measles-hoax-cdc-who-merck-documents-proves-vaccinated-are-spreading-virus/ ].
As Beck told it, "if you look at the 102 children in California who have been detected with measles, you look at where they came from, you see that the two cases came from 1) an Amish community and 2) a group of travelers who entered the U.S. from the Philippines. If you eliminate those two sources, there is no uptrend in measles."
Beck and co-host Pat Gray then went on to assert that even though immigrants from the Philippines are responsible for the measles outbreak, the media won't report that because their intention is "to make the case that you've got to obey the government" and get vaccinated. "Do everything you can just to obey the government," Beck said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VY90ri9H_oA (next below, as embedded; with comments)]:
As usual, apparently nobody within Beck's entire company could find five minutes to do some basic research on these claims, because if they had, they would have quickly realized that Beck's assertions were entirely wrong.
As the CDC explained [ http://www.cdc.gov/measles/cases-outbreaks.html ], there was a large outbreak of measles "among unvaccinated Amish communities in Ohio" in 2014, but that outbreak started [ http://www.dailynews.com/health/20150204/disneyland-measles-outbreak-dwarfed-by-2014s-in-ohios-amish-country ] when "unvaccinated Amish missionaries traveled to the Philippines and returned with the virus."
The current measles outbreak has literally nothing to do with this 2014 incident and Beck's assertion that the current outbreak can be tied to "this Filipino family or group of travelers" is entirely false as it was not Filipino tourists who brought the disease into the U.S. but rather unvaccinated Amish missionaries who brought it back to the U.S. from the Philippines in April of last year [ http://www.vox.com/2015/1/29/7929791/measles-outbreak-2014 ]!
Nothing better exemplifies the true absurdity of Beck's media empire than the fact that he opened his radio program yesterday by spreading utterly false information while alleging some sort of government conspiracy all while operating under the banner of "Truth Lives Here."
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/glenn-beck-measles-outbreak-hoax-meant-convince-people-obey-government [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110701265 and preceding (and any future following)]
--
GOP Presidential Hopefuls And Members Of Congress Appear In New Anti-Gay 'Documentary'
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Thursday, 2/5/2015 12:48 pm
Update: Porter has also released a trailer [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/sen-rand-paul-and-gop-congressmen-appear-new-trailer-anti-gay-documentary (next below)] featuring Rand Paul and several GOP congressmen.
Today, Faith 2 Action [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/faith-2-action ]'s Janet Porter [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/janet-porter-n%C3%A9e-folger ] sent out an email [ http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?ca=92504120-888b-4166-ba02-ff4ff94669b2&c ] to activists excitedly announcing that she is finishing up editing a new anti-gay [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/topics/anti-gay ] documentary that she intends to release at the National Religious Broadcaster's Convention in Nashville at the end of this month.
Porter, who was a longtime Religious Right activist and radio host [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/republican-leaders-join-anti-gay-extremists-insane-documentary ] until she lost her program [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/vcy-drops-porters-radio-program-over-dominion-theology ] due to her increasing radicalism only to re-emerge as an anti-abortion activist [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/janet-porter-will-appeal-heaven-passage-her-heartbeat-bill ] and right-wing social media entrepreneur [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/get-ready-reaganbook-facebook-patriots ], has brought together a who's who of hardline anti-gay activists, members of Congress, and presidential hopefuls for her film entitled "Light Wins: How To Overcome The Criminalization Of Christianity."
Among the participants are Rep. Steve King [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/steve-king ], Rep. Trent Franks [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/trent-franks ], Rep. Louie Gohmert [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/louie-gohmert ], Rep. Tim Huelskamp [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/tim-huelskamp ], Sen. Rand Paul [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/rand-paul-0 ], Mike Huckabee [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/mike-huckabee ], David Barton [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/david-barton ], James Dobson [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/james-dobson ], Mat Staver [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/mat-staver ], Phyllis Schlafly [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/phyllis-schlafly ], Scott Lively [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/scott-lively ], Alveda King [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/alveda-king ], Brian Camenker [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/brian-camenker ], Frank Pavone [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/frank-pavone ], Robert Knight [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/robert-knight ], John Stemberger [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/john-stemberger ], and, of course, Porter herself, who can been seen walking around in the woods with a lantern, warning that gay activists are seeking to turn Christians into criminals [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFIctFKnZKQ (below, as embedded; with comments)]:
Porter released a separate preview [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPQzabna5kg (below, as embedded; comments disabled)] of the film today, featuring a clip in which she blasts the Boy Scouts for having "needlessly caved to a dark sexual agenda" by allowing gay Scouts to join the organization while Knight and Stemberger warn that, as a result, the Boy Scouts will soon face "homosexual scandals" just like Penn State and the Catholic Church:
While it might come as a bit of a surprise to see someone like Rand Paul listed as appearing in this documentary, Mike Huckabee's participation should come as no surprise at all, as he has had close ties to Porter for years [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/huckabee-i-answer-janet-porter ], even having named her as co-chair of his Faith and Family Values Coalition [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/right-rallies-round-huckabee ] when he ran for president in 2008 [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/religious-right-debate-organizer-declares-huckabee-anointed-one ].
Predictably, Huckabee has nothing but praise [ http://www.ambassadorspeakers.com/ACP/speakers.aspx?speaker=270 ] for Porter's film:
"Light Wins" reveals the frightening trend not to simply ignore Christian believers, but to rid society of us altogether. This ground breaking, eye opening film will awaken viewers to the fact that being a spectator is no longer an option. One will be part of the solution or part of the problem, and I hope this riveting documentary will cause believers to take notice."
For more info on Porter's long history of making insane claims, see this round-up [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/republican-leaders-join-anti-gay-extremists-insane-documentary ].
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/gop-presidential-hopefuls-and-members-congress-appear-new-anti-gay-documentary [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=95666631 and preceding and following]
--
Sen. Rand Paul And GOP Congressmen Appear In New Trailer For Anti-Gay Documentary
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Wednesday, 2/11/2015 4:42 pm
Last week, we noted that fringe [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/republican-leaders-join-anti-gay-extremists-insane-documentary ] Religious Right activist Janet Porter was readying the release of a new anti-gay documentary she produced called "Light Wins: How To Overcome The Criminalization Of Christianity" that was reported [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/gop-presidential-hopefuls-and-members-congress-appear-new-anti-gay-documentary (just above)] to feature a variety of members of Congress and Republican presidential hopefuls.
At the time, there were only two clips from the movie available and the only political figure shown in either was Mike Huckabee. Today, Porter released another preview of her film [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jGMTdnNr6g (below, as embedded; comments disabled)], which contains footage of interviews she conducted with several anti-gay activists as well as with Rep. Louie Gohmert, Rep. Tim Huelskamp, Rep. Trent Franks, and Sen. Rand Paul, all attacking the Supreme Court for striking down the Defense of Marriage Act and for threatening to utterly destroy the institution of marriage entirely by legalizing gay marriage:
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/sen-rand-paul-and-gop-congressmen-appear-new-trailer-anti-gay-documentary [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=93675334 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=98128173 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110674811 and preceding (and any future following)]
--
David Horowitz: 'Racist' Obama Lets 'All Aggressors Of Color Get To Be Victims'
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Tuesday, 2/10/2015 12:55 pm
David Horowitz [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/david-horowitz , http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/david-horowitz-freedom-center ] was invited to Newsmax [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baumO71pzA4 ("This video is private. Sorry about that.")] today to discuss a new DHS information service [ http://www.dhs.gov/immigration-information-and-assistance ] for people with questions about the implementation of President Obama’s executive actions on deportation relief, which he said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cYsTsXPZAU (below, as embedded; with comments)] showed that “we let all aggressors of color get to be victims.”
“I mean, it’s not just the immigration [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/topics/immigration-0 ] issue,” he continued. “It’s the race issue, too. We had a lynch mob out there in Ferguson [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/topics/ferguson ] for months that spread then to the rest of the country, and they were called protesters, and it’s like there was some hurt inflicted on them. What is the hurt in taking down a criminal like Michael Brown, who’s assaulting a police officer?”
“So the left has successfully changed the equation so that if you’re here illegally, somehow we should be sympathetic to you, and somehow you have rights, and somehow we want to heed your complaints. This is suicidal,” he said.
Later in the interview, Horowitz declared that “the president of the United States is a racist” and claimed that President Obama had appointed Rev. Al Sharpton, the “chief racist” and “chief lynch-mob leader in the country,” as his “race relations advisor.” The president is “backing these lynch mobs,” he added.
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/david-horowitz-racist-obama-lets-all-aggressors-color-get-be-victims
--
Fischer: Roy Moore Is A Modern Day Martin Luther King, Jr.
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Tuesday, 2/10/2015 3:33 pm
On his radio program today [ http://vimeo.com/119269646 ], Bryan Fischer [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/bryan-fischer ] hailed Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/roy-moore ] as a modern-day Martin Luther King, Jr. for his order to state probate judges not to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples after a federal judge struck down the state's gay marriage ban.
Fischer laughably asserted that it is the federal judge, not Moore, "who is standing in the courthouse doorway ... in defiance of both the law and the Constitution," before praising Moore and the probate judges who are refusing to grant marriage licenses to gay couples as the heirs of MLK.
"What Judge Moore and these probate judges are doing is in the finest tradition of Martin Luther King, Jr.," he said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4AiprbrYO4 (below, as embedded; with comments)]. "They are waging the civil rights battle of this decade, using nonviolent protest to do it":
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/fischer-roy-moore-modern-day-martin-luther-king-jr [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=103100000 and preceding and following]
--
Rick Santorum: 'Sexual Activity' Rights Encroaching On Religious Rights
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Wednesday, 2/11/2015 2:45 pm
On his radio show yesterday, Steve Deace played clips [ http://stevedeace.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/deace_hour1_021015.mp3 ] of interviews he held recently with likely presidential candidates on whether “the sexual revolution trumps the American Revolution,” or if “someone’s erotic liberty trumps your religious liberty.”
The Iowa talk radio host directed these questions at potential presidential candidates Mike Huckabee, Ted Cruz [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/ted-cruz , http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/ted-cruz/ted-cruz ], Ben Carson [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/ben-carson ], Scott Walker and Rick Santorum [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/rick-santorum ], along with consistent non-candidate Donald Trump [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/donald-trump ].
All six Republican politicians agreed that no, “erotic liberty” does not trump religious liberty. Santorum stressed that freedom of religion takes precedence over “the newfound freedom to do whatever you want to do from a sexual orientation — not a sexual orientation — a sexual activity point of view, that to me is a much lower freedom because is an activity, it is not at the heart of who you are.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/santorum-sexual-activity-rights-encroach-on-religious-rights ) embedded]
Deace also discussed new claims [ http://chicago.suntimes.com/lynn-sweet-politics/7/71/360811/obama-denies-axelrod-account-switching-support-gay-marriage-political-gain ] that President Obama reversed his previous support for same-sex marriage as a presidential candidate in 2008 because he feared upsetting African American voters [ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/02/11/what-david-axelrod-got-wrong-about-gay-marriage-and-the-black-church/ ], asserting that Obama only hid his real stance on marriage equality in order to become “America’s first champion for sodomy in the White House.”
“There is a word we typically use to describe those who mislead their own tribe, mislead their own peer group, commit acts of treachery like this to manipulate them: this is traitorous, absolutely traitorous,” Deace said.
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/deace-obama-is-first-champion-for-sodomy ) embedded]
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/rick-santorum-sexual-activity-rights-encroaching-religious-rights [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=109057017 and preceding and following]
--
Michael Savage Cites Fake Quote To Blast Obama As 'Jew-Hater In The White House'
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Wednesday, 2/11/2015 3:35 pm
Michael Savage is positively outraged about President Obama’s remarks [ http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/after-uproar-white-house-clarifies-obama-s-thinking-on-paris-kosher-deli-terror-20150210 ] about the terrorist attack at a kosher deli in Paris, railing against Obama as “the Jew-hater in the White House.”
“How can the Jewish people ever vote for this man who hates Israel and hates the Jews?” Savage asked on his radio show today [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFV2Yb9WNC0 (next below; with comments)].
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/savage-obamas-a-jew-hater ) embedded]
The right-wing talk show host went on to cite a fake quote [ http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/jarrettislam.asp ] from Valerie Jarrett, in which she “says” that she wants to make America a “more Islamic country,” in order to prove his point that Obama is a secret Muslim who seeks to “attack Jews.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/savage-uses-fake-quote-to-suggest-obama-jarrett-are-muslims ) embedded]
Savage’s meltdown continued as he called White House spokesman Josh Earnest a “piece of human garbage,” a “filthy double-talking piece of—” and a “lying, simpering, inhuman thing” who is “a shame to his mother and father and a shame to his entire genealogy, he has just disgraced his entire gene pool.”
“This thing has to go, this creep, this creep, this lowlife creep spokesmouth for Obama just did something that Goebbels wouldn’t have dared do,” Savage said. “If there really is a God in Heaven and a Judgment Day, man, I want to be there, I want to be there when this character who talks for Obama like this goes before whoever does the prejudging for God. I’d like to be in the audience, I’d like to see what the punishment would be, because there will be punishment for this man in his own life, he will get sick from his own words.”
He then called out Steven Spielberg, Jeffrey Katzenberg, David Geffen and Michael Bloomberg as part a modern-day Sanhedrin [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhedrin ] run by the “Jews of Hollywood” that backs the “Fuhrer” Obama.
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/savage-has-meltdown ) embedded]
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/michael-savage-cites-fake-quote-blast-obama-jew-hater-white-house [and see e.g. (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=19878797 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=35675436 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=41427048 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=43516185 and preceding (and any future following), http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=56691256 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=73013825 and preceding (and any future following)]
--
Fischer: Obama's Support For Gay Marriage Was A Declaration That He Is No Longer A Christian
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Wednesday, 2/11/2015 3:36 pm
On his radio program today [ http://vimeo.com/119372711 ], Bryan Fischer discussed David Axelrod's claim [ http://news.yahoo.com/obama-disputes-aide-david-axelrods-gay-marriage-085901692--politics.html ] in his new book that President Obama concealed his support for gay marriage when running for office for political reasons, a claim which Obama disputes [ http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-02-11/obama-axelrod-mixed-up-on-my-gay-marriage-views ].
Fischer's main takeaway from the whole episode, of course, is that what President Obama [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/topics/president-barack-obama ] was really doing in eventually announcing his support for gay marriage was declaring that he was not a Christian.
"Think about this for a second," Fischer said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuutiwM89Fo (below, as embedded; with comments)]. "President Obama said several times, 'The reason I believe that marriage is a union of one man and one woman is because I am a Christian.' So what does it mean, what are the implications when President Obama says, 'I no longer believe that marriage is a union of one man and one woman'? The implication is, 'I'm no longer a Christian. Christianity teaches marriage is a union of one man and one woman, I used to be one of those, I used to be a Christian, I used to believe in a Christian view of marriage. I don't any longer' ... If you press what Obama's saying there, he would be saying 'look, I'm no longer a Christian'":
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/fischer-obamas-support-gay-marriage-was-declaration-he-no-longer-christian
--
Mississippi KKK Chapter Backs Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore In Anti-Gay Marriage Fight
WASHINGTON - JUNE 8: Roy Moore, former Chief Justice of The Alabama Supreme Court, testifies at a Senate Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights Subcommittee hearing, entitled 'Beyond the Pledge of Allegiance: Hostility to Religious Expression in the Public Square.' on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC June 8, 2004. Moore was removed from office for refusing to take down a public display of the Ten Commandments in the courthouse.
(Photo by Matthew Cavanaugh/Getty Images)
[ http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/02/roy_moore_mississippi_kkk_gay.html (with comments),
(more at) http://photos.al.com/4558/gallery/roy_moore_toons/index.html#/0 (no comments yet)]
By Paige Lavender
Posted: 02/12/2015 10:46 am EST Updated: 02/12/2015 8:59 pm EST
Imperial Wizard Brent Waller of the United Dixie White Knights, a Mississippi branch of the Ku Klux Klan located near the border of Alabama, shared the group's support for Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore in a statement published on the UDWK's website [ https://sites.google.com/site/uniteddixiewhiteknights/words-from-the-wizard ] and the white supremacist forum Stormfront [ https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1087840/ ] on Tuesday.
"The Mississippi Klan salutes Alabama's chief justice Roy Moore, for refusing to bow to the yoke of Federal tyranny," Waller wrote. "The Feds have no authority over individual States marriage laws. The fudgepackers from Hollywood and all major news networks are in shock that the good people from the heart of Dixie are resisting their Imperialist, Communist Homosexual agenda!"
Waller urged Klansmen and other white nationalists to support "the Christian community's protests that are surly [sic] coming against tyranical [sic] Federal judges," but asked them to leave out "any insignia, colors, shirts" that represent the KKK. In an email to HuffPost, Waller said Alabama members of the KKK brought the gay marriage story to the UDWK's attention.
Earlier this week, Moore made a last-minute attempt [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/09/alabama-gay-marriage_n_6642622.html ] to block same-sex marriages from taking place in Alabama, ordering state probate judges to refuse to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. The Supreme Court allowed same-sex marriages to begin in the state on Monday, though some counties still refused [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/10/alabama-gay-marriage-refu_n_6657654.html ] to issue gay marriage licenses.
H/T [ http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/02/mississippi_kkk_salutes_alabam.html ] AL.com
Copyright ©2015 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/12/kkk-roy-moore_n_6669734.html [with embedded video report, and comments]
--
Roy Moore's Showdown With The Courts Over Gay Marriage Tied To The Work Of Neo-Confederate Leader
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Thursday, 2/12/2015 1:30 pm
Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore threw his state into turmoil this week when he ordered probate judges to defy a federal judge’s ruling striking down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage and refuse to issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples. Moore, who has a history [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/alabamas-notorious-anti-gay-chief-justice-wants-state-defy-federal-courts-marriage ] of making extreme anti-gay statements [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/roy-moore-2002-homosexuality-evil-abhorrent-and-destructive-criminal-lifestyle ], insists that the federal judge is the one who is really breaking the law since she violated [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/roy-moore-supporter-lgbt-rights-advocates-are-real-anarchists-because-they-defy-gods-law ] divine [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/roy-moore-institution-marriage-god-ordained-under-sustained-attack-federal-judges ] law [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/alabamas-notorious-anti-gay-chief-justice-wants-state-defy-federal-courts-marriage ] by ruling for marriage equality.
Moore’s call for statewide defiance of the federal judiciary’s “tyranny” stems from a belief that the Constitution was made to protect biblical commandments, so that anything that goes against his personal interpretation of the Bible is therefore in violation of the Constitution.
Moore shares that belief with a powerful ally: Michael Peroutka [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/michael-peroutka ], a neo-Confederate activist who is also one of the most influential behind-the-scenes figures in the Religious Right’s reimagining of American law.
Peroutka, who once held [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/michael-peroutka-leaves-league-south-shocked-discover-racism-neo-confederate-group ] a leadership position in the neo-Confederate League of the South [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/league-of-the-south ] and remained a member of the group until it hampered his run for a local office in Maryland last year, promotes this theocratic view of the law through his group the Institute on the Constitution [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/institute-constitution ]. Speaking at an event at the Institute in 2011, Moore gushed [ http://religiondispatches.org/close-encounters-with-roy-moore/ ] that Peroutka would help lead America to a “glorious triumph” over the federal government’s “tyranny.”
But Peroutka is more than a friend and ideological ally to Moore [ https://www.au.org/church-state/september-2007-church-state/featured/roy-moore-in-exile ]: he has funded Moore’s activism for more than a decade, and in 2012 bankrolled [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/ten-commandments-and-4300-year-old-dinosaur-michael-peroutka-s-web-christian-nation-influenc ] Moore’s successful campaign for the top seat on the Alabama Supreme Court.
After Moore was removed from his original position on Alabama’s high court in 2003 for defying a federal court order to remove a monument of the Ten Commandments from the state judicial building, Peroutka paid for the ousted judge to go [id.] on a national speaking tour to build support for his cause. He also funded [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/ten-commandments-and-4300-year-old-dinosaur-michael-peroutka-s-web-christian-nation-influenc ] a group that held rallies in support of Moore.
Over the nine years, Peroutka contributed [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/ten-commandments-and-4300-year-old-dinosaur-michael-peroutka-s-web-christian-nation-influenc ] over a quarter of a million dollars to two groups founded by Moore, the Foundation for Moral Law [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/foundation-for-moral-law ] (which is now run by Moore’s wife Kayla) and the now-defunct Coalition to Restore America.
In 2004, the far-right Constitution Party [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/constitution-party ] tried to recruit Moore to run for president on its ticket. When he declined, Peroutka stepped in to run in his place.
This neo-Confederate leader [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/maryland-goper-michael-peroutka-leads-dixie-national-anthem-southern-secessionist-conference ] helped to lay the ideological groundwork for Moore’s current standoff with the federal courts, a standoff which many commentators have compared to Alabama Gov. George Wallace’s decision to defy federal law on desegregation.
Peroutka thinks states should defy and ignore federal rulings on gay rights [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/deace-and-peroutka-compare-gay-marriage-bank-robbery-urge-kentuckians-ignore-marriage-equali ] since federal judges have “no authority [id.]” to rule in marriage cases, because marriage was already defined by God and the Constitution was designed to enforce such divine arrangements.
Peroutka said last year that such rulings would “coerce” state officials to “declare that which is sinful and immoral” to be “valid and right,” even forcing them to “participate in it.” Such “evil” decisions, according to Peroutka [id.], must be “resisted at every level of government, even the lower levels of government, most especially the lower levels of government,” since local governments are the true “protectors against those who would force these things on us tyrannically from above.”
For example, after a federal judge struck down Kentucky’s ban on same-sex marriage last year, Peroutka insisted that Sen. Rand Paul [id.] move to impeach the judge who made the decision, defund the court, and press for his state to defy the ruling: “He should use every influence he has in Kentucky to have people not obey this; the Kentucky legislature, the Kentucky courts, should not obey this, this is not lawful.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/peroutka-gay-marriage-debate-a ) embedded]
Peroutka also believes that local officials should defy their state legislatures on issues like marriage equality [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/topics/marriage-equality ]. After Maryland’s general assembly voted in 2012 to legalize same-sex marriage in the state, Peroutka declared that the assembly’s decision to “violate God’s laws” effectively invalidated its legal authority [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/michael-peroutka-explains-how-marriage-equality-invalidated-all-maryland-laws ], since any law that contradicts divine law does “not constitute a law – even if it were enacted and signed.”
Using an argument similar to the one Moore is now making in Alabama, Peroutka said [id.; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMsjV5S2KRA (below, as embedded; with comments)] that lower-level officials could ignore not only the marriage equality law but any law passed by the state’s general assembly, since it had invalidated itself by breaking biblical decrees: “Is it possible that those who are sworn to uphold the law, such as police and sheriffs and judges and prosecutors, may soon come to the conclusion that the enactments of this body should be ignored because they are based not in law, but in lawlessness?”
For the same reasons, Peroutka believes Roe v. Wade is invalid [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/new-anti-choice-group-launches-michael-peroutka-lecture-how-roe-v-wade-isnt-actually-law ] and supports religious tests for public office [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/institute-constitution-course-there-should-be-religious-test-public-office ], since atheists and non-Christians do not believe in the basis of constitutional law…the Bible. He also deems the teaching of evolution [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/michael-peroutka-promotion-evolution-act-disloyalty-america ] in schools to be “anti-American” because evolution challenges what his reading of the Bible says about the origins of humankind. “The promotion of evolution is an act of disloyalty to America,” he once declared [id.].
In Peroutka’s view, anything that breaks the “organic law,” or biblical law, is automatically unconstitutional.
Peroutka believes [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/how-unions-victory-civil-war-led-gay-marriage ] that America needs to “go back to what God called marriage, not what the state has perverted the definition to be, but what God called marriage.” Since biblical law doesn’t permit same-sex marriage in his view, then civil law can’t either: “There is no way we are ever going to validate homo- or sodomite-‘unmarriage’ because God defined marriage as between a man and a woman once and forever.”
“I always go back to these two standards: What does God say and what does the Constitution say?” Peroutka explained [id.] in 2013.
He added that the United States will have a small, limited government as long as it adheres to biblical standards. But he believes that the Union’s victory in the Civil War — or as he calls it, “The War Between the States” — enabled the federal government to greatly expand its powers, thus undermining the authority of biblical law and leading to such evils as same-sex marriage.
“Ever since then, there’s been this huge black hole of centralized power that’s formed in Washington, D.C.” he said. “People sometimes talk about ‘The War Between the States’ as being about the issue of slavery. I believe that history is written by the winners, it wasn’t about that at all. What it was about was consolidating power into the hands of a few people.”
“[T]he real effect of the war and the Reconstruction after the war was to take the very foundation of our understanding of our rights away from us, that is to say that they come from God, and put them in the hands of men and say that they come from the Supreme Court or they come from the legislature or they come from the executive,” he added [id.].
The end of the Civil War, Peroutka claims [ https://www.au.org/church-state/september-2007-church-state/featured/roy-moore-in-exile ], produced an “evil anti-God, anti-Christian revolution” that led to a “tyrannical consolidation of power” in Washington, D.C., undermining the “biblical worldview that acknowledges Christ’s authority over all things.”
Peroutka also contends that the gay rights movement isn’t just “federalizing homosexuality” but “federalizing perversion,” even claiming that the federal government violated the Constitution [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/peroutka-enda-will-ultimately-force-people-be-gay ] by imposing civil rights laws on the states.
“[T]he so-called civil rights laws are not law,” he said in 2013. “They never should’ve been passed. They’re not law now, they weren’t law then. They aren’t law now because there is no such thing as a civil right.”
Since Peroutka believes [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/peroutka-s-mlk-day-message-martin-luther-king-didn-t-actually-support-civil-rights ] “rights come from God” and not civil government, he argues that all civil rights laws are illegitimate since “the term ‘civil rights’ is kind of an oxymoron. There’s no ‘right’ in the sense of a permanent, fixed, thing that you have, that can be defended, if in fact it comes from the civil government.”
Now Moore is once again putting Peroutka’s words into action, threatening state judges who lawfully issue a marriage licenses to a same-sex couples. Because in the eyes of Moore and Peroutka, their personal reading of the Bible takes precedence over the law of the land.
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/roy-moores-showdown-courts-over-gay-marriage-tied-work-neo-confederate-leader
--
Bryan Fischer: 'Gay Gestapo' Forcing Alabama Judges Into 'Slavery'
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Thursday, 2/12/2015 3:36 pm
Bryan Fischer is outraged that a federal judge may order [ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/13/us/alabama-same-sex-marriage-ruling.html ] the dozens of Alabama probate judges who are refusing to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples to back down. On his American Family Radio [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/american-family-radio ] program today [ https://vimeo.com/119478608 ], Fischer said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUtHe3NXnFQ (below, as embedded; with comments)] that such an order would be tantamount to “tyranny” and “slavery” enforced by the “gay gestapo.”
“There’s a court hearing today before the federal judge, and she may order these probate judges to violate their own conscience and their own religious scruples,” he said. “She may order them to violate their conscience. You know what that is, ladies and gentlemen? You are ordered by an agent of the government to violate your conscience? That is tyranny.”
“When you are ordered by an agent of the government to violate your own conscience in something that you do, that is slavery. If you are forced to violate your conscience to do work, that is tyranny, that’s Tammy Bruce, that’s the gay gestapo. Tammy Bruce is the one that coined the term ‘gay gestapo.’ That’s the gay gestapo at work. You either do what we tell you or you’re going to get punished.”
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/bryan-fischer-gay-gestapo-forcing-alabama-judges-slavery
--
Alabama GOP chief says gay marriage will incur God's wrath, but state is already hellbound
[ http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/02/gay_marriage_has_alabama_truck.html (with comments)]
By John Archibald
on February 12, 2015 at 4:30 PM, updated February 12, 2015 at 5:20 PM
Bill Armistead is on that virtual street corner again, holding up the placard that reads "The End of the World is Nigh!"
"The State of Alabama and the United States of America will reap God's wrath if we embrace and condone things that are abhorrent to God, such as redefining marriage as anything other than a union between one man and one woman," the head of Alabama's Republican Party wrote in a column this week [ http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/02/alabama_gop_chairman_bill_armi.html ].
Repent Alabama! Build an ark! Because doom -- thanks to the gays -- is upon us!
Sorry, Bill, but you're too late. The doom is already on us, the end of our world is guaranteed. Look at the state of our state, the state of our people and politics, and you'll see that Alabama might as well go ahead and change its car tags to say Heart of the Hellbound.
Go to that Bible you thump if you don't believe it, Bill.
Proverbs says "put a knife to your throat if you are given to appetite." Been to the Golden Corral lately?
It goes on to say "be not among drunkards or among gluttonous eaters of meat."
But Alabama is the second fattest state in a fat America. The U.S. is second only to Luxembourg in the amount of meat it shovels in. Think about it, the average American eats 271 pounds of meat a year - roughly the mass of Alabama defensive lineman Da'Shawn Hand.
We're eating our way to hell. And it gets worse.
Jesus warned in Matthew that "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God." But Alabama lawmakers' whole platform involves making themselves, and the rich, even richer.
Shoot. He even said "If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor." But we won't even get into that.
Jesus went on to say "I was a stranger and you did not welcome me," but we build whole political campaigns on ridding the U.S. of immigrants.
He said he was "sick and in prison and you did not visit me," but we will not expand Medicaid to help the poor and the helpless. Our prisons are ugly and overcrowded, but we wait for the federal government to act because we are not, as a state, moved to care.
This stuff is hard, if you really want to take it literally. Keep reading Matthew.
"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart."
Oh snap. Half the population - and more than half the Legislature - is going to burn in hell for that one.
1st Corinthians says your body is a temple, but we don't care. Lung cancer rates in Alabama are among the highest in America, and our cigarette tax is among the lowest.
And then there's this one:
"Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery."
Look around, Bill Armistead.
Matthew tells us "Judge not, that you be not judged," but we don't practice that either.
And of course there is the hard one. Jesus in Matthew said "Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."
But here in Alabama we'll punch you square in both cheeks. We're so proud of that fact that we made it our motto: "We dare defend our rights."
We just don't give a damn about yours.
And that, Bill Armistead, is the real reason we need to repent.
© 2015 Alabama Media Group
http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/02/alabama_gop_chief_says_gay_mar.html [with comments]
--
Bryan Fischer: 'Sexual Immorality' And Abortion Will Cause God To Drive Americans From Our Land
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Friday, 2/13/2015 9:57 am
A few months ago, Bryan Fischer justified the forcible removal [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/bryan-fischer-suggests-native-americans-were-justifiably-removed-their-land ] of Native Americans from their land by citing the biblical story of the Amorites, who he said “lapsed into superstition and paganism and idolatry and sexual immorality and savagery” and were therefore justly removed by God.
On his American Family Radio program yesterday [ https://vimeo.com/119482708 ], Fischer cited [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItUX6tjYoG4 (below, as embedded; with comments)] the same story to warn that the United States is similarly in danger of “forfeiting our moral authority to maintain governance of this piece of land” because of legal abortion, a “turning away from Christianity” and, of course, “sexual immorality.”
“Again, the same principle of people can become morally disqualified to exercise sovereign authority over land by their savagery (think about the blood we’ve shed in abortion); by their superstition (think about our turning away from Christianity and from the God of the scriptures); and sexual immorality, I mean that’s an obvious problem in our culture,” he said.
“If that principle is true that God will displace a nation that lapses into unrepentant savagery, sexual immorality and superstition, then we are in danger, I believe, of forfeiting our moral authority to maintain governance of this piece of land, maintain sovereignty,” he warned. “Something that ought to be a concern to all of us, something that ought to take us to our knees in prayer and repentance for our land.”
Fischer didn’t specify who he believed God would empower to drive Americans from their land, although last year he cited some of the same scriptural passages [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/fischer-god-will-use-isis-punish-america-gay-rights ] to claim that God is using radical Islamic groups like ISIS to inflict his judgment on America for gay rights.
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/bryan-fischer-sexual-immorality-and-abortion-will-cause-god-drive-americans-our-land
--
GOP Rep.: Gay Marriage Harms Children, Economy And Society
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Friday, 2/13/2015 10:50 am
Yesterday on “Washington Watch [ http://www.frc.org/wwlivewithtonyperkins/david-christensen-tim-huelskamp-penny-nance-matt-salmon ],” Rep. Tim Huelskamp called on Congress to hold a vote on his Marriage Protection Amendment, which would impose a national ban on same-sex marriage, as a way to pressure the Supreme Court against deciding in favor of marriage equality. The Kansas Republican told Family Research Council [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/family-research-council ] President Tony Perkins [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/tony-perkins ] that federal courts created “chaos” by striking down bans on same-sex marriage and now “folks are confused about what a marriage is.”
Huelskamp said [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDzGFS9oK9c (below, as embedded; with comments)] that if “we don’t protect the traditional basis for marriage, it harms everyone, particularly our young children.” He also agreed with Perkins that legalizing gay marriage will “discourage family formation” and undermine the black community.
“So now is the time when the courts are trying to rule and might decide to redefine or undefine marriage, it is critical not just for individuals and for families but for society as a whole,” Huelskamp said. “At the end of the day, it’s children that are hurt.”
The congressman lamented [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsaraWho6c0 (below, as embedded; with comments)] that “our founders never envisioned a society which would reject a basic understanding of nature” and warned that marriage equality will harm America’s “economic wellbeing.”
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/gop-rep-gay-marriage-harms-children-economy-and-society
--
Robert Knight: Stop Gay Marriage By Impeaching Judges Who Rule For Equality
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Friday, 2/13/2015 11:31 am
Washington Times [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/washington-times ] columnist Robert Knight [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/people/robert-knight ] joined Steve Deace on his radio program [ http://stevedeace.com/podcast/deace-show-podcast-02-12-15/ ] yesterday to discuss the showdown in Alabama over a federal court ruling striking down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage.
Knight lamented that “judges have gotten out of control” because state and federal lawmakers have failed to bring them “to heel” by impeaching judges who rule in favor of marriage equality.
“The reason judges have gotten out of control is because legislators have not protected their turf, they have not used the constitutional means to bring these judges to heel,” he said. “One of them is impeachment. At the federal level and at the state level, there are many ways judges can be removed. In Massachusetts, it would have been easy to remove the Supreme Court judges who found a right to gay marriage in the Massachusetts Constitution in 2004, but that would have taken Gov. Mitt Romney to go ahead and get the process going and he refused.”
He also blamed the “pro-family movement” for failing to address why homosexuality is “bad for people” and neglecting to lift up the stories of people “who have recovered and become straight.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/knight-impeach-judges-who-rule-for-marriage-equality ) embedded]
Deace told Knight that Republicans who think a Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality would help them by putting aside a contentious issue are wrong, and that the ensuing national debate would “make Roe v. Wade look like a picnic.”
“This is going to go DEFCON 1, DEFCON subterranean, because now we’re going to be in an issue where the other side of the argument now thinks they are empowered and emboldened to unleash the full coercive power of government to force believers nationwide all the way to the church door to change their belief system,” he said.
“This is going to escalate if the court goes Roe v. Wade on this in the summer,” he warned. “It won’t diminish it at all. It will take this from a largely provincial state-by-state issue into a national debate that I think’s going to make Roe v. Wade look like a picnic.”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/deace-scotus-marriage-ruling-would-make-roe-v-wade-look-like-a-picnic ) embedded]
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/robert-knight-stop-gay-marriage-impeaching-judges-who-rule-equality
--
Mat Staver: Homosexuality Is 'Very Deadly And Damaging'
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Friday, 2/13/2015 12:10 pm
Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/liberty-counsel ] stopped by VCY America [ http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/voice-christian-youth-america-vcy-america ]’s “Crosstalk [ http://www.vcyamerica.org/blog/2015/02/12/marriage-under-attack-alabama-supreme-court-justice-stands-up ]” yesterday to discuss his group’s attempt to stop judges from issuing marriage licenses [ http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14102&AlertID=1883 ] to same-sex couples in Alabama. Staver praised Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore for flouting the ruling of a federal court on the matter and lashed out at the Supreme Court for rejecting [ http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-02-09/gay-marriage-cleared-by-u-s-supreme-court-to-start-in-alabama ] Alabama’s appeal of the marriage case, saying that Alabama “does not have to obey” any future Supreme Court ruling “that there’s some invented right to same-sex marriage and therefore you can’t have marriage as a union of a man and a woman.”
“That is so far off the beaten path, so far removed from the Constitution that it is no rule of law,” Staver said. “There is a limit to what the court can do, there is a limit to what the people can stomach. If that court were to say, the laws of gravity were fine for the founders but we have progressed, we’re a progressive society and we think they have changed, you would say, ‘That’s nuts, have they lost their mind?’ The question is: Have they lost their mind by saying there’s a constitutional right for same-sex marriage?”
“Have they literally lost their mind?” he asked.
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/staver-justices-have-literally-lost-their-minds ) embedded]
Staver added that legalizing same-sex marriage is “harmful” to children because it tells them that “your moms and dads are absolutely meaningless.”
“Why would we take a relationship of same-sex unions, same-sex sexual activity, protect it and elevate it when we know that it’s a very harmful and it’s a very deadly and damaging relationship?” Staver asked. “Why would we elevate some kind of bad relationship, bad activity, dangerous and harmful, unhealthy activity to a protected status?”
[audio ( https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/staver-homosexuality-is-deadly ) embedded]
© 2015 People For the American Way
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/mat-staver-homosexuality-very-deadly-and-damaging
===
'50 Shades' a hit in religious right's backyard
The Rachel Maddow Show
02/12/15
Rachel Maddow reports that the movie "50 Shades of Grey" is particularly popular in Southern, Bible Belt states, and especially so in Tupelo, Mississippi, the backyard of the very disapproving religious right group, The American Family Association.
©2015 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/50-shades-a-hit-in-religious-rights-home-398477891837 [with comments] [show links at http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/citations-the-february-12-2015-trms (with comment)] [the above YouTube of the segment at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWp9wRjGJSA (with comments)]
--
Des Moines kink community welcomes 'Fifty Shades'
Dominatrix Ms. Robin stands in the basement dungeon of her West Des Moines home Tuesday, Feb. 10, 2015.
(Photo: Zach Boyden-Holmes/The Register)
Courtney Crowder
10:45 a.m. CST February 13, 2015
While other 6-year-old girls were brushing their Barbies' hair and dressing them up for convertible rides with Ken, Ms. Robin was hogtying hers.
"I saw cartoons like 'Mighty Mouse' where they tied up the heroine," Ms. Robin said recently, sitting on a chair in her West Des Moines home, "and in my mind I tied these women up, because it's what I liked. It's who I am."
It was the first inkling that Ms. Robin was interested in a different kind of life from her peers, the kind of life that involved hogtying — professionally.
Ms. Robin, 60, is a dominatrix and has been for almost a decade. She's a grandmother of three and an expert in bondage, flogging, caning, spanking and medical play.
She lives in an unassuming house on an unassuming block — with a dungeon in her basement replete with stocks, a rack, a jail cell, a Robospanker and a wall of countless props, including whips, chains and masks. She watches "The Bachelor" on Monday nights, but spends other evenings intricately binding clients and suspending them in her garage.
Ms. Robin, who asked to be identified by her professional name, is part of the kink community that is experiencing exponential growth locally and nationally because of the popularity of E.L. James' best-selling erotic romance series "Fifty Shades of Grey."
The trilogy and accompanying movie, which opens in theaters Friday, have more people seeking out information on the BDSM lifestyle, local kinksters said. And although some in the kink community have qualms about the story and its stereotypes, many welcome the publicity as a way to draw more people into the fold.
"'Fifty Shades of Grey' came out and we just exploded," said Jay, a founder of local BDSM group Central Iowa Power Exchange (CIPEX) who requested to be referred to by his first name. "We are growing left and right."
A pop phenomenon, "Fifty Shades" centers on college student Anastasia Steele and her complicated relationship with Christian Grey, a 27-year-old CEO and kink enthusiast with dominant tendencies. The movie is Fandango's fastest selling R-rated title, according to the company, and the YouTube trailer has been viewed more than 50 million times.
"I am expecting to have another big spike (in members) after the movie," Jay said. "When the book came out we were nervous we were going to get men saying 'I'm dominant, bow to my needs,' but we didn't get that. Instead, we got a lot of people who were curious and wanted to learn."
Kink defined
BDSM is short for bondage and discipline, dominance and submission, sadism and masochism. But tying down what exactly that means is like herding cats. Simply, to those in the BDSM community, it means what you want it to mean.
"It's about stimulating other parts of the body and the mind and the heart," said Susan Wright, founder of the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, an advocacy group for the kink community. "... For some people, it's not a sexual thing at all. It's a spiritual response, a cathartic response. For other people, it's an endorphin rush, like a runner's high. For other people, though, it's sex and it's how they have sex."
For Ms. Robin, domination is about the skill, not the sex. "I, myself, am always clothed," she said of her client sessions.
Unlike the popular image of the leather bustier-wearing, stiletto-healed, foul-mouthed dominatrix, Ms. Robin is merely a free-spirited craftswoman. She spent five years apprenticing with dominatrixes across the country before turning pro. Now she speaks at conferences and colleges nationwide.
"I'm the most monogamous person, (and) I'm pretty straight-laced in some ways," said Ms. Robin, who lives with a partner. "But I'm very open and accepting of people and their kinks."
She was 40 when she entered the BDSM lifestyle. After a divorce, she dated a man who pointed out that her natural sexual penchants were dominatrix-like. She didn't know what the word was, but a quick Internet search introduced her to the culture.
Many people come into the kink community in a similar way: Someone tries something, they like it, they seek out people with similar interests.
It's like quilting, but with whips.
'Fifty Shades' of kink
At its core, "Fifty Shades" is a love story. Strip away the kink, and you're left with the bumpy, beautiful story of two people stumbling through life to find their happy ending.
And that depiction of a couple working together to create a sex life they're both comfortable with fits with the reality of kink culture, said Susan Wright, founder of the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, an advocacy group for the kink community.
"In the books, it's clear that part of (Anastasia) likes (kink), and part of her doesn't like it, which can happen," Wright said. "You can be inconsistent about things like 'I don't know if I want to try that, but I am going to try that.' ... You have to go through the process in order to figure it out."
As for the actual descriptions of sex: "Very close, and very erotic," Ms. Robin said.
Yet, it's not a BDSM how-to manual, Wright said. The trilogy's most dangerous misconception is the implication that Christian Grey's childhood abuse fuels his need for kink, BDSM advocates said.
"That is not the norm in the lifestyle," Ms. Robin said. "We are highly intelligent, high-functioning people. We don't drink. We don't do drugs. We are normal and boring. ... We just have a more elaborate sex life."
Despite such flaws, Wright contended: The book "brought kink into the mainstream, and we're talking about it with nuance."
"There are lots of kinky people standing up and saying ('Fifty Shades') is fantasy, if you want to learn the reality come here and we will help you," she said. "That's helping many kinky people realize they can express their sexuality, that they are OK, they are not alone."
Local kink
In Des Moines, kink culture has changed drastically over the years. When CIPEX started two decades ago, participants were afraid of persecution, Jay said.
"Back in the day, when I hosted a play party at my home, I would invite 20 or 30 people, and I would tell people, if the police come to the door, immediately untie each other, do not hit each other and let me talk to them," Jay said. "Now, I have a policeman in my group."
Jay estimates that more than 500 people claim to be regular members of CIPEX, and half of the 100 people who showed up at his last event hadn't been there before.
He said a regular play party on a Saturday night draws people from Cedar Rapids, Cedar Falls, Mason City and Omaha and Lincoln, Neb.
What once was taboo is now on the coffee table, Jay said.
"It's opening doors (and saying) there is something else out there," Jay said. "This is not an abusive lifestyle, it's kinky. Hey, people get tired of vanilla ice cream, and sometimes they want to try chocolate."
Jay and his wife are planning a Valentine's Day outing to "Fifty Shades," and Wright said she will see it this weekend as well. Ms. Robin's partner, too, answered with an enthusiastic "yes" when asked if they were going.
"Well," Ms. Robin said, pausing as a wide smile spread across her face. "I'll have to see if I have a session first."
© 2015 www.desmoinesregister.com
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/life/2015/02/12/dominatrix-fifty-shades-grey-grandmother/23326407/ [with embedded video with Ms. Robin and her dungeon and gear, and comments]
===
in addition to (linked in) the post to which this is a reply and preceding and (any future other) following, see also (linked in):
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110748556 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110749365 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110752764 and preceding (and any future following),
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110753907 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110775173 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110782665 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110784507 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110806218 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110821686 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110825010 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110828638 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110834634 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110860914 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110860986 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110870404 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110870610 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110876468 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110879726 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110885203 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110889515 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110901479 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110908577 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110911745 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110912373 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110912566 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110921138 and preceding (and any future following)
Greensburg, KS - 5/4/07
"Eternal vigilance is the price of Liberty."
from John Philpot Curran, Speech
upon the Right of Election, 1790
F6
Join the InvestorsHub Community
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
