The so-called ‘Christian’ Right (or ‘Reich’?) Wing Sets Out To ‘Restore’ Ohio

This is really pretty messed up.

For so many, many reasons.

http://ohiorestorationproject.com/overview.php

This is loaded with blatantly bad history, too. Most telling is how they refer to the US being founded as a ‘Christian’ nation because of the Mayflower Compact. Of course, they neglect to mention that it was because of such laws that colonies such as Rhode Island were established expressly as a haven of religious freedom and tolerance to escape the theocracies of the early New England colonies.

Here is a little bit on Rhode Island history, just for one short example.

Maryland, of course, was established as a haven for Catholics, in large part because of the anti-catholic persecution of those whose descendents first drafted the aforementioned Mayflower Compact. Not to mention the fact that the Virginia colony (strictly intended as a source of income for English titled class investors) came before the Mayflower. Are we to take cues from its charter as well?

And then there is the ultimate absurdity of placing a cross on the orginal 13 star American flag, a flag created by the first non-theocratic, secular republic possibly ever, whose established Constitution in 1789 expressly forbid the use of religion as a vehicle for state power or a standard to measure one for any public office.

To conflate a religious sect (and these people are a cultish sect of Christianity, which becomes clear when you read their little manifesto), with America, the political embodiment of the principles of the enlightenment and the so-called Age of Reason, is almost too absurd for words.

But these loons have managed to do it.

Check out Theocracy Watch for more on these types of efforts, and the dangers they can pose.

From the father of modern conservatism….

“Religious factions will go on imposing their will on others unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. They must learn to make their views known without trying to make their views the only alternatives.”
- Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-AZ)

“However, on religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God’s name on one’s behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I’m frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in ‘A,’ ‘B,’ ‘C,’ and ‘D.’ Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of ‘conservatism.’ ”
- Sen. Barry Goldwater (from the Congressional Record, 9/16/81(?)

“I think every good Christian ought to kick Falwell’s ass.”
- Sen. Barry Goldwater

Letter to Pat Robertson
August 25th, 2005
http://www.cbn.com/700club/

Dear Mr. Robertson,

Exactly what part of “Thou Shalt Not Kill” do you not understand?

Sincerely,
Andy Valeri
Dayton, Ohio

P.S. How are things going with Freedom Gold these days? Are your investments doing okay, or have you been seeing diminishing returns since your business partner Charles Taylor had to back out of his commitments to your financial plans, what with being on the run from those pesky international socialist types at the UN and International Criminal Court. Fully unwarranted accusations, I’m sure, that bit about his being involved in war crimes and crimes against humanity and all. Just curious if those diamond mines you were operating with Mr. Taylor in Sierra Leone were still reaping the same profits, particularly since Mr. Taylor hasn’t been on the scene to keep things in line by chopping off the arms of children who wouldn’t fight for him or do the mining work. But at least they’ve been given the generous opportunity of finding the Lord through your missionary efforts via your investments in Freedom Gold.

And that’s a pretty nifty title for your company, too. Freedom Gold. Was that supposed to be your way of honoring the words of James, half brother of Jesus, or was it meant more as an homage to George Orwell?

“Come now, you rich, weep and howl for the miseries that are coming upon you!
Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth-eaten.
Your gold and silver are corroded, and their corrosion will be a witness against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have heaped up treasure in last days.
Indeed, the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, cry out; and the cries of the reapers have reached the ears of the Lord.
You have lived on the earth in pleasure and luxury; you have fattened your hearts as in a day of slaughter.
You have condemned, you have murdered the just; he does not resist you.”
- James; 5, 1-6

Good luck on your day of reckoning, Mr. Robertson. You’re going to need it.

This is a good one. Ralph, poster boy for the Talibanker nexus, adds a whole new dimension to the idea of the ‘collection plate’.

Read The Report from The Carpetbagger

The unholy alliance between the corporatists and religious fundamentalists, the “Talibankers,” is beginning its final naked play for complete control of the mechanisms of government by pursuing the GOP strategy of imposing the “nuclear option” against minority voices in the Senate. This change would end the use of the filibuster in Senate debates on judicial nominees. Of course, a blitzkrieg of disinformation is being spread about what this means, but anyone devoted to intellectual honesty knows that this radical and unwarranted act is hypocrisy. It is pandering to power over principle (After all, the Senate has approved over 95% of the judgeship nominees made by Bush, a far greater percentage than Clinton nominees approved by the GOP in the 90’s. And these handful being rejected are not on religious grounds, but due to their extreme inclination to side with corporations against the interests of America’s working class).

Leading this propaganda assault is our homegrown Taliban with their “Justice Sunday” (Just Us Sunday?) event on April 24th, being used to declare their jihad against the Constitution. This event features Senate leader Bill Frist explaining how the filibuster is being used “against people of faith.” So, using centuries old tools of republican government is now somehow sinful? Against which faith? There are probably around a billion people who would claim that the “war on terror” is a crusade “against people of faith” as well.

In the ads for the Sunday pep rally for Sharia law, there is an image of a perplexed boy contemplating a gavel and the bible. Above it is a statement that reads “He should not have to choose”. That is right. No one should have to choose between serving America and serving their religion. That is one of the reasons our system was designed the way it was. So just who are the theocratic political forces at work in our nation forcing this choice? It’s certainly not anyone who believes in our Constitution (which contains a grand total of exactly zero references to God).

This entire effort by the GOP leadership and their theocratic cronies on the far right runs completely counter to the United States Constitution, which CLEARLY states in Article VI “that no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

To those ayatollah-wannabes and their followers who are trying to destroy the wall between church and state, I say “America, love it or leave it.” If you don’t like the fact that America was established by our Founders in 1789 upon Enlightenment principles as a secular democratic republic, then you should move to Iran or Saudi Arabia where you obviously belong.

Originally posted April 2005

Below is the text of The Mayflower Compact, the document that theocrats claim gives legitimacy to religious intrusion into our republic’s government. I for one do not see how a document that makes a point of twice swearing feudal fealty to a king on another continent can be construed as a basis for interpreting the intent of the founders of a republic here in America. Conservatives have been known to discount the more egalitarian elements of the Declaration of Independence as legally non-binding because they were never meant to be a foundation of law for the nation. The Mayflower Compact is a foundation of law, not of the USA, but of a religious colony (Cape Cod Virginia!) loyal to a foreign king. Now, if the people of Massachusetts want to codify the Mayflower Compact, more power to them, insofar as they do not violate the binding agreement they made to the USA, but I do not live in Massachusetts, nor did any of my ancestors, so please, theocratic fanatics, refrain from attempting to ensnare me into your anachronistic schemes. Oh, and I’ll eye your progress persuading the people of Massachusetts to give up the rights that the citizens of Lexington and Concord died for, and Elbridge Gerry, John Hancock, John Adams, Abigail Adams, Sam Adams and others lived for.

Ed Lacy
UnCommon Sense TV Media

The Mayflower Compact

“In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the Loyal Subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord, King James, by the Grace of God, of England, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, e&.

Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia; do by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the Presence of God and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid; And by Virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the General good of the Colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.

In Witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape Cod the eleventh of November, in the Reign of our Sovereign Lord, King James of England, France and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth. Anno Domini, 1620.”

Joe Conason helps unravel the unholy alliance of the modern American corporate pharisees and mammon with this piece in Salon.

Jack Abramoff and his deeply religious right-wing cronies express their “biblical worldview” by swindling Indian tribes and bribing legislators. Verily, mysterious are the ways of the Lord.

Rarely has the contrast between the rhetoric of the religious right and the behavior of its leaders been so starkly exposed as in the Abramoff scandal. The most obvious example was the manipulation of Christian activists in Louisiana and Texas by Reed, former executive director of the Christian Coalition, who said he was helping them fight gambling when he was actually using them to promote Indian casinos (and to make a few million bucks for himself).

That episode alone should have alerted honest Christians to the moral rot within the Republican leadership that professed to represent their interests. But there is of course much more evidence of the religious cynicism of Abramoff and his cronies.

Read the article

An interesting interview with Rep. Ted Strickland from Ohio, who is also running for Ohio Governor in 2006.

http://www.streetprophets.com/storyonly/2006/1/24/131656/823

The Maker of US Policy
By Mark Lawson
The Guardian UK
October 8th, 2005

What a stroke of luck that God’s advice to George Bush fits so neatly alongside US national interests.

According to Shaath’s recall of Bush’s confession, God, apparently addressing the president each time as “George”, had told him, in three separate briefings: “Go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan … go and end the tyranny in Iraq … go and get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security.”

While it’s clearly not in a columnist’s interest to encourage other pundits, especially omniscient ones, it would also be fascinating to have the deity’s opinion on whether it should be Clarke or Cameron and just how worried to be about Asian bird flu. But, as a commentator on foreign policy, what’s perhaps most striking is the sudden shift from an Old Testament God (smiting terrorists and tyrants) to such a carefully nuanced position on the Middle East, respecting the key demand of each side.

It’s perhaps surprising that divine revelation should so precisely coincide with state department policy during the Bush administration. A fundamentalist believer would explain this overlap by saying that the president is simply being obedient to God, but it seems rather convenient to have a supreme overlord whose politics so closely mirror your own. The really interesting question for Bush would be whether God has ever told him he was wrong about anything, whether the Maker has broken administration policy as well as making it.

We’re unlikely to get clarification on this because the White House spokespeople seem to have decided, echoing Alastair Campbell’s public line on the possibility that Blair looks to a higher power than Jack Straw on foreign affairs, that “we don’t do God”.

Given British embarrassment about religion, Campbell’s judgment was probably correct, but Bush has spoken openly about his personal conversation with God in the past and in this very week could probably benefit from wearing his sacred heart on his sleeve, as his Christian-right supporters are upset by the nomination to the supreme court of White House counsel Harriet Miers, who is not thought by hard line believers to have put in enough knee-time in public.

But the likeliest reason for the White House’s panic is that they can see the trap set by the Shaath anecdote. Bush’s previous religious admissions have suggested that God was a kind of vice-president, whereas it now seems that George is the running mate.

The political risk of this is obvious. If God is directing American foreign policy, He is presumably also advising on domestic issues, such as Supreme Court nominations. If so, Bush would face the fascinating task of explaining to the Christian right why God advised against a Supreme Court justice who was too associated with Christian fundamentalists.

And, even before the Palestinian insight into his beliefs, we can guess that the president’s theology was in a mess. Throughout his five years in office, Bush has sustained a simple old Sunday-school world view in which external evil threatens American interests and is then met by force which believes it has God on its side. The fact that the perceived aggressors (Bin Laden, Saddam) also feel divinely justified is no more of an obstacle to this belief system than it has been for the religious throughout history.

Hurricane Katrina, though, severely challenges this exegesis. What can a president of such simple religious faith have made of the devastation of America by what insurance policies call an act of God? Whereas even an event as terrible as 9/11 could be sustaining and confirmational for someone of Bush’s apparent Manichean convictions, a sudden drowning of the chosen invites only agonized study of the Book of Job. This affront to Bush’s relationship with God may explain his public bewilderment during the weather crisis.

What we would give to know what Bush’s secretary of higher state said to him after those events. But the president is likely to be less confessional to foreign politicians about these matters from now on.

There’s nothing inherently dangerous about a leader having religious beliefs - politicians can be just as lethal if they believe too devoutly in themselves - but Bush’s alleged conversation with Shaath suggests that the president has kicked all decision-making upstairs. And, even though American politics is theistically inclined, this is understood as too steep a genuflection.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)

Strategizing a Christian Coup d’Etat
By Jenny Jarvie
The Los Angeles Times

August 28th, 2005

A group of believers wants to establish Scriptures-based government one city and county at a time.

Greenville, SC - It began, as many road trips do, with a stop at Wal-Mart to buy a portable DVD player.

But Mario DiMartino was planning more than a weekend getaway. He, his wife and three children were embarking on a pilgrimage to South Carolina.
“I want to migrate and claim the gold of the Lord,” said the 38-year-old oil company executive from Pennsylvania. “I want to replicate the statutes and the mores and the scriptures that the God of the Old Testament espoused to the world.”

DiMartino, who drove here recently to look for a new home, is a member of Christian Exodus, a movement of politically active believers who hope to establish a government based upon Christian principles.

At a time when evangelicals are exerting influence on the national political stage - having helped secure President Bush’s reelection - Christian Exodus believes that people of faith have failed to assert their moral agenda: Abortion is legal. School prayer is banned. There are limits on public displays of the Ten Commandments. Gays and lesbians can marry in Massachusetts.

Christian Exodus activists plan to take control of sheriff’s offices, city councils and school boards. Eventually, they say, they will control South Carolina. They will pass godly legislation, defying Supreme Court rulings on the separation of church and state.

“We’re going to force a constitutional crisis,” said Cory Burnell, 29, an investment advisor who founded the group in November 2003.

“If necessary,” he said, “we will secede from the union.”

Burnell has not moved to South Carolina himself - he promised his wife that they would stay in Valley Springs, Calif., until the end of next year - but believes that his 950 supporters will rally to the cause. Five families have moved so far.

Burnell said his inspiration came from the Free State Project, which in October 2003 appealed to libertarians to move to New Hampshire for limited government intervention, lower taxes and greater individual rights. By 2006, organizers had hoped to have 20,000 people committed to relocating to New Hampshire; so far, 6,600 have said they intended to make the move, and only 100 have done so.

Christian Exodus, Burnell predicted, will be more successful.

“There are more Christians than libertarians,” he said.

After scrutinizing electoral records, demographic trends and property prices, Christian Exodus members identified two upstate South Carolina counties - they will not officially say which ones - as prime for a conservative takeover. By September 2006, Burnell hopes to have 2,000 activists in one county and 500 in the other.

Frank and Tammy Janoski have settled into a five-bedroom house with white vinyl siding in a new subdivision in rural Spartanburg County.

“This is where God wants us to be,” he said.

Janoski, 38, a self-employed computer engineer, had been contemplating moving from his deadline-oriented lifestyle in Bethlehem, Pa., to a more conservative region with cheaper housing and lower taxes when a church friend handed him a Christian Exodus flier.

“What attracted me to the movement was the idea of calling back the country to a righteous standard,” he said.

His first six months in South Carolina have been idyllic, Janoski said. Not only do his neighbors wave as they pass by, but they also share most of his conservative Christian beliefs.

“If you’re going to secede, this is the place to do it,” he said. “A lot of the locals have that spirit.”

Although Christian Exodus members are confident that they can capitalize on evangelical disillusionment with the Republican Party, local observers are skeptical.

James Guth, a professor at Furman University in Greenville who studies the influence of religion on politics, does not think that Christian Exodus will be successful beyond a county level.

“South Carolina is a state that is dominated by Republicans,” he said. “Although there are people on the far right edge of the Republican Party � in general, the population is a big fan of Bush.”

Nestled in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains, upstate South Carolina is the most conservative region of a conservative state: Bush won 58% of the South Carolina vote in 2004, and Greenville is home to Bob Jones University, a fundamentalist Christian college that until recently had banned interracial dating.

Cleatus Blackmon, treasurer and director of missions at the Greer Baptist Assn., which oversees 39 Baptist churches in Janoski’s town, doubts that Christian Exodus’ focus on taking over government bodies will appeal to the majority of the region’s Christians.

“You don’t find the word ‘control’ in the scriptures,” he said. “The basic mission of the church is to proclaim God’s redeeming love through the example of Jesus Christ.”

But Christian Exodus activists insist that they will forge ahead, even if they end up polarizing the Christian community.

“We want to separate the wheat from the chaff,” DiMartino said. “There’s a lot of deception in the church. If the Republican Party says something, a lot of churches say it’s gospel.”

Despite its cynicism about the Republican Party, Christian Exodus plans to use the party’s popularity to its advantage. Rather than running for office themselves, Christian Exodus activists hope to influence which Republican candidates win local primaries.

“All we have to do is put our guy on the ballot with an ‘R’ sign,” Burnell said. “It could be a corpse and they’ll vote for him.”

Local Republicans, however, point out that they would never sit idly by while Christian Exodus took over.

“He talks about 2,000 activists, but I can easily get 4,000 activists,” said Bob Taylor, a Republican Greenville County councilman and a dean at Bob Jones University. “There’s incredible dedication to the [Republican] cause.”

While many South Carolinians may oppose abortion and gay marriage, Taylor said, few would support secession.

But DiMartino is not worried about the naysayers.

When he explained Christian Exodus to the man who sold him his home in Pickens County, he said, the salesman gave him a high-five. DiMartino looks forward to living alongside Christians who want to put local government back in the hands of what, he believes, America was really founded for.

“Whether it flies or not,” he said, “is really in the Lord’s hands.”

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)