From the NY Times:
Less than two years after it was plunged into a rape scandal, the Air Force Academy is scrambling to address complaints that evangelical Christians wield so much influence at the school that anti-Semitism and other forms of religious harassment have become pervasive.
There have been 55 complaints of religious discrimination at the academy in the past four years, including cases in which a Jewish cadet was told the Holocaust was revenge for the death of Jesus and another was called a Christ killer by a fellow cadet.
The 4,300-student school recently started requiring staff members and cadets to take a 50-minute religious-tolerance class.
I don’t know what is going on here, but it doesn’t sound good. Specifically when you have this sort of thing coming from the leadership:
The superintendent, Lt. Gen. John Rosa, conceded there was a problem during a recent meeting of the Board of Visitors, the civilian group that oversees the academy.
”The problem is people have been across the line for so many years when you try and come back in bounds, people get offended,” he said.
The board chairman, former Virginia Gov. James Gilmore, warned Rosa that changing things could prove complicated. He said evangelical Christians ”do not check their religion at the door.”
Here we go again. Some basic infor about the academy:
More than 90 percent of the cadets identify themselves as Christian. A cadet survey in 2003 found that half had heard religious slurs and jokes, and that many non-Christians believed Christians get special treatment.
”There were people walking up to someone and basically they would get in a conversation and it would end with, `If you don’t believe what I believe you are going to hell,”’ Vice Commandant Col. Debra Gray said…
Rosa and other academy leaders say some among the large number of Christian cadets — nearly 2,600 are Protestant, some 1,300 are Roman Catholic, and about 120 are Mormon — may not realize that evangelism is unwelcome among their fellow students. The corps of cadets also includes 44 Jews, 19 Buddhists and a few Muslims, Hindus and others. There are 15 chaplains and one rabbi.
Again, I don’t know what is going on, and I am suspicious of anything that comes from the pressure cookers that are our military academies, but there has to be a little something to this story. At any rate, the reason I am posting this is not to engage in Christian bashing, but to expose this absurd statement:
Two of the nation’s most influential evangelical Christian groups, Focus on the Family and New Life Church, are headquartered in nearby Colorado Springs. Tom Minnery, an official at Focus on the Family, disputed claims that evangelical Christians are pushing an agenda at the academy, and complained that ”there is an anti-Christian bigotry developing” at the school.
Whee! Focus on the Family and James Dobson again. Gotta love it. Now on to the statement from Mr. Minnery-
Of 4300 students, 90% are Christian. That means that 44 Jews and 19 Buddhists (world renowned for their bigotry) are terrorizing 3870 Christians.
For those of you keeping count, that is one Jew for every 88 Christians, and one Buddhists for every 204 Christians. Talk about tyranny of the minority!
Oy Vey!
I wish I could see videotape of Minnery saying that with a straight face.
CadillaqJaq
…evangelical Christians “do not leave their religion at the door.”
No shit. This has nothing to do with the Air force Academy in Colorado Springs, but my 30 year old son “found” Jesus a few years ago and ever since it has been nearly impossible to communicate with him without his proselytizing to the rest of us “ordinary” Christians in the family. Sad.
[‘scuse me for venting.]
norbizness
Something about this puts me in mind of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory:
Veruca Salt: They don’t want to find it. They’re jealous of me.
Mr. Salt: Sweetheart, I can’t push them no harder; 19,000 bars an hour they’re shelling; 760,000 they’ve done so far.
Veruca Salt: You promised, Daddy. You promised I’d have it the very first day.
Mrs. Salt: You’re going to be very unpopular around here, Henry, if you don’t deliver soon.
Mr. Salt: It breaks my heart, Henrietta. I hate to see her unhappy.
Veruca Salt: You’re a rotten, mean father. You never give me anything I want.
chloeindia
Am I the only one scared shitless by this article? The military is now coming under the strong influence of one religion? How messed up is that?
I am just hypothosizing here, but I bet that people who believe as strongly as these cadets seem to believe in the singular rightness of their religion will experience no cognitive dissonance if they are ever called upon to restrain (or kill) their non-Christian countrymen. With the radical right’s increasing influence/control over the White House, Congress, and perhaps in the the not too distant future, the judciary, being a “non-believer” becomes more dangerous every day. I am shaking in my boots to discover that there is a good chance the radical right might control the military as well.
In spite of their disingenous mewling about being the victims of anti-Christian bigotry, the radical religious right now has more influence/control over the direction of this country than any other group – religious or sectarian. Unfortunately, they have demonstrated repeatedly that they have ittle or no tolerance for minority views. Anyone, religiously inclined or not, who isn’t a radical Christian should be working diligently to move these guys off the political stage.
Ridge
For those who think the linking of the GOP with the American Taliban is not a
problem, look at the Air Force Academy. Evidently, fundamentalists feel so
comfortable and secure in their position at the Academy or within elements of
the Military, that they go around and condemn people to Hell, deride other
religions and basically harass those who believe differently.
This is not an assault on Christianity but the perversion of basic American
Values. What will happen when military officers feel that they have a
greater allegiance to their interpretation of the Bible than to the
Constitution?
“–The academy commandant, Brig. Gen. Johnny Weida, a born-again Christian,
said in a statement to cadets in June 2003 that their first responsibility is
to their God. He also strongly endorsed National Prayer Day that year. School
spokesman Johnny Whitaker said Weida now runs his messages by several other
commanders.”
Will we end up like Turkey where officers are rooted out if they express too
great a religious feeling? They fear a fundamentalist take over of a secular
state using the Army. Are they wrong?
Of course the American Taliban see nothing wrong. They want their tentacles
into the US military. When Generals claim G Bush is a direct instrument of
God and his judgment, they smile.
“The board chairman, former Virginia Gov. James Gilmore, warned Rosa that
changing things could prove complicated. He said evangelical Christians ”do
not check their religion at the door.”
That slug Gilmore financially crippled the State of Virginia solely to
advance his political prospects. He would sell his mother for influence and
I’m not surprised he is trying to downplay this.
Ridge
Kimmitt
The thing is, Minnery is right. According to his worldview, anything other than explicit state sponsorship of his sect is anti-Christian bigotry.
timekeeper
I call Bullshit on the Commandant and the board chairman. The military is absolutely one group in which the behavior of its members can be controlled by orders. The basic attitudes may not change, but the behavior can be controlled. Proselytism is not acceptable behavior, and bigotry of any type (religious, sexual, racial) is specifically prohibited. If it’s happening at the Air Force Academy, a housecleaning may be in order. Evangelicals don’t have to check their religion at the door, but they *do* need to shut up if they are told that their proselytism is objectionable.
As for the idiots at Focus on the Family, what can I say? They’re hopeless.
Ridge: Drop the “American Taliban/GOP” meme. Until GOP movers and shakers start advocating stoning adulterers and gays, requiring women to cover themselves from head to toe and not hold jobs outside the home, ban any broadcast that is not religious in nature, attempt to control the personal grooming of all Americans, ban any religion other than their own, and destroy 3000-year old historical artifacts as “idolatry”, they are not equivalent to the Taliban. Farging idiotic statements like that are one of the reasons the religious right claims they are persecuted.
John Cole
I call Bullshit on the Commandant and the board chairman. The military is absolutely one group in which the behavior of its members can be controlled by orders. The basic attitudes may not change, but the behavior can be controlled. Proselytism is not acceptable behavior, and bigotry of any type (religious, sexual, racial) is specifically prohibited. If it’s happening at the Air Force Academy, a housecleaning may be in order. Evangelicals don’t have to check their religion at the door, but they *do* need to shut up if they are told that their proselytism is objectionable.
Another anti-Christian bigot rears up! They are everywhere! Don’t you realize that if you don’t let them infuse every aspect of society with their religious worldview, you are being a bigot?
Kimmitt
Farging idiotic statements like that are one of the reasons the religious right claims they are persecuted.
I have to disagree; the religious right’s been claiming that they were persecuted since long before America had heard of the Taliban. They claim they are persecuted because we do not allow them state sponsorship. That’s it.
KC
Well John, I just don’t think you get how dangerous those 44 Jews and 19 Buddhists are. I mean, Jews want to take your money, Buddhists want to toss it, a clear commie threat. I’m tellin’ you, we’re in for it man, if the Jews and the Buddhists take over.
Sanddog
Evangelical Christians are on the same moral level as radical Muslims. Sure, they’re not mass murdering innocents…now. That’s because we stomp their bigotted asses down into the dirt when they rear their ugly heads and start making demands. If keeping them out of power is persecution…well, then let’s persecute the hell out of them.
Jeff
Look, I live in the bluest part (Philly) of a blue state, i pretty much agree with everything John said about the Schiavo case and the pharmacy issue, and the rightward drift of the party in general, and except for weddings and funerals, I haven’t been to church in ten years.
Now that I’ve established my “I’m not a bible-thumping nut” street cred, let me try to give a partial explanation of why some christians may feel like bigotry against them is tolerated.
Look at the 2004 election when Christian conservatives, and their high turnout, were one of the biggest factors in Bush’s win.
Many people, without hesitation or fear of labeled prejudiced or whatever, immediately labeled them as dumb, and easily manipulated and all sorts of other stuff. Some of this was put out by people on the left who are generally considered to be pretty mainstream.
Contrast that with our Mayor’s race here (Philly) in 2003. Before the bug was found in John Street’s office, polls had him and Sam Katz pretty much neck and neck, and they also found that a lot of black voters would be staying home due to their dislike of Street.
After the bug was found, and the Street campaign, led by Street’s corrupt, race-hustling friend Ron White, played the whole “black mayor victimized by evil white Feds, led by Ashcroft” card, all of sudden Street lept ahead and won in a landslide, despite the fact that Street’s administration is currently being proven to be every bit as corrupt as people thought, although to be fair to Street, nothings touched him yet, probably because Ron White died before the trial started.
Now, what do you think would’ve happened had fairly mainstream people said that Street won due to dumb and easily manipulated black voters? Even if it’s true, nobody would’ve dared say it.
Ridge
Timekeeper-
I think the comparison between the Radical Clerics of the Right and the Taliban is apt.
No, its not stoning or cutting off hands, but that has never been the American Tradition.
The Taliban ruled based on their strict interpretation of the Koran; using it to structure society and judicial decisions (“shira”).
The Devil
Rick
Oh, the sky is falling.
Jumpin’ Jeebus on a pogo-stick, people. Get a grip. The threat lies in the nature of the state, and how it has been allowed to dominate society.
There will always be groups grasping for the brass ring. Better to keep it small, but that not the trend.
Cordially…
CaseyL
Ridge – But…but you’re saying that a pharmacist has more right to free exercise of religion than our brave boys in uniform!
I mean, my *god* man, if a lowly pill pusher can throw aside professional ethics and good citizenship behavior in pursuit of “Living His Faith and Making Others Live His Faith, Too” – then how can we be *less* deferential to those who actually put their lives on the line to defend our nation?!
Ridge
CaseyL-
CaseyL
Um…Ridge? I sure hope you realize I was being about as sarcastic as one can be without actually turning into a lye pit.
I do appreciate seeing the Military Oath. It’s nice to know the exact wording.
But, if the military really is being inflitrated by Inquisition mini-mes, I hope you realize the wording of the oath, and the stack of Bibles or whatever the oath is sworn on, will have about as much meaning and influence as the Oath to protect, defend and uphold the Constitution of the US that GWB swore on January 20, 2001. Which is to say, none whatsoever.
Lee
Holy (can I say that on this website w/o getting slammed as being a ‘fundamentalist?) mackeral… for a second, i thought i was linking to the democratic underground. reading these posts, you people are beginning to scare ME with your ‘evangelicals are out to get me’ attitudes. amazing. simply amazing….
Rick
Oh, great: the 2005 Theocracy Hunt continues at Balloon Juice, which the Alarmed Mr. Cole fails to notice bigger game:
http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/042005/soros.html
Plutocrats! Lefties used to be afraid of them (back when Bible-thumpin’, snake-handlin’, tongue-speakin’, foot-washin’ Baptists were part of the FDR through Jimmy Carter constituencies), but I guess they’re more useful now.
Cordially…
Lee
“Evangelical Christians are on the same moral level as radical Muslims. Sure, they’re not mass murdering innocents…now”
“I think the comparison between the Radical Clerics of the Right and the Taliban is apt.”
People, as Rick suggested, get a grip. Sarcasm is great–and i hope what i quoted was just that, but enough of the ‘Christians are as evil as radical muslims’ screed.
This attitude has permeated our society–thanks to the media, ect; to the effect normal that (non-blogging/albeit less informed(?)) people I speak with seem to be picking up on the bias. This country was founded on Christian principles, by Christians (primarily). Is this where the true argument lies?
Rick
Lee,
I’m afraid you’ve just ordered up a big glass of House Whine.
Rather than confront the religious right in, say, Iran, or the general ME, they worry about Pat Robertson’s 800′ Jesus.
Avoidance behavior, it is.
Cordially…
sharon
Lee —
No one’s saying that Christians are evil. In fact, no one’s saying that Muslims are evil.
What most people (except for Rick, who has his head up his ass per usual) are saying is that radicals are dangerous and radicals with combat training are scary and dangerous. The last thing we need is a new breed of military officers who think that Jews deserved the Holocaust for being Christ-killers.
And when groups like Focus on the Family complain that in a school that is 90% Christian, Christians are being discriminated against — well, that’s just stupid. But when people act like Focus on the Family make sense, well that’s kind of scary too.
chloeindia
“This country was founded on Christian principles, by Christians (primarily).”
Actually, the United States as an independent state was founded by Deists, not Christians. The first settlers were Christians, but that the US started out as a “Christian” nation is a very fundamental and dangerous misunderstanding running rampant in the country today. The founding fathers, in fact, worked very hard to ensure that one religion did not dominate.
Let’s start with the Declaration of Independence, Paragraph 2:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are empowered by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
The government derives its existence and legitimacy from the people. Nowhere does it say that government derives its powers from God, or from Christian traditions.
Then there is the Constitution. Article I of the Bill of Rights states:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government fro redress of grievances.”
Christianity is not, and never has been, the religion of this country.
Thomas Jefferson was quite critical of the Puritans and their persecution of the Quakers and other religious groups. As the architect of the Declaration of Independence and the Consitution, he was very careful not to enshrine Christianity in the tenents of American government. Mr. Jefferson would have been appalled at the actions of people such as Senator Frist. I think he would have considered Senator Frist’s actions seditious.
I recommend reading Jefferson’s writings to anyone who cares about the future of democracy in America.
Kimmitt
Rather than confront the religious right in, say, Iran, or the general ME,
Er, okay. It’s not like Amnesty International or the many other human rights-based lefty organizations don’t trumpet human rights abuses in the area to the high heavens.
The difference is that Christian fundies affect me directly while Muslim fundies, however dangerous, are all the way over there. It’s not unreasonable for us to want our country to be run well rather more than worrying about how other people’s countries are being run.
ketel
The whole “Christians are persecuted” line is the main problem and it’s bogus. They think they’re persecuted because the Bible tells them they will be. I think some actually like feeling persecuted (even when it’s not happening) because it reinforces their belief in the Bible. But it makes them overly defensive and creates something of a self-fulfilling prophecy. If they bitch enough and try to force their views down people’s throats, they will eventually meet with strong resistance.
It’s also a great tactic to stop anyone from complaining about dangerous things you might doing or to silence opposing views. Kind of like the cries of “liberal media” we’ve heard for the last 30 years, or the new attacks on our independent, mostly Republican appointed judiciary. Or David Horowitz’s attack on liberal academia.
And as for the guy up above who was talking about mainstream Dems calling the religious right suckers for continually following the Repubs, see this cover story of a recent American Conservative. They are being played like suckers and they’re getting pissed. As long as their radical demands are on the table, they shouldn’t be engaged by either side at all. It’s better that way.
Lee
yikes…Sharon, the fact that someone quoted christians as not mass murdering civilians, yet, is a sign that that these people are saying Christians are evil. And cloeindia, certianly people came to the US to be able to worship freely, but do you think they were primarily muslim? hindu? it’s fairly straightforward. ‘deist’? yeah, but… we could argue all day. the vast majority of our founders went to Church. and guess what, they didn’t follow that up by killing baby seals. and the sins of our great country are continually purged. sins caused by man, not religion. yep, even in the middle east. difference is, us krazy Christians are open to other views. if you DON’T acknowledge or believe this, you are the one that realy needs to examine your views.
CaseyL
Lee – I keep hearing about how “the US was founded on ‘Xtian principles.'”
Please, please, please point out your sources.
Where, for example, does the Bible talk about freedom of conscience/religion, freedom of expression, and freedom to petition the government to address grievances?
Where, for example, does the Bible talk about voting rights?
Where, for example, does the Bible talk about representative government?
Where, for example, does the Bible set out term limits, balance of power, checks and balances, and the different responsibilities of an Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branch of government?
Where, for example, does the Bible weigh in on states’ rights versus federalism (‘federalism’ in the original sense of the word)?
Oh, and also – just out of curiosity – tell me if you’ve ever heard of Athens.
Ridge
CaseyL-
Yes I recognized the sarcasm but did not want to pass up the chance to point out a few things. Including the willingness of the Radical Right to forgive any lapse in honor and tradition in order to win.
The military element is just one more brick . The espousal of “Natural Law or God’s Law” over man made is what’s scaring the bejesus out of me.
When folks start talking like that, then look out. They will use any means to win as they recognize no restraints on their actions. Those are man made restrictions and we “answer to a higher authority” The end justifies the means. W publicly rejected his “earthly” Father and all his works for some sort of Heavenly mandated obligation. Aside from the startling Oedipal implications, who knows that Heaven will tell W and his minions to do next.
R
chloeindia
Lee –
Check your history. The men who founded this country – not the Puritans who first settled it – the men who did the thinking to put the democratic form of government together, were Deists. Deists believe that creation was set in motion by a higher intelligence or being, but once set in motion, He/She stepped out of the picture and hasn’t interfered since. The Deist founders of America would roll over in their graves if they heard George Bush say that God intended him to be President and that his decisions were directed by God. They would have had him committed to the 18th century version of the looney bin. They would also have looked upon the actions of the radical Christian right as antidemocratic. The roots of this country are secular, regardless of whether or not the founders attended church.
A. Democrat
“Of 4300 students, 90% are Christian. That means that 44 Jews and 19 Buddhists (world renowned for their bigotry) are terrorizing 3870 Christians.”
John, check your numbers, 44 out of 4300 is just over 1% not just over 10%. 440 would be more like it, although I agree, 440 people running roughshod over another 3900 people just doesn’t sound credible.
John Cole
You are counting the 10% who are not Christian- You divide the 90% christian and the number of catholics. Check again.
A. Democrat
You are right, but what I’m saying is that 44 Jews and 20 some odd Buddhists does not make 10% of 4300 students, it only makes about 1.5 – 2% of that total number of students.
over it
The rest of the %10 may be atheists…or, God fobid, Satanists!! Really though, they could be anything other than Xtian, Jew, Buddhist.
;)
Jorge
I just wanted to point out that Focus on the Family, the 800 club, the Catholic Church, the Southern Baptist Conventions, etc are organizations made of people. Christianity, evangelical or other wise, is a sprititual belief system that is not owned by any group or person and was orginated by God, not any group or person. I understand the need for shorthand in writing, but as a Christian who believes that Jesus is my salvation but also disagrees strongly with James Dobson, Tom Delay, Jerry Falwell, Pope Benedict XVI etc, I would appreciate that these men be indentified as speaking for earthly organizations and not for the bible and God.
Lee
cloeindia: you could not be more wrong. the roots of this country ARE NOT secular. not even close. wait–we are talking United States? i’m talking about religious leanings… religious following… religious beliefs… It has not been until recently that the goodness of Christianity has been really under attack by the secularists in the country/world. And if you doubt the ‘goodness’, I will cite many examples of such. Yet all I hear in these posts are people such as yourself and CaseyL espousing fear and loathing of us. My friend, Soros scares me a heck of a lot more than GWB (or HILLclinton) scares me.
Kimmitt
the roots of this country ARE NOT secular. not even close.
Religion is mentioned precisely once in the Constitution before the Bill of Rights, in Article VI:
Clause 3: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
The founding document of our nation does not agree with your interpretation of history.
It has not been until recently that the goodness of Christianity has been really under attack by the secularists in the country/world.
Interesting — what would you refer to as one of the earliest examples of this?
My friend, Soros scares me a heck of a lot more than GWB (or HILLclinton) scares me.
Which of his statements and/or actions in particular are most frightening to you?
Lee
what scares me about soros? the fact that he has billions of dollars at his disposal… to use as he pleases (to rid the world of capitalism–to which i kinda subscribe). kimmit, you maybe a soros wannabe. if so, YOU scare me. socialism scares the crap out of me. cameras on street corners; baby seats for kids up to 80 lbs. new laws every time you take a piss. THAT scares me. I grew up in the south–very individualistic. being dictated to by the gov’t at every turn IS NOT comforting.
Lee
Kimmet:
do you prefer having a gov’t tell you how to do things? do you not think giving your time to others is not ‘good’ (as in missionary work, habitat for humanity, rebuilding/feeding disadvantaged groups of peoples)? recent ex: mother theresa. ok, that was too easy. how about the 1,000s that have come before her that were not as famous (my g-grandmother). doesn’t count b/c you’ve never heard of them? fair enough. get out of politics for a while and explore the positive things people do. life’s too short to be a pessimist.
Kimmitt
what scares me about soros? the fact that he has billions of dollars at his disposal… to use as he pleases (to rid the world of capitalism–to which i kinda subscribe).
George Soros is an investment fund manager — in particular, he specializes in currency trading. He makes his living through taking advantage of highly-developed capitalist structures. He has spent billions on assisting Eastern European countries in their transition away from Communism. I need you to please point me to a single action which Soros has taken — an article somewhere or something — in which he has attempted to promote anything other than capitalist economic structures.
do you prefer having a gov’t tell you how to do things?
Well, sure, when it massively reduces transactions costs. For example, I love it when the government tells me which side of the street to drive on, because then I can be pretty clear on how to avoid getting hit by oncoming traffic.
Eric
As a veteran of the 3rd Infantry Division, I suggest most of you read ‘Thunder Run’ before you make any more ignorant comments about the crazy evangelicals. Most of the commanding officers who formulated and executed that brilliant battle plan were evangelicals. Our military academies could do worse than have people who are not afraid of death, yet are also compassionate in charge of our war on terrorism.
As for the founders being Deists, I wish that myth would go away. Even granting that Thomas Jefferson was a Deist and Thomas Paine was an atheist, you have dozens of other men who helped bring about the Republic and craft the Constitution who were theistic christians. It is a plain and simple fact that the most cited document in the development of the constitution was the bible.
For CaseyL who misses the forest for the trees by asking where the bible talks about voting, you forget the necessary pre-cursor for voting. The idea that individuals are valuable. That radical idea is spelled out very well in ‘silent america’ by Bill Whittle. The bible established the idea that God wanted a relationship with each individual person, thus establishing their worth. Every other civilization and society believed that the state could do as it will, with no higher power to answer to. Quite frankly, I am more afraid of individuals who believe that they can exercise the power of the state without fear of any after-life review. This is why atheistic regimes murder and torture far more individuals than religious ones.
Lee
Kimmit–sure, soros is just an investment fund manager/speculator. and i crap gold nuggets.
i think it’s great you need govco telling you how not to get hit by cars… it’s dangerous world out there and who else you gonna trust.
CaseyL
“The bible established the idea that God wanted a relationship with each individual person, thus establishing their worth.”
Oh, lordy lordy me. What a load of crap.
For one thing, you’re saying that only God can give a person individual worth. You’re saying there’s nothing inherent in our humanity that gives us worth, that only a relationship with God makes us worthwhile.
So I guess Buddhists, Hindus, Shintoists, anamists, and pagans can join the agnostics and atheists over in the “No Individual Worth” category. Thanks a lot, kid.
Tell me, do you know *anything* about Xtian history? Does the word ‘Inquisition’ ring a bell? Do you know anything about the way the Spanish behaved when they conquered the New World? Ever hear of the Crusades? How about burning, drowning, and stoning witches and heretics to death? Ever hear of any of that?
Those weren’t aberrations, boyo. Xtians have always been ready, willing and eager to decide certain groups of people aren’t covered by Thou Shalt Not Kill. They’ve generally been pretty happy to dispossess, exile, torture and rape along the way to the killing.
No, dear, the idea that individuals have worth, dignity, and inalienable rights wasn’t fully enunciated until the Enlightenment. And the Enlightenment was made possible by the END of monolithic Christianity.
The philosophy of individualism and free will were NOT products of theology. They were reactions AGAINST theology.
If the Bible is the source of our personal liberty, why was it a crime punishable by death to translate the Bible into the vernacular language?
If the Bible is the source of our personal liberty, why were the Middle Ages so amazingly devoid of personal liberty?
If the Bible is the source of our personal liberty, where did the “divine right of kings” come from?
If the Bible is the source of our personal liberty, why was polytheistic Athens in 300 BCE a more free and democratic place than Christian Europe was for most of its history?
If the Bible is the source of our personal liberty, why was Moorish Spain a far, far more free, open and progressive place than Most Catholic Spain?
People who say we get our liberties and individualism from the Bible are ignorant fools. Christianity is incarmined with the blood of countless millions; it’s crusted and stinking with 2000 years of atrocities.
Go learn a little something about the history of your religion, and then get back to me.
Kimmitt
It is a plain and simple fact that the most cited document in the development of the constitution was the bible.
Cite? Because I thought it was Locke, Hobbes, and the other English political philosophers.
God is not mentioned in the Constitution. Prohbitions against any “religious test” and state establishment of religion are.
i think it’s great you need govco telling you how not to get hit by cars…
Wait, I need to establish the ground here — are you opposed to traffic laws? Because that’s cool; it just means that we don’t have anything resembling a common frame of reference.
bago
The bible is the most cited book in the constitution??
Bullshit.
Go here: http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html
That is the text of the constitution. Now, hit CTRL+F, to find, and type in the word “bible”.
Notice how nothing is found?
The constitution does not cite the bible. Period.
Wake up and smell the bullshit.
Eric
For bago, who obviously forgot to put on his reading glasses, let me put my salient point in all caps; ‘the most cited document in the DEVELOPMENT of the constitution was the bible.’ There were dozens of other constitutional framers besides Thomas Jefferson. Perhaps you should read them sometime. When developing, definding and describing the constitution these men, and even Jefferson to a lesser extent, repeatedly cited the bible. And yes, it was cited more times than Locke and all the other English philosophers combined. I never said that the bible is cited in the constitution itself.
As for CaseyL, are you really so dense as to believe it coincidental that the Enlightenment, the Age of Reason and the eventual ‘grand experiment’ that is our government, came out of a Judeo-Christian culture, as opposed to Islam, Buddhism or any other ‘ism’? The raving evangelical fanatic Nietzsche was correct when he predicted that the values that made Western Civilization great could not be divorced from the Judeo-Christian foundation that it came from and rested upon. The worst, totalitarian regimes in history came about as a result of the ‘progressive’ idea that societies could be scientifically managed for the better, now that God was dead. Nietzsche was vindicated. As for the worth of individuals of every other ‘ism’, I said nothing. Whatever system they develop that defines and gives worth is great, but that is not the impetus of the development of this country, the abolition movement, the suffrage movement and the civil rights movement. These, along with the baptist push in Britain to stop the slave trade at cannon-point, were all faith-based movements. There may have been individuals who were not christian, but they were not the driving force in numbers and influence.
A final thought, when doing a college paper on optimstic humanists, which is when I became a fan of Nietzsche’s writings, I concluded that they had largely faded from history. Their belief that, with God dead, they could speed up humanities evolution and solve various problems has evolved into the modern-day liberal. They may use the same language and mechanisms, but they are used for cynical, power-grabbing purposes. Yet after reading many of your posts, where you seem to believe that America can remain free and prosperous, even while getting rid of our Judeo-Christian foundation, I guess there are still a few of you out there. I salute you for your perseverance, but I believe you are a vanishing breed. Even Anthony Flew has been forced to abandon his belief in evolution which was the foundation of his belief in atheism. He’s not a theist, but he has been forced to admit that something designed DNA.
CaseyL
“As for CaseyL, are you really so dense as to believe it coincidental that the Enlightenment, the Age of Reason and the eventual ‘grand experiment’ that is our government, came out of a Judeo-Christian culture, as opposed to Islam, Buddhism or any other ‘ism’?”
Well, then I guess slavery must have been a good thing, because without it, there never would have been an abolitionist movement.
It didn’t ‘come out’ of a Christian culture (and don’t you drag my people into the hell that was pre-Enlightenment Europe; that wasn’t a ‘Judeo-‘ culture at all) it was a reaction *against* the Christian culture.
Eric
Sorry CaseyL, I was irritated at bago and extended it to you. You are definitely not dense, but you are wrong if you believe that individual rights and worth would evolve from the other religions out there. Islam has a governmental philosophy. It is called shar’ia. They regulate the individual for the good of the Muslim community. Hinduism is a caste system that was created by elites, for elites. Buddhism has no concept of individual worth, since it focuses on denial of self. As for Judeo-Christian, the two systems have many of the same characteristics whether you acknowledge them or not. Were Jews persecuted? Yes. So also were my spiritual ancestors, the Donatists. This sect was anti-hierarchical and insisted on adult baptism. How do you think they fared after the Roman Catholic Church was formed at the council of Nicaea? Roman Catholicism is not reflective of true christianity, since they openly state that their pope gives them the authority to ignore biblical teaching. It’s hard to follow Christ when you ignore the words that He spoke and the account of the life that He lived. Am I saying that all Catholics are going to hell? No. Since many are reading things into what I say, I’ll add that up front.
bago
Oh, in the development of the constitution they cited the bible a whole bunch.
Ok, here’s the federalist papers:
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa00.htm
The premier set of documents about the creation of the US constitution. Search them. ERO references to the bible in the federalist papers.
So who are you going to believe, someone who can’t even find a single citation of the “most-cited” references, or your lyin eyes and the US constitution.
over it
“Islam has a governmental philosophy. It is called shar’ia. They regulate the individual for the good of the Muslim community.”
Hmmmm….seems to me that that sounds a whole heckuva lot like what the Radical Xtian Republicans are attempting to do here and now. Attempting to use biblical law as the litmus test for U.S. law(and lawmakers).
When you get right down to it….how would a nation run strictly by the laws laid out in the Bible differ from a nation ruled by sharia?
Take a look at the oft quoted book of Leviticus. ‘Man laying with man’ is not the only thing that is punishable by death. Should all of the biblical laws be followed? If not, then who gets to pick and choose? And, if they all should be followed…they are equally as radical as the sharia.(Please note that I am not defending the sharia…I do not believe in religious rule of any nature)
Radicals are radicals….no matter what they happen to adhere to. They are all a danger to free society.
Eric
Over it, since this is a discussion about christians, please show me the christian sect that still believes in the governing authority of the Old Testament and would use Leviticus to implement religious law. Last I checked, the supplanting of the Old Testament by the New Testament is why they are christians, rather than Jews.
bago, perhaps you should check out the “Americans United for Church and State” website for Tennessee. They even admit, “While there can be little doubt that Christian values shaped the thinking of the Founders to a significant extent, it is wrong to jump to the conclusion that the Founders were almost all ‘orthodox evangelical Christians.'”. I agree with them that most of the founders were not evangelicals, since there were only a dozen or so. However, they even admit that Christian values shaped the thinking to a significant extent. As for the references, I am basing this off of the study by University of Houston political science professors who confirmed that 34 % of the quotes were bible citations. You may argue with their motives, methodology or whatever, but that is their conclusion and the only quibbling I have read, is that they should have better refined what constituted a significant quote. There’s your fact and reference. As for reading the constitution, maybe you should point out the ‘separation of church and state’ clause in the constitution. I can’t find it. The fact that Thomas Jefferson wrote about it in one of his letters and an activist, FDR appointed Supreme Court discovered it as a constitutional proviso does not mean it is actually in the constitution itself. Yes, it may have been progressive philosophy translated into constitutional law, but philosophies can change, as we are currently witnessing. Finally, I’m glad you read the Federalist papers. They also do not contain the phrase ‘separation of church and state’, just like the constitution. The establishment clause was to prevent a single christian denomination from gaining supremacy, not to undermine the christian foundation and character of the nation. In fact, that is exactly Thomas Jefferson’s context in that letter to the baptists, where he mentions separation of church and state.
Eric
How can I forget one of my favorite quotes? Old age is definitely starting to hit me. I might as well end it on my 30th birthday.
“Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other.
over it
Eric-
Where, other than Leviticus(or other OT writings), is homosexuality bibilically denounced? If the denouncement is not found in NT writings(and assuming that Xtians only use the NT)….where do Xtians get their aversion to it?
I do not pretend to be a biblical scholar, but, I have never heard any NT quotes against homosexuality. If I am wrong…I am wrong. No biggie. However, I believe that the idea that most Xtians use ONLY the NT in their belief structure is more of an ideal not a reality.
Big picture, I do not really care one way or the other. It is my belief that any government run by religion is inherently tainted…especially if run by the radicals of said religion.
Eric
Good question, over it. In 1 Corinthians 6: 9-10, Paul gives a long list of people who will not inherit the kingdom of God. This list includes homosexuals and sodomites. The important verse is verse 11, “And such WERE some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God”. At the time, the Greek culture, and, to a lesser extent the Roman culture, was very decadent and hedonistic. Many of the christians were guilty of adultery, others were guilty of homosexuality. But that is why Christ commanded repentance and warned of destruction if we do not, in Luke 13:3-5.
You guys keep complaining about Dr. Dobson, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. These guys were nobodys, politically, until homosexual activists decided to re-define what the state considered marriage to be. In case you haven’t missed it, marriage between a man and a woman is far beyond an ‘evangelical issue’. Even Oregon, a left-wing bastion added it to their constitution with a healthy 57-43 margin. Since those 3 and others tapped into the widespread opposition to GBLT marriage, they now have increased power and clout. I have several friends who have multiple types of relationships, including a female friend who lives with 5 guys and sleeps or has slept with 3 of them. But their relationship is not marriage. If they want to establish powers-of-attorney and living will documents giving each other marital benefits and rights, more power to them. But they don’t consider what they are doing to be marriage and are not pushing for it. Hence, the lack of political christian effort to combat their lifestyle. Marriage being between one man and one woman is so fundamental, it easily predates Judaism and the other monotheistic religions. Even Greece and Rome, when you went below the priviliged, hedonistic, classes, did not consider two men to be married. Some Greeks considered homosexual love superior to marriage, but they did not try to redefine it as marriage.
bago
So, There’s no direct citations you can point to in the constitution, the federalist papers, or anywhere except for a website for “the americans for a united church and state”, an organization you can’t even hyperlink to, that might just be a teensey bit bised in this race.
Show me a bible quote in the constitution or in the federalist papers.
Here, let me quote from the constitution itself.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion….
That’s going to be a problem for the people wanting a united church and state. That’s also a fairly clear wall between church and state, that whole forbidding law on the subject thing.
Eric
Sorry bago, I didn’t spell it out correctly. It’s Americans United for the SEPARATION of church and state, so they agree with your agenda, but at least they have the intellectual honesty to admit christianity was a huge influence in the development of the constitution. As for finding things, perhaps you have heard of google.
Let me expand on my favorite quote and see if any of you answer it:
over it
Eric- Thanks for the info. Like I said, I did not know one way or the other. My point is still the same though. The reason I did not know was because the only verses I had heard Xtians quote on the subject were from OT. Which means that there are boatloads of ‘Xtians’ that do not adhere to your belief(which I happen to agree with) that the NT(per Jesus) was to ‘supplant’ the OT. Know what I mean? And, further, it is my opinion that it is these ‘Xtians'(the radicals) that are causing so much grief these days. You may share many of their beliefs….but something tells me you are not fully on board with them.
My beef is not with the Faith(or the Faithful for that matter). My issue lies with the radicals of ANY faith and their attempts to pressure government(and all citizens, Xtian or not) to kow-tow to their agenda.
Be it the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, or any other religious writing….it does not need to be used in the running of our nation. Period.
At this point….I am not looking to argue. So, we disagree. We will probably always disagree. Peace.
Kimmitt
I was unaware that de Tocqueville or John Quincy Adams were deeply involved in the creation of the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, or Constitution. The things you learn on blogs.
Eric
Kimmit, John Quincy Adams and de Tocqueville are being used as witnesses since de Tocqueville came to study us strange folks across the pond and determine what makes us great and John Quincy Adams was raised in revolution and knew its people and philosophy. Since the debate is about the character and philosophy of the people who wrote, developed and implemented the constitution, I feel their insights are important. They’re a lot smarter than I am and they lived a lot closer to the time of the founding than any of us. For me, they are reliable witnesses, although you seem to disagree.
Over it, I’m sorry I probably won’t hear from you again. I agree with Nietzsche, John Quincy Adams and George Washington that America cannot survive as a free nation, a republic, without christian principles as the anchor and foundation. Alexis de Tocqueville, after studying us, determined that the biggest difference between the French Revolution, that failed, and the American Revolution, that succeeded, was that liberty and christianity were not considered enemies in America, but they were in Europe. The French government was far more secular than the American government. He believed that is why it failed, and I do as well. Alexis de Tocquevilles comments are very striking since he is not known as a religious individual. If you haven’t please read Kim du Toits excellent essay, “Morality, Manners And The Law” from his website. It was posted on July 26, 2004. In it he states,
“Human behavior is governed best by observing the three behavioral codes in the hierarchy
Eric
Oops, I stretched. Nietzsche believed that the death of the christian God, with no God in the cradle, was far more likely to produce a horrible culture and a more dangerous future. However, he should not have been included in the list of people who thought that the marriage of christian principles and civil government was necessary to preserve liberty. Thank you all for forcing me to edit myself better.
Jealous Buddhist
I hate Jesus because he was so skinny.
Slick Willie
I think we should follow the Jews’ lead. Have a country all to ourselves. I mean, but not like oppress anyone else, of course.
We can give Jews and Muslims minority rights in our country the way they give minority rights to Christians and Muslims in their country.
I mean,after all, we are fighting Iraq to keep Jews dominant is Israel, why are they fighting so hard to marginalize us Christians in America? And for the atheists, they can have all of Europe. They do now, don’t they?
Yeah, I know, it will make Jews more uncomfortable in America, but they won’t be any more uncomfortable than Christians are in Israel, the Jewish homeland, right? Israel is a democracy, right? So what’s the problem?
M. Simon
It is passed time that Christians got down with the old time religion.
If it was good enough for Jesus why isn’t it good enough for them?
M. Simon
The Old Testament is not all there is to the Old Time Religion. It is modified by the oral law.
M. Simon
The #1 cause of the rise in prison population is prohibition.
A similar problem was noted during our previous romance with prohibition as a substance abuse cure.
We wised up in ’32 and changed the laws in ’33. Seventy two years later and we are no smarter. In fact that kind of lag makes us very stupid. Incapable of learning.
M. Simon
Eric,
Jews supplanted the Old Testament with the oral law.
Supplanting is not a scheme dreamed up by Christians. It is an old practice stolen from the Jews.
It is why Jesus found an audience among Jews. They had a history of change.
Funny thing is these day Christians knowe nothing of their origins.
Past time for that old time religion.