crossposted from Liberal Street Fighter
Fundamentalist, conservative religion threatens to destroy this nation, this great experiment of the Enlightenment. Sadly, though, it’s hard to speak out against the imprecations of the fascist theocrats who have seized power through the Republican party. Religion, you see, is on an elevated plane. One must speak carefully about it, lest one offend everyone who considers themselves religious. Tender skinned, those who’ve been “saved”, those who have an eternity in Heaven to look forward to when they leave this mortal plane, this great gift from which they seek such eager escape. While they’re here, though, obeisance must be paid. The religious right, of course, hides behind this social taboo, all the while attacking anybody who doesn’t conform to their beliefs. “Good” christians act as a protective shield, slapping down anybody who tries to attack these dangerous radicals where their strength lies … in their dogma. After all, they say, we must “respect” other’s relgious beliefs.
Well, some of us must disagree with this naive and dangerous demand. In fact, we find that no less a respected man than Bill Moyers finds that this is A Time For Heresy:
Now when a young boy in the tribe was ready to become a man, a ritual took place. Wearing masks, the elders would kidnap him and take him into the woods, tie him down, and with a flint knife slice the underside of his penis. It was painful, but the medicine man said this is how you became a man.
It meant shedding one’s innocence. At the end of the ritual one of the masked men dipped the bullroarer in the boy’s blood and thrust it in his face, simultaneously removing his mask so the boy could see it’s not a god at all – it’s just one of the old guys. And the medicine man would whisper, “We make the noises.”
Ah, yes – it’s not the gods after all. It’s just the old guys – Uncle George, Uncle Dick, Uncle Don. The “noise” in the woods is the work of the old guys playing gods, wanting you to live in fear and trembling so that you will look to them to protect you against the wrath to come. It takes courage to put their truth-claims to the test of reality, to call their bluff.
We need such courage today. This is a time for heresy. American democracy is threatened by perversions of money, power, and religion. Money has bought our elections right out from under us. Power has turned government “of, by, and for the people” into the patron of privilege. And Christianity and Islam have been hijacked by fundamentalists who have made religion the language of power, the excuse for violence, and the alibi for empire. We must answer the principalities and powers that would force on America a stifling conformity. Either we make the heretical choices that will inspire us to renew our commitment to America’s deepest values and ideals, or the day will come when we will no longer recognize the country we love.
We cannot fight this dangerous social movement without attacking the battery that powers it, and the battery that powers it is its dogmas. Sadly, though, as this twisted fundamentalism has appropriated the words and images used by other believers, it is nearly impossible to confront them without running the risk that doing so may give offense to others. It is imperative, though, that we not let this stop us. In fact, we can look at religious leaders in the past to see that the words and images are ephemeral. It is deed and actions that must motivate us, that we must use to demonstrate our allegiance to whatever it is we hold sacred. Moyers again:
So, my friends at Wake Forest, there is work to do. These charlatans and demagogues know that by controlling a society’s most emotionally-laden symbols, they can control America, too. They must be challenged. Davidson Loehr reminds us that holding preachers and politicians to a higher standard than they want to serve has marked the entire history of both religion and politics. It is the conflict between the religion of the priests – ancient and modern – and the religion of the prophets.
It is the vast difference between the religion about Jesus and the religion of Jesus.
Yes, the religion of Jesus. It was in the name of Jesus that a Methodist ship caulker named Edward Rogers crusaded across New England for an eight-hour work day. It was in the name of Jesus that Francis William rose up against the sweatshop. It was in the name of Jesus that Dorothy Day marched alongside auto workers in Michigan, brewery workers in New York, and marble cutters in Vermont. It was in the name of Jesus that E.B. McKinney and Owen Whitfield stood against a Mississippi oligarchy that held sharecroppers in servitude. It was in the name of Jesus that the young priest John Ryan – ten years before the New Deal – crusaded for child labor laws, unemployment insurance, a minimum wage, and decent housing for the poor. And it was in the name of Jesus that Martin Luther King Jr. went to Memphis to march with sanitation workers who were asking only for a living wage.
This is the difference. OF versus ABOUT, acts rather than creeds … this is the difference between those who have used their faith or beliefs as a call to do good, to spread freedom, to bring succor to those in need, and those who use their creeds to bludgeon and to punish others. Many of those in the Democratic Party, frightened by the continued successes of the Republicans, fall into the trap of aping their tactics.
We must mock the religious right. Deride the religious right. Drag the absurdities of their ridiculous theologies into the light, show the contradictions and the damage caused by these backwards superstitions. TRUE faith, after all, cares nothing of the mocking of us athiests, or the catcalls coming from the believers in other faiths … it is only those of weak faith who can’t take comfort in their beliefs. It is important that we attack the religious right at the source of their strength, because their brainwashing and lies and cons damage those who can least afford it. Whether it is poor whites being fed misogynistic bullshit or poor blacks being fed homophobic bile, these sick and twisted versions of Christianity allow the Republicans to redirect people as political foot soldiers, all while they set about dismantling the underpinnings of our society in the service of making the obscenely wealthy even richer, as Joe Bageant spells out in is inimitable style:
My brother’s church is what is known as an “independent Baptist church.” Independent enough of your world and mine that he says things like, “I helped cast out my first demon yesterday, Joey. I wish you could have been there.” Actually, I do too. Independent fundamentalist churches are wild and woolly places theologically, whose characteristics and belief systems can accommodate just about anything “Preacher Bob” or “Pastor Donnie” or whoever can come up with from misreading the Good Book. The “clergy” arise from within the church ranks and are usually poorly educated. (Hell they went to public school in America, didn’t they?) This has always been true of American fundamentalism since the backwoods stump church days, and it continues to provide the nation with charismatic literalists whose reading and abstracting ability is minimal to zilch. Combine that with 30 years of Christian school growth, and you can begin to understand how we got in such deep shit today…why so many states find themselves revamping their educational systems so that the fables of Adam and Eve may replace Darwin and we can all be reassured that David slew Goliath despite the complete lack of evidence of either’s existence.
Yet, look across the congregations of these churches and you see these aren’t bad people. They are neither a minority nor a cult in this nation, given their millions, and are simply what the ordinary Americans are today—working class people whose interior lives were clobbered by the Twentieth Century. Unaware of it as they are, theirs is part of a global revival of fundamentalism, which emerged when triumphant materialism arrived in the wake of the enlightenment. Poor dear enlightenment! So brief! Then smashed by two world wars, Verdun, Dresden, Auschwitz, the gulags, nuclear weapons, impending ecological disaster… Not that anyone in this church ever heard of the enlightenment. Two generations of them were raised in Christian schools amid the unyielding hostility and fear of the Cold War and declining real wages and education. Is it any wonder they are so attracted to the Apocalypse both materially and literally? From home as they know it on this planet, you look out the window what you see is the approaching end of the fucking world.
In response, they long ago collected themselves in what amount to mental and theological compounds, built thousands of Christian institutions and schools and trained two generations for a theocratic state. Fundamentalist thinker Gary North announced decades ago, “We will train up a generation of people who know that there is no religious neutrality, no neutral law, no neutral education, and no neutral civil government. Then they will get busy in constructing a Bible-based social, political and religious order which finally denies the religious liberty of the enemies of God.”
Well, they’ve done it.
They’ve done it, only they’re not done yet. It’s not just gay marriage, or abortion. They want to invade our bedrooms, including that of married couples. Sex, after all, is filthy. Human life enjoyed, pleasures indulged, are sinful, and it will be the business of the state, THEIR state, to make us conform with their dogmas, their prejudices, their own hatred of their own essential humanity. Militarism, however, is fine for these Christian soldiers. How can we not confront them, and how can those Christians who claim to reject them not see that it is the dogma that must be attacked, that we must do so BECAUSE they have taken words and symbols that mean things to people and twisted them?
One of the great things that came out of the Reformation was the eventual emergence of the idea that it was a person’s own conscience that was the center of religious belief, not the words, not the images, not the dogmas and vestments and long lists of rules. Moyers again:
Many Baptists are fundamentalists; they believe in the absolute inerrancy of the Bible and the divine right of preachers to tell you what it means. They also believe in the separation of church and state only if they cannot control both. The only way to cooperate with fundamentalists, it has been said, is to obey them. James Dunn and Bill Leonard are not that kind of Baptist. They trace their spiritual heritage to forbearers who were considered heretics for standing up to ecclesiastical and state power on matters of conscience. One of them was Thomas Helwys, who, when Roman Catholics were being persecuted by the British crown, dared to defend the Catholics. Helwys went to jail, and died there, for telling the king of England, King James – yes, of the King James Bible – that “Our Lord the King has no more power over their [Catholic] conscience than ours, and that is none at all.”
Baptists helped to turn that conviction into America’s great contribution to political science and practical politics – the independence of church and state. Baptists in colonial America flocked to Washington’s army to fight in the Revolutionary War because they wanted to be free from sanctioned religion. When the war was won they refused to support a new Constitution unless it contained a Bill of Rights that guaranteed freedom of religion and freedom from religion. No religion was to become the official religion; you couldn’t be taxed to pay for my exercise of faith. This was heresy because, while many of the first settlers in America had fled Europe to escape religious persecution at the hands of the majority, once here they made their faith the established religion that denied freedom to others. Early Baptists considered this to be tyranny. Said John Leland: “All people ought to be at liberty to serve God in a way that each can best reconcile to their own consciences.”
After all, isn’t that basic, most American of ideas in line with this admonition of the Son of Man, you know, the one the right claims to worship? Didn’t He say:
And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. 6But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. 7And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. 8Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him. Matthew 6: 5-8
I read the transcript of Bill Moyer’s speech this afternoon. As usual with his work, I was struck by how he can take a potentially explosive issue, such as religion in America, and talk about it in a manner that is respectful and constructive as well as truthful. Unfortunately you do not have that talent.
thank you for making my point.
I knew I could count on you, or one of the other “you must GENUFLECT to religion” cultists.
No. Thank YOU for making MY point.
and of course, you didn’t read what I wrote, or caught my point, but that isn’t a suprise either.
I loved Moyers piece when I read it yesterday and I love this one also. Something tells me that Moyers would too.
Maybe your god is listening Mary and he will reward you for demanding bloggers tiptoe around religion. Maybe reward you for leaving the insulting comment with the unbeliever.
Q: What are you going to do after fighting the righteous battle?
A: I’m going to Heaven World!
While Karl Marx was wrong about a lot of things, he was right about one thing. “Religion is the opiate of the masses.” We can modify that statement today to say fundamentalist religion of any stripe, Christian, Muslim or Jewish is the crack cocaine of the masses.
Madman hit the nail on the head. Religion of or about Jesus. The religion of Jesus was to contrast God’s imperial rule (what the crusty old duffers who wrote the King James version call the kingdom of god because, of course, they wanted to kiss King James’s ass) with the Roman empire. And then to ask, you choose? The religion about Jesus is a triumphalist turning of Jesus on his head, best exemplified by the Jesus in the cartoon in Madman’s piece. This is, by the way, also the Jesus of the lunatic last book in the New Testament, Revelation.
Dotted with historical infochunks, a big gooey cookie of a rant, and as always, excellent word writing!
Religion is perhaps the most useful tool of the warlord, and its toolhood gets a boost from the very human instinct to seek supernatural help in the face of natural danger, whether the danger is real or a creation of the warlord himself.
While religious studies takes one into the most complex labyrinths of human thought, from basic psychology to the outer limits of metaphysics, which don’t exist because of infinity anyway, the dressing up of simple animism, the purest and bestest of all theologies, in layers of manmade sequins and tulle, has done no favor for the uneducated man, who hies to Brother Donnie with the snakes or Mullah Abdullah with the barking about the sins of kite flying, and the warlords chuckle all the way to the bank.
thanks!
Madman, you have written what has been in the back of my mind for quite some time. I was thinking about calling them on their hypocrisy, but that wouldn’t do it…the religious right’s answer would be to “Pray…Do God’s will.” Or some other bullshit like that. And the thing is, the right thinks that we are boxed into a corner by (gasp!) daring to question the will of God–at least that is the language their die-hard supporters understand.
But, just demonstrating hypocrisy won’t work, as they have a pat answer. Mocking them and pointing at the problems in society caused by their so-called beliefs will!
It just seems to me that too many want to take the high road and try to out-class these nutcases (for lack of better words). And it doesn’t work, unless we want to keep on supporting so-called classy losers who don’t give a damn anyway. Hell w/that nonsense!! IMO, if you don’t respect me, I don’t respect you!
We need to play to win!!!
Heck, I am a Christian (admittedly a very unconventional one) and as far as I’m concerned the religious right has made such a mockery of Christ’s message that they deserve to have their “religion” of death and bloodlust mocked.
From your description, I would guess that I know a few people who share your unconventional Christian beliefs. And, I am wondering if those are the people that really count. Seems to me that there are some who have followed blindly and have woke up. But, the few that I know appear to be conflicted by what their religion is saying, their personal beliefs and calues, and the reality of the world today.
The mocking is long overdue!
To a large degree I credit an anarchist friend of mine for turning me on to the idea that Christianity didn’t have to involve some sort of strict authoritarianism. That cat did a better job of actually living his values than anyone I’ve known – of course this is the same cat who turned me on to Malcom X, Chomsky, a bunch of English hardcore punk bands (think Flux of Pink Indians, CRASS, etc.), zines, and nonviolent direct action. In other words someone whom I now as a parent would consider a good influence. 🙂
Thing is like my old friend, I almost never mention my religion (this will be one of the rare times when I will here). There’s no need to – I’d rather focus my energies on more pressing issues than whose God is better, ad nauseum. And when I read Madman’s diary, I could dig on where that cat was coming from. Nothing to be offended by as he was saying something that I’d been thinking for ages.
thanks!
No prob! Keep on keepin’ on. 🙂
although their numbers are large, we have the sheep effect to account for. All it takes is for Fundamentalism/MegaChurches/RadicalRightWingTurkeys to fall into a little disfavor and the whole thing will unwind. The sheep will go find the next hot thing. My sister beat them to it by a few years, but she’s smarter than most.
I swear, I am a Christian and all I ever see are people running around with their damn fish and fundy bumperstickers (oh oh and bibles on the dashboard) and it makes me want to gag. There is way too much Pharisee’ing going on and very little private talks with G-d.
What the hell do you need a bible on your dashboard for? Just in case you want to look up a quick passage at a stop light?
No, they need it to “assure themselves” that if they die, they can reach for the Bible, read a passage of scripture and ensure they are going to heaven. Please, it is show and tell game, not true belief in God! I guess they are worried that they might “forget something” since their minds are so wrapped up in “converting” everyone so to misquote equals damnation!
Most of what the fundamentalists practice is not a religious spirituality, but superstition and magical thinking.
There is a huge difference between a gut level connectedness to the universe, and reliance on magic words, magic talismans, and magic spells.
We can speak with spiritually religious folks because their ability to think critically has not been sacrificed on the alter of magic. The Talisman Taliban Fundimentalists dare not think about anything too deeply, or their house-of-cards belief system will collapse.
I really like that phrase. I think that hits it just right. They are a superstitious lot. I believe it comes from not having any understanding of the world about them, due to a lack of real interest. In some cases they lack the ability to understand it. I have met these types. They went to parochial school with me, lived with me in the Navy. No curiosity, no ambition, no desire. The real drones of society.
My wife says they are golems.
It is their own insecurity that makes them show off in that manner–See, look at me, I can afford a new SUV because God blesses me with money because I am a Christian! And, they think they are spreading the word. (Wonder how much fundie churches make off the bumperstickers?)
There are more than a few that actually think like that~!
BTW, Medicare D(isaster) is the perfect example of the hypocrisy of the right that needs to be called on.
And you have given me a great idea for a diary–thanks!!!
Madman, I have to admit you’ve hit one of my hot buttons, too. First, here’s where we seem to agree – there’s a dangerous, and possibly large, element in the religious right that is trying to usurp both mainline Protestant denominations and our government. Let’s oppose them. Where we find charlatans, let’s expose them. But it’s easy to read your rant and get the impression – intended or not – that you’re indicting Christianity on the grounds that these operatives are active. That’s where I get off the bus.
I count myself a liberal, both politically and theologically. I also count myself a religious person. You can find a reasonably good summary of my point of view on liberal religion here. So here’s the hot button. Every time someone on the left makes a statement equating religion (particularly Christianity) with the cynical political manipulations of elements of the religious right, you’re advancing their cause by weakening the voice of liberal religion.
I’ve no political issue with religious folk that are thoughtfully, sincerely conservative (or orthodox) theologically. I may disagree with them on doctrine, but if they’re sincere and respect the Establishment Clause, I say God bless them. The suspects that hoodwink unsuspecting masses for economic or political gain are another matter. How do you tell the difference? By their fruits.
but you see, that’s the deal. How do you attack their beliefs without talking about them? You can’t do it without using words and symbolism that other people find sacred as well. That’s why they’ve been so damned successful.
You can’t respond if everything you say is prefaced by somekind of social boilerplate:
Now, of course you need to understand that I’m not talking about GOOD Christians, BUT …
You’re done, right there. I think I made it quite clear that I’m talking about the right, yet some see the pictures and read the words and they … stop … reading. That is the danger. That’s what Bill Moyers was talking about. I’m sorry that I’m not as elegant as him, but we aren’t an elegant people. The struggle against the right will go nowhere if other believers don’t grow thicker skin, because they use YOUR attachment to the words and symbols as a way to hide themselves from retaliation.
IMO, hitting a hot button is another way of proving a point. And, if that needs to be done, it needs to be done.
I agree. Too much tip-toeing around things these days.
Can’t tip-toe…well, you can if you are content to lose and do the “wait till whenever” mantra again.
People have to be called on bullshit.
Said it upthread and will say it again–have to play to win. And, if you have to get in people’s faces to do so, so be it.
. . . .and parallels the case of Islam, which gets tarred by the brush of “fundamentalist extremism” due to an effective violent minority having seemingly appropriated the religion.
Likewise, this appears to be the case with Christianity in this country (and in some others as well). An effective — and in some cases, violent — minority (you would say) have seemingly appropriated the religion.
As far as this disinterested observer of professors of faith, whether Islam or Christianity (since those are the two I’m discussing) is concerned, unless and until both religions’ organized and recognized leaders strongly, consistently, and perpetually hold the fundamentalists accountable for their alleged perversions of these faiths, then these religions richly deserve all the scathing criticisms they receive.
I am sick of the wishy-washy apologists who say, “Oh, those people aren’t real Christians,” yet allow these non-Christians to remain members of organized Christian churches. Those churches also fail to excommunicate and punish the fundamentalist leaders of (for lack of a better word) perverse churches, who, certainly evidenced by their words and deeds, can’t be real Christians or Christian churches, either.
You who are “real” Christians can’t have it both ways: expect observers to accept your judgment of who a Christian is and isn’t and accept your word that the “unreal” Christians don’t represent your faith while doing nothing about the ones you say aren’t!
As long as “real” Christians and Muslims allow the fundamentalist perverts of their religions to remain acknowledged and unpunished members of their faiths — in effect, hijack their religions — the so-called harsh judgments against those faiths will continue. And rightly so!
the problem with what you suggest is that neither Islam nor Protestant Christianity are hierarchical, meaning that there is nothing like a pope, or one single authority who can do these things.
This came up in another thread recently on the subject of Islam, your recognized scholar is my crackpot, and vice versa, and your supreme authority is my self appointed bunch of babblers, so any discussion along those lines will quickly deteriorate into is not is too.
And this is also true of Christianity. The Presbyterians may have some supreme body to which all Presbyterian churches may be accountable in some way, but this body has no authority whatsoever over the doings of, for instance, the Primitive Baptists.
So if the Primitive Baptists suddenly take it into their heads to announce to their own particular faithful that cherry cheesecake is a satanic food that causes promiscuity, there is not really anything that the Presbyterian Supreme Authority, if in fact such exists, can do about it. I guess some Presbyterian churches in areas afflicted with large numbers of Primitive Baptists could make a point of serving cherry cheesecake at their suppers, but they can’t really excommunicate the Primitive Baptists from anything, and are likely to regard it as not really necessary for them to go on the Leslie Blitzer show to emphasize the deep respect and tolerance that Presbyterians everywhere have for cherry cheesecake, since about the only people who would feel that such an action would be necessary are not really people that would be comforted by it or can be talked to about anything anyway.
that’s all true, but there are some people in Islam that have the authority to speak on major issues. People like Sheikh Tantawi, Sheik Abdul Aziz al-Sheik, and Grand Ayatollohs: Ali Sistani, Jawad Tabrizi, Ali Khamenei, Kazem al-Haeri, Sadiq Rohani, Muhammad Fazel Lankarani, Ali Montazeri, Mohammad Hussein Fadlullah, and Sadiq Hussaini Shirazi.
When leaders like these make rulings they carry a lot of weight.
Of course, they do not agree on everything. Generally speaking, they are very protective of their status and are not inclined to allow any revisionism to creep into century old ways of interpreting the law.
Tantawi is fond of calling people ignoramuses, or whatver is translated as ignoramuses from Arabic. I see he just got chummy with Prince Charles and gave him an honorary degree.
“authority,” but someone else’s list might be different, and in the absence of one single unquestioned official authority, neither of you would be either “right” or “wrong.”
From my personal point of view, because I have been and am privileged to know many Christians, who while they may belong to different sects, and have beliefs that differ from each other on this or that, they are all good intelligent and sensible people and it is not necessary for any of them to tell me that Franklin Graham or Jerry Falwell are wackos, much less go on TV and announce it.
Now I also know people, both in and outside of the US who do not really know any Christians, much less have any Chrisitian friends with whom they sit regularly, have into their homes, nor do their descendants have any Christian friends who come to their houses for sleepovers, or invite them to theirs, and I am sorry to say that some of those folks tend to lump all Christians into Jerry Falwell’s pot, or the pot of whatever wacked out missionary group may have most recently insulted them, these people have their minds made up, they don’t know anything about Christian theology, they have never read the Bible, they have no interest in doing so, they will grudgingly accept that Jesus is a Prophet of God because the Koran says it is, that is if they have actually read the Koran in a language they speak, which is also unlikely, and their opinion of Christians and Christianity is pretty much that Christians exist to kill Muslims and they will point to the crusade theatres to prove it.
Telling them that this is not Christianity does no good, it would do no good if the head honcho of the Presbyterians, the Archbishop of Canterbury and whatever your list of Christian scholars who have “authority” to speak on this matter were all to go on Pakistan TV and denounce everything from the occupation of Palestine to Abu Ghraib to US atrocities in Waziristan.
It is my hope that they, and their American counterparts, will all modernize and educate themselves and obtain an advanced psychology, but this is something that only they can do.
We can make resources available to them, and there are, the same internets exist in Pakistan as here, and some of the people I am talking about have internet access, and have the resources to do all that modernizing of their thinking, but it is not their wish.
They have their views, they have their beliefs, and again, like their American counterparts, because when it is all said and done, people are not really different here there or anywhere, they simply do not have an interest in changing those views, or listening to anybody whose beliefs are so different from theirs.
I wish it were not so, it is not my favorite human characteristic, but what people of good will can do is just work around those folks, and do whatever they can to improve things despite them, because only they can decide to change their own beliefs.
just so we are clear here, you are comparing the list of scholars I provided with Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson?
I could have listed MIMRI’s favorite whack jobs and bin Laden’s personal favorites. That would make your comparison a lot more accurate.
Sistani, for example, is no pope, but he is no Falwell either. If he says mayonaisse goes with corned beef there are going to be a lot of spoiled sandwiches in Najaf. That’s all I’m saying.
There are people who do consider Falwell et al to have more “authority” to make pronouncements regarding Christianity than the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Pope, or any list of Christians you would put on your list, or that any Muslim might put on their list.
Your list could be compared to them, or to anyone’s list, of Christians or Muslims. And all those lists have the same meaning to their makers as yours does to you.
Even adding the pope would not really give more punch to a Christian list. It would just mean that the maker of that list believes the pope has authority. Many Christian Protestants don’t believe he does; that was, in fact, something of a hot button issue a few centuries back, and resulted in a number of events.
He does have, at least theoretically, authority over Roman Catholics, he can excommunicate a Roman Catholic, or remove a Roman Catholic from the clergy, but he can’t do anything about Falwell or Graham or Robertson or Fred Phelps.
Your wackjob is someone else’s authority, and vice versa, whether you are talking about Muslims or Christians, and the question of whether a comparison is “accurate” is like asking whether the Immaculate Conception or the Night Journey to Jerusalem is “accurate.” To some, they will be, to others, they will not be.
Sistani, by the way, is a playa. ;->
is not the issue.
Core values are. What is a Christian is the topic. Not what’s a Presbyterian, Baptist, or Epicopalean.
What is a Muslim? Not what is a Shia, Sunni, or Sufi.
Let’s not lose sight of the discussion topic of my original post — Christians and Muslims.
What I consider to be core values and what makes someone a Christian might not be the same for you, or for someone else.
Neither Christians nor Muslims are a monolith, nor are they really hierachical across and among the various sects.
While Roman Catholics and some Protestant sects have a “creed” which they recite at their services, you will not have to look far to find people who agree on that creed, but disagree on other things, or even interpretation of some aspects of that creed. And you will find people who do not recite it at their services, but who do not disagree with anything that is in it, and would be very offended if you suggested that they are not Christians!
The five pillars of Islam, Faith, Prayer, Charity, Fasting and Plgrimage, may be accepted by all Muslims, but finding two Muslims who agree on everything else will be as difficult as finding two Jews who agree on everything, or two Hindus. And it’s not hard to find Buddhists who disagree with themselves on a regular basis 🙂
So your question of what makes someone a Christian, or a Muslim, is one to which you, and every other person on earth, are free to answer in his or her own way.
In order to have a discussion the parties pretty much have to agree to accept the generally accepted view of what a Christian or Muslim believes — creeds and pillars, commandments and holy books are widely publicized representatives of those beliefs. I accept the generally accepted views. My opinions are based on my observations that the bulk of fundamentalist Christians and Muslims deviate from that.
Heck, I even accept the Mormon’s mural representation of lost tribes in South America and Christ’s coming with special messages for them that I’ve seen in Salt Lake City as what they believe and happily declare, “What a load of crap!”
But keep in mind, I am no theologian. Nor am I a going to be a niggling poster.
It is not an easy life. 😀
many immams don’t waste time issuing misplaced fatwas mostly against non-believers by the score.
Let them try issuing a few well placed ones against their own for a change.
their pronouncements, or the pronouncements of Christian clerics, are “well-placed” or “mis-placed.”
Because neither you nor I are the boss of either Christianity or Islam, we are free to opine, but no one, cleric or believer, is obligated to agree with us about anything, nor we with them!
No one needs to be the infallible elect of God to police him/herself and the organization they affiliate with. If you call yourself a minister of an organized faith, you answer to someone in the bureaucracy of that organization; you are a leader witha all its responsibilities.
The synods out there find themselves perfectly capable to pronounce on whether or not gay clerics are acceptable, whether or not gay members are, etc., etc,. etc. Not to mention which political candidate their thousands of members need to get behind and support. They had better find themselves capable of pronouncing on the perverts of their religions.
And the off-the-hard-road religions are equally able to be judgmental about non-members of their particular brand of “Sound and Fury,” without the requirement of a selected leader. Likewise, let them take responsibility or blame that should be imposed upon them from anyone in the “real” Christian community.
“Brothers in the faith” and all that.
All the monotheists need to remove their own motes, before looking around for offenses beyond their own bodies. Until that happens, they’ve earned and deserve my condemnation.
I especially like the pictures.
is when good people who practice (or attempt to practice) their religion as they see it get lumped in with the crazies on any side — because some religious folks are nuts, then ergo all are nuts.
But the problem is not religion, it’s fundamentalist religion, especially fundamentalist and literalist religion.
It’s fundamentalist Christians that are trying to remake this country into their God’s image. It’s fundamentalist Muslims who are calling for the death penalty for crimes against Islam. It’s fundamentalist Jews that for the most part are pushing for the continued war between Israel and the Palestinians. If we looked closely, we’d probably find fundamentalist Hindus and Buddhists causing a stink in their societies. And those who believe not in the letter of the Law, but rather the spirit, get caught in the crossfire. I found it highly ironic the other day when Pat Robertson proclaimed Islam a “satanic religion”, because anyone who looked at his brand of Christianity might come to the same conclusion about him.
It’s not religion that needs to be fought, but rather fundamentalist religion that is stuck in the old style punishment laws rather than moving forward into a more adult relationship with their God. Jesus boiled down the Law into two categories — love God, love your neighbor. If an action affects one of those categories, it’s a transgresion. And one type of transgression isn’t worse than another — Jesus had far more to say about hypocrites and unfair business practices than he did about sex stuff, but you’d never know it from listening to those on the Religious Reich.
That’s a great explanation. The only thing I would add is the recognition of the exploitation of the fundamentalists by small groups of power/profit mongers. The fundies are essentially not destructive when they aren’t used as tools to accomplish illicit goals.
that the fundies have also been successful at portraying themsleves as martyrs–no pun intended. A few that I used to know had the we’re-being-picked-on-because-we’re-Christian attitude.
And that being-picked-on attitde has also been used successfully by all of the repubs, going up to gwb…only it has been a variation–the dems are out to get us.
See how the mindset works? Gain sympathy from others for whatever reason and manipulate others to believe what you say.
And, those who oppose the theocracy are seen as heretics. So, let the mocking begin!
but again, why isn’t their faith enough? It’s quite clear generally that it’s the nuts that are being counterattacked, but other believers seem to think that any talk about the nuts’ beliefs is out-of-bounds. How do you talk about them without talking about their theology? How can you do that without risking offending others? They wrap themselves in god like they wrap themselves in the flag, and use other people’s easily wounded faiths as a shield.
Why, if faith is so comforting, isn’t it more bulletproof? That is one thing that always puzzles me. In fact, I’ve found that people who are of the strongest faith don’t give a damn what ANYBODY says about it. Sadly, though, I meet people like that infrequently.
In fact, I’ve found that people who are of the strongest faith don’t give a damn what ANYBODY says about it.
You and my late father would have gotten along great!
Isn’t it ironic that if we are actually in the end times that those who have advocated these policies are most likely to be left behind, or bound for an unintended destination? If there is divine intervention and we are all placed in situations requiring the correct choices made, it would explain the results of a group’s leader making the wrong ones.
To show exactly how un-Christian Fundamentalists really are you only have to look at the obvious. While this group has flexed its substantial power politically in the USA the poverty rates in our nation have climbed and we make and drop more bombs than ever.
Fundamentalists have nothing whatsoever to do with Christ. No one should be fooled for a minute.
Madman, this is a great diary. Thanks for taking the time to share your observations.
How would you compare the blind faith acceptance of irrational thinking by fundamentalists and the same mindset of average people who accept the irrational govt explanations of the events of 9/11?
Do you see the similarity between the two?
good point, and both of them feed on fear. Dark, numbing, paralyzing fear. “Now if only someone (God, government, heavily armed man …) would protect us!”
From there, “I’ll give up anything to be safe” seems to just tumble off of some people’s lips.
The first thing you need to do to make something less frightening is to NAME it, yet the right has managed to shield themselves with God and Patriotism. Well-meaning people help them in this by treating any talk of how their dogma is wrong, or how the government as wrong, as crossing some terrible taboo. “Why do you hate America” and “you’re a bigot against religious people” etc …
So debate dies, along with the Republic, sacrificed on the altars of fear and thin-skinned proprieties.
They also share a perception of doubt being equated with disloyalty. Fundamentalists require 100% acceptance of the reasoning given even if it’s irrational. They are both based in some fear of the unknown, as you’ve said, but in both cases the faith should make them less scared, but it doesn’t. Maybe on a deeper level they don’t really believe but feel they have to keep appearances or they simply have a fear of not being part of the group.
I was raised a woman in fundamentalist world, and have spent the last 25 yrs painfully de-programming myself from it’s life crippling effects. I nearly did not survive those 40 years, and no one could possibly hate this “brand” of Christianity any more than I do. Like you, Madman, I want to fight it tooth and nail.
I do not see you attacking Christianity as a whole any more than I do in my own attempts to fight this KIND of Christianity. I am an intelligent person, I can see with my own eyes that the religion itself, as practiced by my own daughters and thier families, is one of love in action, according to the real messages Jesus gave.
What I can’t understand is why many Christians who do embrace that kind of genuine Christianity, often become defensive and think THEIR religion is being attacked, when the topic is defending us against this one perverted BRAND of Christianity and it’s effects.
Not only that, I can’t understand why more of them are not LEADING the fight against it than there are. It’s their faith..their own good religion, being hijacked and perverted by the rabid Christian exremists.
Sometimes it seems that I (a non christian) am more angry about this than many good Christians I know are..and I really do not get that..I really don’t.
Why aren’t we more willing to join forces to fight this perversion of a religion, that is wreaking havoc on ALL our lives, religious people and non religious people alike? We need each other, standing side by side, not in opposition to each other.
My daughters and I stand side by side. They have no problem understanding I am not attacking THIER religion…and that I AM attacking..WE are attacking together..is this perverted form of Christianity and are fighting who choose to exploit it for thier own sick need for power and control.
Because that’s what it’s going to take. Good Christians and good non-Christians united, not divided.
Keeping us at war with each other, is part of the right wing fundamentalist game plan. We can be smarter than they are..we really can be, if we want to be.
Thanks so much for that Scribe. It puzzles me too. As Moyers points out, there were RELIGIOUS patriots who demanded that the State stay away from the Church at the time of this country’s founding. How did that get lost?
I have a theory about why some people don’t “join the fight”, but it’s one that will make some religious people even madder than my rants already do.
I think SOME don’t help fight the Fundies because they are fine with PARTS of what the fundies are trying to get passed.
For example, some conservative Catholics may hate the war, but agree that abortion should be criminalized.
Some moderate “mainline” believers may not want Creationism in the schools, but they think the culture is out of control, and gosh-darn-it could having the Ten Commandments on the wall of the schools really HURT anything?
I think some conservative Jews are unsettled by the deep and dark anti-semitism of the Evangelical right, but they are thrilled with the militant protection and promotion of the hyper-nationalistic policies of Likudist Israel.
They want the “good” parts of the Christian Right’s agenda, without the “bad” parts, and those definitions of “good” and “bad” shift depending on the dogmas of the otherwise liberal or moderate believer.
THIS IS WHY RELIGION HAS NO PLACE IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE. It serves ONLY to divide, ONLY to exclude. It caries with it a cultural taboo against criticism.
Again, it’s the difference between “of” and “about”, and sadly, like so much in American culture, many believers narcissistically focus on their version of “about” without active work toward the “of”.
Wow, that was a seriously tortured sentence, wasn’t it?
I think the point in Moyer’s piece speaks directly toward this. Do what your faith calls on YOU to do, not demand what you believe your faith calls on OTHERS to do. That’s between them and their god/goddess/spirit guide/conscience. That’s the whole point. THAT’S the difference between religious activists like MLK and the Berrigan Brothers as compared to the Falwells, Grahams and Robertsons of this world.
Think abortion is a sin? Don’t have one. Think birth control is a sin? Don’t use it. Think kids need more structure in their lives? Help set up an after school program. There are ways, as principled believers show quietly EVERY day in this country, to act on your beliefs without demanding that others conform to your creeds.
The defensiveness of believers in the supernatural isn’t really surprising. It is not you they need to convince, but themselves. The greater their doubt, the stronger their demand for unquestioning unanimity of belief.
Faith by definition has no proof; if a thing can be proven, it is no longer an article of faith. The faithful are required to believe where there is no proof, and even inspite of proof to the contrary.
This is very tricky, and can make people nuts. How far does faith go ? Do you flout all traffic laws because you believe in the inevitable divine intervention of a benevolent diety ? If you REALLY believe that your god will protect you, why take any precautions at all ? Do you give credence to anybody who claims that God talks to him ? How, exactly, can those who believe in a personal god, who busies himself with the affairs of men, function in a cause/effect universe ?
Why do religious people cry when a loved one dies ? Like us atheists, they are sad to lose someone who will be missed, but shouldn’t their belief in heaven be a mighty counterweight to that essentially selfish reaction ? Is not their loved one now in Paradise ?
I think they cry because deep down, where they can’t control it, they have no more firm faith in an afterlife than I do.
If someone tells you that only stupid people rely on arithmatic to balance a checkbook, I doubt you’d react defensively, because the value of numbers as an accounting tool is a provable fact. It’s more likely you’d dismiss her without rancor, thankful she’s not your business partner.
Religious people react defensively in proportion to their own doubt.
REligion is being used more and more as a method of control than it has ever meant to be. I say that as a mom-practicing Catholic who has always held liberal views.
And, one of the reasons that I don’t attend church regularly is due to the fear that is used to keep the believers in line. I don’t need that–I believe in an understanding and caring God, not a punitive one.
And, my understanding and caring God knows what my beliefs and values are.
I don’t care what religion a person follows, if any. It is none of my business, as long as the person treats me with respect. And that is what the wingnuts/fundies don’t get–they do not respect anyone who does not cave into whatever their demands are.
Well, you can only push a person so far. And I think that many have been pushed far enough, only they don’t want to admit it.
Gotta fight back! The country’s at stake. So, would that make us martyrs???
Interesting thought….
Madman,
I read your diary entry this morning and decided, instead filling your comments areas with lots of words, I would write my thoughts based upon my experiences in dealing with the issue of religious extremists.
Curing the Disease and Not the Symptoms
It is from different perspective and I hope you take the time to read it and provide some comments.
Thanks!
For me, the essential problem that is inevitable whenever there is an attempt to combine religion with democratic governance in some sort of “joint-authority” construct is that where democracy is a system based on shared participatory empowerment, religion is both *arbitrary and authoritarian by nature. Hence, each discipline,(democracy or religiosity), requires the other to relinquish the foundation of its authority in order to exercise its own because each one’s authority must needs trump the other. And this “oil and water” dysfunctionality prevents enlightened governance from manifesting.
The other thing about religion is that, because of its authoritarian nature, there is no legitimate place for religion in a democratic society to impose its doctrine or restraints on people. Religion as practised within a democracy must remain a voluntary enterprise, without the ability to mandate behavior or restraint on anyone who does not voluntarily submit to such arbitrary authority.
Whether it’s the Sharia law enthusiasts currently in the news in Afghanistan, or the powermad extremists running the evangelical movements here in the US (who seek the same sort of hegemonic theocracy as the Sharia gang), these people have no business trying to enforce their will on others based on their arbitrary interpretation of a belief system they purport to hold sacred.
And when these zealots do seek this aggressive imposition of their beliefs on others, they depart the realm of spirituality and enter the realm of tyranny.
Madman,
We cannot touch the underlying beliefs of the radical. They take their twisted message from the same books that moderates read. Fundamentalists just take the readings literally. Moderates twist it to mean whatever is convenient. Until you can stand up in a crowded theater and say religion makes no sense then we fight the fundamentalist with one hand tied behind our backs. Our fault for not being brave enough to say the whole thing is nuts.
Good diary.
Well, you seem to have stepped on some toes with this diary.
As someone who recently joined a church after 21 years of avoiding the whole organized religious thang, I don’t consider myself anti-Christian. I do consider myself a heretic, however. Meaning that I do reject orthodoxy.
I personally did not see your diary as an attack on all religion or all Christianity, but rather on its perverse forms. I think both you and Moyers are on to something.
thanks so much.
Kahli,
I believe that any time you start talking about sex, religion or politics, you end up stepping on some toes :-)!
Madman did a great job in explaining his position with regards to the religious extremists/zealots that are currently awash in our societies around the world. It is pure madness to see this happening. No form of authoritarian mandate (religious or otherwise) is healthy for any society. I think history reflects this to be true.
Thinking outside the box is tough when you discuss religion but I recall someone who did that and the results were not “nice” towards Him as well.
I guess it is just the way of world, sad but realistic.
Is it religion/faith/god or money making? To me that is the only question I need answered to know where some folks are coming from. Now if it’s money making I deal with as I would any other product. The person espousing their product is trying to sell me something. But, if it is the other thing I’ll listen if they speak.
I was not going to revisit this but Vieravisionary’s diary caused me to rethink that. Despite the impression that some people have, I’m actually not at all religious in any traditional sense of the word. I do, however, know a wide circle of people who are VERY traditionally religious although not of the fundamentalist variety. These are people who agree with liberal goals on many, many issues and yet they regularly vote Republican.
I would like them to vote with us. More, I would like them to give money to our candidates, give of their time to get good liberal candidates elected and proudly tell the world that they are NOT Republicans but are Liberal Democrats who also happen to be people of faith.
But I’m regularly told by them that “the Liberals” are not welcoming to people who have strong religious faith. They know that the Republican Party and its fundamentalist base lack respect for them. But, in their eyes, “the Liberals” have even less respect for them because they mock the very idea of religion. They feel comfortable telling me that because, even though they know I don’t necessarily share their faith, I will not mock them for their beliefs.
It is a shame they feel this way because, really, they are the ones that are in the best position to help us fight the battles with the fundamentalists because they understand the fundamentalists and their language so well. But they just keep banging their heads against the wall trying to make themselves fit within a Republican party hijacked by the same fundamentalists they should be fighting.
It is certainly necessary to fight the fundamentalism that threatens our Democracy. I agree completely with that. But to advocate a policy of mockery; to advocate a policy of derision; and to advocate dragging “the absurdities of their ridiculous theologies into the light [and] show the contradictions and the damage caused by these backwards superstitions” will backfire on us, although it may look appealing in the short term when it is applied to the fundamentalists.
Because even those with “true faith” can be timid and can run away from catcalls and the mocking of atheists. Not every person of “true faith” is a “soldier of Christ.” Most of them are just ordinary people like you and me. And in the end, if we drive them away with our rhetoric and our satirical pictures they will simply stay where they are and remain voting soldiers of the Republican party. And we will, once again, lose.
This is not to say that should not discuss the issues of fundamentalism and our democracy. We simply should do it with respect. As Bill Moyers did.
of course, their knee-jerk whining about “liberals” is a sign of deep respect on their part, right?
Sorry, don’t buy it. If they are that thin-skinned, then I question how deep their faith is. I am perfectly capable of dealing with the looks of pity when I say I’m not religious, or the assumptions that I plainly have no morals or ethical code because I don’t have a list sanctioned by some ecclesiastical authority. I am perfectly capable of respecting people who are capable of returning it. I have a few deeply religious friends and coworkers. As we talk, sometimes they act suprised to learn what I think and believe about things, since plainly someone without an imaginary friend couldn’t have a moral code. Hell, at least half the time I know the Bible as well as or better than they do.
However, there is NO other way to deal with the bully fundamentalists than scorn and derision. It’s sad and counterproductive that religious liberals would rather identify with wild-eyed radicals than atheists and agnostics who share their politics.
Really, you can find offense here if you want. I frankly don’t care. Christians are by far the majority in this culture, but they whine and cry and pound their chests like they were still sneaking through the alleys of ancient Rome trying not to end up in the colliseum. All of this bullshit about disrespect is just a way to stifle debate.
No, their reactions are not based in anything that reflects a understanding of true spirituality and understanding of God’s message. In fact, it seems to show a selfish reaction to change things because they can not control or change the laws into the philosophy they believe is correct.
On the other hand, there are those who see and understand what God wants for their lives but they do not try to “change” others by lashing out. They just show their beliefs in simple and constructive ways and are not worried about rewards or return favors.
Anger can create blindness. I am a pastor’s son (my dad died when I was 12-13 yr old but I will always be seen as a pastor’s son) and I learned from my dad that anger creates the inability to see the truth. Simply put, we are not perfect (conservative or liberal). We have to realize that our imperfection hinders our ability to reach our highest potential.
So, I can understand your viewpoint, but it can not reach its highest potential until we can step back, on all sides, and see the whole picture, not just our own narrow viewpoint.
Please think about this and know that I respect you and your desires to correct or stop actions that will impact others in a negative way.
It’s very hard to step back when almost daily I read stories like this one:
By being bullied into submission, these educators help perpetuate the cycle of ignorance that is destroying this country.
Mary,
I greatly appreciate you reading my dairy entry! I just try to show that until the real cause is known, we could be using the wrong strategy to resolve the problem.
I believe that religion stirs emotions that we rarely reveal to others. My faith in God is strong and I believe in what the Bible says. I also believe that we can not change the view until we understand the true reasons for their reactions and actions. It not simple to define or easy to see. You have to look beyond the words to the intent of the words before you can understand the true source of the action itself.
Pain bring anger to the surface and many individuals, beyond the folks on this site, feel this anger and express in different ways. I told Madman earlier today that religion, along with sex and politics, brings out the gut feelings that we would not normally express because they are so private to us as human beings.
I do not define myself as “religious” but “a person who understands what my relationship with God means to me.” Beliefs are not something we can force on others but must reside and originate with each of us. For Madman, it’s his viewpoint and I understand it but if I disagree, that is fine, as long as I can express my views and know that I am not out to change Madman’s viewpoint but provide my views for his consideration.
I think that is the key, but I am very humbled and thankful that my words, and thoughts had an effect on you and caused you to think. that’s my goal and I am truly thankful and touched to see this!
Have a great weekend!
The curious thing is that people struggle to understand the rock solid right wing of xtian stripe. They appear, over and over, to want to simply control most things, especially women and children. In medieval and oppressive ways. The authoritarinism of US Religion aids them. Quite a neat scam it all is.
Further, they flock to Bush. A violent non christian who is hiding out inside the demanded “respect” for the religious ranks and the automatic, with no investigation, ”forgiveness” of fundie religion.
It has worked out very well for Bush. And so called ”moderate” religion has done little. And the Catholic church has been on board with Bush from day one.
Bernard Cardinal Law gave the national Catholic database to Rove in 1999. Craig Crawford reported that a long time ago in the CQ.
Religion, in the form of organised authoritarian religionists, is just one more power grid.
meanwhile Pastor Dan is keeping track of the “praying Democrats”.
Gotta laugh. What a dodge.
I can’t speak for all of this. But I can speak for what I have seen for years first hand in northern Thailand.
The Baptists, the American Baptists, the Chinese Baptists and a host of similar organizations and people, have squatted in northern Thailand for at least 40 years, mounted like a parasite on the backs of the hill tribe people like the Akha.
These Baptists, they care nothing about freedom of religion but their own. They are the definition of fascism.
They brutalize the hilltribe using every trick in the book to villainize their culture and destroy their identity and language. A host of lies, deceptions, and coercion.
They work hand in hand with the US DEA drug war and prisons. When the fathers are gone, they are right there to take the children.
A bigger group of Fucking Assholes can not be found.
And that is not to go into the rampant abuse of the children removed to these “christian” missions.
These people don’t give a shit about family values, taking other people’s children, destroying all contact they have with their culture and language. Their culture is evil after all, right?
What they say they believe, they don’t believe for other people, only themselves.
I always ask them, how can the Gospel start out with a lie?
Look at one of their typical websites about Forced Conversion in an Akha village.
They don’t turn out bigger assholes than people like this.
http://www.loriandpaul.hopedenver.com/about.php
Sadly, this is all part of the large problem that nobody in government wants to correct. It’s the combination of covert intelligence, GOP, fundamentalism and private organizations to finance a world political/religious conversion.
These groups have all cooperated and exploited each other for their own gain. The toll in innocent victims is incalculable. The Abramoff connections coming to light might do more to slow it down than anything else.
Madman, I understand the anger that you and others are expressing here and I share your dismay at the problems you identify, but I couldn’t disagree more with your solution. I can’t think of a single time when mocking of any group has solved a problem.
Culture war. They declared it. When at war, under attack, there is nothing to do but answer kind with kind.
sorry, but that is where we are.
I don’t buy into the war analogy, it’s just playing their game. I seriously am curious though if you can think of a time when mocking ever helped in a situation like this.
sure, Jimmy Swaggart’s little empire fell apart when he became the butt of jokes. Father Coughlin, who had enormous influence, was eventually stopped when his opponents frequent debunking of his statements, and reports that his followers were arming themselves, eventually forced the FBI to shut him down.
It’s drilled into the ‘faithful’ that life is a constant struggle of spiritual warfare. The political and the fundamentalist concentrated power drive started several decades ago.
I’d like to say–in a soft and gentle voice–that I find this diary, like many of Madman’s pieces, to be intentionally and needlessly offensive to Christians.
It is obvious the way he sets things up in his first paragraph to try to immunize himself from criticism, and it is pathetic, I believe, that so many of the really good and intelligent people here fall for that.
Diaries like this make a hostile environment for leftie Christians. And they are stupid politics.
Crap like this would not be tolerated if it were directed against ANY other group. It would be so easy to write 10 paragraphs, and drop in a few emotional pictures (copying Madman’s method) to prove that.
Let me say again: this is very stupid politics.
I’d have to agree this is bad politics. If anyone feels the need to attack these folks, attack their deeds as individuals. You will never get anyone to listen to your point of view if you attack what they hold sacred. Point out where they far short of their own belief system and do it respectfully. Ya never know.
What if the discussion is focused on the use of Fundamentalist Christians by political interests to further global agendas? Would that be perceived by you as less offensive to Leftie Christians?
First, I’m not talking just about “lefty” xians (what ever that is). They should make-up their own minds. It is their business to behave in what ever way is deemed fit for their beliefs. I say let them have space in which to act. IOW, act as a coalition.
Second, talk to others as individuals, as free agents not just as members of this or that sect. For example, personally I would avoid attacking another person’s beliefs if I didn’t already have some kind of connection to them in other ways. In fact I would NOT attack them at all, I would seek to make friends not enemies. This was Martin Luther King’s great insight for speaking to people outside your own belief system.
Third, talk to whoever you want to about whatever you want to, I could care less. I’m not out to convert anyone to anything, political, religious or otherwise. Treat others as human beings with all that entails for you.
Fourth, don’t be naive. Protect yourself (and your loved ones if applicable).
Last, a question. Do you honestly think Fundy xians in the USA have enough access to power to take over? I don’t, at least not yet if ever. The real and in my opinion, more dangerous power centers in this world are the Global Capitalists. The last time I looked the Fundy xians were not destroying the very planet we all live on, nor are they likely to gain such power, at least not yet.
pax
I should’ve added that if the PTB (powers that be) can join a coalition with the Fundies, maybe, just maybe others can too. It is worth a try.
I think maybe you violated your 4th suggestion. It would be naive to think that the fundamentalists aren’t in control right now.
I see the problem as the unholy marriage of convenience between the fundies, the global capitalists and the neocons, combining resource and using the power mad puppet in the oval office to gain the control they each want to use for their own ends.
Do you think this is only recent in the GWB administration or do you think this is the culmination of several decades?
In other words, when do you think these specific goal oriented relationships started?
Probably a lot longer ago that we realize.
rumi, Yes. Of course!
I’m as negative as anybody here about the Fundamentalist Christians.
Madman is different. He was wounded in his youth or something, and he doesn’t see distinctions. He just hates all Christians, and goes out of his way to desecrate sacred symbols. His stuff is just plain ugly bigotry, every bit as bad as the worst fundie anti-gay hatred, for example.
“hostile environment for christians”.
Boo fucking hoo. You people run the goddamned country. Someone who isn’t christian or jewish can’t get elected to office in the country. Your superstition is all over our money, is celebrated at the beginning of every legislative session. And now, because of radicals on the right, and the cooperation of believers on the left, it’s being used to squelch debate and dismantle the rights of women and further erode the already tenuous rights of GBLT.
Stupid politics? What’s been done so far is working real well, isn’t it?
You are a hatemonger. I’m not. It’s a difference.
okay Timaeus … why don’t you go on to explain the way I and everybody else why we MUST conform to your take on moral choices, and maybe throw some more bullshit my way about how I’m off base.
You should stop congratulating yourself before you pull something. It really didn’t take Sherlock Holmes to figure out that I used to be Timaeus on DKos. I’m sure you and Marisicat think you’re quite the sleuths, but I’ve written about that openly and frequently.
And I still stand quite literally behind exactly what I said in the post you linked. I have independent opinions. I’m a yellow dog Democrat. I’m a champion of human rights. I’m also an educated Catholic. And every once in awhile I even agree with some of the Republicans on some issues.
And please. I never said anybody “MUST” conform to my take on moral choices. My linked post doesn’t say that.
If you really want to score some points in a war like this, you’re going to have to show your own cards more openly. That will score points with cronies. But the more you do that, the more you lose in the court of public opinion, like all bigots and hatemongers.
It’s tempting to make a quip about “educated Catholic” being an oxymoron, but I’ll resist the temptation.
You can not be a “champion of HUMAN rights” if you’re pushing YOUR religious superstitions on other people’s life choices, choices which are between them and their conscience/god … you’ve got NO say in the matter. Enforced pregnancy and enforced health maintenance are not championing human rights.
You advocate that laws be enacted to “protect” people or entities that you have no say in. That IS saying “must”.
Sorry, bud. That’s just projection and invention. None of it reflects what I actually believe or support. You’re just pulling things out of your ass. And that’s something I always tell junior lawyers that they will get fired for if I catch them doing it more than once. Your version of reasoning doesn’t cut it in the real world.
yup, when I want to be lectured about “reason” in the “real world”, I look to a superstitious fool who believes that Terry Schiavo was “murdered” for guidance.
He ha ha.
what was not ”stupid politics” about your diary and comments of exactly this time lst year? I have no idea and less interest in your personal faith but i have surely noticed over the years that Ash Wednesday, Easter, Lent, that whole season, can be a crisis period for some.
I am sure you recall this time last year. Your accusations, pompous and pontificating in extremis, across many days, many threads and diaries, toward many posters, that they ”condoned murder” in the case of Terri Schiavo, that they should “atone” for ”condoning murder” … and you went quite a bit further than that as well. There is no real reason to link to it all, but it is there under ”Timeaus”.
You insisted there was extensive ”evidence” “on the internet” that she ws ”at least semi conscious”. It appeared you believed the same “evidence” that Frist did. Years old, highly deceptive and edited tapes. It appeared you read none of the extensive medical assessments, nor the many court verdicts. You went on “faith”, I guess in the Schindlers. And Fr Pavone of Priests for Life, and so on. Randall Terry, he ws htere too. A long list. Jeb Bush.
You get the picture.
I hope you at least took some time to read the autopsy report for Terri Schiavo.
I won’t be replying to you (there is no point), but you might think back. And look to yourself.
LOL I rather think tho, that you are ”always right” and blessed with God’s holy grace. And others should “atone”.
This note, as with many of Madman’s, violates the rules of this board. You were wrong then and you’re wrong now. You certainly don’t seem to have learned anything about decency and kindness.
I never said I was always right. I never said I was always blessed. You are crudely projecting, just as Madman does. More importantly, I never mocked anybody’s religious beliefs and I didn’t add petty little condescending “LOLs.”
You’re a minor player, Marisicat.
I gave this a 0 super troll rating, which it deserves, but I quickly tried to cancel that, because I really don’t believe in negative ratings (although I do think this post is mean to the point that it qualifies as trollish). But the board will not let me replace one rating with no rating, so I left it at 2. Which is appropriate.
Some think we must attack and mock the dogma of the religious extremists to stop them from taking over this country. Others think we must look for the root cause, ie: an overall lack of respect for each other.
I hear that attacking their dogma alienates many good leftist Christians who may then vote republican because they don’t feel thier faith is respected by the left.
I can’t see how identifying the problem as lack of respect is of much use, unless both sides are willing to participate, and these extremists have made it mighty clear that have NO intention of respecting anyone elses position but their own.
So, I am asking the good Christian left just how DO we stop these right wing fanatics from shoving their radical dogma down all our throats, via using years of accumulated political power and wealth, to make it into the laws of this land? How can they be stopped? How CAN we, together, stop this?
If there is one over riding reason I totally abhor organized religion of any kind, it’s exactly this: it’s incredible power to separate good people with common goals, and set them against each other.
This has nothing to DO with God or Jesus..or faith. It has everything to do with the abuse of power, by those who exploit the man made structures of faith by using them to exert power and control over others for thier own selfish ends.
I completely honor, respect and celebrate the individual chosen faith pathway of every person, and I equally honor and resspct the non faith pathway of those who do not choose any religion or belief system.
But I do not, and never will, trust or respect the institution of the “church”, or organized religion as a whole. These are man made, man run, heirarchal organizations ripe for exploitation by those within them, who in their quest for power over others, pervert and corrupt and exploit everyone in thier path. They are allowed to do this by those of “good faith” who sit next to them in ther pews, who, for whatever reason, do not become involved in seeing it or in stopping it.
Don’t try to tell me any benevolent deity ever intended this. Man intended this, man made it so, and man is allowing it to go on and on and on.
Meanwhile, vast and growing numbers of us have separated ourselves from “the church” and organized religion altogether. We can’t be conviently plugged into either the “church goer” or “athiest” catagories, We still have our faith and it lives within. And we are not likley to willingly vote for ANY candidate, of any faith, no matter how “good”, who places their religion above the Constitution or above the need for separation of church and state.
If there is one sure pathway to the destruction of a free society, it is when “religion” becomes it’s ruling force.