portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary oregon & cascadia

gender & sexuality | human & civil rights

Christian fanaticism poses greatest threat to America

This article was found on the Knights Of Enlightenment website.(www.knightsofenlightenment.org) It discusses the threat that is being posed to our American values by a group of citizens that proclaim they are doing so by god's command At this present time, we are witnessing a historic event as gays and lesbians are being denied freedom and equality by those of the Christian right. In effort to expose the these religious zealots for what they are, I offer this short essay.
Christian fanaticism poses greatest threat to America

Anthony Dick

Cavalier Daily Viewpoint Writer

WITH EACH passing second, every freedom-loving American is in danger of losing his liberty to a dangerous group of religious fanatics. These extremists believe that our ideals of global freedom and humanitarianism contradict the will of God, and they therefore feel justified in destroying these ideals. They place their deep superstitions above liberty education and intellect. They hate what our nation stands for.

Most frightening of all, the most dangerous of these fanatics do not live across the ocean, and they have nothing to do with Osama bin Laden. They are close to home, living among us. They look the same, speak the same, and dress the same as we do. They hold the minds of millions of people in their clutches and have influence in the highest levels of our government. They call themselves the Christian right, and it's high time we acknowledge that they are a threat.

Some may say it is unduly harsh to equate the Christian right with the lunatics who attacked our nation on Sept. 11. While the two groups of fanatics differ in their tactics, their motives are strikingly similar. Both believe that they are justified in causing misery and angst on Earth in the name of their deities. Anyone who doubts that the Christian right causes misery on a daily basis needs only to consider the plight of a Christian homosexual who, powerless to change her sexual orientation, lives her life utterly terrified by the prospect of eternal torment. The Christian right is a danger to us all because it places its ideology above considerations of our happiness and liberty.

Days after hearing of the terrorist attacks, Christian right leader Jerry Falwell announced, "I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way - all of them who have tried to secularize America - I point the finger in their face and say, 'You helped this happen.'"

If this isn't terrorizing society in the name of religion, then nothing is. Falwell thinks that thousands of innocent people deserved to be destroyed because they committed the sin of living in a nation of tolerance and civil liberties. He hates what our nation stands for, and he wants to destroy it.

The Christian right is currently the most potent threat to our way of life, more so even than bin Laden's cadre of nutcases. This becomes obvious when we consider which group of fanatics is more likely to succeed in thrusting their repressive ideology upon us. In March 2000, a Gallup poll reported that 24 percent of American adults considered themselves a part of the Christian right. While all of these people might not agree entirely with Falwell, he influences all of them. With a quarter of the population under their thumbs, the leaders of this fanatical faction possess a frightening political power that makes the Christian right infinitely more dangerous to our freedom than any violent terrorists ever could be.

The Christian right understands that the way to attack our freedom is not with violence but with subtlety and manipulation. Its political agenda includes drafting and passing laws that favor Christian values and compromise our government's impartiality. With lawmakers and large groups of voters in its thrall, it has the tools to ingrain these tenants of repression into the very fabric of our nation.

As we protect our country against outside threats, the Christian right is slowly chipping away at it from the inside. It does not strive to destroy our great nation outright. It seeks to pervert it so badly with hatred and intolerance that there will be nothing left worth protecting.

The Christian right is not a violent group of people, and it should not be treated as such. It respects our methods of peaceful societal change, and in this way it is different from those who have attacked us with violence. But it does seek to destroy our way of life with tactics of psychological terror and fanatical determination. It puts its hateful superstitions above our sacred ideals of liberty and equality.

Noble Americans have fought peacefully and politically against religious extremism in the past, and they have won. Without a doubt, our nation remains strong enough today to fend off anti-freedom fanatics, foreign and domestic. But as we embark on President Bush's crusade against fanatical religious extremists abroad, perhaps we should keep an eye fixed on the ones in our own backyard.

(Anthony Dick is a Cavalier Daily viewpoint writer.)

homepage: homepage: http://www.knightsofenlightenment.net/Religion.html

Bush masturebates right (relgious right, not the right way) 14.Mar.2004 09:52

Stevie

The movements of the 'Christian Right' are just as vulnerable to being high-jacked as any other political or religious movement, if not more vulnerable. This vulnerability within the movement comes from a single flaw that is written within the Bible. That flaw is paraphrased, anyone else who gives lip-service to God is also one of God's people to be loved and trusted. That is the reason so many Christians put unconditional trust in President Bush and other leaders who pay lip-service to God. For the Right's trust to be further nurtured in Neoconservative leadership, the administration makes headway into extremely polar issues which carry no real substance when it comes to managing a people and it's national resources. We all know what these issues are, they are also issues which divert important attention away from real problems. These polar issues are abortion, gay marriage, overseas military threats, and the like. Real problems which rarely receive media attention are more likely to be; global warming, industrial and agricultural pollution, living-wage middle class jobs, human rights abroad, government and corporate corruption, and so on, we know what these issues are, and the independent media does a spectacular job of covering them.
The Christian Right has been duped. They are not bad people, matter of factly I am the only person in my family which is not a card carrying member. It is very irritating to confront their ignorance, but they must be softly educated. I feel as stubborn as they are, their personal growth WILL bring change, because they do things with conviction and proselytizing others is their strongest suit.

So, the moral of the story is, expose Bush for the fraud he is, how his lips move, one hand masturbates the right, the other fists his people, and the real Christians (small c) will be capable of making an informed decision.

Re: Christian fanaticism poses greatest threat to America 14.Mar.2004 10:06

Great Analysis

amen!

ironic 14.Mar.2004 10:24

jd

*For the Right's trust to be further nurtured in Neoconservative leadership, the administration makes headway into extremely polar issues which carry no real substance when it comes to managing a people and it's national resources.*

the ironic thing is that many neoconservative leaders are actually jewish.

and that is in now way meant to be anti-semitic, or conspiracy minded.

further response to JD 14.Mar.2004 11:02

Stevie

You are very right, approximately half of the new-world order leadership IS Jewish. There is some interesting commentary in the latest Adbusters on that subject. A closer investigation of the Bush Administration and the State of Israel reveals an unholy alliance at the upper levels. In the Bible (yet again) it can be paraphrased that anyone gentile who does a good thing for a Jewish person will be favored by God. The Right, is able to use this advantage because common people are yet unaware of the distinction between the secular State of Israel and the Jewish People. We have only the media to blame. What the State is doing to the Palestinian people is an abomination to God. This is a very difficult subject. Just know this, Jewish people are refusing to serve in their military, that we hear about this via international news can only mean it is a symptom of much wider feeling in the Jewish people.

I find it comforting to know that Western Civilization was plummeted into the Dark Ages by the power of the church, only to be gifted the knowledge we had learned back from the Muslims. The same who we now portray to be the ignorant fundamentalists that we are. It is the massive projection of what we hate about ourselves onto another culture. Sick.

No, the muslims are crazy fundamentalists too. 14.Mar.2004 11:11

t

Don't romanticize people just because they're not here. Be careful about conflating jews and israel. you make it sound as though all jews everywhere are somehow responsible for israel. it's an ethnic category that has not a thing to do with israel.

The MOSCOW TIMES sees our Pin Heads better than do 14.Mar.2004 11:54

WE

reposting from THE MOSCOW TIMES

Friday, Mar. 12, 2004. Page 116
PIN HEADS
By Chris Floyd

One of the sticking points in crafting the just-signed "interim constitution" of the Pentagon cash cow formerly known as Iraq was the question of acknowledging Islam as the fundamental source of law. After much wrangling, a fudge was worked out that cites the Koran as a fundamental source of legal authority, with the proviso that no law can be passed that conflicts with Islam.

We in the enlightened West smile at such theocratic quibbling, of course: Imagine, national leaders insisting that a modern state be governed solely by divine authority! Governments guaranteeing the right of religious extremists to impose their views on society! What next -- debates about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Oh, those poor, ignorant barbarians in Babylon!

Well, wipe that smile off your face. For even now, the ignorant barbarians in Washington are pushing a law through Congress that would "acknowledge God as the sovereign source of law, liberty [and] government" in the United States. What's more, it would forbid all legal challenges to government officials who use the power of the state to enforce their own view of "God's sovereign authority." Any judge who dared even hear such a challenge could be removed from office.

The "Constitution Restoration Act of 2004" is no joke; it was introduced last month by some of the Bush Regime's most powerful Congressional sycophants. If enacted, it will effectively transform the American republic into a theocracy, where the arbitrary dictates of a "higher power" -- as interpreted by a judge, policeman, bureaucrat or president -- can override the rule of law.

The Act -- drafted by a minion of television evangelist Pat Robertson -- is the fruit of decades of work by a group of extremists known broadly as "Dominionists." Their openly expressed aim is to establish "biblical rule" over every aspect of society -- placing "the state, the school, the arts and sciences, law, economics, and every other sphere under Christ the King." Or as Attorney General John Ashcroft -- the nation's chief law enforcement officer -- has often proclaimed: "America has no king but Jesus!"

According to Dominionist literature, "biblical rule" means execution -- preferably by stoning -- of homosexuals and other "revelers in licentiousness"; massive tax cuts for the rich (because "wealth is a mark of God's favor"); the elimination of government programs to alleviate poverty and sickness (because these depend on "confiscation of wealth"); and enslavement for debtors. No legal challenges to "God's order" will be allowed. And because this order is divinely ordained, the "elect" can use any means necessary to establish it, including deception, subversion, even violence. As Robertson himself adjures the faithful: "Zealous men force their way in."

Again, this is no tiny band of cranks meeting in some basement in Alabama, as recent reports by investigators Karen Yurica and David Neiwert make clear. The Dominionists are bankrolled and directed by deep-pocketed, well-connected business moguls and political operatives who have engineered a takeover of the Republican Party and are now at the heart of the U.S. government. They've made common cause with the "American Empire" faction -- Cheney, Rumsfeld, the neo-conservatives -- who seek "full-spectrum dominance" over the globe. The Dominionists provide money and domestic political muscle for the Dominators' imperial ambitions; in return, the Dominators provide a practical vehicle -- overwhelming military might and state power -- for making the Dominionists' dreams a reality.

The Dominionist movement was founded by the late R.J. Rushdoony, a busy beaver who also co-founded the Council for National Policy. The CNP is the politburo of the American conservative movement, filled with top-rank political and business leaders who set the national agenda for the vast echo chamber of right-wing foundations, publishers, media networks and universities that have schooled a whole generation in obscurantist bile -- just as the extremist Wahabbi religious schools funded by Saudi billionaires have poisoned the Islamic world with hatred and ignorance.

One of the chief moneybags behind the rise of Dominionism was tycoon Harold Ahmanson, Rushdoony's protege and fellow CNP member. In addition to establishing theocracy in America, Ahmanson has another abiding interest: computerized voting machines. As reported here last year, Ahmanson, a fervent Bush backer, was instrumental in establishing two of the Republican-controlled companies now rushing to install their highly hackable machines -- with untraceable, unrecountable electronic ballots -- across the country in time for the November election.

The Dominionists also have strong backing on the Supreme Court, Yurica notes. Justice Antonin Scalia, author of the unconstitutional ruling that gave Bush the presidency, declared in the theological journal First Things that the state derives its moral authority from God, not the "consent of the governed," as that old licentious reveler Thomas Jefferson held in the Declaration of Independence. No, government "is the 'minister of God' with powers to 'revenge,' to 'execute wrath,' including even wrath by the sword," Scalia wrote. He railed against the "tendency of democracy to obscure the divine authority behind government."

Meanwhile, the tools of dominion keep expanding. Just days after the Congressional Bushists launched their theocratic missile, General Ralph Eberhart, head of America's first domestic military command, said the Regime must now bring the experience learned on foreign battlefields to the "Homeland" itself, including the integration of police, military and intelligence forces, "wide-area surveillance of the United States" and "urban warfare tactics," GovExec.com reports.

Put this juggernaut at the service of democracy-hating extremists with no legal restraints on their enforcement of "God's sovereign authority" -- plus a proven track record of subverting the law to gain political power -- and what would you have? A mullah state? A military theocracy?

Or should we just call it "a second term"?

please answer the following questions. 14.Mar.2004 12:04

this thing here

NOTE: TO CHRISTIANS AND THE CHRISTIAN RIGHT.

first, find one example of a entirely theocratic society and government on this earth (NOT in heaven) that:

- historically has existed, and presently exists, in utter peace and harmony, as if a mirror reflection of heaven itself.

- has not turned into afghanistan under the taliban.

- has not turned into iran under khomeini.

secondly, describe how the christian equivalent of islamic sharia law would operate at all levels of governance (individual, local, state, federal), and compare and contrast it to islamic sharia law.

last, please explain why people shouldn't rightly call you the "american taliban".

The Handmaid's Tale 14.Mar.2004 13:10

Reader

The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood is a fictional look at what a Christian Amercica might look like. Highly recommended. Even the movie is decent.

Haw 14.Mar.2004 13:33

ME

I don't see why Christians scare you when it is secular states that are interfering with people's religious freedoms. The banning of outward symbols of faith in the schools in France; the oppression of the Sunni muslims under Saddam Hussein's secular regime; the burning of synagogues all over Europe.

ME 14.Mar.2004 14:06

jlii

The Christian right is destroying the Constitution, starting a civil war in the country which will never end. What do you think will happen if the "Constitution Restoration Act of 2004" were passed? DO you think WE are going to march into the camps? America is committing suicide and you are proving the bullets.

Responding to "this thing here" on three questions 14.Mar.2004 14:17

a simple christian

"this thing here" (in "please answer the following questions") wrote:

>> NOTE: TO CHRISTIANS AND THE CHRISTIAN RIGHT.
first, find one example of a entirely theocratic society and government on this earth (NOT in heaven) that:
- historically has existed, and presently exists, in utter peace and harmony, as if a mirror reflection of heaven itself.
- has not turned into afghanistan under the taliban.
- has not turned into iran under khomeini.
secondly, describe how the christian equivalent of islamic sharia law would operate at all levels of governance (individual, local, state, federal), and compare and contrast it to islamic sharia law.
last, please explain why people shouldn't rightly call you the "american taliban". >>



NOTE: TO "THIS THING HERE"

First, as for a perfect society here on earth, the devil tempted Jesus with a vision of such a world:

>> . . . the devil took Him to a very high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to Him, "All these things I will give You, if You will bow down and worship me." Then Jesus said to him, "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'You shall worship the LORD your God, and Him only shall you serve.' " >> Matthew 4:8-10 (NKJV)

And, as for theocratic government, Jesus said:
>> For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. >> Matthew 5:20 (KJV)


Second, as for the "christian equivalent of islamic sharia law," Jesus has explained that law, as follows:
>> If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him! Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets. >> Matthew 7:11-12 (NKJV)

Again, in Matthew 22:

>> But when the Pharisees heard that He had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, and saying, "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?" Jesus [quoting scripture] said to him, "'You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.''' On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.'">> Matthew 22:34-40 (NKJV)

As for why christians in the United States should not rightly be called the "american taliban" --- without knowing in any detail what the taliban were or are in Afghanistan (or elsewhere) --- I suppose that these taliban believe(d) something like this:

Rigorous adherence to many rules of superstition (presented as "the law and the prophets") and severely punishing their neighbors whenever they found their neighbors violating such taboos would earn eternal life and great credit and merit in the kingdom of heaven.

Of course, that is contrary to mainstream christian belief, because most christians do not believe in salvation by other than grace. Adherence to the law of God flows from grace, (in most cases somewhat imperfectly), but the idea of gaining salvation through enforcing adherence to certain laws is contrary to the teachings of Jesus, as is made clear in a positive sense at Luke 10:25-37:

>> And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested Him, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" He said to him, "What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?" So he answered and [quoting scripture] said, "'You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,' and 'your neighbor as yourself.''" And He said to him, "You have answered rightly; do this and you will live." But he, wanting to justify himself, said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" Then Jesus answered and said: "A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, who stripped him of his clothing, wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a certain priest came down that road. And when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite, when he arrived at the place, came and looked, and passed by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was. And when he saw him, he had compassion. So he went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; and he set him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. On the next day, when he departed, he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said to him, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I come again, I will repay you.' So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?" And he said, "He who showed mercy on him." Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise." >> Luke 10:25-37 (NKJV)

help 14.Mar.2004 15:02

spread word

they force drug people in so called''mental health'' centers.please wake up to torture in THIS country.those people in charge are true terrorists!!

Is the Christian right peaceful? 14.Mar.2004 16:18

mom

The original poster wrote that:
"The Christian right is not a violent group of people, and it should not be treated as such. It respects our methods of peaceful societal change, and in this way it is different from those who have attacked us with violence."

While I agree with nearly every other thing that the poster wrote, I have to question the "non violent" statement due to the violent nature of abortion clinic bombings; murder/beatings of gays; and public executions (capital punishment) carried out by a self proclaimed right wing president. These actions are far from non violent. Fanatics will stop at nothing to impose their righteous beliefs --- it doesn't matter if they are Chrisitan fanatics, Muslim fanatics, Jewish fanatics or some other religion. The world, indeed the daily papers are filled with news about violent events that take place under the guise of religion.

They are dangerous not only to our way of life, but to life that is different from that which they view as 'right'.

one thing we can all agree on 14.Mar.2004 17:29

Stevie

Is that seperation of church and state MUST be enforced. As for me, I say shitcan religion once and for all, its turned into nothing but a right-winger support group where they feel strength in numbers, baaaah baaaah. Truely, freedom isn't free, and if you piss enough on some ideology, you might be shown someone feels strongly enough to make someone die for it. Tolerance people, within the bounds of common sense.

The Fear Mongering 14.Mar.2004 17:31

Me

jlii: You toss around the Constitution Restoration Act of 2004 like it's something other than a figment of the imagination of a bunch of fringe thinkers, yet ignore my simple question of why is it that secular governments have historically and currently infringed on the rights of people. (I hadn't even mentioned the biggest offenders:Mao, Stalin, and Castro.)

I offer concrete, real-life examples of things that have happened. You address my concerns by throwing around a phrase that is meaningless and saying that I along with other Christians are "providing bullets" for America's "suicide." Typical of those having no argument, you resort to hysterics and name calling instead of reason and logic.

So why is it that the secular states have been/are the most oppressive?

Hey Me 14.Mar.2004 18:35

Skullhunter

The Constitution Restoration Act of 2004 is NOT a figment of anyone's imagination. Go and look it up yourself at www.senate.gov in the Bills section, it's Senate bill S. 2082, give it a read. Here's an excerpt.

`Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.

Translation - Reconstructionist jackasses like Judge Roy Moore would be able to place their purely religious monuments in public buildings and also engage in other religiously biased conduct with impunity. Anyone attempting to act against them in such matters would they themselves face removal. Ignores the fact that if "God" was indeed the basis of law, liberty and government in this country, there would be laws against working on Sunday, worshipping any god but the Christian one, etc. . Would also enshrine in the law of the land of the United States that our law and government are based entirely on Abrahamic doctrine, directly contradicting the Treaty Of Tripoli, signed and ratified by President John Adams on 10 June 1797. Anything else you're not clear on?

"Me," secular states have been the most oppressive? 14.Mar.2004 19:46

GRINGO STARS

You mean like Israel? Or Taliban-ruled Afghanistan? States PERIOD have been oppressive. You show no evidence to back your claim that secular states have been the most oppressive. I'd love to see your reasons for saying such a thing.

history is evidence 14.Mar.2004 23:35

ME

Skullhunter: I have seen no discussion of the CRA of 2004 except on fringey websites. Your excerpt from the passage, while interesting, provides no clue as to whether the Act is expected to come up for a vote, who is sponsoring it, and its chances of passing into law. I would say that any legislator who voted for the Act would be handing his/her opponent an issue come election day. There is no way the Act is going to pass and that's why only the fringe cares about it. It's a bogeyman. A sham.

GRINGO: Sorry I didn't think people here needed to be schooled on the millions killed under Stalin (the Soviet Union was atheist), Mao (China is officially atheist), or Castro (Cuba is atheist -- but I forgot, he is a darling of the Left what with that high literacy rate.) For my other examples of my reasons for "saying such a thing", see my post above about the secular French govt.'s banning of religious symbols in schools, along with other examples.

Language reveals a lot 15.Mar.2004 00:27

Skullhunter

Funny, originally CRA was just a "figment of the imagination of a bunch of fringe thinkers", now it's real but it's only important to fringe thinkers. The real interesting part is the step-by-step adherence to the usual talking points when someone brings up the excesses and dangers of a Christian theocracy; ignore any of the facts and instead focus on "atheist" regimes, as if somehow there's a competition with a prize for the biggest body count. Every single time someone brings up the Christian hunger for dominion, it's always back to Stalin, Mao, et cetera, ad nauseam. Well, as we all know, a nation guided by God would only kill EVIL people, right? Just like the old days, when they put those servants of Satan to the rack and the fire, put those heathen Muslims to the sword, forced those godless Indians off land that belonged to those chosen by God to live there. You don't worry about living in such a nation, Me, because you think that you and people like you would be left alone. You could care less about the people that would be imprisoned or murdered, in your mind they'd deserve it. What you and most of your fellow holier-than-thous fail to realize is that unless you're part of the ruling elite, you're just as expendable as any of us "lefties".

selective history indicates selective thinking 15.Mar.2004 00:51

reader

We wouldn't want to leave out that Hitler was devout Catholic.

Oh, and where can I read about the millions killed under Castro that you mention?

Dark at the End of the Tunnel 15.Mar.2004 02:42

nomad

`Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.

The Bill (S.2082) was introduced by Sen Richard Shelby (R) [AL] on 2/12/2004/

The cosponsors and date of signing on are:

Sen Allard, A. Wayne - 2/12/2004 [CO]
Sen Brownback, Sam - 2/12/2004 [KS]
Sen Graham, Lindsey O. - 2/12/2004 [SC]
Sen Inhofe, Jim - 2/12/2004 [OK]
Sen Miller, Zell - 2/12/2004 [GA]

(Miller is a Republican mascarading as a Democrat.)

Reading the torturous language, characteristic of the products that our "representatives" have been spewing out for the past 200 years, or so, I'm struck that this could be applied to getting the runt in the White House off the hook for his lunatic raving:

"God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did,
and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections
will come and I will have to focus on them."
-- George W. Bush, to Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas, from June 24, 2003 edition of Ha'aretz

Thus, in the event that at some future time he is brought to justice for his high crimes and misdemeanors, one of which is lying to the American people and to Congress in order to send American troops to die in Iraq for oil, and, IF the Bill survives and becomes law, the runt's above statement might get him off.

The latter part of the Bill S.2082, in fact, makes failure to perform on the part of any Supreme Court Justice or other Federal judge, grounds for impeachment of that (those) judges.

The very brevity of the Bill in fact makes it appear that it is aimed at just such a narrow eventuality. You can read it by going to:

 http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/g_three_sections_with_teasers/legislative_home.htm

and typing in "S.2082" in the "By number" window.
======================
BTW, trying to argue matters of justice and the self-determination of peoples, from a faith perspective by citing religious writings and opinions, interpretations of religious writings and opinions, is distracting from the real issues of life on the planet--IMHO. It's impossible to come to rational conclusions when arguments are rooted in the unknown, imagined and fanticized. Impossible.

HIITLER? 15.Mar.2004 11:50

Me

Hitler was a Catholic? Funny, I've read that he was a pagan, a vegan, an atheist ... Funny how people can make Hitler be anything they want him to be.

The reason I brought up all of those atheist regimes is because the original post was that the "Christian Right" was going to wreck the Constitution. My point, which nobody has disproved, is that historically people have had more to fear from secular governments than nations that are comprised of religious people. (The U.S. has always been officially secular/unofficially deist, thanks to those deists who came up with the First Amendement. For these reasons, CRA 2004 will never come up for a vote and if it does it will never pass. So stop fear mongering.)

sure, people can say whatever they like 15.Mar.2004 12:28

reader

But saying something doesn't make it true. Though I'm sure you can find as many "sources" calling Hitler a vegan as you can find "sources" talking about how Castro has killed millions of people. The claim is usually that Hitler was a vegetarian. Of course, that claim is completely false; Hitler outlawed organizations advocated vegetarianism (because allowing compassion for animals would definitely not help his agenda of removing compassion for people, and people the Nazis considered no better than animals):
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/07/267991.shtml

Hitler believed he was doing Christ's work and carrying out God's will in his extermination and genocide of the Jews. Hitler was baptized a catholic and was even an alter boy in the Catholic Church. Though to be fair, he also admired Martin Luther a great deal.

Me, you should really do some work educating yourself. This country does not seek to impose knowledge, only the mindless propaganda of the sort you've been regurgitating. Educate yourself, then maybe there can be an intelligent discussion on these matters.

And if you need more examples of religious architects of genocide, those can be provided as well, though I get the feeling you wouldn't see it even if it was right in front of you, you are clearly too wrapped up in your peculiar dogmatic worldview.

Hitler in Better Homes and Gardens 15.Mar.2004 17:35

ME

Actually, i don't believe i said that Castro has killed millions, though cumulatively over the years of his reign, that is possible. Stalin and Mao each are responsible for tens of millions of people dying, if not hundreds of millions. If you want to learn more go to britannica.com. Open any history book. Are you going to tell me that Stalin and Mao, both secular communists, did not go after the churches, and temples? I am of eastern european descent and have heard many stories of priests being killed. Even Pope John Paul II was forced to be ordained in secret for fear of the USSR. Where are your sources saying that these murders never happened?

Just because Hitler was born Catholic (and I'm not so sure -- he may have been Lutheran), doesn't mean he was a Christian or endorsed Christianity. And even if he did endorse Christianity, it doesn't make Christianity the equivalent of Hitler.

I am educated. What about you? Here's a place to start. It's a scanned image of an article about Hitler that appeared in 1938 in Better Homes and Gardens wherein Hitler is described as a vegetarian "gourmet" whose personal chef prepares vegetarian dishes according to his "exacting standards". I've also included the link. Yes, people can say anything they want. Looks like you have been doing just that. By the way, I am not saying vegetarians are nazis;I'm not as unreasonable as people who would link Hitler to Christianity and use it to tar Christianity (or link some Christian extremists with the rest of Christianity)

hitler
hitler

you can't learn what you refuse to see 15.Mar.2004 17:57

reader

There was a psych experiemtn some time ago that proved that people will not see what is troubling to their worldview. Show a person offended by nudity a picture with a breast in it and their eyes will not even track to it. When asked later if there was breast in the picture they will claim they have not seen it because, in fact, they did not see it. I bring this up because I already referenced an article refuting the Hitler was vegetarian argument which you did not, perhaps could not see. And it's not that Hitler eating meat threatens your worldview, but that you would be lied to so easily that threatens your worldview. I would try reading that link which points to the importance of the "Hitler as an ascetic" myth.

"Where are your sources saying that these murders never happened?"

If you're resorting to tired straw-man arguments like this, you are not as educated as you think.

"And even if he did endorse Christianity, it doesn't make Christianity the equivalent of Hitler."

Again with the straw-man arguments, can't you stick to a logical debate? Hitler is one example of many religious mass murderers. Many presidents of the US, sadly, are other examples in their genocide of native americans. And, to make it clear, there is some historical debate over Hitler's views of Christianity but some of his quotes are quite clear on the matter:

"Therefore, I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the Lord's work."

"I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so."

"Christ was the greatest early fighter in the battle against the world enemy, the Jews . . . The work that Christ started but could not finish, I--Adolf Hitler--will conclude."

Of course, Hitler could no more be said to be following the path of Christ any more than anyone who advocates war, genocide, and oppression. But we are talking about religious fanatics which all pervert their religions by doing that very thing. And there are many christian fanatics and the reason they are so dangerous is not because of anything worse about their fanaticism, as compared to muslim, hindu, or jewish religious fanatics, but because their control of the most destructive weapons on the planet and their belief that they are bringing us to the end-times of their religious prophecies. This makes them extraordinarily dangerous, perhaps uniquely placed in the position to bring about the end of all life on the planet.

Pointing Fingers 15.Mar.2004 19:19

Me

Reader - everything you've written so far attacking me just so happens to describe you to a T.
So why don't you stop "psychoanalyzing" and start sourcing your claims, as I have. You include "quotes" attributed to Hitler that you can not or will not source. Would you rather that readers here when evaulating our statements, will look at what you have provided and conclude that you had no means of backing your claims and so you are full of it?

fair enough 15.Mar.2004 20:54

reader

"Therefore, I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the Lord's work."
Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (similar words can be quoted from the Reichstag Fire speech)

"I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so."
Hitler, 1941 (John Toland, Adolf Hitler)

"Christ was the greatest early fighter in the battle against the world enemy, the Jews . . . The work that Christ started but could not finish, I--Adolf Hitler--will conclude."
Hitler, 1926 (John Toland, Adolf Hitler)

"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter."
Adolf Hitler, speech deliver 4/12/1922 and published in "My New Order"

"Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross.
Adolf Hitler, speech deliver 4/12/1922 and published in "My New Order"

Robert Payne is widely considered to be Hitler's definitive biographer. In his book, Hitler: The Life and Death of Adolph Hitler, Payne says that Hitler's "vegetarianism" was a "legend" and a "fiction" invented by Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi Minister of Propaganda. According to Payne:

"Hitler's asceticism played an important part in the image he projected over Germany. According to the widely believed legend, he neither smoked nor drank, nor did he eat meat or have anything to do with women. Only the first was true. He drank beer and diluted wine frequently, had a special fondness for Bavarian sausages and kept a mistress, Eva Braun... His asceticism was fiction invented by Goebbels to emphasize his total dedication, his self-control, the distance that separated him from other men. By this outward show of asceticism, he could claim that he was dedicated to the service of his people. In fact he was remarkably self-indulgent and possessed none of the instincts of the ascetic."

 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/07/267991.shtml
 http://www.foodrevolution.org/askjohn/47.htm

"Reader - everything you've written so far attacking me just so happens to describe you to a T."

Ad hominem attacks are the last resort of someone who cannot defend their position. The sources are there, what you choose to do with them is up to you.

CRA 2004 09.Apr.2004 06:44

Nunyabiz

To me just the mere action of such lunatic fringe Bill even getting to the point of being drawn up then signed by current politicians in office is a warning sign, hell its a blatant slap in the face that we MUST beat down these religious right nutcases before something like this DOES become law.

There are already many states where the religious right are continuously trying to pass laws to ban evolution in schools and teach the outright lie of creationism as if its fact.
They have already somewhat reduced Evolutionary fact by forcing textbook publishers to include a caveat stating that "Evolution is just a theory" in Biology text.

We have idiots such as "Mr." Roy Moore he has thankfully been disbarred trying desperately to rewrite history just like many Christians are very fond of doing, taking quotes completely out of text, denying
historical facts trying to bolster Christianity in any way possible.

Right wing Christian Fundamentalist/Terrorist ARE dangerous VERY dangerous they clearly represent the most danger to this country BY FAR than any Muslim terrorist.
They are here by the millions, they are IN governmental positions all thoughout from Federal/State/County/Town their goal is to take control of the USA and turn it into a Totalitarian Theocracy and unless EVERYONE else stands up and says OH NO YOU DON'T you freak then that's exactly what they are going to do.

Already the ENTIRE Senate of 99 is either Christian fanatics or at least very biased to that view and without any doubt influenced by Christian right wing fanatics as can clearly be seen by their 99-0 ruling just recently stating they were going to try and intervene in the "Under God" being taken out of The Pledge of Allegiance, they ALL voted to keep what is without question a direct and blatant violation of The Separation of Church & State.
So tell me that right wing Christian fundamentalist nutcases don't have control of the US Government!

Its sickening

Hate Speech 05.Jun.2004 15:47

Edgar Ignatious

I thought there was a Federal law against hate speech! Your site is obviously the source.