Pols Push U.S. Toward Theocracy
A poll finds that 55 percent of Americans think the U.S. was created as a Christian theocracy. “The strong support for official recognition of the majority faith appears to be grounded in a belief that the United States was founded as a Christian nation, in spite of the fact that the Constitution nowhere mentions God or Christianity,” says Charles Haynes of the First Amendment Center.
Sadly, these morons are allowed to vote. Tragically, one of them is a major presidential candidate. “The Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation,” John McCain recently told an interviewer.
Here’s an offer that an erstwhile front-running shoe-in, now low on cash, ought not to refuse. Senator McCain: If you can show me where the Constitution makes us a Christian nation, I’ll donate $10,000 to your campaign. If you can’t, please explain why we should trust your presidential oath to preserve, protect and defend a document you haven’t read.
Lest you think McCain’s comment was an isolated brainfart, check out his pandering morsel from the same interview: “We were founded as a nation on Judeo-Christian principles. There’s very little debate about that.”
Speaking of war criminals, Bush won 80 percent of the Christian fundamentalist voting bloc in 2004. (If they can show me where Jesus advocates the murder of hundreds of thousands of people, I’ve got another ten grand set aside.) This year, however, the Christian soldiers are in play, dissatisfied with the entire field of presidential candidates.
It’s not for lack of sucking up.
Mitt Romney is one-upping McCain, misrepresenting Mormonism as well as the secular nature of American government. “The values of my faith are much like, or are identical to, the values of other faiths that have a Judeo-Christian philosophical background,” he said in New Hampshire. “They’re American values, if you will.” Or if you won’t. As The New York Times notes, “Mormons do not believe in the concept of the unified Trinity; the Book of Mormon is considered to be sacred text, alongside the Bible; and Mormons believe that God has a physical body and human beings can eventually become like God.” Also, the Mormon Jesus will eventually return to Independence, Missouri. “Much like.” Right.
McCain, Romney, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Mike Huckabee, Sam Brownback have all signed up to address this week’s right-wing Christian “Values Voter Summit.” So has Democrat Bill Richardson. But when it comes to indulging the whims of Christianists, these guys have nothing on the Big Three Dems.
Hillary Clinton has hired an “evangelical consultant” to court the quarter of voters who tell pollsters that God favors the United States in foreign affairs. Barack Obama deploys evangelical imagery at campaign stops in the Bible Belt. At an evangelical church in Greenville, South Carolina, he said he wants to be an “instrument of God” and expressed confidence “we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth.”
“That terminology,” said the Rev. Welton Gaddy of the Interfaith Alliance, “has a very specific, indisputable definition that is exclusive rather than inclusive.” On the campaign trail, Gaddy continued, Obama “has sounded precisely like George W. Bush.”
Even John Edwards, the most reasonable person running, isn’t above whoring his faith for votes. “I think that America is a nation of faith. I do believe that. Certainly by way of heritage–there’s a powerful Christian thread through all of American history,” he told BeliefNet. To his credit, he doesn’t go as far as his opponents. Yet he can’t bring himself to condemn prayer in public schools: “Allowing time for children to pray for themselves, to themselves, I think is not only okay, I think it’s a good thing.”
Between 10 and 14 percent of Americans are atheists. Devoting a “moment of silence” in schools sends a message to their children: you and your parents are out of step with American society.
If people want to believe in God, the Great Pumpkin, or a Jesus who lives in Missouri, that’s up to them. But religion has no place in the public life of a democracy. None.
Right-wing Christians started questioning their support for the GOP last year, when former White House staffer David Kuo published “Tempting Faith,” a bestselling book that revealed that Bush Administration officials privately ridiculed evangelicals and ignored them between elections. Bush betrayed “the millions of faithful Christians who put their trust and hope in the president and his administration,” wrote Kuo, who was the White House’s deputy director of the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives until 2003.
Who knew? Bush isn’t all bad.
McCain, meanwhile, is getting ready to get soaked to score Christian votes. “I’ve had discussions with the pastor about [undergoing a full-immersion baptism] and we’re still in conversation about it,” he says.
COPYRIGHT 2007 TED RALL
DISTRIBUTED BY uclick, LLC/TED RALL
20 Comments.
Great column. The only place I would disagree is right here:
"Speaking of war criminals, Bush won 80 percent of the Christian fundamentalist voting bloc in 2004. (If they can show me where Jesus advocates the murder of hundreds of thousands of people, I've got another ten grand set aside.)"
People need to realize something: Christianity is NOT nice. Yahweh is NOT nice. The Bible is full of genocides just like this. Unbelievers are destined for an eternal Lake of Fire. I think the Bible exemplifies and promotes this very kind of in-group thinking! Liberal touchy-feely lovey dovey Christians are as selective in their reading of the Babble as Fred Phelps is.
Ted – Even when I disagree, you are clearly able to say things others are unable to, and so I value your columns. While I am religious, I agree with the thrust and conclusion of your piece. However, still, it makes sense to point out data that's clearly "out of whack" and therefore corrupts your message.
The ARDA statistical archive is the standard on religious statistics, and I assume you are basing your stats on this database.
The ARDA lists 0.5% of the US population as Atheist, which is nowhere near the 10-14% you describe. I assume you are throwing "non-religious" – 9.3% of the US population – in with the Atheists, which gets you close to 10%. If you are serious about seeking a stronger division between church and state, this hinders your message because you start out with a declaration far out of whack with reality. Most people know Atheists don't make up more than a tiny percent of the US population. You start off looking like you are trying to get away with something.
We can reasonably assume that the 9.3% of "non-religious" are either agnostic, or just don't care about things religious. Both the agnostic and the religiously unconcerned are a very, very different group from those who actively declare themselves Atheist. Atheism is the belief in the non-existence of any form of deity. Agnosticism is completely different from this from this, as the Agnostic is (as-yet) uncommitted, and most Agnostics, in calling themselves Agnostic are welcome to consider evidence on both sides, without the forgone conclusion of there being no deity. The Agnostic tends not to be offended by things religious. The unreligious, as opposed to Atheists and Agnostics, simply do not care, and in fact can be very happy to participate in activities and festivals associated with religion – such as Christmas gift-giving, or Easter-egg hunts. Go ahead and stick up the Ten commandments – the non-religious just don't care. They aren't going to bother themselves with nonsense like religious symbols on courthouses, or morning prayers in Congress.
I agree that the government should not be involved with religion, but realistically, those who feel so ardent in their disbelief to "take up arms" in this effort – i.e. Atheists – are a tiny, tiny fraction of our population. It does not pay to lump unreligious into this group, because they are either undecided, or just don't care.
If you are serious about actively pursuing greater division between church and state, to achieve numbers, you would do better to address the religious who agree with you than to inflate the number of Atheists. Of course, if you are just preaching to an Atheist choir (flattering them by making them think they are more significant than they really are), have at it, but don't expect any RESULTS in the real world.
If, however, you really want to change things, you might try connecting with those you had not considered allies – the religious.
I do get annoyed when I hear evangelical Christians make BS claims the the U.S. was established as a Christian nation. However, I do not believe that politicians should have to turn off their faith when they get elected. For many, faith is a moral compass that guides out lives. The majority of the faithful are regular people who go about their lives in peace and who mind their own business. Unfortunately in all organizations the zealots and extremists make the most noise, and so they get the most attention. Christianity is no different.
As for brian's comment that Christianity is "NOT nice", I strongly disagree. The message of Christ is one of peace and and acceptance. He travelled with what was considered the scum of the earth in the Roman world. He preached a revolutionary message of loving and understanding those you look on as your enemy. Christ just wants everyone to live in peace and stop killing eachother of petty crap. But I am not a literalist when it comes to the Bible (or "Babble", and you arrogantly put it).
Dude Ted, your email doesn't work. I wanted to personally send you this message, so you could personally offer me 10 grand, but as you probably wouldn't have anyway, here we go:
Hello Ted,
Luke 19:27 "But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king
over them – bring them here and kill them in front of me." It's in
red in my bible, so Jesus said it.
You don't need to count all non-Christians, just count the people that
actively hate or oppose Christ, and I'm sure you'll get hundreds of
thousands.
It's also pretty clear that Christians are supposed to do the killing:
Luke 22:36 "if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one"
Also in John Jesus says he brings "not peace but a sword"
And this doesn't really contradict the bits about turning the other
cheek and loving enemies and so forth. You are supposed to love your
personal enemies, but you are supposed to hate the enemies of God.
So thank God we aren't a Christian theocracy, otherwise the
Christianist state would come and kill you, and probably me too. In
that you have continually denounced the Christianists, I'm surprised
you offered them 10 grand to demonstrate that their God demands blood.
Joseph
"Most Agnostics, in calling themselves Agnostic are welcome to consider evidence on both sides, without the forgone conclusion of there being no deity."
I don't know about "most", but if you polled me I'd call myself an Agnostic because I understand the logical impossibility of disproving something that, by definition, hides itself away so well that it can only be discerned by "faith". That being said, I lean much more strongly towards atheism than otherwise because there is NO evidence on the other side.
I don't generally try to convince others that the God hypothesis is highly improbable because firstly, I have nothing to offer to replace something that brings them comfort and secondly, because many of them claim that without their God there's no reason to act morally and this may be true- for them.
I suspect that far more agnostics are 99.999/0.001 atheist/theist than truly 50/50. People don't usually call themselves atheists unless they actually want to challenge other people's beliefs, which many non-believers don't, actually.
But Christ is not only coming in Peace. Only a tiny portion of the world will be justified.
I am disturbed by the core premise of Christianity: The oh so perfect and loving God, if He is omniscient, knew that his creation would fall. He created us imperfect. Then, he tortures a portion of the trinitarian Godhood to somehow justify us. Those who cannot accept this for whatever reason-pride, ignorance, other religions, culture, disniterest-eternal torture.
That's why I see the Gnostic interpretation of the nature of deity so much more appealing.
"A poll finds that 55 percent of Americans think the U.S. was created as a Christian theocracy."
You did not state the poll results correctly.
"55 percent of Americans said they believe that the Constitution establishes a Christian nation"
Further down in the analysis of the poll:
"Nevertheless, the latest poll doesn't mean a majority favors a "theocracy," said Rick Green of WallBuilders, an advocacy group that believes the nation was built on Christian principles, according to USA Today. Rather, the poll shows that most believe the Constitution reflects Christian values, including religious freedom."
Ted Does Theology
Sorry. Joseph, my $10,000 stays in my bank account.
Here's the extended director's cut in which Luke 19:27 appears:
<<11While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. 12He said: "A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. 13So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas.[a]'Put this money to work,' he said, 'until I come back.'
14"But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, 'We don't want this man to be our king.'
15"He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it.
16"The first one came and said, 'Sir, your mina has earned ten more.'
17" 'Well done, my good servant!' his master replied. 'Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.'
18"The second came and said, 'Sir, your mina has earned five more.'
19"His master answered, 'You take charge of five cities.'
20"Then another servant came and said, 'Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. 21I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.'
22"His master replied, 'I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23Why then didn't you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?'
24"Then he said to those standing by, 'Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.'
25" 'Sir,' they said, 'he already has ten!'
26"He replied, 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. 27But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.">>
Christ is telling a parable that quotes someone else. In no way, shape or form is he personally advocating murder.
Luke 22:36 reads: "He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'[b]; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me."
This is when Christ tells his disciple Simon that he will betray him. He tells him to buy a sword so that he can be counted among the transgressors—the Romans—and thus be part of the group who will kill him. At most, this could be called masochism.
Christianity, like all religions, contains many internal contradictions. But, as far as we know, neither the historical nor the biblical Jesus Christ never advocated murder.
I must say, it's naively literalist to say the parable is quoting somebody else. If one were to write the "Idiots Guide to Interpreting New Testament Parables", it would include that references to a king/nobleman refer to God/Christ. Of course we can debate the exact meaning of the parable ad nausium, and the version under which you owe me money might not come out on top. However, if someone were looking to justify the mass slaughter of non-believers, this would be a good place in the New Testament to start.
Dawkins makes this point in "The God Delusion": The bible is so multifaceted and "just plain weird" that even believers seldom use it to derive moral notions. Rather people apply their secular moral notions when reading and interpreting the bible, and emphasize or dismiss according to what they already want to believe.
I don't know how many people actually believe that Luke calls for the mass slaughter of the enemies of Christ. But the "Sell your cloak to buy a sword" bit is taken very seriously by many of the second amendment types. Hence "our God-given right to bear arms".
Ted: You don't believe that Revelations contradicts your thesis? There's plenty of war and killing going on there?
I can't believe the comments here. Our country was founded SPECIFICALLY rejecting religion as a basis of rule. Ted is spot on. Anyone who has read the Federalist Papers, Locke, Jefferson and the rest of the stuff that the founding fathers were into would know that this country was not founded as a religious nation. The sad thing is that I can only think of a handful of people that I know that have ever read the Federalist Papers, fewer that read Locke and Thomas Paine, and even fewer that have read De Toqueville. I am not sure how adult Americans who go around calling themselves patriots and calling me a goddless commie have not read these things. It is really sad.
On the issue of Christianity being nice… After the 20-30 times I got my ass kicked for not being Catholic or Lutheran growing up in Indiana, I have to agree with the first poster. The number of ass kickings I got at Abilene Christian University (as well as the expulsion letter) after I told a handful of friends that I wasn't sure that I believed in God further supports that premise. Then when a nice Catholic lady who was my boss harrassed and fired me because I told her, after she asked me where I went to church, that I wasn't a christian… well, you get the point. I obviously have studied the bible (see ACU earlier) and the first dude was correct. Christianity is devisive. It tells people to do cruel things. Find a christian and ask them how they feel about gay guys and you will get your answer. Listen to James Dobson talk.. you will get your answer.
Sometimes, when I'm feeling unusually optimistic, I can imagine a time when the Bible and the Qu'ran will be consigned safely to the realm of myth along with the stories of Zeus/Odin/Ra/etc. in the minds of the majority of the world's peoples, and "faith" will be recognized as the synonym for "ignorance" that it is, and one's fitness for leadership will be measured in terms of one's capacity for rational thought.
Unfortunately, a change like that would seem so miraculous that it'd probably send everybody running back to their holy books to try to explain how it could ever have happened. Oh well.
fyi: it's "shoo-in," not "shoe-in." Unless you're talking about the "shoe" "in" McCain's mouth that got there because he stuck his foot so far in.
"If people want to believe in God, the Great Pumpkin, or a Jesus who lives in Missouri, that's up to them. But religion has no place in the public life of a democracy. None."
This article is the best thing you've written in years. Awesome job, Ted.
Sorry Joseph and Kurt, Ted is right so far. I grew up Jewish and I know first hand that Christians can be very cruel. Never picked up the new testiment and haven't a clue what's in it. But, Ted's point is not that Christians are nice people his point is that they ignore their own damn religious teachings. The point of that pariable is pretty damn clear to anyone who actually reads it. Problem is, nobody does accept maybe Ted. That's the whole point of Ted argument.
No 10 grand until you find Jesus advocating murder not someone else assuming he did.
I would like to point out that the lumping of Jewish and Christian values/principles/traditions/whatever is a load of nonsense. Jewish and Christian values have not been very similar for over 1000 years. And, moreso, "Jewish principles" is very broad and very vague, as is the phrase "Christian principles". Are we talking Orthodox Jews and Southern Baptists? If the US was founded as a Christian nation (which I agree it certainly was not), you can bet your ass they didn't give a shit about the Jews. It's just a convenient way of pretending to be inclusive.
>Sometimes, when I'm feeling
>unusually optimistic, I can imagine
>a time when the Bible and the Qu'ran
>will be consigned safely to the
>realm of myth along with the stories
> of Zeus/Odin/Ra/etc.
Oi, Odin has said very clearly what to do with those who doubt his existence!
"Geth hreydirr dei sagne sethirth moromdir ok slegir deir saman."
There is absolutely no way of misinterpreting this quote from the Book of Yngve.
"ted does theology"–not so much
Ted said, "Luke 22:36 reads: "He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'[b]; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me."
This is when Christ tells his disciple Simon that he will betray him. He tells him to buy a sword so that he can be counted among the transgressors—the Romans—and thus be part of the group who will kill him."
Actually, the phrase, 'And he was numbered with the transgressors' is a self-reference to Jesus' being crucified with 2 thieves, not Simon's betrayal of Christ. Simon's betrayal didn't get Jesus crucified; Judas's did. Jesus himself interprets the Old Testament prophecy about himself when he says, "…and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me."
If you read the rest of the passage (vv. 47-51), the disciples actually try to stop the Romans and Jewish priestly leadership from arresting Jesus and 1 of them (church history says Simon, but the Bible doesn't name him) manages to cut off the ear of the servant of the high priest, which Jesus immediately heals. He then tells his disciples to put away their swords.
Simon's later denial of his association with Jesus only saved his (Simon's) own neck. It did nothing to secure the crucifixion of Jesus.
Hey Ted-
Don't get hung up on that Jesus guy- he was a gutless liberal, all peace and love (and you can rot in hell if you don't listen). He was a hippy, in a childish rebellion against his old man, who was as Republican as they come. Old Blood and Guts. He once killed a guy for pulling out of his wife because he was in a hurry! And when he told his people to kill, he had them kill everyone, including the children. Sometimes he would let them keep the virgins as sex slaves, just to show he wasn't totally heartless.
That is why Joe Lieberman gets along so well with Bush & Co. They are all Old Testamenters. We are doing God's work in Iraq! But just to be sure, maybe we should start collecting the foreskins of our slain enemies. They make a nice necklace, like the ears back in Vietnam.
Religion has been a pox on humanity from Day 1.
However, it is useful for the investor class, for as a wise observer once said, it stops the poor from killing them.