Political Poison from the Religious Right

[Gene Scarborough]

http://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2012/03/americas-most-biblically-hostile-us.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BibleProphecyBlog+%28Bible+Prophecy+Blog%29&m=1

By David Barton
WallBuilders

When one observes President Obama’s unwillingness to accommodate America’s four-century long religious conscience protection through his attempts to require Catholics to go against their own doctrines and beliefs, one is tempted to say that he is anti-Catholic. But that characterization would not be correct. Although he has recently singled out Catholics, he has equally targeted traditional Protestant beliefs over the past four years. So since he has attacked Catholics and Protestants, one is tempted to say that he is anti-Christian. But that, too, would be inaccurate. He has been equally disrespectful in his appalling treatment of religious Jews in general and Israel in particular. So perhaps the most accurate description of his antipathy toward Catholics, Protestants, religious Jews, and the Jewish nation would be to characterize him as anti-Biblical. And then when his hostility toward Biblical people of faith is contrasted with his preferential treatment of Muslims and Muslim nations, it further strengthens the accuracy of the anti-Biblical descriptor. In fact, there have been numerous clearly documented times when his pro-Islam positions have been the cause of his anti-Biblical actions.

Listed below in chronological order are (1) numerous records of his attacks on Biblical persons or organizations; (2) examples of the hostility toward Biblical faith that have become evident in the past three years in the Obama-led military; (3) a listing of his open attacks on Biblical values; and finally (4) a listing of numerous incidents of his preferential deference for Islam’s activities and positions, including letting his Islamic advisors guide and influence his hostility toward people of Biblical faith.

It has been a while since I have seen such distortion of a President who is abiding by the Constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion. The author is an obviouis fundamentalist right wing Republican. Please read the entire rant and see what you think

A little more looking shows him to be an "influential" guy from Texas who formed this organization = beware fundies from Texas!!!!

[Haruo]

He'll get his next year when Obama forces him to wear a microchip.

[Gene Scarborough]

Just joking----I pesume old limping one!!!

[Gene Scarborough]

Recent collection of the poison from the Religious Right:

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/

You won't believe how it is coalescing for a state of control beyond our imagination in a free society!

•AFA's OneMillionMoms is now targeting the ABC television show "GCB' because it is "a Christian-bashing program" that is "blasphemy at its worst."

•Speaking of AFA, it wants you to "Let Kirk Cameron know you support his stand."

•James Robison warns that "everything sacred is being trampled under the feet of those who consider God unimportant or non-existent. Faith, family, and freedom are being trampled by many who call themselves liberals, socialists, progressives, and activists."

•Beware: the new movie "The Lorax" is "designed to motivate your children and turn them into little eco-warrior."

•FRC prays that "same-sex 'marriage' efforts in Maryland, Maine, and Washington State [will] fail!"

•Finally, the quote of the day from Cliff Kincaid: "[Rush] Limbaugh is losing this debate and may lose his show. He has no one to blame but himself. Armed with no facts and a series of smears, Limbaugh, a college drop-out, went into a battle with a young woman law student that he lost and is continuing to lose. Conservatives can and should do better than this. Limbaugh should go, before even more damage to the cause is done."

[KeithE]

Good find Gene.

Barton searches for quotes that he can spin into his paranoia that Christians and Jews are discriminated against by Obama. When one is looking for a conclusion, one sees it in every corner.

Even granting his conclusion (Obama is anti-Biblical) -which I do not grant -, Barton is not practicing the greatest Biblical principle namely Love your neighbor. Love perseveres all, it does not keep a record of wrongs.

1st alleged anti-Biblical statement said during his campaign.

April 2008—Obama speaks disrespectfully of Christians, saying they “cling to guns or religion” and have an “antipathy to people who aren't like them.” [1]

OBAMA: Here’s how it is: in a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long, and they feel so betrayed by government, and when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn't buy it. And when it's delivered by -- it's true that when it's delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama (laugher), then that adds another layer of skepticism (laughter).
But -- so the questions you're most likely to get about me, 'Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What's the concrete thing?' What they wanna hear is -- so, we'll give you talking points about what we're proposing -- close tax loopholes, roll back, you know, the tax cuts for the top 1 percent. Obama's gonna give tax breaks to middle-class folks and we're gonna provide health care for every American. So we'll go down a series of talking points.
But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there's not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Note he said “religion” not Christianity.

Barton shows his hypersenstivity. Obama was showing his understanding of people’s frustration.

The Christianty Today author Sarah Pulliam Baily shows her politicizing:

A political storm is brewing over Sen. Barack Obama's recent statements. Last Sunday, Obama was explaining his difficulty with winning over working-class voters in Pennsylvania and the Midwest, saying they have become frustrated with economic conditions:
"And it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations," Obama said.

She just had to say Obama was having 'difficulty winning over working class voters in PA and the Midwest'. BTW Obama did win PA and the Midwest.
http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/map.html

Now has Obama done what he said he would do (green above)? Not really. But in fairness the atmosphere has not been very conducive to change. Corporations, Lobbyists, Republicans and many Democrats have seen to that. http://www.voterocky.org

2nd alleged Anti-Biblical statement. right after taking office rescinding some of what Bush put in place in his last days of office.

Barton: February 2009—Obama announces plans to revoke conscience protection for health workers who refuse to participate in medical activities that go against their beliefs, and fully implements the plan in February 2011. [2]

Article Barton supplies as support: The Obama administration has changed a George W. Bush provision that was created to allow health workers to opt out of services they find objectionable on religious grounds, Rob Stein of the Washington Post reports. The change maintains the provision that allows workers to refrain from performing abortions.
The Health and Human Services Department eliminated nearly the entire rule put into effect by the administration of President George W. Bush during his final days in office that was widely interpreted as allowing such workers to opt out of a broad range of medical services, such as providing the emergency contraceptive Plan B, treating gay men and lesbians and prescribing birth control to single women.
Calling the Bush-era rule "unclear and potentially overbroad in scope," the new, much narrower version essentially leaves in place only long-standing federal protections for workers who object to performing abortions or sterilizations. It also retains the Bush rule's formal process for workers to file complaints.

Barton exaggerates. Thou shall lie.

Do you think Jesus would treat a gay man or lesbians? He treated lepers and ministered to an adulteress. And as Cathy has pointed out there are several other reasons to take birth controls pills. And there is no real prohibitions about contraceptives in the Bible (Song of Solomon may have actually sanctioned it). So how has Obama been painted as “Anti-Biblical”. Only in Barton’s and his ilk’s minds.

I think I’ll stop there. Barton does more harm to the Biblical witness than Obama.

[Gene Scarborough]

Another article from the above:

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/santorum-appears-extremist-talk-show-love-fest-ensues

Rick Santorum has demonstrated, yet again, his willingness to associate with people whose views are repugnant to most Americans. This afternoon he appeared on one of the most extreme Religious Right programs in the country – American Family Radio’s Focal Point with Bryan Fischer.

Fischer, the Director of Issues Analysis for the American Family Association, has been accused of crossing the line against “decency and civility” and of using “poisonous language” – by none other than Mitt Romney at the Values Voters Summit, who was trying to cautiously distance himself from Fischer’s repeated attacks on his Mormon faith while still courting the Religious Right. Later in January, Fischer claimed that a electing a Mormon president would threaten the “spiritual health” of the country.

But Fischer isn’t only out to get Mormons. He has an extensive history of bigotry against groups like Muslims (who are stupid because of inbreeding), gays and lesbians (who are responsible for Holocaust), Native Americans (who are “morally disqualified” from controlling land) , low-income African Americans (who “rut like rabbits”), and basically anyone who isn’t a “real” Christian. Fischer has also likened President Obama to Adolf Hitler and called him a tyrant who has a “hatred for the United States” and a “hatred for the white man.”

That brings us to Rick Santorum, who is hoping today’s appearance on American Family Radio will help him reach right-wing voters in Alabama, Mississippi and Kansas – the next states to vote in the GOP primary. He even gave a shout-out to the Deep South at the top of the interview: “We spent yesterday in Mississippi and Kansas and today we’re in Alabama. I’ll tell ya, there’s just nothing friendlier than the Deep South. We’re just enjoying the heck out of it here.”

Republicans seem to be in great trouble with the economy showing signs of recovery and withdrawal of troops from Iraq. The price of gas is making folks mad, but are the Primary candidates now becoming exotic dancers trying to lift the money from the angry

[Stephen Fox]

In SBC Trends, War On Faith Thread. Righteous Southern Baptists felt compelled to bring up Jeremiah Wright's name again to paint Obama as Other.

[Gene Scarborough]

Sorry---I don't see your point, Stephen

[Stephen Fox]

Some day you will, Gene as have the editors of the Bham News who most likely will publish my letter.

In the meantime for GOP Poison, think on this:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2 ... venge.html

[Gene Scarborough]

Recent observations related to the Conservative Right Wing Political/Religious stuff:

Dear Friends,

I have been greatly moved by Rick Santorum's wise pronouncements, guided by Biblical principles, especially those concerning marriage. Of course he believes that sexual intercourse should be used only for purposes of procreation (he says he has never worn a condom), but there are some gray areas I was hoping he could clear up, so I wrote him the following letter:

“Dear Sen. Santorum:

Thank you for doing so much to educate us regarding God's Eternal Law. I have learned a great deal from you and understand why you would propose and support a constitutional amendment outlawing same-sex marriage, which of course is an abomination.

As you said, "In the eyes of God, marriage is based between a man and a woman." I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how I might obey them:

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies only to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Can I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? (She works hard, but does eat a lot.)

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness (Lev. 14: 19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking when meeting young women at church socials, but most of them seem to take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is with my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them, or would Lysol work?

5. I have a neighbor, Aaron Rogers, who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states that he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it? And how good is the Packers backup QB?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev.11:10) it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there degrees of abomination? What about a homosexual at an oyster bar?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I do wear glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here? What about contacts? Can God tell?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die? I know they must be put to death, but I do not know the recommended method. .

9. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field (I think corn and alfalfa). And his wife wears garments made from two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev. 24:10-16). Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their inlaws? (Lev. 20:14).

10. And last, I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean. May I still play football if I wear gloves?

I know that you are very busy with your presidential campaign, but, if you get a chance, I would really like your guidance on these critical and disturbing issues.

Thank you again for reminding us of the eternal and unchanging truth of the Holy Bible. God bless you. And may He guide you in your quest to lead this great nation of ours.

Sincerely, Dan
Middleton, Wis.”

[KeithE]

LOL

Conservative and/or fundamentalist Christians are so use to ignoring these and other such passages, they cannot see their own selectivity of biblical passages (all of which they proudly announce must be absolutely and everlastingly true else their faith is without any basis).

True some say with justification (Galatians 3:23-25, Hebrews 10:14-16 which recalls and fulfills Jer 31:31-33) that the OT law is not longer in play (except when they want to use it such as to condemn homosexuality or demand a tithe or claim the 10C’s are exempt from being not in play). As justified as these statements are in saying the law has been replaced, it ignores (and inerrantists cannot so consistently) what Jesus is reported to have said in very strong terms in the NT:

Matt 5:17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Now the phrase at the end of vs 18 (“until everything is accomplished”) is sometimes used to mean Christ’s crucifixion and that is a reasonable assertion. I have no real quibble with those that construct their faith in that manner relying on the Holy Spirit as the ultimate authority (if sufficiently attuned). But they must realize that to again shrink back into expounding some selective OT laws dogmatically when it so suits them, is inconsistent. Pointing out truths in OT statements is OK by me but it has to be validated by the Holy Spirit and the “it is written” mentality cannot be the sole authority.

My own approach to this is to believe in the possibility of vs 18-19 are insertions to Jesus’s true words (Matt 5:17 and 5:20) which read like a perfect couplet both language wise and content wise and it fits as a perfect introduction to the Sermon on the Mount. They could have been added by Judaizers who would to like to trump all the “You have that it was said to an older generation,.... but I say to you .....” statements from Jesus in the following Sermon on the Mount (5:21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43) that threatened their Pharisaic ways.

As a non-inerrantist I am free to synthesize this key understanding of our ethical basis best I can within the Spirit’s guidance. Matt 5 consistently corrects an OT understanding of laws with a more internal motivation based ethic (“written on our hearts” or "Fulfillment by Spirit”). An inerrantist is stuck being legalistic (“written on paper”). They are forced (knowingly or unknowingly) to being selective when what’s on paper does not pass the giggle test such Gene's post parodies.

I see Jesus as against the strict “teachers of the Law”, the modern equivalent today being the Religious Right. Sorry if I offend.

[Haruo]

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies only to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Can I own Canadians?

This is a tricky one. Basically it depends on whether the Canadians are still "the Northern Kingdom" or whether they have sunk into the vicious stagnation that is Samaritanism. I say that, except for the surviving Philistines in Quebec, and the idolatrous hill tribes, the bulk of the Canadians are still children of Israel, hence not (yet) eligible for enslavement.

[Dave Roberts]

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies only to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Can I own Canadians?

This is a tricky one. Basically it depends on whether the Canadians are still "the Northern Kingdom" or whether they have sunk into the vicious stagnation that is Samaritanism. I say that, except for the surviving Philistines in Quebec, and the idolatrous hill tribes, the bulk of the Canadians are still children of Israel, hence not (yet) eligible for enslavement.

[Gene Scarborough]

Only a bunch of BL bloggers could have this much fun with "stupid" in politics these days!!!

Santorum takes Alabama and MIssissippi---they can't make it to a Mormon, it seems even through he is otherwise appealing to their hate and greed, he's still a XXXX Mormon!

[Gene Scarborough]

Back on track:

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2012/03/many-southern-gopers-say-obama-is-muslim/1

More polls and more evidence that a significant number of Republicans continue to believe President Obama is a Muslim.

In Mississippi, 52% of GOP members say Obama is Muslim, according to Public Policy Polling.

Only 12% of Magnolia State Republicans say they believe the president is a Christian, while 36% are unsure.

In Alabama, 45% of Republicans say Obama is Muslim, according to the PPP survey. Just 14% say he is Christian, and 41% are unsure.

"There's considerable skepticism about Barack Obama's religion with Republican voters," says Public Policy Polling, a firm based in Raleigh, N.C.

Obama has repeatedly declared his Christian faith.

Do people ever listen to the man uttering his own words at the National Prayer Breakfast????

This is a national scandal when we are supposed to separate church and state and have enough sense to listen and hear.

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: But Gene, There are a number of SBC leaders in whom you seem to see no good but the offer some nice prayers especially at public breakfast meetings.

And while I Hope some one steps up who can unseat Obama I do not question his profession of being a Christian.

[Gene Scarborough]

Just send the President some Legislators who are statesmen over party addicts, and see if things won't improve!!!

[Ed Pettibone]

Just send the President some Legislators who are statesmen over party addicts, and see if things won't improve!!!

Ed: I would rather send the Legislature another president

[Dave Roberts]

From what I've seen from Congress over the last decade, Congress seems to remain in gridlock no matter who is in the White House. When did we last have a federal budget that didn't rely on special appropriations for the Defense Department and continuing resolutions to fund lots of things at last year's level because Congress couldn't even agree on how to discuss them. Seems like that goes back at least to about 2005.

[Mrs Haruo]

Granny Hoppingobble who lives in a yurt up back of my apple trees says "I'm amazed at the stupidittidy of the present candidates for office. They seem to git worse every year. Particalarly that GOP."

[Gene Scarborough]

My Grandpappy put it this way:

"The higher the monkey climbs the tree---the more you see his tail!"

Somehow monkeys are not restricted to any political party nor church! Do your own looking and evaluating these days and forget about that slick commercials or sound bites produced on Madison Avenue---which can make dog poop smell like roses----until you pick it up and taste it and then it's too late!

[Stephen Fox]

GScar's poll findings above say a lot. On Tuesday I had contentious conversation with Bama Bap Editor Bob Terry. He could not bring himself to say he believes Obama is a Christian yet he went on 60 minutes to defend the Allied Defense Fund's Pickering against charges of Racism a few years ago. And I think Terry did a good job in that instance.
It is a failure of SBC leadership that deep south evangelicals are in such a fog, or worse hold these resentments about Obama's faith.

[Gene Scarborough]

The first thing Southern arsnic or DDT effects is the brain---maybe they farmed too much cotton when they were young and never got past "stupid" in their brain development!

On the other hand they could be just plain stinking mean and enjoy it!!!

Either way, "Houston, we got a problem here!"

[Gene Scarborough]

A most sensible and insightful article by David Gushee:

Opinion: When ministers are used by politicians
By David Gushee
Monday, March 19, 2012

(ABP) -- A leading presidential candidate writes letters to Christian ministers from around the country. He remarks positively on their contribution to society and church and suggests his interest in personal conversation. He invites the ministers to respond to a particular campaign official to set up a face-to-face. Many of the clergy respond in turn by contacting the campaign.

A delegation of Christian ministers is invited to visit the White House and receive a briefing on current issues. They are met in the Executive Office Building by White House officials bearing important titles. After several hours together, the clergy leave the White House and return to their churches with memories and some pictures on their phones.

A group of ministers is called by Congress to testify before a committee on a controversial administration decision. Each argues that the administration’s position violates constitutional principles. Their testimony gains national attention.

These are fairly routine kinds of events in the relationship between church and state in the United States. I have personally experienced each of them.

Notice what these events have in common. In each case the initiative flows from the state to the church. In each case the state official invites the Christian minister to participate in some way in the political process. In each case the state official offers access or the appearance of access to government power or those who (might soon) exercise it. In each case the Christian minister responds positively and becomes involved in the manner suggested by the inviting politician.

Consider how this experience is processed from the minister’s side.

Receipt of the letter from the presidential campaign, the phone call from the White House or the invitation to testify before Congress is exciting. It isn’t every day that a Christian minister laboring anonymously in a clerical vineyard somewhere gets such a phone call, e-mail or letter.

The minister is not just excited. He is flattered. This call means he is being noticed, and by very high officials in Washington. One does not always know whether anyone is really noticing our hard work. The kinds of people we see on TV every day -- they know I exist! They think I have something important to say! I might get to be on TV too! What outfit should I wear?

While excited and flattered, the minister is an earnest person. He does not want to say yes to the state’s summons simply because of vanity. He says yes, sure, but the reason he says yes is because this is a chance to make a difference. He might influence a future president or affect an important policy debate. It is unlikely that he will make any difference whatsoever, but he will go, certainly go, when summoned.

Now consider the matter from the politicians’ side. Why do they offer such invitations to gentle clergy folk?

They do it so they can win.

Each minister stroked and flattered by a politician has the potential to become an ally. His very presence in the room signals that this politician is a friend and not an enemy. At the very least, the invitation likely neutralizes any potential public opposition from the minister to this candidate or politician. Once having experienced the excitement of a gilt-edged White House or Congressional invitation, the minister is less likely to do or say anything that might cost him future experiences, invitations or access.

Every four years (every two years; every year; most months) Christian ministers in America are enticed by politicians to come onto their turf and play their game their way. When we say yes, it is not so much a church/state violation as it is a state-church seduction. Both parties do it, and they do it well. Ministers of all political ideologies succumb just as helplessly. Perhaps it is comforting to find that we all have this in common. Bipartisan unity at last!

Come into my parlor, said the spider to the fly.

Sorry I didn't have a link since this was sent me via email by a thinking buddy retired down in Georgia

[Stephen Fox]

Of LBJ and Senator Sam Ervin. I'm not sure what Scar and Gushee are gettin at, but if they are failing to make a distinction between Karl Rove's relationship to Richard Land, and Robert Parham and Jim Evans recent visit to the Obama White House, then I think we ought to explore it.
James Dunn walked the tightrope between politickin for Jimmy Carter with Jimmy Allen in the Texas Primary in 1976. I don't think Pressler ever forgave him and that was one of the reasons for all the energy in the SBC Takeover.
Scaroborough and Gushee both should maybe examine STeven Miller on Graham and Nixon a little closer; or my friend Darrick Harkins and President Obama.
Ross Douthat has a book coming out soon on the GOP and the Religious Right.
And Parham has a post up today at www.ethicsdaily.com on goodwill Baptists.
I posted it at Kady Ann Davy's Facebook page near Lumberton.

Let's continue to explore.