New York Times editor compares religious belief to belief that space aliens live among us, and suggests that candidates for President should explain their faith.

Oh I LIKE this guy!

Courtesy of Bill Keller of the NYT:

If a candidate for president said he believed that space aliens dwell among us, would that affect your willingness to vote for him? Personally, I might not disqualify him out of hand; one out of three Americans believe we have had Visitors and, hey, who knows? But I would certainly want to ask a few questions. Like, where does he get his information? Does he talk to the aliens? Do they have an economic plan?This year’s Republican primary season offers us an important opportunity to confront our scruples about the privacy of faith in public life — and to get over them. We have an unusually large number of candidates, including putative front-runners, who belong to churches that are mysterious or suspect to many Americans. Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are Mormons, a faith that many conservative Christians have been taught is a “cult” and that many others think is just weird. (Huntsman says he is not “overly religious.”) Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann are both affiliated with fervid subsets of evangelical Christianity — and Rick Santorum comes out of the most conservative wing of Catholicism — which has raised concerns about their respect for the separation of church and state, not to mention the separation of fact and fiction. 

I honestly don’t care if Mitt Romney wears Mormon undergarments beneath his Gap skinny jeans, or if he believes that the stories of ancient American prophets were engraved on gold tablets and buried in upstate New York, or that Mormonism’s founding prophet practiced polygamy (which was disavowed by the church in 1890). Every faith has its baggage, and every faith holds beliefs that will seem bizarre to outsiders. I grew up believing that a priest could turn a bread wafer into the actual flesh of Christ. 

But I do want to know if a candidate places fealty to the Bible, the Book of Mormon (the text, not the Broadway musical) or some other authority higher than the Constitution and laws of this country. It matters to me whether a president respects serious science and verifiable history — in short, belongs to what an official in a previous administration once scornfully described as “the reality-based community.” I do care if religious doctrine becomes an excuse to exclude my fellow citizens from the rights and protections our country promises. 

I am sorry but there should not even be any debate about this.  Of COURSE we should know what kind of beliefs might inform the decision making of potentially the most powerful person in the world.

Look at Rick Perry for example.  The man has said numerous times that he would leave the more difficult problems facing his state, and our country, "in God's hands." Is that really the guy we want to have at the helm tasked with steering this great country through the troubles which lie just over the horizon?

Here are the questions that Keller sent to the candidates:

1. Is it fair to question presidential candidates about details of their faith? 
2. Is it fair to question candidates about controversial remarks made by their pastors, mentors, close associates or thinkers whose books they recommend? 
3. (a) Do you agree with those religious leaders who say that America is a “Christian nation” or “Judeo-Christian nation?” (b) What does that mean in practice? 
4. If you encounter a conflict between your faith and the Constitution and laws of the United States, how would you resolve it? Has that happened, in your experience? 
5. (a) Would you have any hesitation about appointing a Muslim to the federal bench? (b) What about an atheist? 
6. Are Mormons Christians, in your view? Should the fact that Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are Mormons influence how we think of them as candidates? 
7. What do you think of the evangelical Christian movement known as Dominionism and the idea that Christians, and only Christians, should hold dominion over the secular institutions of the earth? 
8. (a) What is your attitude toward the theory of evolution? (b) Do you believe it should be taught in public schools? 
9. Do you believe it is proper for teachers to lead students in prayer in public schools?

I don't know about all of you but I would LOVE to hear the answers to these questions, ESPECIALLY from Bachmann and Perry, and of course Palin if she were ignorant enough to throw her hat into the ring.

Already the recent journalistic focus on Dominionism has started to freak the Evangelicals out a little, as evidenced by this complete denial of its existence by disgraced "Right Hand of God" Ralph Reed.

Hey, in my opinion if they are really secure in their faith, and proud of their religious convictions, they should be proud to discuss them in the public forum.

I mean it's not like they have something to hide, right?

US teachers spend the most time in the classroom teaching. So much for the idea that American teachers are lazy.

Courtesy of the Wall Street Journal:

Among 27 member nations tracked by the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ), U.S. primary-school educators spent 1,097 hours a year teaching despite only spending 36 weeks a year in the classroom — among the lowest among the countries tracked. That was more than 100 hours more than New Zealand, in second place at 985 hours, despite students in that country going to school for 39 weeks. 

The OECD average is 786 hours.And that’s just the time teachers spend on instruction. Including hours teachers spend on work at home and outside the classroom, American primary-school educators spend 1,913 working in a year. According to data from the comparable year in a Labor Department survey, an average full-time employee works 1,932 hours a year spread out over 48 weeks (excluding two weeks vacation and federal holidays).

One of the things that can piss me off faster than just about anything else in the world is listening to people slam teachers. That absolutely makes my blood boil.

I have had the privilege of working with some of the finest educators in the country, and I can tell you from my own experiences with schools in the Anchorage area, that I have only rarely, and I mean RARELY, come across a teacher who I considered less than completely dedicated to the children they taught.

When I worked at the local elementary school for those four years, I would often receive calls from the teacher that I worked with, who was still at the school sometimes as late as seven o-clock in the evening inputting data on the computer or preparing her lessons.

Now this article goes on to say that despite these many hours of classroom instruction that America is still not doing as well as it could with educating our young people. But I would suggest that it has much more to do with the lack of parental involvement, the "dumbing" down of the textbooks around the country,  and the focus on "teaching to the test" that has been the focus of education in our public schools since the introduction of NCLB.

Nor does it help to provide a multifaceted educational experience with the dramatic increase in the banning of books from our school libraries:

On Monday at the Republic, MO school board meeting, four Republic School Board members reviewed a year-old complaint that three books are inappropriate reading material for high school children. In a 4-0 vote, the members decided to ax two of the three books from the high school curriculum and the library shelves: Twenty Boy Summer by Sarah Ockler and Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut. Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson was spared. The resident who filed the original complaint targeted these three books because “they teach principles contrary to the Bible“ 

There have been 20 books banned in the last six months from school libraries. And instead of responding to complaints from a single parent, like in times past, these days the complaints are coming from organizations that seem determined to "clean up" the libraries in response to a religious or political agenda:

Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, says he believes the challenges are increasingly influenced by politics and the economy. 

" Districts are dependent on budgets, and politically motivated school boards try to determine what we read, what we think and what we teach," he says. 

Here is the list of banned books.

Cutting school funding at every opportunity, demanding high exam scores even in low income/high crime  areas, and removing intellectually stimulating reading material that does not comport with a right wing political agenda, and we want to blame TEACHERS for the lack of success in our classrooms?

Leah Burton, of "God's Own Party," announces the release of her long anticipated book "God, Guns, & Greed."

Courtesy of God's Own Party:

I attribute Palin’s meteoric rise for prompting me to jump back into the world of politics. The announcement on August 29th, 2008 that Sarah Palin was the vice presidential running mate to John McCain just about gave me whiplash and knocked me from my desk chair. In a matter of seconds, I knew that I had to begin writing about the world of Political Dominionism and Sarah Palin. 

So, in honor of this woman bringing so much attention to herself – and simultaneously - to the world of religious extremism in American politics I am announcing the release of my book on the 3rd anniversary of her walk onto the world stage in Minneapolis, Minnesota at the Republican National Convention September 4th, 2008. 

Here is the official announcement:


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

God, Guns & Greed 

Forward by Dr. Anthea Butler, Graduate ChairReligious Studies, University of Pennsylvania 

Author Leah L. Burton 

A Dangerous Path for America 

 God, Guns & Greed is an irreverent look into the rise of religious extremism tying Perry, Bachmann Palin & Co. as not simply a handful of devout Christians. They are political Dominionists and their message is being preached from pulpits across America, reaching an enormous voting bloc of “social conservatives”. 

A debate has ensued over what to call these religious extremists. Whether you call it “Dominionism” or the “New Apostolic Reformation” this fight is real and it affects every American! Dominionists claim authority from Genesis 1:28 mandating that they take dominion and be stewards of this earth until the Second Coming of Christ. Rewriting America’s history is an integral part of their message insisting that America is a Christian Nation and their followers are drinking the Kool-Aid. 

Their efforts are made more powerful by the cross-pollination of non-Dominionists seeking to tear apart government control and regulations. Corporatist’s wealth like the Koch Brothers and Sovereign Citizens disdain for the federal government are just two of the unholy alliances Dominionists make in their common goal to privatize government. It is a win-win for all of them. 

Stepping outside the typical “political book”, Burton exposes their religious messaging and tactics. Pulling from her years of research and experience, she writes in straight forward language about this organized effort – hiding in plain sight – to destroy religious and personal freedom. 

This path for America is a place where freedoms are diminished and theocracy rules. It is a profoundly un-American place. God, Guns & Greed will help inform you what this Movement is and how we can stop it.

I have often said, and I will repeat it here again, that Leah is my "go to" source on Dominionism.  She has made the study of this terrifying branch of fundamentalism the focus of her research for many years now, and I cannot think of anybody whose input I would value more than Leah Burton's on this topic.

I have been one of the few fortunate individuals to have the ability to e-mail or call Leah when I was struggling to understand something about the movement, or trying to find the right words to describe their agenda or progress in the political spectrum.

Now all of you can enjoy that same access to Leah's knowledge base that I have found invaluable for all of these years, by ordering her new book here.

Little girl beaten to death in the name of God.

I am not going to use this incident to slam Christianity, or the teachings of the Bible. But I am going to say that we have learned SO much more about how to raise our children in the thousands of years that have passed since those books were written that following the guidelines for parenting that are laid out in the Old Testament is just nuts.

There is NO excuse for brutalizing a child, and if you believe in a God that condones or encourages such behavior, than my tolerance for your religious choice has to come to an end.

As hard as it is too watch this video I think it is important, because there are forces in this country that are demanding that we go back to a time when we received out instructions for how to live our lives, raise our children, and treat our spouses, from religious leaders instead of educators, scientists, and therapists.

There is a real attempt these days to discredit intelligence and to replace it with faith. In other words to believe, rather than to think. And in my opinion it is that kind of slippery slope which ultimately results in this kind of tragedy.

(H/T to CNN.)

Who are the Teabaggers? Well it turns out they are EXACTLY who we thought they were.

 Courtesy of the New York Times:

Our analysis casts doubt on the Tea Party’s “origin story.” Early on, Tea Partiers were often described as nonpartisan political neophytes. Actually, the Tea Party’s supporters today were highly partisan Republicans long before the Tea Party was born, and were more likely than others to have contacted government officials. In fact, past Republican affiliation is the single strongest predictor of Tea Party support today. 

 What’s more, contrary to some accounts, the Tea Party is not a creature of the Great Recession. Many Americans have suffered in the last four years, but they are no more likely than anyone else to support the Tea Party. And while the public image of the Tea Party focuses on a desire to shrink government, concern over big government is hardly the only or even the most important predictor of Tea Party support among voters. 

 So what do Tea Partiers have in common? They are overwhelmingly white, but even compared to other white Republicans, they had a low regard for immigrants and blacks long before Barack Obama was president, and they still do.

More important, they were disproportionately social conservatives in 2006 — opposing abortion, for example — and still are today. Next to being a Republican, the strongest predictor of being a Tea Party supporter today was a desire, back in 2006, to see religion play a prominent role in politics. And Tea Partiers continue to hold these views: they seek “deeply religious” elected officials, approve of religious leaders’ engaging in politics and want religion brought into political debates. The Tea Party’s generals may say their overriding concern is a smaller government, but not their rank and file, who are more concerned about putting God in government. 

This inclination among the Tea Party faithful to mix religion and politics explains their support for Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota and Gov. Rick Perry of Texas. Their appeal to Tea Partiers lies less in what they say about the budget or taxes, and more in their overt use of religious language and imagery, including Mrs. Bachmann’s lengthy prayers at campaign stops and Mr. Perry’s prayer rally in Houston. 

Yet it is precisely this infusion of religion into politics that most Americans increasingly oppose. While over the last five years Americans have become slightly more conservative economically, they have swung even further in opposition to mingling religion and politics. It thus makes sense that the Tea Party ranks alongside the Christian Right in unpopularity.

Republican racists who want to turn this country into a theocracy.

Color me unsurprised.

Want a second opinion?  Here you go.

When I started going to Tea Party meetings two years ago, I was sympathetic. Just after attending one in North Dakota in August of 2009, I wrote: "Most tea partiers are not bad people. They're just mad. In many meaningful ways, today's Tea Party attendees' lives have gotten consistently worse for the last 20 years, regardless of which party was in power." I concluded that trying to figure out what they wanted was a dead end because what they wanted was simply to complain—that the Tea Party "is not a group of listen and respond; this is a group of respond and respond." 

Two years of Tea Party functions later, and I finally know what the Tea Party wants: A Christian nation.

It appears that these small minded, ignorant racist fundamentalists have completely taken over the Republican party.  And through them they want to take over this country.

What say we keep that from happening.  You with me?

With Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry now two of the three GOP front runners, Dominionism is now getting the scrutiny it deserves. Update!

Sarah Palin may have been the first shiny object to really draw our attention to the Dominionist movement, but now that it has been clearly defined the media is beginning to pick up the signs of its influence on OTHER candidates as well.

Courtesy of The Daily Beast:

With Tim Pawlenty out of the presidential race, it is now fairly clear that the GOP candidate will either be Mitt Romney or someone who makes George W. Bush look like Tom Paine. Of the three most plausible candidates for the Republican nomination, two are deeply associated with a theocratic strain of Christian fundamentalism known as Dominionism. If you want to understand Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry, understanding Dominionism isn’t optional. 

 Put simply, Dominionism means that Christians have a God-given right to rule all earthly institutions. Originating among some of America’s most radical theocrats, it’s long had an influence on religious-right education and political organizing. But because it seems so outré, getting ordinary people to take it seriously can be difficult. Most writers, myself included, who explore it have been called paranoid. In a contemptuous 2006 First Things review of several books, including Kevin Phillips’ American Theocracy, and my own Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, conservative columnist Ross Douthat wrote, “the fear of theocracy has become a defining panic of the Bush era.” 

 Now, however, we have the most theocratic Republican field in American history, and suddenly, the concept of Dominionism is reaching mainstream audiences. Writing about Bachmann in The New Yorker this month, Ryan Lizza spent several paragraphs explaining how the premise fit into the Minnesota congresswoman’s intellectual and theological development. And a recent Texas Observer cover story on Rick Perry examined his relationship with the New Apostolic Reformation, a Dominionist variant of Pentecostalism that coalesced about a decade ago. “[W]hat makes the New Apostolic Reformation movement so potent is its growing fascination with infiltrating politics and government,” wrote Forrest Wilder. Its members “believe Christians—certain Christians—are destined to not just take ‘dominion’ over government, but stealthily climb to the commanding heights of what they term the ‘Seven Mountains’ of society, including the media and the arts and entertainment world.”

I was talking to a very good, and well informed, friend recently about this topic and was told that someday we may all feel a sense of gratitude toward Sarah Palin for clumsily revealing just how influential and pervasive these Fundamentalist Christian groups had become.

Before Palin people like Leah Burton and Frank Schaeffer were considered "Chicken Little's" crying about a sky that was falling which nobody else could see. But with their help, and the help of many others, we are now able to see great chunks of falling debris and recognize the danger that they represent.

It reminds me of the movie "They Live" in which the danger was all around, but until you put on those special sunglasses you were completely unaware that everything you thought you knew was false.

Those of us who visit here, as well as God's Own Party, and various other informational blogs and websites, have our glasses firmly in place, and KNOW exactly what we are looking at when it comes to a Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, or Rick Santorum.

Now it falls on those of us who are newly aware, to open the eyes of our friends and families to the dangers that are posed by this EXTREMELY aggressive and determined group of Theocrats.

Sarah Palin maybe yesterday's news, but the headlines for tomorrow may be equally as grim.

Update: A friend just reminded me that Leah Burton has a very important book on this subject coming out soon, called "God, Guns, and Greed." You can check it out for yourself, and even pre-order it, by clicking here.

Michele Bachmann listed Francis Schaeffer as one of her most important influences.. His son, Frank Schaeffer, explains why that should terrify you.

From AlterNet:

As presidential candidate Michele Bachmann chews up scenery in the GOP primaries, the mainstream media is finally digging into her extremist beliefs in a serious way. In a profile published earlier this week, the New Yorker's Ryan Lizza talked about Bachmann's radical right-wing influences, which include the most extremist figures in the history of the religious right movement. 

One of these was my evangelical leader father, Francis Schaeffer. Bachmann says in the New Yorker article that she got into politics because she watched a film series I directed called “How Should We Then Live,” written by and featuring my dad. 

What the New Yorker article doesn’t do is explain why people like Bachmann, Sarah Palin, et al. turned to the hard reactionary anti-government right. I explain this in my book Sex, Mom and God. I think it’s important to understand this. So let me add what the New Yorker left out.

Frank Schaeffer then proceeds to take his readers on an out of control carnival ride with frights that include Theocratic beliefs, abject hatred toward homosexuals, and a complete distrust for government. 

I urge you to read it with a hot comforting beverage to sip and all of the lights on to chase away the darkness.

Things you did not know about Michele Bachmann, and some you will probably wish you had never learned.

Courtesy of NPR:

While at Oral Roberts, Bachmann worked as a research assistant for one of the professors, John Eidsmoe. She has brought up his influence on the campaign trail, telling one audience in Iowa this year that he "taught me so many aspects of our godly heritage." 

Eidsmoe's 1987 book, Christianity and the Constitution, tells Christians that "they need to get politically active and they need to get involved with the legal system and they need to make sure American law is more biblically based," says Lizza. "That's what the book ends on, a clarion call for his students to get involved. ... Eidsmoe is someone who believes American law should be based on the Bible. He believes that the United States is a Christian nation, should remain a Christian nation and that our politics and our law should be permeated by one's Christian faith." 

"For a number of years, Michele Bachmann's personal website had a list of books she recommended people read. It was called 'Michelle's must-read list.' I was looking over the list and noticed this biography of Lee by Wilkins. [I had] never heard of Wilkins and started looking at who he was. And frankly couldn't believe that she was recommending this book.""Wilkins has combined a Christian conservatism with neo-confederate views and developed what is known as the theological war thesis. 

This is an idea that says the best way to understand the Civil War is to see it in religious terms, and [that] the South was an Orthodox Christian nation attacked by the godless North and that what was really lost after the Civil War was one of the pinnacles of Christian society. This insane view of the Civil War has been successfully injected into some of the Christian home-schooling movement curriculums with the help of [Wilkins]. My guess is this is how she encountered the guy at some point. ... She recommended this book on her website for a number of years. It is an objectively pro-slavery book and one of the most startling things I learned about her in this piece." 

Wow! And here I thought Sarah Palin was the craziest bat in the belfry!

There is more in that NPR link and I encourage you all to read it.

I have to admit that the part about the South being a Christian bastion against the godless North left me slack jawed. But do you know what?  That is exactly the same kind of language that we are now seeing coming out of the Teabaggers, so I guess it does make some kind of batshit crazy sense.

There really are two Americas and I will never, and I mean NEVER, relate to this one!

But I do have to say that there are several members of my family who would feel right at home listening to that prayer and watching those cars drive around, and around, and around, and around, and....well you get the idea.

Are you prepared for spiritual warfare in the United States? Well perhaps you are not, but many others are more than ready.

Courtesy of Aljazeera:

Prior to 9/11, the Taliban government in Afghanistan did not register very much on American radar screens, with one notable exception: when it blew up two colossal images of the Buddha in Bamiyan province in early 2001. But destruction of treasured artifacts isn't just limited to the Taliban.

There's a right-wing politico-religious presence centred in the US, but with a global reach, engaging in similar practises, destroying religious and cultural artifacts as a key aspect of its ideology of "strategic level spiritual warfare" (SLSW).

Until recently a fringe evangelical movement, warned against as deviant, "spiritual warfare" is rapidly positioning itself within America's mainstream political right. It's well past time for political journalists to start covering what this movement is up to.

As an example, leaders have bragged online about the destruction of Native American religious artifacts, which their twisted ideology somehow sees as a liberating act, promoting "reconciliation" between estranged groups of people. Critics, however, see it as reflecting an eliminationist mindset, while traditional conservative evangelicals have denounced the ideology as un-biblical. Some even claim it is actually a form of pagan practice dressed up in Christian clothes, according such artifacts a spiritual power that the Bible itself denies. 

The ultimate goal is to replace secular democracy, both in America and around the world, with a Christian theocracy, an ideology known as "dominionism". The supposed purpose is to "purify" the world for Christ's return - again, strikingly similar to what the Taliban believe, but also significantly at odds with more common, long-standing Christian beliefs about the "end times", as well as the nature and purpose of prayer, and the roles of human and divine power. 

This is a VERY informative article which touches on many of the same frightening themes that fans of Leah Burton, and God's Own Party,  are probably already aware. The piece explores the New Apostolic Reformation, the Seven Mountains Mandate, the influence of Sarah Palin, and also lays out the three levels of Spiritual Warfare.

Ground level spiritual warfare is casting out demons from individuals. Occult level spiritual warfare is a confrontation with demons operating through witchcraft and esoteric philosophies (examples are Freemasonry and Tibetan Buddhism). Strategic Level Spiritual Warfare is the highest level, dealing with confrontation of territorial principalities that control entire communities, ethnic groups, religions, and nations.

Like I said the article is quite informative, however it is also a chilling read that might cause you one or two sleepless night.  So take care.  

Teabaggers let the cat out of the bag concerning ultimate goal for our public schools.

Courtesy of Think Progress:

In a series of e-mails and interviews, Teri Adams, the president of the Idependence Hall Tea Party Association, explains that her organization is involved in its voucher advocacy because it believes “public schools should go away.” Adams said that their ultimate goal is to “shut down public schools and have private schools only“:

“We think public schools should go away,’’ says Teri Adams, the head of the Independence Hall Tea Party and a leading advocate — both in New Jersey and Pennsylvania — of passage of school voucher bills. The tea party operates in those two states and Delaware. They should “go away,” she says, because “they are hurting our children.’’ [...] Adams says the current voucher program “discriminates” against wealthier students by providing public subsidies only to inner-city children in allegedly failing schools. Her group’s e-mails pushing vouchers caught the attention of James Kovalcin of South Brunswick, a retired public school teacher who asked Adams for clarification. She responded via email: “Our ultimate goal is to shut down public schools and have private schools only, eventually returning responsibility for payment to parents and private charities. It’s going to happen piecemeal and not overnight. It took us years to get into this mess and it’s going to take years to get out of it.”

Well there you go, any questions about the motives of the radical right wing now?


These people are willing to completely dismantle the American public school system, which has leveled the playing field to allow those who come from humble beginnings to rise to the top through hard work and access to a good education, in exchange for ONLY providing an adequate education for those that can afford it.

Essentially they are trying to gut the very foundation of the American dream, and attempting to impose a class system in this country, where only those who are born with means can achieve success. That is certainly NOT what the founders envisioned for this country:

After the Declaration of Independence, 14 states had their own constitutions by 1791, and out of the 14, 7 states had specific provisions for education. Jefferson believed that education should be under the control of the government, free from religious biases, and available to all people irrespective of their status in society. Others who vouched for public education around the same time were Benjamin Rush, Noah Webster, Robert Coram and George Washington.

And these Teabaggers dare to call themselves "patriots?"

Frank Schaeffer reveals how Fundamentalist religions are destroying the world. They're playing my song baby!

Courtesy of Alternet:

The deluded religious belief that any people or nation or church is a "chosen" people is the root of almost all our troubles. So is the lunacy of believing in "Truth" revealed through one special prophet to one special peoples and/or tribe, be they Jews, Muslims or American Evangelical Christians, or conservative Roman Catholics who believe in the special primacy of their popes.

Eliminate willful self-serving tribal religious delusion from the globe and there might be hope for the survival of the human race. Combine tribalism and religious conviction with nukes and the "right" to exploit the earth and disaster looms.

It's no accident that the most dangerous cultures today are also the most religiously observant societies. The ultra-religiously observant USA embraces perpetual war as a way of life. With our notion of "exceptionalism," we fear the "other" who might challenge our notion of having been chosen by God for some special task.

This is a great article and I urge you to spend the time to read all of it.  However I will let you know that this next part is my favorite portion.

Someday these "special" and "chosen" countries will cease to exist as will all nation states. Someday they will not even be remembered because all things pass from time into oblivion, nor will their "holy" books and "holy" places exist forever, simple geology will take care of that. What makes them dangerous today is their shared religious delusion that they are somehow essential and eternal.

I know that for religious people this is a very difficult concept to grasp, that their nation, and even their religion, may someday disappear into the mists of time, but anybody who has studied even junior high school history cannot deny the reality of that statement.

I remember once making a born again Christian hopping mad at me for referring to his religion as a mythology.

"No it is not!" he said.

"You're right." I replied. "It's not a mythology, today. But someday it WILL be, unless of course it is not remembered at all."

I was kind of a jerk in those days, and loved to rattle people's cages concerning their sacred cows.  I am much more mellow, and less combative, these days but the truth of my prediction is no less valid.

What has to be remembered is that thousands of years ago armies of "chosen" warriors marched to war after giving offerings to,and receiving the blessing from, Gods that you and I have never even heard of.  Yet they had complete faith that these long forgotten deities would keep them safe, or provide a place for their spirit to reside if they were felled in battle.

Millions have died under the swords of armies who believed that their gods had given  them license to destroy those who dared to worship at "sacrilegious" altars. And that faith allowed them to do so without even a hint of guilt at the wholesale murder of entire civilizations.

Now be honest, from that time to this, has mankind REALLY evolved that much?  And if not, why not?

Michele Bachmann is "Hot for Jesus." Jesus might want to look into getting a restraining order.

I find it absolutely hysterical that these people believe that they are in the "real" reality.  They are so far removed form reality it is not even funny.

"The one thing that I knew, that I knew, that I knew." This is the same phrase that Sarah Palin used to say.  What in the hell does it even mean?

I do NOT think that Bachmann understands what he word "hot" actually means.

Apparently God order this wingnut to marry a man who is clearly a closeted, deeply in denial, gay man, and to attend the the most pathetic "law school" in the country.

So the question is "Why does God hate Michele Bachmann so much?"

The reason for Palin's belt buckle crucifix REVEALED!

Seeing the picture below really bothered me the other day.

I mean of all of the places to wear a crucifix, who puts one right above their naughty bits?

But then I read this...

A Crucifix, considered in Christian tradition as a defense against demons, as the holy sign of Christ's victory over every evil.

...and I was confused no more.

So the crucifix is the symbol of Christ's victory over evil.

And Palin wears it right above, what I imagine must be, the gates of hell.

Well that makes sense. And here I thought it was just decorative.

(By the way, weren't crucifixes also used to keep evil contained?)

Leah Burton explores the Seven Mountains Mandate. You might want to read this with the lights on.

From Politicususa:

Last week I wrote an article here at PoliticusUSA introducing the Christian Dominionist Movement. First, let me say that I was tremendously encouraged by the responses and that so many of you are taking this seriously. Please click here to read a more in-depth compilation of writing and research defining Christian Dominionism. It is a challenging task to write and speak out about this extremism due to the very fact that they have crawled under the skirts of legitimacy of what once was the Republican Party while invoking Christianity as their moral spring board.

To write or speak out against this very well organized sect attracts defensive postures from all sides, from Dominionists themselves, to the mainline Christians in America who are not yet aware that they need to be distancing themselves from this extremist fundamentalist sect, one that is attempting to drag them along for the ride back into the days of pre-Enlightenment.

This is a creeping cancer, a malignant growth if left unchecked, that desires total dominion over all secular institutions in America, establishing this country firmly with arrogant supremacy as a Christian Nation. One of those very well laid out plans is something they call the 7 Mountains Mandate.

This is VERY difficult to process, but I assure you that this is the driving force behind much of what we see happening on the surface among the Right Wing Fundamentalist Republicans.

Leah and I used to have long talks about these issues, about a year ago, and some of the things she would tell me (And by the way I am somebody who felt he was pretty knowledgeable about Christian cults), would make the hairs stand up on the back of my neck.

Leah is probably one of only a handful of people who have studied this subject in any real comprehensive fashion, so I always defer to her superior knowledge on Dominionists and Evangelicals.

Journalist Sarah Jones bravely delves into the world of the "Quiverfull Movement."

Vyckie Garrison ex-Quiverfull member

Courtesy of Politicususa:

Sarah Jones: Can you define “Quiverfull movement” and what you’ve identified as the patriarchal beliefs behind it?

Vyckie Garrison: I like to define Quiverfull as a very powerful head trip. It’s an all-encompassing vision of a big, happy family which infects the mind and affects every aspect of a Believer’s life. The term “Quiverfull” comes from a reference in Psalm 127 which likens children to “arrows” in the hands of a mighty man, “blessed is the man who has his quiver full of them.”

Quiverfull Believers eschew all forms of birth control in favor of “trusting the Lord” with their family planning. The Quiverfull ideal embraces a “biblical” model (read, fundamentalist) of the traditional family which insists that the husband is the head of the household and the wife is the submissive “helpmeet.”

Sarah Jones: How do those beliefs manifest for wives and female children? Can you give us some examples of expectations of wives and daughters that might surprise our readers?

Vyckie Garrison: In practice, the Quiverfull ideals often result in larger-than-average families (think, Jim Bob & Michelle Duggar of TLCs “19 & Counting” fame) in which the woman stays at home having babies, homeschooling, homesteading, dressing “modestly,” and most importantly, serving and submitting to her “lord,” i.e., her patriarchal husband.

The Quiverfull lifestyle is extremely demanding and the only way a woman can hope to succeed is to rely heavily on her older daughters. It is expected that a Quiverfull daughter will be fully capable of running the household, including all meal-preparation, laundry duties, child care and homeschooling of younger siblings by the age of twelve. Many girls are doing all this by the time they’re eight or ten because their mothers are so consumed with birthing more and more “arrows” to fill the quivers of their husbands.

A Quiverfull daughter is taught from a young age that her purpose in life is to serve the man whom God has placed in authority over her. She serves her father while she lives at home (she does this primarily by assisting her mother in domestic duties and child care). She absolutely must remain a virgin and is taught to expect to meet and marry her future husband through a father-led match-making process called “courtship.” Her education is geared toward developing domestic skills ~ college is generally considered unnecessary and even dangerous for her spiritual well-being.

Sarah Jones: Do Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann (both of whom share a belief in the bible replacing the constitution; i.e., a theocratic takeover of the American government) represent the beliefs you were taught and if so, how? If not, why?

Vyckie Garrison: When I was a fully-convinced Quiverfull believer, I did question how Sarah Palin could justify her political activities so long as she had children still living at home. I also thought it ironic that, according to the ideals she espouses, women should not hold authority over men, or even be allowed to vote for that matter.

Still, I supported Palin because she understands and promotes conservative Christian “family values.” I was especially impressed by her convictions with regard to “taking back America for God” — in my Quiverfull-colored opinion, Sarah Palin “got it.” Meaning, of course, that she has a decent understanding of Dominionist principles and she has a plan to lead America toward a “truly Biblical” (read, theocratic) society.

This philosophy of breeding for God is as old as religion itself. Older even.

It dates back to a time when the only hope that a community had of survival was to have more warriors, and more people working to support those warriors, than their enemies had at their disposal.

One of the main fears that Christians, even today, have is that the Muslims are out breeding them, and that ultimately they will lose their religious dominance and power structure. By the way that is the same fear that the White Power people have concerning Hispanics, Asians, and African Americans. And yes, the two ARE tied together.

I am still constantly amazed how Sarah Palin is able to gain the support from these hyper Fundamentalists when her entire lifestyle is an affront to the tenets of their belief system. It seems that essentially these people are bred to accept the lies told to them by their leaders, and therefore give her a free pass.

Please do click the link at the top and read this entire interview.  Though it is very troubling, it provides important information to help us understand where the Republican party keeps finding their supporters.

Personally I think this is the best way to learn about Mormonism.

I am sort of fascinated with the judgemental attitude, and out right rejection, or Mormonism by other Christian denominations. Especially in light of the fact that we may have two Presidential candidates who are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

You know as it turns out I actually do know quite a bit about Mormonism, as I spent my youth studying various religions, philosophies, and their impact on the world.

Essentially I do not place ANY religious belief above another, yet Mormonism has always seemed to expect an even more profound suspension of disbelief than have other western religions, since it is so much newer and somewhat more radical in its interpretation of Christianity.

In my opinion only Scientology requires an even more profound denial of contradictory evidence.

So perhaps for that reason I have always been a little fascinated with the Mormon religion.

Especially since other Christians often treat it as ridiculous and unbelievable. Which I always considered odd since their own faith requires a suppression of critical thinking and the complete acceptance of things which an ancient book that has been translated hundreds of times, and updated and modified over and over again throughout the centuries, tells them is a factual account of events that happened many thousands of years ago.

Which begs the eternal question.  Why is YOUR belief worthy of your unquestioning faith, yet others are deemed unworthy, or even loony?

And on that note why is 22% of the country hesitant to vote for a candidate solely because they are Mormon? For someone like me, that just seems hypocritical.