Thursday, September 06, 2007


When I was a kid the Christian Right used to swear that it would be happy with a moment of silence in our public schools.   Then they wanted student led prayer.  Then they wanted prayers led by teachers.

When I was a kid the Christian right used to swear that it was primarily interested in stopping abortion, contraption seldom coming into the discussion.   Then they wanted to eliminate certain kinds of contraception because they believed those forms of contraception destroyed life at the moment of conception.  Now the truth has finally come out.  They want to eliminate contraception all together and force their sexual mores onto the entire population, namely celibate lifestyles until marriage.

This, of course is just another stab at an establishment of religion.  In a Christian Republic, or a theocracy if you will, the schools would be geared up to spread the Christian faith.  So of course they're going to take what they can get piece by incremental piece.  In a Fundamentalist Theocracy, gays and lesbians would become second class citizens--if not subjects of public execution--so of course the Fundamentalist have to begin by denying gays and lesbians employment, marriage, and adoption rights.  In a Fundamentalist theocracy women would be subservient to men, and to achieve that end the Fundamentalists want to take away a woman's right to control her own body and destiny.  They began with abortion.   They they expanded their demands to include certain forms of contraception.  Then they revealed their true colors, exclaimed that God wants us to live celibate lives until marriage, when in fact what they really mean, is "honey, back to the bad old days of knocked up, barefoot, and no control over your own body and destiny."   The fitly Fundamentalist bastards know that they can't effect an outright theocracy all at once because that really would violate the Constitution, so what they're trying to  impose the various beliefs of their Fundamentalist "Christianity" piecemeal on a nation of approximately 300 million people.   To which I ask, why should a maximum of 28 percent of the American people, of a particular group of one particular faith be allowed to impose ANY of its values on the nation as a whole?  
If they want to pray (some might say that they prey) let them do so in designated times and places as other extracurricular groups are required to do.  If they don't ant to use contraception they should get out their thermometers and hope to God the damned thing is properly calibrated.  If they want to be celibate they themselves know what is best for them and how they can best maintain their celibate lifestyles until marriage.  If they are offended by homosexuality they can stop snooping n what their gay or lesbian neighbors are doing and not engage in homosexual acts.   In other words, it's about time that these Pecksniffian  Puritans began to mind their own business and removed the motes from their own eyes.
Because I for one, am getting a little sick and tired of being told how to live, think, and behave by a vocal minority with the fanaticism of a Reverend Jim Jones and the collective IQ of a used condom. 

Saturday, August 18, 2007


The following post was composed by my blogging partner, Kelli (AKA Donatra) at THE COALITION FOR A DEMOCRATIC AMERICA.  I am publishing it here to dispense with the idea that George W. Bush is in any way an effective wartime leader.  This country has seen effective war time leaders, most notably, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt.  And after reading enough history about the Revolutionary, Civil, and Second World Wars I think it is proper and safe to conclude that George W. Bush is one of the most incompetent, immoral war time leaders that this country has ever known.

On that note, enjoy Donatra's interview with her great-uncle-in-law.  It goes a long way towards dispelling the foolish idea that George W. Bush and the Nazicons are in any way patriotic or effective


By Donatra
Edited by Praetorone

During the weeks and months leading up to my marriage, my then future husband told me that I would be marrying into a veritable united Nations and In many ways, he was right on center.  My husband is part Irish and Puerto Rican, a former Catholic turned Buddhist.  My oldest (half) brother-in-law is part Puerto Rican and Part Swedish, and is a very liberal member of the Unitarian Church, while my youngest (half)  brother-in-law is part Puerto Rican and part Danish and describes himself as a progressive Christian.  My father-in-law is part Irish, German, and Scottish, a former Presbyterian turned atheist.  His wife, my husband's step mother, is part Dutch, Polish, and German, a former Jew turned Episcopalian.  And her 87-year-old Uncle is a German-Dutch Jew who immigrated to this country with his parents in the year 1928, luckily missing the rise of Hitler and the nightmare years of the Third Reich. 

This is a man whose body is slowly but certainly being crippled by rheumatoid arthritis and failing vision.  that's a pity because this is also a man with degrees in both medicine and law, and who sees it as a civic duty to remain informed about what is happening in both, the country he adopted and in the rest of the world.  And yet, despite increasing physical infirmities his mind is alert and his memory appears to be as sharp as ever.  In may ways he and some of the middle aged members of our crew serve as our 'in house" historians and we are always grateful when Abe can offer his unique insight to some of our materials.  Indeed, up until a few years ago, when a series of mini strokes began to affect his vision, he was a semi active member of our old blog, and if you want the honest to God truth, we rather miss him.

One of the benefits that comes from having elderly in-laws (my "great uncle-in-law"  turned 87 earlier this year) is that he has actually experienced, lived through this wonderfully interesting and often times bizarre thing that we call history.  This of course means that he has  first hand information at his command that we don't have, the kind of information that comes from watching the march of history from a personal point of view, not from reading about events, places, and individuals in history books and biographies.   As an eye witness to some of the watershed events of the 20th Century my Uncle-in-Law naturally has opinions about current events, and as an 87-year-old man whose family followed the rise of the Nazi regime throughout the late 1920s and 30s, he of course has an interesting take on those who would compare themselves to the great and near great figures of the past.

Nothing irritates my Uncle Abraham more than when members of the Bush Administration compare themselves to the members of the Roosevelt Administration.

"It's Ironic," Abraham told me.  "On the one hand these people--and I use the term loosely--want us to think of them as modern Day FDRs, bravely leading America through another world conflict, but," he adds in a rolling German accent,  "on the other hand they are attempting to dismantle everything that Roosevelt did to protect the lower and middle classes.  They're trying to have it both ways and anyone with a serious background in history knows that they are playing fast and loose with the facts."   In addition, Abe is distressed by the disingenuous rhetoric from the current Administration which attempts to equate the current war on terrorism with the tragedy that was the Second World War.

"I don't think people today understand just how serious things were back then," Abe offers.  "By the early 1940s--1942 I believe--the world situation was grim.  Very grim.  Hitler, the Nazi war machine, and their Italian allies had conquered most of the European continent and were threatening to crush the Soviet Union."  Then, from memory he began to list the European nations which had come under the domination of Italian and German Fascism.  "Poland, Denmark, Norway, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Yugoslavia. and Greece.  Finland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, and Albania, " he added, "were Axis occupied territories; Italy had swallowed up Libya."  Continuing in a similar vein, Abe pointed out that by 1942 the German war machine had conquered the Ukraine and was poised to swallow up Moscow, Stalingrad, and the oil rich Caucuses.  And then there was that matter of Italy's occupation of Libya."  Or, as my husband has put it on previous occasions, the Mediterranean was little more than an Axis dominated lake.

The situation wasn't any better in the Pacific where by September 1941,  Imperial Japan had consumed  Korea,  Manchuria, much of the Eastern Coast of China, French Indo China, Formosa, and Sakhalin Island.  Moreover there were plans in the making to conquer Thailand, Borneo, Sumatra, Java, New Guinea, the Philippine Islands, the Solomon Islands, the Kurile Islands, etc.  Chillingly, most of these objectives were obtained within a period of six months, including the sneak attack o Pearl harbor which quite literally destroyed the American presence in the Pacific Ocean.  "Again," Abe offers.  "Nobody realized how badly off the United States was during this time."  Noting past influence by the isolationists in the form of the America First Movement, Abe informed me that in the mid 1930s America had the 18th largest military in the world.  Both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan had superior war machines and more war ready soldiers than the United States.  "You have to remember," Abe said, "that the Isolationist movement fought President Roosevelt at almost every turn.  They were determined to keep America out of another World War.  The only problem was that this was the wrong war to avoid.  But the Republicans were eager to score points against Roosevelt whenever they could and then, like now, they weren't afraid to engage in a little fear mongering.  When I was a young man it was the fear of another conflict like the first World War.  Today the Republicans use the fear of terrorism to smear their opponents.  It's the same tactic played over and over again like a badly scratched phonograph record."  When I asked Abe if the America First movement wasn't a broadly based movement that was composed of both, Democrats and Republicans, he responded by telling me that it was indeed a broadly based political movement, but that it was primarily a Republican led phenomenon.

"And I suspect that there was more than just a little Antisemitism mixed in there too.  According to Abe,  Antisemitism ran rampant in the years prior to the Second World War.  Indeed, it wasn't really until the liberation of the Nazi death camps near the end of the war that Antisemitism became a dirty word.  "There were people out there--at least i think they were people--who believed that Jews were in charge of the banks.  There was a belief out there that we were a part of some secret society or maybe a conspiracy to control and dominate the United States, maybe even the world."  During his youth Abe frequently heard the old cliches about Jewish people:  That they were all rich, that they were dishonest in business transactions, that they had killed Christ, that they were vampires who wanted to drink the blood of Christian children.  "Both the Catholic and Protestant churches had troubling theories about Jews," he remembers.  "Much of the hatred towards Jews in those days came from Christian denominations who taught that Jews were tools of the devil.  The Catholics and the Lutherans stand out as some of the most virulent, but other denominations were just as loathsome."  Abe also remembers reading about and seeing photos of Nazi youth, American children who burned books in public squares, and who goose stepped to the antisemitic chant that was drifting out of central Europe during the prewar years.  "They looked Iike and behaved like the Hitler youth," Abe said.  "Like their counterparts in Germany and Austria, they would congregate at some public square, throw books on blazing bonfires, and sing the praises of Hitler and antisemitism.  And it didn't help to have a national hero who was openly sympathetic to the German regime."  When asked to specify, Abe informed me that Charles Lindbergh, a popular aviation hero of the era, had been a driving force in the isolationist America First movement, as well known for his antisemitism as for his aviation talents.  "Lindbergh was no friend of the English or the French and he certainly wasn't a small d democrat.   If you ask me I don't think he saw the conflict between Hitler and the western democracies as a fight between freedom and totalitarianism."  This after all was a man (Lindbergh) who, had traveled to Germany and offered glowing reports about the rising Reich and German peoples love for their nation and Fuhrer.  Lindbergh, like so many of the people in the America First movement, refused to recognize Hitler and the Nazi government for what it was.  "As a matter of fact, I think he appreciated the regime, gave it what you kids call an 'official thumbs up.'"

So how does the current conflict differ from World War II?  "The terrorists can do a lot of damage if they set their minds to it," said Abe.  "But it isn't like World War II.  It is not as if they can destroy an entire nation state.  It is not a global conflict.  We see pockets of conflict.  An offensive here, and offensive there, but we do not have large armies of hundreds of thousands of soldiers sweeping across continents trying to capture Berlin, or Paris or London.  It's an entirely different situation.  Entirely different."

So are there other differences?   "Most certainly," Abe responded.  According to Abe, the entire attitude is different.  "No politician, no leader, not a Democrat or a Republican would have treated a returning Vet (during World War II) the way George W. Bush treats returning Veterans from Iraq.  "That creature in the White House has no feelings for anyone but himself.  He has this attitude that tells him volunteer soldiers are disposable.  He cares as little about our returning Veterans as he does for anyone else.  Your husband, and others, believe that the man is a sociopath.  I don't have a problem with that argument, because I believe it to be true."  In Abe's opinion Franklin Roosevelt had a watershed event in his life which made a huge difference in the way he treated people.  "The rich people in this country viewed Roosevelt as a traitor to his own class.  After he was struck with polio and lost the use of his legs, Mister Roosevelt developed an even deeper understanding for people."  And by people Abe does not mean the members of the economic elite.  He means the lower and middle classes.  "Unlike Herr Bush," Abe continued, "Roosevelt developed a deeper compassion--genuine compassion for the middle and lower classes.  Herr Bush, on the other hand, has yet to want for anything.  The man suffered, that much is certain.  He suffered when his little sister died of leukemia and his parents wouldn't allow him to mourn.  But Bush never used that experience to develop genuine empathy, genuine sympathy.  It may well be that he never could.  Sincere empathy and compassion are alien concepts to this man."  Bush, Abe believes. was probably born a psychopath or a sociopath.  The manner in which  he was raised didn't help the situation either.  When a sociopath or a psychopath is constantly bailed out of the trouble that they so often cause for themselves, it only makes them more reckless and more dangerous.  Bush has a long record of close calls, and a powerful clique of friends and family who have repeatedly pulled his chestnuts out of the fire.  He has yet to face the consequences for his wrong doing, although I suspect--very strongly mind you--that this is about to change now that the rats are abandoning the sinking ship of state." 

Unlike Roosevelt, Bush has yet to create a sense of the American people being "in it together."  This isn't only true of the failed invasion of Iraq, but in his failure to demand any real sacrifice from the American people.  "Look, Kelli, when I was a young man during World War II we rationed--don't laugh--rubber.  When it became clear that America required rubber and that the Germans had learned how to make synthetic rubber, we realized that we had to do something until we had the ability to synthesize rubber right here at home."  This Abe explains led to a number of unpopular steps by "that man in the white house."  One of the most unpopular involved tires.  In an effort to conserve rubber the Roosevelt Administration made it more difficult to buy a new set of tires.  Ultimately this led to gas rationing.  "The idea went something like this.  We didn't have a gas shortage, but Roosevelt realized that if he made it harder to drive long distances there would be an automatic conservation of rubber."  Other moves had already been taken with other products made out of rubber, but with the advent of gas rationing the people were not at all amused.  "Roosevelt remedied the situation with one of his fireside chats.  He simply went on the air, explained the situation, and promised that the government was actively promoting a synthetic rubber program."  In addition to an explanation Roosevelt initiated a drive in which various rubber products (everything from the rubber in women's girdles, to rubber balls, rubber bands, and pet toys) were collected during rubber drives and shipped off for recycling, to be used in the war effort.  "It made the American people feel as if they were doing something for the war effort."  And more importantly it reduced opposition to gas rationing.  "And there was an up side to the situation."  And what an up side it was.  traffic fatalities went down.  People went to movies and learned to enjoy simpler, more personal and interactive forms of entertainment.  "Instead of driving all over creation on weekend joy trips, we stayed at home, got to know our neighbors.  We rediscovered that wonderful thing called conversation--something your generation should rediscover." 

Rubber wasn't the only product that was rationed.  Sugar was rationed.  American housewives learned to use corn syrup and saccharine (yes it was around even then) as substitutes in their baking. Those same housewives also learned to cut back on eggs in their baking, they poured yellow dye into margarine so that our troops could use real butter.    Nylon was another product which had to be rationed.  To that end the one piece bathing suit disappeared and the two piece bathing suit was born.   The hemlines on now unpleated skirts rose to above the knee.  Even fat was recycled.   "And then there were the coupon books," Abe chuckled.  "As a part of the war time rationing families were given coupon books.  You'd use thee coupons to buy food, clothing, shoes, you name it.  If I remember correctly, you had to make the coupons last for a month.  It was an inconvenience, but it certainly rationed all those important things that were needed by our troops."  Revealing an obvious, but restrained anger, Abe then added, "that's a hell of a difference from THIS aschloch who sent our troops into battle without the proper equipment for an invasion."  

And then there were the price caps and tax hikes.  Unlike The Shrub, Roosevelt recognized the fact that America needed to properly fund the war, Bush has yet to so much as ask the American people to make a significant sacrifice towards for this war and the troops.  "He's more interested in protecting his own class and his own fortunes," Abe grumbled accusingly.  "If Roosevelt was a traitor in the eyes of the wealthy elite, what is the aschloch?   Your husband is a Star Trek fan.  He says it time and time again. 'The needs of the many must outweigh the needs of the few.'   Roosevelt understood this.  The American people (in the 1940s) understood this.  Bush, however is the only schwienhund who does not --as you kids like to say--'get it.'  He has taken your husband's very logical axiom and he has turned it on it's head.  'The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many.'  Maybe it's even worse.  Perhaps he believes that the needs of 'the one,' (himself) outweigh the needs of the many."  In either event, Abe truly believes that Bush is more interested in protecting his own elite class than he is in preserving the middle class. "That young man of yours has a theory and it goes something like this:  Conservatives see democracy and a thriving middle class as a threat to order and stability.  To that I would add, 'you are damned right my dear boy.  Especially when it's the conservatives who will be dictating the order and stability."  In Abe's opinion the so called conservatives in this country despise, or perhaps even fear, a prosperous middle class because prosperity creates leisure time and leisure time gives people time to think about freedom,. democracy, and human rights.  Sadly for us, "freedom, democracy, and human rights are anathema to conservative notions of order and stability"

"My parents came to this country in 1928 after my father read a copy of Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf," said Abe.  " Papa believed that if someone were crazy enough to write that kind of insanity that same person would be crazy enough to act on his writings if he ever came to power."  Regrettably Abe's Aunts and Uncles refused to take Hitler's rambling treatise seriously.  While Abe and his parents and three siblings came to the United States, the rest of the family refused to take the German warlord seriously.  I don't think I have to tell you what happened to the European branch of his family.  "Most of them didn't make it," Abe said ruefully.  "Between outright extermination, disease, starvation, and being worked to death...You can guess what happened.  Very few of them survived it."

Chillingly, Abe recognizes similar patterns between then and now.  "I see another leader," Abe said, "an American leader who is using the same tactics that Hitler used during his rise to power.  I see the scapegoating of racial minorities and homosexuals; and those antisemitic Dominionists who celebrate the idea of Jesus coming back to earth to kill and torture the Jewish infidels.  Oh yes.  They make me feel ever so safe."  But it is the political shenanigans which trouble Abe the deepest.  "I see (an abuse) of power at the expense of our civil liberties.  I see the emergence of a unitary executive branch which is undermining the separation of powers in the same way that the Nazis undermined the Wiemar Republic.  And the so called Patriot Act.  Is this not the American equivalent of the Enabling Act which Hitler used to claim dictatorial power in the days following the Reichstag Fire?"  According to Abe we have been here before.  Sadly, the American people are not well versed in their world history and that has made it much easier for Bush Incorporated to rewrite the past record whenever it serves him to do so.  "If Bush is cunning sociopath or psychopath--and I believe he is--he is also a megalomaniac.   He craves power in the same way that an alcoholic craves the next shot of vodka.  We've been here before,  We've seen all of this before.  But we still have people who think Bush is some kind of great war leader, and we still have people who are willing to give up freedom for security.  Ignorance and fear are a frightening combination--especially when they can be manipulated to serve the twisted impulses of a corrupt, and I might add, power hungry leader."

Daniel Andrew Gallagher

Monday, August 06, 2007


by Praetor One, SweetPea, BibleBelted, and Matthew5

"Just a minute. Now hold on Mister Potter. You're right when you say my father was no business man, I know that. Why he ever started this cheap, penny-ante Building and Loan I'll never know. But neither you nor anybody else can say anything against his character because his whole life was...Why in twenty-five years since he and Uncle Billy started this thing he never once thought of himself. Isn't that right Uncle Billy? He didn't save enough money to send Harry to school, let alone me, but he did help a few people get out of your slums, Mister Potter. And what's wrong with that? Why...Here, you're all businessmen here. Doesn't it make them better citizens? Doesn't it make them better customers? said that uh...What'd you say just a minute ago? They, they had to wait and save money before they even thought of a decent home. Wait? Wait for what? Until their children grow up and leave them? Until they're so old and broken down that they...Do you know how long it takes a working man to save five thousand dollars? Just remember this, Mister Potter, that this rabble you're talking about...they do most of the working and paying and living and dying in this community. Well is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die in a couple of decent rooms and a bath? Anyway, my father didn't think so. People were human beings to him, but to you, a warped frustrated old man, they're cattle. Well, in my book he died a much richer man than you'll ever be."

From the Frank Capra Film, It's A Wonderful Life
Written by Philip Va Doren Stern (story) and Frances Goodrich (screenplay).

In a slight change of pace we've decided to write about another kind of peace. The kind of peace that comes from knowing you live in a sane, prosperous society where the middle class is valued and treasured, not undermined at every turn by conservative leaders who are terrified of and perhaps even jealous of a prosperous middle class. The dirty little secret in Republican Administrations from Reagen onwards, has been the disturbing fact that right wingers aren't only fearful of gays, lesbians, and minorities. They are also frightened by the idea of a prosperous middle class, disturbed by the idea that people might actually have leisure time in which they can think about their condition and take steps to improve their lot in life.

This may come as a surprise to corporate America and its theocratic allies; and it may even come as a bigger supply to the burdened middle class, but in many ways the most politically productive times in this country are those in which large numbers of Americans have disposable income and leisure time to think about the important issues of the day. It is no coincidence that one of our greatest eras of change, the 1960s, was a prosperous era in which Americans enjoyed little things like decent health care and a relatively rational health care system; when workers stood up for workers rights, and when employees were more cooperative with their workers and more willing to make concessions than they are in today's economy. It is not a coincidence that the Civil Rights movement, which had been slowly building in previous decades, began to bear fruit in the 1960s and 1970s when Americans still enjoyed little things like pensions, vacation time, an eight hour day, and safe working places. With extra time and extra income the American people were more willing to think about the critical issues of the day. Not threatened by an ever increasingly competitive workplace and a limited number of jobs, the American people were more willing to share slices of the political and economic pies with those who differed from them.

By the same standard, it is no coincidence that the women's movement came to the forefront during the early 1970s, again a time of relative prosperity when people had the time and resources to consider the great issues of the day.

Unfortunately for us, for the American worker, taxpayer, and middle class citizen, the Powers That Be, the corporate overlords and aristocrats, discovered, during he late 70s and especially during the 1980s, the era of Reaganomics, that there were ways to curtail thoughts about freedom and reform, and the primary way in which this could be achieved was through the weakening and virtual destruction of the Middle Class. And the best way to do that was through the dismantling of the reforms that were set down by Franklin Roosevelt and the Democrats during the 1930s. Mind you, this is not a debate as to whether or not the New Deal was a successful remedy to the Republicans' Great Depression. This is a discussion about the protections that were set in place during the Roosevelt era which were designed to protect the rights of he American worker and to limit the power of and ability of corporate America to exploit the American worker. This is not a a discussion as to whether or not the New Deal was Socialistic. The primary topic of discussion here is one of whether we want efficiently regulated capitalism or the kind of cutthroat highway robbery which is passed off as capitalism in the modern era of Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II.

You just have to give the Republicans' credit. In their modest opinion (and they have a lot to be modest about) Ronald Reagen is a bona fide political saint; a modern day reformer who arrived just in time to defeat the forces of communism and socialism. But when Ronald Reagan denigrated the words "I'm from the Federal Government and I am here to help," he was in fact announcing his intention to deregulate big business (read " to encourage corporate corruption) at the expense of the America worker and middle class. Or, as we are so fond of saying, "When Democrats wage a war against poverty they wage a war against social, political, and economic injustice, against social problems; when Republicans wage a war against poverty they wage a war against the weak, the ill, the poor, and the middle class." In other words, Reaganomics (and the current economic/financial policies of the present Bush Administration, are based primarily upon Social Darwinism and totalitarian values, not values such as freedom, democracy, and Constitutional liberties.

The first indications to exactly how ruthless the far right could be was when Ronald Reagan placed our air traffic by summarily firing the air traffic controllers. Not only did this create a situation in which countless lives might have been put in danger (a condition which seldom bothers Republicans if there is a profit be made), it also sent a signal that the new (Reagan) Administration would be more than willing to side with the few and the powerful and against millions of hard working American taxpayers.

Reagen's tax cuts were a joke as well. Why? Because they weren't really tax cuts. Each time Reagan cut taxes at the Federal level the states and local governments were forced to increase state and local taxes to make up the difference. And who were the ultimate victims? You guessed it. The average taxpayer and home owner who paid the difference in state,county, local, and real estate taxes. moreover, there wasn't even that much cutting at the Federal level. Orwellian to the very end, the Reagan Administration merely made up the difference by increasing fees and plugging loopholes. In the crazy, inverted world of Reaganomics, terms such as "tightening IRS enforcement," "Revenue enhancements," ad nauseam were all synonymous with the term "raising taxes," although the Administration in Washington would never admit as much.

The Tax "Reform" Act of 1986 offered more in the way of imbecility. Only this time the act was so convoluted and so confusing that the only people who could even vaguely understand it were accountants and tax lawyers. Indeed, the Reagan class warriors had finally succeeded in creating a tax code that was so confusing and so bizarre that he IRS didn't even understand it. At the same time the various loophole closings resulted in another burden on most of the middle and even some of the upper class. According to a study conducted by Hausman and Poterba, the 196 Tax Reform translated into a marginal tax increase for more than 40 percent of the nation's tax payers, while a majority of those who did see a reduction only 11 percent saw an reduction of 10 percent or more. Translated into modern English from the Orwellian Double Speak the end result of the 1986 ax Reform Bill was negligible.

And while we're at it, let's not forget that the Reagan Administration's remedy to inflation was so shocking that it threw the United States economy into not one, but at least w steep recessions, leading many unemployed Americans to quip at the time that "at least under Carter I at least had a job."

But the worst thing that the Corporate dominated right wingers have discovered is the fact that if you can limit the supply of jobs, that if you encourage the importation of illegal workers (although we suspect there is no such thing as an illegal worker, only illegal employers), and ship American jobs, both blue, and white collar, overseas, you can efficiently dry up the labor pool at home and set the American worker against both, immigrant labor and his fellow Americans. This of course is not an accident. It is not a coincidence that George W. Bush has continued the policies of Ronald Reagan. It is no accident that this Administration has done everything in its power to further dismantle labor, to undermine worker safety legislation, and to strengthen the hand of big employers, while reducing the constitutional and worker place liberties of the American worker. Like the Reagan Administration before it, the Bush Administration is using a divide and conquer strategy. Continuing deregulation, encouraging tax loopholes for American headquarters that operate over seas, and openly encouraging American jobs to fly East and South to China, India, and Mexico, etc. Again the tactic is obvious. The Bush administration like the Reagan Administration before it, understands that a prosperous middle class will only encourage instability by daring to think about freedom, liberty, reform, and the rights and well being of others. To prevent this and to maintain strict political and economic order (some might call it fascism) the Powers that Be in Washington and Corporate America have decided that Peace of mind is the last thing that Americans should enjoy. Instead, they have decided to institute a policy in which the American worker is over-stressed, over-tired, and always willing to find someone else to blame for his or her financial status. The Powers that Be would rather see the typical American take out his frustrations on the people he or she considers below him or herself. Whether it be the poor who are almost invariably blamed for their own poverty, or the immigrant worker, who is scapegoated as a brown-skinned subhuman, or gays and women who are denigrated as perverted or disobedient, the Powers That Be are thrilled to see Americans backstabbing one another instead of taking out their frustrations the leaders and corporate fascists who have created the situation in the first place.

Heaven forbid that we might actually experience a period of domestic and overseas prosperity and tranquility. God forbid that we might actually take all the time, energy, and resources which are currently being used for destructive purposes and use them to create a new Golden Age in America. We wouldn't, after all, want to encourage little tings like education, thinking, reasoning, compassion, and benevolence towards ones fellow man or woman. Noooo. We wouldn't want to do that. No. we would much rather declare peace unpatriotic. We would rather promote war and hatred as American values as opposed to true American values such as tolerance, acceptance, and liberty. We wouldn't want to build new schools, new museums, and new libraries, or new theaters and concert halls. Why would we want to do that when Corporate America would rather build bombs, tanks, and weapons of mass destruction?

It seems to us that we are paying an incredibly high price for allowing the Powers that be to turn us against our fellow human beings. It seems to us that the price is too high. Too high in waste, to high in blood, too high in death, and too high in the destruction of the human soul. All this because we have been indoctrinated into taking out our hostilities on the other, on those who are weaker or different from us. In the end we may just realize that we are indeed our brother's and sister's keeper.

"They've started a lot of talk about free people going soft, that we can't take it. That's a lot of hooey. A free people can beat the world at anything, from war to tiddle-de-winks if we all pull in the same direction. I know a lot of you are saying "what can I do? I'm just a little punk. I don't count. We;, you're dead wrong! The little punks have always counted because in the long run the character of a country is the sum total of the character of it's little punks.

"But we've all got to get in there and pitch. We can't win the old ball game unless we have team work. And that's where every John Doe comes in. It's up to him to get together with his teammate.

"And your teammates, my friends, is the guy next door to you. Your neighbor! He's a terribly important guy, the guy next door. You're gonna need him and he's gonna need you, so look him up! If he's sick, call on him! If he's hungry, feed him! If he's out of a job, find him one. To most of you your neighbor is a stranger, a guy with a barking dog and a high fence around him.

"Now you can't be a stranger to any guy that's on your own team. So tear down the fence that separates you, tear down the fence and you'll tear down a lot of hates and prejudices! Tear down all the fences in the country and you'll really have teamwork.

"I know a lot of you are saying to yourselves: "He's asking for a miracle to happen. He's expecting people to change all of a sudden. Well, you're wrong. It's no miracle. It's no miracle because I see it happen once every year. And so do you. At Christmas time. There's something swell about the spirit of Christmas to see what it dos to people, all kinds of people.

"Now why can't that spirit last the whole year round? Gosh, if it ever did, if each and every John Doe would make that spirit last three hundred and sixty-five days out of the year, we'd develop such a strength, we'd create such a tidal wave of good will, that no human force could stand against it.

"Yes sir, my friends, the meek can only inherit the earth when the John Does start loving their neighbors. You'd better start now. Don't wait till the game is called on account of darkness! Wake up, John Doe! You're the hope of the world!"

From the Frank Capra Film Meet John Doe
Written by Richard Connell and Robert Presnell (story) and Robert Riskin (screenplay)

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

Satan's Right WIng Army

Now let me see if I've got this straight. We're supposed to be happy because Anti-Semitic teachings have been scrubbed from an Army site. It seems to me that the real issue is why in the hell they were ever there to begin with.

As my fellow blog members have already demonstrated, the Christian Right, in addition to undermine democracy through political and legal (some might say illegal) means, has also been infiltrating the military and law enforcement agencies. So if you want to know why Anti-Semitic teachings have appeared on an army indoctrination site, you might want to consider the fact that teachings such as the ones described in this and similar articles are only the tip of the iceberg.

There people really do believe that if you don't agree with them on every single theological detail that you are a part of a Satanic conspiracy. Although one might remind the that their King Jams Bible teaches that even Satan has the power to transform himself into an angel of light and that the Antichrist supposedly has the ability to deceive others. According to their own theology Satan is the father of lies, and when you consider the fact that the Radical Christian Right has the collective IQ of a fresh, steaming bowel movement, you have wonder just who represents the forces of darkness. Could it be that the Radical Religious Right is itself a tool of the Devil? God knows they don't act like Christians.

Again, according to their own theology, in the end times Christians will be a persecuted minority, and if we listen to the Radical Religious Right they are constantly contradicting themselves on this matter. When they want to create sympathy for their movement they claim that they are a persecuted minority. When they feel like bragging they claim to be a mainstream majority. Which one is true? Don't ask the Radical Religious Right because it appears as if they don't even know. The only things that they do know are how to twist the truth for convenience and how to persecute others while they whine about being hated while they hate everyone except themselves. And to be honest, there are times when I wonder if they don't hate one another too.

So for now the Anti Semitic teachings have been scrubbed. But that doesn't change the fact that the Radical Religious Right is trying to infiltrate the military and law enforcement agencies which could potentially engage in a coup against Constitutional government and basic human rights.

Monday, May 21, 2007


By Matthew 5 
Assisted by BibleBelted, and SweetPea

"Government in our democracy, state and national, must be neutral in matters of religious theory, doctrine, and practice. It may not be hostile to any religion or to the advocacy of no-religion; and it may not aid, foster, or promote one religion or religious theory against another or even against the militant opposite. The First Amendment mandates governmental neutrality between religion and religion, and between religion and nonreligion."
- Abe Fortas, Epperson v. Arkansas , 393 U.S. 97, 1968. [1]

You'd think that devoutly religious people would be in favor of governmental neutrality when it comes to religion. Granted, we have the First Amendment religion clause which supposedly protects us from an established national church and which protects our religious freedom, but governmental neutrality (separation of church and state, if you prefer)  is the mechanism that enforces our the religion clause.  I don't know about you but I find it very strange that the most religious people in this country are the same people who are so obsessively determined to undermine the method by which we enforce the religion clause.  Considering the fact that under normal circumstances the political/religious pendulum swings back and forth, from left to right and back again, one would assume that the religious right in this country would want to maintain government neutrality to protect their own religious freedom.

Roger Williams (December 21, 1603-April 1, 1684) a figure heard from to infrequently these days, understood this argument very well.   A separatist preacher, Williams was banished by the  the Massachusetts General Court on September 13, 1635 for advocating religious tolerance and for criticizing the Massachusetts Bay Charter.  Initially considered himself a Baptist, but as he aged, Williams revealed himself as one of those rare people who becomes more open minded with age, eventually becoming a nondenominational Christian ( i.e. a seeker).  Ironically, while the radical religious right attempts to tear down the wall between church and state, it was Roger Williams whose use of similar terminology way well have inspired Thomas Jefferson's use of the term.  Wrote Williams

"When they [the Church] have opened a gap in the hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world, God hath ever broke down the wall itself, removed the Candlestick, etc., and made His Garden a wilderness as it is this day. And that therefore if He will ever please to restore His garden and Paradise again, it must of necessity be walled in peculiarly unto Himself from the world, and all that be saved out of the world are to be transplanted out of the wilderness of the World." [2]

Note the similarities between the terms "hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world," as used by Williams and the term "Wall of Separation" [3] that Jefferson used more than a century and a half later.  Contrary to what the radical religious right would have us believe, the truth of the matter is that both, Williams and Rogers believed that a Separation of Church and State was necessary to protect both, religion and government.  We have already read what Jefferson thought about establishment in earlier contributions to this series, but what did Williams have to offer?  Well, to be precise, Williams to believed that a marriage of church and state was detrimental to both, the religious and civil authorities and that it was better to keep the two apart.  In the preface to The Bloody Tenet of Persecution for Cause of Conscience, Williams issued "Twelve Arguments for Religious Tolerance."   

"First, that the blood of so many hundred thousand souls of Protestants and Papists, spilt in the wars of present and former ages, for their respective consciences, is not required nor accepted by Jesus Christ the Prince of Peace.

"Secondly, pregnant scriptures and arguments are throughout the work proposed against the doctrine of persecution for cause of conscience."

"Thirdly, satisfactory answers are given to scriptures, and objections produced by Mr. Calvin, Beza, Mr. Cotton, and the ministers of the New English churches and others former and later, tending to prove the doctrine of persecution for cause of conscience.

"Fourthly, the doctrine of persecution for cause of conscience is proved guilty of all the blood of the souls crying for vengeance under the altar.

"Fifthly, all civil states with their officers of justice in their respective constitutions and administrations are proved essentially civil, and therefore not judges, governors, or defenders of the spiritual or Christian state and worship.

"Sixthly, it is the will and command of God that (since the coming of his Son the Lord Jesus) a permission of the most paganish, Jewish, Turkish, or antichristian consciences and worships, be granted to all men in all nations and countries; and they are only to be fought against with that sword which is only (in soul matters) able to conquer, to wit, the sword of God's Spirit, the Word of God.

"Seventhly, the state of the Land of Israel, the kings and people thereof in peace and war, is proved figurative and ceremonial, and no pattern nor president for any kingdom or civil state in the world to follow.

"Eighthly, God requireth not a uniformity of religion to be enacted and enforced in any civil state; which enforced uniformity (sooner or later) is the greatest occasion of civil war, ravishing of conscience, persecution of Christ Jesus in his servants, and of the hypocrisy and destruction of millions of souls.

"Ninthly, in holding an enforced uniformity of religion in a civil state, we must necessarily disclaim our desires and hopes of the Jew's conversion to Christ.

"Tenthly, an enforced uniformity of religion throughout a nation or civil state, confounds the civil and religious, denies the principles of Christianity and civility, and that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.

"Eleventhly, the permission of other consciences and worships than a state professeth only can (according to God) procure a firm and lasting peace (good assurance being taken according to the wisdom of the civil state for uniformity of civil obedience from all forts).

"Twelfthly, lastly, true civility and Christianity may both flourish in a state or kingdom, notwithstanding the permission of divers and contrary consciences, either of Jew or Gentile..." [4]
What does this mean?  It means that the wall between Separation of Church and State offers two way protection, not just one way protection of the church.  It means that history shows us how violent and brutal establishment has been and that the best thing government and religion can do is to maintain a wally between them for the benefit of all.  Unfortunately there are people who truly believe that church state separation and government neutrality is a form of hostility towards their particular religion. 
"... the .most devoutly religious people should also be the staunchest defenders of government neutrality in matters of religion. Given the awesome power of the modern state, religious people should want to do everything reasonable to reduce the risk that the state will interfere with their religious institutions, and that would include the state coming down against them in theological matters. Accomplishing this requires removing from the government the authority to support them in theological matters as well.

"Unfortunately, too few people seem to be aware of this — or, if they are, they don't consider the risk to be high enough to give up the benefits of state endorsement. This may seem like a reasonable gamble, given America's history as having a predominantly Christian population. It's an unwise gamble, though, given how much variety there is within American Christianity and how far religious pluralism has advanced in recent decades.

"There are people who believe that government 'neutrality' is the same as government "hostility," but exactly the opposite is actually the case. If the government is not neutral, then the government is taking sides. If the government is taking sides on behalf of one group or belief, then it is also taking sides against the alternative groups or beliefs. Perhaps it isn't the intention of the government to send the message that those alternatives are worse, but it does so necessarily when it signals that the chosen option is favored by endorsing, supporting, or promoting it. That, in turn, qualifies as a form of "hostility." [5]

But what the Dominionists fail to recognize is that theocracy, by its very nature, is a self destructive concept.  How many nations, past theocracies, have destroyed the very nation that it took over?  Theocracy, if nothing else, is a recipe for both religious and civil corruption.  In the end it contaminates everything it touches.  It stifles scientific curiosity; degrades the technological advancements that a nation needs to survive; and through internal violence in the form of inquisitions and through external violence through religious wars of conquest, bleeds the theocratic nation dry.  That's a hell of a price to pay for imposing a particular religious view on other people.  

"The sad reality of Dominionism is that in order to achieve power and control over other men some sort of accord or treaty must be established with the world system. Biblical Christians of the devotional evangelical variety are fully aware of this danger. They see any bid for power and authority in this world as a very dangerous move. The gathering and the 'unity' that is achieved by this means is artificial, cheap, and short-lived. The reason for this is quite simple. Any bid for power is based on compromise with the spirit behind that power. Dominionism is achieved by playing games with the systems of this world. And when they use the ways of this world to establish authority the Church that becomes established finally ends up running counter to true Christianity.
"History bears this out. The recurring pattern is as follows. Establishment Christians make deals with the worldly powers. Then they always end up beholden to these worldly powers. Compromised Christians then find themselves, (through fear of their worldly masters), being forced to persecute their uncompromised fellow Christians. Church history is absolutely full of strange stories based on this corruption. Sadly, it continues today. Dominion Theology will comes to its peak in the Apocalypse. It will become the future Harlot Church John saw. (Rev.17 & 18)"   [6]
That's ironic when you consider the fact that it is the radical religious right, the  Dominionists themselves who suffer from a paranoid delusion in which they see everyone except themselves as a part of a New Age Satanic plot. which includes:
"Acupressure, Acupuncture, Aerobics at the YMCA, The American Civil Liberties Union, Alcoholics Anonymous, Amway Corporation, Atari Computer Corporation, Biofeedback, Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Buffalo (New York) Public Schools, Campbell's Soup Company,  the Catholic Church, Catholic Communion, Chrysler Corporation, the movie Cocoon , Norman Cousins, Creative visualization, Ending World Hunger, Environmentalism, Freemasons,  Globalism, Mikail Gorbachev, The Grapes of Wrath , Guided imagery for success and prosperity, Health food, Holistic health,  The Hunger Project, Aldous Huxley, Hypnosis, Information revolution,  Jehovah's Witness, Jewish Kabala, Life Magazine, Lions International, Lockheed Corporation, Minneapolis City Government, Mobil Oil Company, Monsanto Corporation, Mormon Church, Mother Theresa, The Muppets, NAACP, Ralph Nader. NASA, National Organization for Women, NBC Television, Native American religious ceremonies, Networking, Newsweek Magazine, New York City Government, Planed Parenthood, Pluralism,  Polaroid Corporation, Pope John XXIII, Positive thinking,  Prince Phillip, Princeton University, Proctor and Gamble,  Reader's Digest , Rock and roll,  Rockefeller Foundation, Rosaries, Save the Whales movement, Self realization, Social Security Administration, Stress management, Transcendental Meditation, Desmond Tutu, U.S. Navy, UNESCO, United Nations, University of Michigan, University of Texas, Lech Welesa, Vegetarian diets, Westinghouse, World Peace efforts, Yale University, Bois Yeltsin. " [7]
In other words, it isn't only gays, lesbians, and abortionists.  It's a wide range of people, entities, and practices which the radical religious right has lumped together for persecution,  including mainstream Protestant Churches, the Catholic Church, and nonchristian religions in general.  And now the bad news.  That list comes from late 1993-1994.  One can only assume that their recent taste of political power has made them even more hungry, more determined, and more fanatical in their hatred of religious dissidents. 
And God knows they've tasted enough power since George W. Bush came to power. 
For all intents and purposes the Dominionists compose a mere seven percent of the American population.  But, like past radical fringe groups, they are well funded, highly organized, and extremely underhanded.  Not only do they operate in the sunlight; like a pervasive fungus they also operate in the shadows, constantly undermining the Constitution and the liberties for which it stands.  This of course isn't surprising.  Lenin operated in a similar manner during the build up to the Russian Revolution.  After the Beer Hall Putch, Adolf Hitler decided to put a happier and friendlier face on the Nazi party to convince the German people that he had moderated his views.  But all the time he was working behind the scenes to establish a virulently racist dictatorship.  The Dominionists are no different.
FACT:   Having converted Christ's ministry into a hellacious bastardization of Social Darwinism, the Dominionists actively seek and collect funds from major corporations which allow them to exert even more influence over both, the Republican Party and the nation as a whole.  Tyson Foods, in addition to making major contributions to radical religious entities, has placed 128 part time chaplains--mostly evangelicals or fundamentalists, in 78 plants across the country.  Other huge backers include Wal-Mart, Sam's Wholesale, and Purdue  [8 ]
FACT.  In 2003 faith based organizations received 8.1 percent of the social service budget or $2.005 billion in funding.  In Fiscal year 2004 that figure jumped to 10.3 percent, or $2.005 billion in funding..  In 2005 the figure rose to $ 11 percent of all federal competitive service grants, amounting to  $2.15 billion.  To make matters even worse, many of the religious groups receiving tax payer dollars openly  discriminate  against gays, lesbians, and people of other faiths.  I In  many cases the only real qualification for employment is that the employee be a Bible believing Christian. [9]
FACT:  At the same time the Bush administration  was wasting more than $1 billion on chastity programs alone.  Programs, incidentally, that a majority of the American people did not want, and which have yet to be proven effective.  And yet approximately 30 percent of American Public Schools teach abstinence only. [10]
FACT:  Prior to the 2006 midterm elections, Christian Fundamentalists held a majority of seats in 36 percent of of all Republican Party state committees, or 18 of 50 states.  At the same time they also held large minorities in the remaining states. Forty-five Senators and 186 members of the House of  Representatives had been singled out for theocratic praise from  radical right groups such as the Eagle Forum, the Christian Coalition, and the Family Resource Council. [11]
FACT:  Tens of millions of Americans depend on Christian broadcasting as their only source of news.  Moreover, anywhere from 1.1 million to 2.1 million children are home schooled.  Almost all of them are Evangelicals which means that the vast majority of these children will  be taught incorrectly that America was established as a Christian nation.  Evolution is not taught,and they are almost never confronted with contrary ideas which might contradict their very narrow Biblical world view.    Instead they are often channeled into right wing universities such as Patrick Henry University, Jerry Falwell's Liberty University, or Pat Robertson's Regent University; the last of which is a level four law school, level four being the worst rating that a law school can muster.  And yet George W. Bush has channeled graduates of these institutions into his administration, knowing full well that they are historical and legal revisionists who are more interested in establishing a Christian Theocracy than upholding the law and the Constitution. [12]
FACT:   We are all familiar with Ken Blackwell (another die hard religious fanatic) and his coordinated effort with Walden O'Dell, CEO of Diebold to deliver Ohio for George W. Bush during the 2004 elections, but how many people realize that the radical religious right, in addition to infiltrating elected positions and the judiciary, is also attempting to infiltrate the United States Military and law enforcement.  This became painfully obvious when senior military officers appeared in uniform in a video to promote a Christian Organization.  I am referring to Brigadier General Vince Brooks and the Christian Embassy, a Christian missionary group which concentrates on government employees. [13]  And then there's that matter of Blackwater, the world's most powerful mercenary Army which is led by a Fundamentalist Christian/former Navy Seal who apparently has enough money to open Blackwater facilities in strategic areas across the United States.  Which raises the question why?  Are we seeing the early stages of a Christianized SS or Gestapo? [14]
  I think we, as a people need to stand up and take our country back before it's too late.   For the most part Separation of Church and State has worked well for more than 200 years.  It isn't a panacea for every church-state issue that comes down the pike, but it has preserved our freedom of religion and prevented the establishment of a Theocracy, a form of government that our Founding Fathers would have found repugnant in the extreme.  In fact, when you really think about it, the idea that men like Madison, Jefferson, and Franklin, et al would have studied European and American History, recognized the corruption, hypocrisy, and bloodshed that stems from an established faith, only to turn around and then impose the same corruption, hypocrisy and bloodshed on the American people through a Theocratic Constitution is at best laughable.
Personally, I don't care what you want to worship.  If you want to believe that America should be a Christian Republic you have a right to believe so.  If you want to hate people based on their race, sexual orientation, or religion, you have a right to do so.  If you want to worship a taco that looks like the Virgin Mary or a grease stain on your garage floor you have a right to do so.  But your right to swing your theological fist stops where my nose begins.  When you want to use the power and financial resources of the United States government to impose your prayers, symbols, hymns, or doctrine on others you have crossed the line.
Thomas Jefferson had it right when he "declared eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
It was good advice then and it's good advice now.  Maybe we should start to embrace it again. 

In closing, we would like to leave you with the following thoughts.

"Be pleased then (honored Sir) to remember that thing which we call conscience is of such a nature (especially in Englishmen) as once a Pope of Rome, at the suffering of an Englishman in Rome, himself observed that although it be groundless, false, and deluded, yet it is not by any arguments as torments easily removed.  

"I speak not in terms of the multitude of all nations, which have their ebings and flowings in religion ( as the longest sword and strongest arm of flesh carries it), but I speak of conscience, a permission fixed in the mind and heart of man, which enforceth him to judge (as Paul said of himself a persecutor) and to do so and so with respect to God, His Worship 

"This conscience is found in all mankind, more or less:  in Jews, Turks, Papists, Protestants, Pagans...

"The maker and Searcher of our hearts knows with what bitterness I write, as with bitterness of the soul I have heard such language as to proceed from yourself and others, who formerly have fled from ( with crying out against) persecutors:  "You will say this is your conscience; you will say you are persecuted, and you are persecuted for your conscience.  No, you are conventiclers, heretics, blasphemers, seducers.  You deserve to be hanged; rather than one shall be waiting to hang him.  I will hang him myself.  I am resolved not to leave an heretic om the country.  I had rather so many whores and whore mongers and thieves come among us. 

"Oh Sir, you cannot forget what language and dialect this is, whether the Gardiners and Bonners, both former and latter, used to all that bowed not the state golden image of what conscience soever they were.  And indeed, Sir, if the most High be pleased to awaken you to render unto His holy Majesty His die praises, in you truly broken-heated confessions and supplications, you will then proclaim to all the world, that what profession soever you made of the lamb, yet these confessions could not proceed from the Dragon's mouth..

"Oh remember it is dangerous combat for potsherds of the earth to fight with their dreadful potter.  It is a dismal battle for poor naked feet to kick against the pricks; it is a dreadful voice from the King of kings and Lord of Lords:  'Endicott, Endicott, why huntest though me? why imprisonest thou me?  why finest, so bloodily whippest? why wouldst thou (did not I hold thy bloody hands) hang and burn me?'  Yea, Sir, I beseech you remember that it is a dangerous thing to put this to the may-be, to the venture or hazard of the possibility.  'Is it possible," may you well say, 'hat since I hunt, I hunt not the life of my Savior and the blood of the Lamb of God:  I have fought against many several sorts of consciences; it is beyond all possibility and hazard that I have not fought against God, that I have not persecuted Jesus in some of them?'  

"Sir, I must be humbly bold to say that 'tis impossible for any man or men to maintain their Christ by the sword and to worship a true Christ, to fight against all consciences opposite to theirs, and not to fight against God in some of them and to hunt after the life of the true Lord Jesus Christ.  Oh remember, wither your principles and consciences must in time and opportunity force you!.

"Sir I know I have presumed much upon your weighty affairs and thoughts; I end with an humble cry to the Father of mercies that you may take David's counsel, and silently commune with your own heart upon your bed. reflect upon your own spirit, and believe Him that saith it to his over zealous disciples, 'You know not what spirit you are of'; that no sleep may seize upon your eyes, nor slumber upon your eyelids, until your serious thoughts have seriously, calm;y, and unchangeably (through help from Christ Jesus) fixed, 

"First on a moderation towards the spirits and consciences of all mankind, merely differing from or opposing with only religious and spiritual opposition,

"Secondly, a deep and cordial resolution (in these wonderful, searching, disputing, and dissenting times) to search, to listen, to pray, to mast, and more fearfully, more tremblingly to enquire what the holy pleasure and the holy mysteries of the most Holy are:  in whom I humbly deserve to be. 
"Your poor fellow servant, unfeignedly
respective and faithful
Roger Williams"

(A letter by Roger Williams from 1651 from Roger Williams to Massachusetts Governor John Endicott on the occasion of the arrest of  of three Baptists in Massachusetts:)   [15]

[1]  From:  About:  Atheism/Agnosticism
Abe Fortas About Government Neutrality Towards Religion
Copyright 2007 About Inc

[2]  From:  Ronald Bruce
Roger Williams Banished:  1635
Separation of Church and State

[3]  From:  THE U.S. Constitution Online
Jefferson's Wall of Separation Letter
By Steve Mount
Copyright 1995-2007 by Steve Mount
Last modified January 30, 2007
Accessed May 16, 2007

[4]  From: The Constitution Society (home page)
Article titled:  "A Plea for Religious Liberty by Roger Williams
Copyright 1994-2005 by the Constitution Society
Last updated November 18, 2006

[5]  From:  About: Atheism/Agnosticism
Abe Fortas on Government Neutrality Towards Religion
Copyright 2007 by About Inc
[6]  From : Dominion Theology in Recent History
By Gavin Finley MD
[7]  From:  Educational Leadership magazine
Pages 6 through 11
December 1993/January 1994
Article titled "When Two Worldviews Collide
byRobert J. Marzano
[8] From:  American Fascists, The Christian Right and the War on America
Page 21
By Chris Hedges
Published by The Free Press
Copyright 206 by Chris Hedges
[9]  Ibid
Pages 23-24
[10] Ibid
Page 24
[11]  Ibid
Pages 22-23
[12]  Ibid 
Page 26
[13]  From:  NPR:  The Nation
Religious Group's Ties to Pentagon Questioned
December 11, 2006
Copyright 2007 by NPR
[14]  From:   Democracy Now
Blackwater Plans for New Facility Near San Diego Draws Fire From Residents, Peace Activists, and Local Congressman

[15]  From:  A Documentary History of Religion in America to the Civil War (Second Edition)
Edited by Edwin S. Gaustad
Pages 114-117
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids
Copyright 1982, 1993 William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company


Distorted Facts:  The Cultural War Against Gays
By SweetPea

During the 1920s and 1930s the world learned that when sociopathic
leaders, such as Adolf Hitler, were megalomaniacal to put their insane
ideas in print, the world should wake up and listen. Today I would
humbly suggest that the same holds true for public statements made by
megalomaniacal religious leaders on the far right.  If we don't wake
up and both, listen, and infer the lessons from the past, we may not
only lose our Constitution and our freedom.   Some of us may well lose
our lives.


If we take the Holy Bible at face value  there are anywhere from ten,
to eighteen, to twenty-three capital offenses. They are as follows:
Murder (Exodus 21:12, Exodus 21:15);   Murder (Exodus 21:12, Exodus
21:15);  Kidnapping (Exodus 21:16); Disobedience to parents (Exodus
21:17, Deuteronomy 21:18); Juvenile delinquency - incorrigibility
(Deuteronomy 21:18-21);  Bestiality (Leviticus 20:15); Violations of
the Sabbath (Exodus 31:15); Adultery (Leviticus 20:10); Abominations
(Leviticus 20:2); Blasphemy (Leviticus 24:16); Incest (Leviticus
20:11); Homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13); Witchcraft (Exodus 22:18,
Leviticus 20:27); False prophecy (Deuteronomy 13:5); Worshiping a
false god (Deuteronomy 13:6-10); Sacrificing to false gods (Exodus
22:20); Sodomy (Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13); Sex with a woman
betrothed to another (Deuteronomy 22:25); False witness in a capital
crime (Deuteronomy 19:16-20); Fornication by daughters of priests
(Leviticus 21:9); Failure to abide by a decision of the High Court
(Deuteronomy 17:12); Unchastity (Deuteronomy 22:21-24); Cursing
someone (Leviticus 24:14); Negligence resulting in death (Exodus

Wow!  That's quite a list, but whether like it or not the truth of the
matter is that there are pastors, laity, and members of congregations
who seriously believe that the above list of capital crimes should
indeed result in executions if the perpetrator is found guilty.
Consider the remarks that follow:

"Brute beasts ... part of a vile and satanic system [that] will be
utterly annihilated, and there will be a celebration in heaven."
Jerry Falwell On homosexuals, as quoted in The Bible Tells Me
So, 1996  [2]

"I've never seen a man in my life I wanted to marry. And I'm gonna be
blunt and plain: if one ever looks at me like that, I'm gonna kill him
and tell God he died."
The Reverend Jimmy Swaggart in a September 2004 evangelism
 television broadcast [3]

"The State carries the power of the sword, that is, the power to
prohibit [homosexual] conduct with physical penalties, such as
confinement and even execution. It must use that power to prevent the
subversion of children toward this lifestyle."
Roy Moore in a 2002 concurrence in a custody case involving a lesbian
mother. [4]

"In Stranger at the Gate , I recalled my experience in a fifty thousand
watt Seattle radio station where I had gone to debate a
Reconstructionist Presbyterian Pastor on a Popular call in show.  When
I asked him how he interpreted the passage in Leviticus that calls for
the death of a man who sleeps with another man, he replied without
hesitation, 'It means you should be killed.'  After swallowing hard, I
asked him, 'Who should do the killing?  You church folk?'  He answered
without pause:  'No, that's the civil authority's job. That's why we
have to get more good men of God elected into government.'"   [5]
Mel White describing an encounter with a popular west coast
Presbyterian pastor

"(R. J. ) Rushdoony used that verse in the book of of Romans (Romans
1:32) to prove that the Laws of Moses, written thirteen centuries
before Christ, still apply to twenty-first century Christians.  In
Leviticus, the author makes it clear that men who sleep with other men
are an abomination and should be executed (Leviticus 20"13).  I have
met fundamentalist Christian Clergy and laity alike who take the whole
verse seriously and warn me in letters and on radio talk shows that it
s God's will that I be executed for accepting my homosexuality as
God's Gift."    [6]
Mel White on R. J. Rushdoony, founder of the Chalcedon Foundation
and of Reconstructionist theology.

I have no doubt that the majority, indeed a vast majority, of the
people in this country aren't so crazy as to call for the execution of
Gays and Lesbians, but for some reason, certain individuals with
authoritative personalities have obsessed over this issue and it has
become their idee fixe. I'd like to say that they weren't sincere,
that their desire to use the state to commit genocide against the gay
and lesbian community were something beyond the confines of their very
dark and twisted "faith," but the truth of the matter is that when
these people say that gays and lesbians should be put to death, they
are not kidding.  They are operating on the same paradigm and Osama bin
Laden and the Taliban.  One may worship Allah and the other may
worship the Old Testament Yahweh ( I see very little Christianity in
their fanatical rants), but in the end both, the radical right wing
Muslims and the radical right wing Christians operate under the same
principles.  They genuinely believe that their Holy Books are superior
to any secular document such as our Constitution and they want to
replace those governing documents with a very brutal and repressive
form of theocracy that will justify the execution of those who dare to

Part of the problem with a literal interpretation of the Bible is that
it fails to recognize the fact that some passages are more relevant
than others.   Those who accept a literal interpretation of the Bible
believe that all parts of the text are equally without error, so you
literally end up with a form of Christianity in which the four Gospels
of Jesus Christ are as important as the Book of  Haggai or Malachi.
Lesser prophets are placed on the same level as Jesus Christ.   That
is a very twisted form of Christianity when your central prophet is no
more important than any other figure in the Holy Text.  But it does
provide a convenient excuse, a brutal justification for selecting the
violent and repressive parts of the Bible which promote bigotry, hate,
violence, and death.  And it allows your typical homophobe to
ignore the portions of the New Testament which call for love, mercy,
charity,  humility, and forgiveness.

I suspect that there are Christians who either won't admit, or who
can't understand that what they say can have an effect on what other
people do.  I do not deny them the right to speak their minds )freedom
of speech is one of the corner stones of our democratic republic), but
I DO retain the right to counter their hateful, obsessive scorn with
what I perceive to be the truth.   In short, I claim the right to
speak the truth to power--or if you will, I claim the right to speak
the truth to what I consider distortion, revisionism, and, often, out
right lies.

Where to begin?  So much of what the far right says is little more
that Orwellian Double Speak, revision at it's very worst. All to often
the far right attempts to portray itself as the innocent victim of
Gay and Lesbian Propaganda, but when you read their material,
listen to their rhetoric, and watch them on television you realize that
they are actually engaged in some of the most hypocritical projection
one could ever imagine.  In short, they are calling the kettle black.
As a mater of fact, many of the accusations they hurl at my
community sound as if they were penned by Hitler's Propaganda
Minister, Doctor Paul Josef Goebbels.

As an out-of-the-closet gay male I am getting a little sick and tired
of being compared to everyone and everything from Typhoid Mary to
Jeffrey Dahmer.  For all intents and purposes gay males are compared
to the worst kinds of people that you could ever possibly imagine and
the sad truth of the matter is that all too often what the far right
promotes as the truth is often picked at random out of their
proverbial asses.

This is the kind of garbage that we hear on an all to regular basis.


First let's get something straight.  Homosexuality is not a disease.
Countless respected, mainstream organizations will tell you this,
including:  The American Psychiatric Association, the American Law
Institute, American Bar Association, the World Health Organization,
The American Psychological Association, the American Medical
Association, the Academy of Pediatrics, and  the Council on Child and
Adolescent Health.  Moreover, in 1999, the American Academy of
Pediatrics,  the American Counseling Association, American the
Association of School Administrators, the American Federation of
Teachers, the American Psychological Association,  the American
School Health Association, the Interfaith Alliance Foundation,  the
National Association of school psychologists,  the National
Association of Social  Workers and the National Education
Association, issued a document called Just the Facts About
Sexual Orientation in which they:

"Expressed concern about harassment of gay and lesbian youth;
condemned reparative therapy as potentially harmful and of little or
no effectiveness,  and describe transformational ministries as
representing only one part of Christianity--those faith groups which
view homosexuality as outside God's will. and incompatible with
Christianity.  The site other denominations as supporting equal
rights, and protection against discrimination, for gays and lesbians."

The idea that gays are either diseased or the disease itself is
nothing more than a reworking of what Nazi propaganda had to say
about the Jews during the 1920s and 1930s.  In the Nazi propaganda
film, The Eternal Jew, Jews were described as disease spreading rats:
"In this way, they (the rats) spread disease, plague, leprosy, typhoid
fever, cholera, dysentery, and so on. They are cunning, cowardly, and
cruel, and are found mostly in large packs. Among the animals, they
represent the rudiment of an insidious and underground destruction -
just like the Jews among human beings." [8]  Today, right wing
theocrats describe gays as carriers of STDs,  as disproportionately
diseased, as more likely to carry syphilis than straight men. "The
disgusting details of the homosexual lifestyle explain why so many
diseases are present in the homosexual community." [9]  That from
The American Family Association.


In this very weak argument, the percentage of gays in the overall
American population is reduced to a mere one percent.  Having
dramatically reduced our numbers, the would be theocrats then go on
to accuse us of running the entire country!  Haven't you heard?  We
control Hollywood, we're wealthy, we control television and radio.
We're more powerful than other Americans.  Does that sound familiar?

It should.

It was the same thing that the Nazis said about Jews in the
first half of the 20th Century.  Again, from The Eternal Jew: At the
beginning of the twentieth century, the Jews sit at the junction of the
world financial markets. They are an international power. Although only
one per cent of the world's population, with the help of their capital,
they terrorize the world stock exchanges, world opinion, and world
politics. New York is today the center of Jewish power." [10]


According to James Kennedy, "The homosexual community does
not fit the bill (of a legitimate minority) Homosexuals as a whole, are
better educated and better off financially than  Average Americans.
In fact, homosexuals hold a disproportionate number of professional
and management positions in our economy!" [11]  Robert Knight of the
Family research Council agrees:  "Homosexuals are among the most
economically advantaged people in our country. Research by
marketing firms shows that as a group homosexuals have higher than
average per-capita annual incomes ($36,800 vs. $12,287), are more
likely to hold college degrees ( 59.6 percent vs. 18 percent), have
professional or managerial positions (49 percent vs. 15.9 percent..."
[12].  But then again, so did the Nazi Propaganda machine."Fifty-two
 out of every 100 doctors were Jews. Of every 100 merchants, 60 were
Jews. The average wealth of Germans was 810 marks; the average
wealth of Jews 10,000 marks." [13]

To all of that I would ask one question:  "So what?"   Isn't that the
American Dream?  Work hard.  Get a good education.  Move ahead
in life.  That's what the far right itself spews whenever it wants to
slash or eliminate spending programs for the weak and the needy,
but when gays, lesbians, and Jews actually succeed suddenly the
American dream becomes a matter of being a powerful elite or over
privileged.  The message could no be more clear.  The American can
only be dreamed by white, male, reactionary Christians who can pass
a theocratic litmus test. Why am I not surprised? 


"Fundamentalist Christians see homosexuals as the primary threat
to the Christian Church as well. Says (James) Kennedy:  'It's obvious
that many in the homosexual community feel intolerance, even
contempt for the Christian faith.' Dobson:  'For more than forty years
the homosexual activist movement has sought to implement a master
plan with goals that include muzzling the clergy and the Christian
media.'  Falwell:  'Complete elimination of God and Christianity from
American society is being designed by homosexual activists) right
now.'  Robertson:  'Just like what Nazi Germany did to Jews, so liberal
America is doing to evangelical Christians.  Its no different.  It is the
same thing.  It is happening all over again.  It is the Democratic
Congress, the liberal-based media, and the homosexuals who want to
destroy the Christians." [14}  Those are rather interesting statements,
when you consider the fact that Robertson calls for the assassination
of foreign leaders and makes knee jerk predictions in which he almost
salivates at the idea of mass destruction. As for Jerry Falwell's remark,
what can I say?  The man certainly has guts, because this is the
same person who asked his if his followers would join him in a
declaration of war, stating explicitly that "There is no middle ground...
For Christians there can be no peaceful coexistence with these
sodomites whom God has given over to a reprobate mind."  [15]
And would it surprise you to know that the Nazi propaganda film,
The Eternal Jew, would have agreed with all of the above statements?
"What does the ancient Talmud law teach? Let us hear some quotes...
(now supposedly quoting the Talmud) Praise to the Lord who has set
apart the holy Israelites from other people. The heathen, who do not
keep the law, will be destroyed." [16]


Ah yes.   The age old myth that all homosexuals want to do is
molest children.  Considering some of the sex scandals that rocked
the televangelist community in the 1980s, plus the Ted Haggard
fiasco, you'd think that this would be the last thing our beloved
Theocrats would talk about, but you have to say one thing--our
beloved theocrats certainly have chutzpah, because this allegation
simply is not true.  It's another scare tactic in the right wing war
against the other, against the dissident.  According to Doctor
Nicholas A. Groth, "The research to date all points to there
being no significant relationship between a homosexual lifestyle
and child molestation. There appears to be practically no reportage
of sexual molestation of girls by lesbian adults, and the adult male
who sexually molests young boys is not likely to be homosexual ."
[17]  But that doesn't stop the far right from spreading the same
old package of prevarications.   "They commit over 33% of the
sex acts with children. Of the pupil molestations, homosexual
teachers commit as many as 80% of those acts."  [18]  Or, if you
prefer, the delusional rantings of Jerry Falwell:  "'Mark my words,"
he writes. (The homosexual's) primary target is the nation's public
schools and our impressionistic children."  Translated into modern
English, homosexuals want to indoctrinate and convert children
(an ironic statement when you consider the fact that it is the radical
religious right which has obsessed over the idea of indoctrinating
homosexuals through restorative or conversion therapy until they
behave like heterosexuals).  Does anyone besides yours truly see
the similarity between this tactic, this particular example of revision
and the manner in which the Nazis dehumanized Jews?  "This
parasitical Jewish race is responsible for most international crime.
In 1932, Jews, only 1 percent of the wrld's population accounted for...
47 percent of crooked games of choice--82 percent of international
crime organizations--98 percent of prostitution."   [19]


How do you answer something like this?  According to a majority
of the psychiatric and psychological organizations, homosexuality is
not pathological.  That isn't to say that gays and lesbians don't
suffer from other disorders such as depression as a result of
constant persecution and harassment by their indefatigable opponents,
but would humbly suggest that those who argue that homosexuals,
gays and lesbians, are by nature perverted and/or pathological should
take a few long strides into the 21st century.

 "Some psychologists and psychiatrists still hold negative personal
attitudes toward homosexuality. However, empirical evidence and
professional norms do not support the idea that homosexuality is a
form of mental illness or is inherently linked to psychopathology.
"The foregoing should not be construed as an argument that sexual
minority individuals are free from mental illness and psychological
distress. Indeed, given the stresses created by sexual stigma and
prejudice, it would be surprising if some of them did not manifest
psychological problems (Meyer, 2003). The data from some studies
suggest that, although most sexual minority individuals are well
adjusted, nonheterosexuals may be at somewhat heightened risk
for depression, anxiety, and related problems, compared to
exclusive heterosexuals." [20]

The Inevitable Results of Threats and Hate Speech

The verbal attacks continue.  Gays and lesbians are compared to
everything from rats to Devil worshipers, which makes me wonder,
what kind of effect does this have on the society at large?  Well, we
already know, don't we?  It creates an atmosphere in which those who
are less than balanced, in which the highly disturbed feel free to act
on their violent impulses.  Can you say Matthew Shepherd?  Can you
say Harvey Milk?  They were individuals who were quite literally
murdered because of their sexual orientation, and they aren't the only
ones who have suffered such a tragic fate.

*Nicholas Ray West, a 23-year-old Southern Baptist singer was
kidnapped, tortured and executed in a gravel pit because he was
gay. [21]

*January 1994,  Michael Benishek, another gay Texan, was found
dead in San Antonio.  The coroner was uncertain if he died from a
severe blow to his head with a blunt instrument or from a knife slash
across his throat.  [22]

*February 1994, Tommy Musick, age 48, a gay hairstylist from
Midland, Texas, was shot four times in the head.  His 18-year-old
killer, Ramsey Harrell, received a mere twelve year sentence because
the jury held an an obvious bias against gay people. [23]

*In March 1994, police discovered the body of Joe Trevino, another
gay man who had been strangled and bludgeoned to death in his
home by two teenagers. [24]

*April 1994, John Anthony Burwell, age 26, was shot to death by
a 16-year-old youth from San Antonio.  The youth dragged Burwell's
body to his pickup truck, drove his victim's body to a nearby creek,
where he dumped his victim off a forty foot birdge into the water
below.  [25]

*June 1994, Paul Quintanilla's body was found in a field near Dallas
Texas.  The young man had been stabbed twelve times and his
genitals had been slashed.  [26]

* "On May 8, 1995, Bill Clayton, 17,  committed suicide after
having been brutally assaulted for being bisexual. [27]

* "Born Teena Brandon and raised as a girl, he was living as a man
 known as Brandon Teena in Falls City, Nebraska, when he was
 murdered at age 21. In December of 1993, two men who
discovered his gender raped him. His attackers later shot and
killed him after learning Brandon had reported the rape and
was to help police in the investigation."  [28]

* "On August 7, 1995, Tyra Hunter died after DC fire
department emergency medical technicians called her epithets,
backed away, and refused to render treatment on discovering that
she was a transgendered woman." [29]

* "On October 6, 1998, 21-year-old college student Matthew Shepard
was tied to a fence in Laramie, Wyoming, pistol-whipped, then left
for dead in the freezing night.  He died six days later." [30]

* "Billy Jack Gaither, 39, of Sylacauga, Alabama was bludgeoned
to death by two men on Feb. 19, 1999, then set on fire with
automobile tires because he was gay. [31]

* "Pfc. Barry Winchell, 21, was beaten to death by fellow
service members while sleeping in his cot on July 5, 1999 at Fort
Campbell, Ky.  His Army colleagues thought (correctly) that he
was gay, so they killed him." [32]

* "On September 22, 2000, a man looking to "waste some
faggots" entered a gay bar in Roanoke, Virginia and opened fire,
killing Danny Overstreet, and injuring 6 others."  [33]

*On the Fourth of July, 2000, JR Warren, 26, who was black and
gay, was beaten to death by three men in West Virginia, then run
over by a car to make it look like a hit and run."  [34]

The upshot to all of this is that despite what the radical religious
right says about homosexual men being more violent than
heterosexual men, the truth of the matter is that there are more
heterosexual on homosexual crimes than there are homosexual on
heterosexual crimes.

In 2004 there were 738 incidents of anti-male homosexual hate
crimes; 164 incidents of anti-female homosexual hate crimes; 245
incidents of anti-homosexual hate crimes; 33 incidents of anti -
heterosexual hate crimes, and 17 incidents of anti-bisexual hate
crimes. [35]

In a similar vein, there were 855 anti-male homosexual offenses;
201 anti female homosexual offenses; 297 anti homosexual
offenses; 35 anti-homosexual offenses; 35 anti-heterosexual
offenses, and 18 anti-bisexual offenses. [36]

There were 902 male homosexual victims; 212 female homosexual
victims; 314 homosexual victims; 36 heterosexual victims, and
18 bisexual victims.  [37]

There were 832 offenders who acted out against homosexual
males; 163 against female homosexuals; 224 against homosexuals;
22 against heterosexuals; and 17 who offended against bisexuals.


Where does this garbage come from?  Usually from bona fide quacks
in professional garb.  The most deplorable of which is Paul Cameron.
"On December 2, 1983, the American Psychological Association
sent Paul Cameron a letter informing him that he had been dropped
from membership. Early in 1984, all members of the American
Psychological Association received official written notice that
"Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a
violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists"
by the APA Board of Directors. Cameron has posted an elaborate
argument about his expulsion from APA on his website,  claiming
that he resigned from APA before he was dropped from membership.
Like most organizations, however, APA does not allow a member
to resign when they are being investigated. And even if Cameron's
claims were accepted as true, it would be remarkable that the
largest professional organization of psychologists in the United States
(and other professional associations, as noted below) went to such
lengths to disassociate itself from one individual."  [40]

Moreover, Cameron, who falsely claims that he is a sociologist, was
also dropped by the Nebraska Psychological Association, which
adopted a resolution stating, "formally disassociates itself from
the representations and interpretations of scientific literature
offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements
on sexuality."  This is important because Cameron repeatedly states
that homosexuals are pathological, that we are perverted; essentially
doing everything in his power to dehumanize gays and lesbians. 
(For more information about Cameron's insane rantings please be so
kind as to see the links in the source given in Footnote Number  [39]


So here we are, two years later, and we have a flip flopping president
who once supported gay rights, but who now sides allies himself with
the most visceral and rapacious haters that the House and he Senate
have seen since the run up to the Civil War.  Consider the following
comments by United States Senator John Boehner, R-Ohio:
"This unconstitutional bill would effectively give the federal government
authority to punish American citizens for 'thought crimes' — a concept
that has Big Brother written all over it. There are already state and local
laws on the books that punish violent crime against any and all
Americans,"  said Boehner..."  [40]

Senator Boehner should talk about Big Brother.  He's the one who is
engaged in Orwellian Doublespeak.  He's the one who is trying to revise
the issue into something else.  Obviously the attempt here is to
convince the American people that the government will try to arrest
people based entirely on what they think, when in fact hate crime
legislation only goes into effect after a a violent or abusive event has
taken place--a minor detail that the Senator seems to have omitted.
As Church Lady might have said, "How con-VEEEEE-nient." 

Other arguments
claim that hate crime legislation violates the 14th
Amendment because it puts the federal government in a position where
it favors one group over another.  Not so. If a group of homosexuals were
to commit murder based on the fact that the victim was a straight man
or woman the hate crime legislation wold come into play.  In other words,
whenever the perpetrator is trying to terrorize an entire community, the
hate crime legislation would kick in.  The only thing that matters is
whether or not the act was intended to send a message to the victim's
community as a whole.  It has nothing to do with the federal government
taking sides. 

Even worse is the phony suggestion that hate crime legislation has been
designed to silence Christian speech.  In many ways this is a return to
the old Nazi argument that Jews want to hurt Christians.  As stated above
it has now been revised to read that gays and lesbians want to hurt
Christians.  It's sheer and utter foolishness on the part of fanatical
paranoiacs, but the point has to be covered.  The hate crime legislation
is primarily concerned with violent crime and what the perpetrator intended
at the time of the attack.  Period.  Granted, I can't blame some Christians
for worrying.  As I have already demonstrated, some of their rhetoric
isn't only ugly, moronic, and paranoid.   It can, and is, at times outright
hateful.  But that doesn't mean that the federal government has a right to
silence the speech.  Indeed, I want the public to hear what these people
are thinking. I don't want to drive their insanity underground where it will only
grow and fester like a deadly fungus.  I want their hurtful sermons, their
half baked sermons exposed to the light of day where it can be debated
and countered with better speech.  But, as I said earlier, I don't have to
like it. I can tolerate, even celebrate their right to freedom of speech, but
I suspect in my heart of hearts that this is a right that they do not
treasure as dearly as I do.


[1]  From: Wikipedia
List of Capital Crimes in the Bible
Last updated on 6 December 2006

[2]  From: Southern Poverty Law Center
Intelligence  Report/Watch Your Mouth Slide Show

[3]  Ibid

[4]  Ibid

[5]  From:  Religion Gone Bad:  The Hidden Dangers of the
Christian Right
Pages 109-110
By Mel White
Published by the Penguin Group
Copyright 2006 by Mel White

[6]  Ibid
Page 108

[7[ From:   Religious
Professional Associations Statements About Christianity

[8]  From:
Matthew Shepard Online Resources
Nazi Anti-Jewish Speech vs Religious Anti-Gay Speech

[9]  Ibid

[10]  Ibid

[11] From:  Religion Gone Bad:  The Hidden Danger of the
Christian Right
Page 237
By Mel White
Published by Penguin Group
Copyright 2006 by Mel White

[12] From:
Matthew Shepard Online Resources
Nazi Anti-Jewish Speech vs Religious Anti-Gay Speech

[13]  Ibid

[14]  From:  Religion Gone Bad:  The Hidden Danger of the
Christian RIght
Pages 235-236
by Mel White
Published by Penguin Group
Copyright 2006 by Mel White

[15] Ibid
Page 238

[16]  From:
Matthew Shepard Online Resources
Nazi Anti-Jewish Speech vs.Religious Anti-Gay Speech

[17]  From:  Facts About Homosexuality and Child Molestation
Copyright 1997 to 2007 by Gregory M. Herek PhD

[18]  From;
Matthew Shepherd Online Resources
Nazi Anti-Jewish Speech vs Religious Anti-Gay Speech

[19]  Ibid

[20]  From:  Facts About Homosexuality and Mental Health
Copyright 1997-2007 by Gregory M. Herek PhD.

[21]From:  Religion Gone Bad:  The Hidden Danger of the
Christian RIght
Pages 307 - 309
by Mel White
Published by Penguin Group
Copyright 2006 by Mel White

[22]  Ibid

[23}   Ibid

[24]  Ibid

[25]   Ibid

[26]  Ibid

[27]  From: home page
Hate Crime Victims List

[28] Ibid

[29]  Ibid

[30]  Ibid

[31]  Ibid

[32]  Ibid

[33]  Ibid

[34]  Ibid

[35]  From: infoplease
Summary of Hate Crime Statistics 2004
(Source: Crime in the United States, 2004,
FBI, Uniform Crime Reports.)
Copyright  2000–2007 Pearson Education, publishing as Infoplease

[36]  Ibid

[37}  Ibid

[38]   Ibid

[39]  From:  Paul Cameron's Biosheet
House OKs Bill to Expand
Copyright, 1997-2007 by Gregory M.  Herek PhD

House OKs Bill to Expand Hate Crimes Law to Attacks on Gays
Thursday May 3, 2007
Copyright 2007 FOX News Network,2933,269853,00.html