Showing posts with label theocracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label theocracy. Show all posts

4.11.2012

Rick Santorum's Greatest Hits

We've dedicated a lot of posts here to Rick Santorum. I had considered posting a look back at the insanity that was the Rick Santorum campaign, but I'd honestly rather pound roofing nails into my eye sockets.

Thankfully, the folks at Right Wing Watch pulled together a highlight reel for us.

Enjoy, and pour one out for Rick. Hopefully his improbable rise to possible GOP candidate for the nomination is the closest we will ever come to an American theocracy.


2.10.2012

Santorum, Apparently Forgetting Everything He's Ever Said, Says 'Government Control Of Your Lives' Has 'Gotta Stop'

Seriously, someone please have a discussion with Rick Santorum about self-awareness.

Speaking today at CPAC, Santorum actually said this (referring to the Obama contraception flap):
"It's not about contraception. It's about economic liberty, its about freedom of speech its about freedom of religion, its about government control of your lives and its gotta stop!"
For real. He said that.

The same Santorum who said he would invalidate all gay marriages.

The same Santorum who said that the right to privacy as it relates to having consensual sex with another adult in one's own home "doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution."

The same Santorum who said about contraception, "It's not okay. It's a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be."

The same Santorum who said he would "advocate that any doctor that performs an abortion, should be criminally charged for doing so."

The same Santorum who said this:
"They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues.

That is not how traditional conservatives view the world. There is no such society that I’m aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture."
Watch Rick's nutty remarks from CPAC:




2.09.2012

Hi, I'm Rick Santorum, And I Have No Self-Awareness

Rick Santorum has been talking a lot about freedom since his trifecta on Tuesday.

Take a look at some of his official tweets following his big day:

"Freedom is at stake in this election. America needs a president who’ll listen to the voice of the people."

"Our freedoms are slowly being eroded by Obama Admn. I will fight to restore them."

A press release from yesterday announced Santorum was "the first and only candidate to sign the Presidential Pledge for Religious Freedom."

If you've been following Rick Santorum for any amount of time, you might be wondering if the man is completely devoid of any self-awareness.

Certainly Rick Santorum does not mean the freedom to wear a condom while having sex:
"One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country. It's not okay. It's a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be."
Certainly he can't mean the freedom to have consensual sex with another adult in the privacy of your own home:
And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution."
And he can't mean the freedom for a doctor to practice his or her profession:
“I believe that any doctor that performs an abortion, I would  advocate that any doctor that performs an abortion, should be criminally charged for doing so.”
Clearly, he doesn't mean the freedom to be brown in an airport:
"Obviously, Muslims would be someone you'd look at [in airport profiling]."
The freedom to stay married to the person you legally married? Nah.
When asked if he would make same-sex couples get divorced, Santorum responded, "Well their marriage would be invalid."
The freedom to not have religion shoved down your child's throat in public schools? Nope.
"It's very interesting that you have a situation where science will only allow things in the classroom that are consistent with a non-Creator idea of how we got here, as if somehow or another that's scientific. Well maybe the science points to the fact that maybe science doesn't explain all these things. And if it does point to that, then why don't you pursue that? But you can't, because it's not science, but if science is pointing you there how can you say it's not science? It's worth the debate."
The freedom to terminate a pregnancy under the care of a licensed doctor? Of course not. Santorum pines for the good ol' days of back alley abortions:
Look at what’s happened just in our tolerance for abortion. Fifty years ago…60 years ago, people who did abortions were in the shadows, people who were considered really bad doctors. Now, abortion is something to that is just accepted. [...] This is the erosion. And it happens in the medical profession. It happened very fast.
I'm really curious about the freedoms Rick Santorum believes he represents. It sure sounds like he wants nothing more than to establish a Christian Taliban.


1.12.2012

Pastor Steven Andrew's 'Christian Voting Guide'

How many more props can I cram into this shot?
Pastor Steven Andrew, president of USA Christian Ministries and author of Making A Strong Christian Nation has just published his Christian Voting Guide.

Andrew is one of several evangelical pastors who have recently chastised Franklin Graham and Joel Osteen for saying that it's okay for a Christian to vote for a Mormon.

How exactly does Pastor Andrew think a good Christian should vote?

"God shows Christians who to vote for. He has four main voting requirements," states Andrew.
Every person we vote for is expected to have these Biblical qualities:

1) Rules in the fear of God - Fears God, reverent of God

2) Able - Strength, efficiency, wealth and leader of the army

3) Person of truth - Reliable, stable, faithful, true doctrine

4) Hating covetousness - Hater of unjust gain (bribes and other frauds)

If a person doesn’t have all four qualities, they don’t meet God’s standard. Would you agree that a God-fearing person obeys God’s laws found in the Holy Bible and brings others who fear God into government appointments? An unprincipled person brings the wicked who disobey God in leadership.
Andrew goes on to stress the need for a Christian theocracy:
We are to welcome God to all government, schools and courts. The first act of Congress was to read the Holy Bible and pray in Jesus’ name. We are to bring back the Holy Bible and Christian prayer in schools as the settlers, George Washington and our Founding Fathers did for 355 years (1607 – 1962). We are to have pro-life laws and we are to keep God’s marriage of one man and one woman in lifetime covenant.
He states, "The First Amendment means Christianity only, not other beliefs. This is the intent of our Christian Founding Fathers."

So, if you are a tax-paying Jew, Muslim, atheist, agnostic, Unitarian, Buddhist, Hindu, Wiccan, etc., you're not welcome here.

Obviously making a case for Michele Bachmann, Andrew states, "While God calls men to lead the USA, the Bible shows that if there isn’t a God fearing man, then a God-fearing woman can be chosen as in the book of Judges when Deborah arose, judged and led the people to victory."

Andrew had been pushing Bachmann and Santorum, but with Bachmann out of the running, is left hailing Santorum as the most God-fearing presidential candidate.

Andrew doesn't mince words when analyzing the remaining candidates:

Ron Paul
"Pray for Ron Paul to seek God first, then Christian freedom...Ron Paul is good at exposing corruption and resisting tyranny, as our Founding Fathers say to do. But Ron Paul voted to put homosexual sin in the military. Paul needs to publicly repent for erroneoulsy believing that God gives the right to sin... Prosperity and freedom are the fruit of obeying God. They don’t come by a libertarian belief that wants freedom but not God.

Newt Gingrich
"While Newt Gingrich is not as bad as a Mormon who has a different gospel (Mitt Romney) or Rick Perry who has betrayed the USA, or Barack Hussein Obama who covers Jesus’ cross and name at Georgetown and who says to leave a living baby to die who survives an abortion, Newt Gingrich is not God’s best for the USA.

1) Newt Gingrich endorsed the homosexual and abortion candidate in NY’s 23rd in 2010 instead of Hoffman, who is more God-fearing. Hoffman may have won if Gingrich did what was right before the Lord. On top of this, voter fraud was discovered and Gingrich did not defend Hoffman.

2) Newt Gingrich would not get rid of all “Government Healthcare” that harms Americans with inferior care, higher costs, “death panels” and other non-Christian things.

3) Reports to be confirmed say Newt Gingrich would help illegal aliens who then vote for anti-God and anti-USA issues, like Obama. This means American citizens are harmed.

4) Newt Gingrich filmed with Nancy Pelosi for the hoax of “Climate Change”.

5) Newt Gingrich has been married three times. What are Gingrich’s loyalty and leadership skills?"

Rick Perry
Andrew has many reasons why Perry is unworthy of the Christian vote. Among them:
"Like obama, Perry signed a hom*os*exual activists “Hate Crimes” law that mocks God and favors sinful sexual “orientations” that God and our Founding Fathers forbid." [Note Andrew's lower-case spelling of Obama, repeated elsewhere.]

"Rick Pery said that Texas can secede from the USA, but God wants the USA to unite in Christ not divide. A “president” doesn’t break up the #1 nation in the world."

"Rick Perry mandated that young girls be vaccinated with Gardasil that killed other girls. But wouldn’t obeying God in abstinence protect girls from sexual diseases?"

"Rick Perry refused to stop obama and tsa’s “sexual assault” and groping at Texas airports when a super majority in the Texas Congress wanted to stop the “sexual assualts”. Rick Perry doesn’t stand up for God’s unalienable rights of personal modesty in our Declaration of Independence."

"Rick Perry campaigned for Al Gore."

Mitt Romney
"Mitt Romney is a Mormon. Mormon’s are secretive, exclusive, do not display the cross and deny the real Jesus Christ His Gospel."

"Romney also did “Government Healthcare” like obama’s"

"Brought Massachusetts away from God, with homosexual sin."

Barack Obama
As if we needed to know Andrew's views on Obama, he provides a laundry list of reasons why Obama is not someone real Christians should support:

"According to Jesus Christ we see that Barack Hussein Obama is not a Christian by his fruit. Jesus warns of wolves in sheep’s clothing."

"Covered Jesus’ name and cross at Georgetown"

"Advocates to leave living babies to die who survive botched abortions"

"Has the blood of millions of aborted babies on his hands"

"Mocks God with sexual and homosexual sin"

"Follows Saul Alynski who dedicates books to Lucifer"

"Called Americans “enemies” in October 2010"

"Mocked God and our Founding Fathers by removing the references to God in the Declaration of Independence when quoting it"

"Lied about the USA’s national motto that it wasn’t “In God We Trust”"

"Lied that the USA is not a Christian Nation. To try to separate a nation from God is the greatest evil to a nation."

"Has broken the law: DOMA, War Powers Act, allowed Mexicans 70 miles into Arizona, “czars”, NDAA removing “due process”, no proof of Constitutional eligibility, worked against the USA constitution…"

"Works against the interest of Americans (“Government Healthcare”, “Hate Crimes”, “ENDA”, “Stimulus”…)"

Based on his writings, I believe we can conclude the following about Pastor Steven Andrew:
"Completely batshit."

"Consistently exhibits terrible grammar and a horrible understanding of constitutional law."

"Cherry-picks his scripture and his US history equally."

"Could really use a fact-checker."

"Creepy as hell."


11.08.2011

The Call: Lou Engle's Plan To Convert Detroit's Muslims

On 11.11.11, the American evangelical firebrand Lou Engle plans on gathering thousands at Ford Field in Detroit, MI, with the hopes of converting the area's large population of Muslims to Christianity.

Who is Lou Engle?

Lou Engle is a senior leader of the International House of Prayer, a well-known Missouri-based evangelical charismatic Christian missions organization which has been called "Kansas City's biggest religious phenomenon in a century." He has been called a radical theocrat, and his sermons have been known to "venture into bloodlust." He has praised Uganda's Kill the Gays Bill.

What is The Call?

The Call is an organization which sponsors prayer meetings devoted to various evangelical causes, including abortion, homosexuality, and same-sex marriage.
Their events feature sermons, prayer, Christian rock music, fasting, and the confessions of personal and national sins. If you are imagining Rick Perry's The Response, you're not too far off. (The International House of Prayer was one of the organizers of Perry's rally.) The Call, like Perry's prayer rally, has been endorsed by many Christian right staples, including Mike Huckabee, Tony Perkins, and James Dobson.

This particular event on 11.11.11 is being held in Detroit, because, according to the organizers, it's a symbol of an America in crisis:
Detroit has become a microcosm of our national crisis—economic collapse, racial tension, and the shedding of innocent blood of our children in the streets and of our unborn.

But the place where they say there is no hope, God has chosen as His staging ground for a great communal healing and His house of prayer for all nations. Therefore, we are calling the nation to a 24-hour solemn assembly, daring to believe that Detroit’s desperation can produce a prayer that can change a nation.

Come and take your place on the wall in Detroit, where we will ask God to send fire on our hearts, to forgive our national guilt and establish justice in our land.
There's a little more to it than that, actually. Nearby Dearborn, MI, has the largest population of Muslims in America. It also is the home of the country's largest mosque. Although The Call's web site makes no overt references to Muslims, Lou Engle would like to convert these Muslims to Christianity. And what a better way to do it than through his brand of Christian love.

Right Wing Watch put together a video of "Engle, along with Rick Joyner and Jerry Boykin, who serve with Engle on The Call’s national leadership team, stating their beliefs that Islam is literally “demonic” and Muslims need to convert to Christianity."

Who wouldn't want to convert after viewing this?





11.07.2011

Mississippi's 'Personhood' Amendment Is Ludicrous (It May Be Coming to Your State, Too)

Update: The Mississippi personhood amendment was defeated on Tuesday, Nov. 8, but other efforts are underway in other states. This initiative is not going away anytime soon.
A blastocyst (aka 'person') on the tip of a pin

Mississippi is on the verge of passing a constitutional amendment that would define a person as a fertilized egg.

The so-called "personhood" amendment is on the November 8 ballot, and according to the most recent polling, it is very likely to pass.

This should be ridiculously alarming to anyone who is not completely out of touch with reality. Not only would the amendment have cascading legal implications, it would also have serious impact on the health and rights of all women. In addition, the amendment endorses all sorts of religious ideas, whether or not those are defined in the legislation.

Slate served up a slightly humorous, yet incredibly scary, list of legal questions that would arise from the legislation, including the following:
If you are legal person at fertilization, does that mean you could drink at 20 years and three months? Could you drive at 15 and three months? Could you vote at age 17, and collect Social Security at 64?

For legal purposes, would your birthday still be your “birth” day? Or your fertilization day?

Could you arrest women for smoking or drinking while pregnant? Could the state file a child abuse case against a mother who didn’t wear a seatbelt or otherwise endangered her fetus?

If a doctor doesn't take all possible steps to stop a miscarriage, would that be manslaughter?

Could you post ultrasound photos of your fetus (naked) on Facebook? Or would that be child pornography?

Would you be an American citizen if you were conceived in Mississippi but born elsewhere? Could there be “anchor babies” whose parents come to the United States, have sex, and then return home to Mexico for their baby’s birth?

If a woman eats food contaminated by Listeria and miscarries, could the agribusiness be prosecuted for murder?

What about ectopic pregnancies? If the embryo is not removed, it could kill the mother. Should the mother or the doctor be prosecuted for manslaughter if they remove it? Maybe it would be fairer to prosecute the embryo. If the fertilized egg is a person, isn't that person trying to commit murder-suicide?

Granted, some of these examples seem silly. But their ludicrousness underscores a few things: A) Such an extreme and broad amendment has huge implications on the interpretation of the law moving forward, and B) The amendment is ludicrous from the get-go.

Let's look at the human blastocyst. (By definition of the personhood amendment, a blastocyst would now constitute a person.)

Neuroscientist and philosopher Sam Harris wrote about blastocysts in relation to the ethics of stem cell research, but his arguments are just as apt in debating 'personhood':
A three-day-old human embryo is a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst. There are, for the sake of comparison, more than 100,000 cells in the brain of a fly. [These] human embryos...do not have brains, or even neurons....Perhaps you think that the crucial difference between a fly and a human blastocyst is to be found in the latter's potential to become a fully developed human being. But almost every cell in your body is a potential human being, given our recent advances in genetic engineering. Every time you scratch your nose, you have committed a Holocaust of potential human beings. This is a fact. The argument from a cell's potential gets you absolutely nowhere.

Sure, a fertilized egg has the potential to become a human being. But we must also remember that an acorn is not a tree. It has the potential to become a tree, sure. We must take into consideration the fact that trees evolved to overcompensate -- to produce acorns that outnumber the trees that result from those acorns. This is how nature works.


Twenty percent of all pregnancies result in miscarriage. If all fertilized eggs are 'people,' then 20 percent of all people are killed before they are born. Will there be investigations to determine who was responsible for the untimely death of 1/5 of all 'people' in Mississippi? Will every woman who suffers a miscarriage be interrogated? If it was natural, is God the most prolific serial murderer in Mississippi's history?

Now that I've brought religion into the picture (how can one not?), let's look at this business of souls. Harris writes:
But let us assume, for the moment, that every three-day-old human embryo has a soul worthy of our moral concern. Embryos at this stage occasionally split, becoming separate people (identical twins). Is this a case of one soul splitting into two? Two embryos sometimes fuse into a single individual, called a chimera. You or someone you know may have developed in this way. No doubt theologians are struggling even now to determine what becomes of the extra human soul in such a case.

Isn't it time we admitted that this arithmetic of souls does not make any sense? The naive idea of souls...is intellectually indefensible.
The vote occurring in Mississippi should be very concerning to anyone who cares about privacy, science, liberty, and the enforcement of religious ideology as law. This amendment would ban all abortions, including those that result from incest and rape. It would ban IUDs and 'morning-after pills.' It would render embryonic stem cell research illegal. It would hamper in-vitro fertilization treatment.

God granting personhood to a blastocyst (artist rendering)
And, if successful, it will serve as a template for similar amendments across the country (there are already efforts brewing in Florida, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, Wisconsin and other states), and passage could fundamentally transform the entire framework of laws in each state.

But what should be most troubling about this amendment is it attempts to define legally something which has yet to be defined by science. There is no consensus whatsoever as to when 'life' begins. There is no consensus on the definition of 'life,' in reproductive terms. The legislation attempts to define life in language that is in no way scientific. What it attempts to do is say that a bolt comes down from on high at the moment a sperm fertilizes an egg, and transforms it into a person.

This is supernaturalism, it's not supported by science, and it's about to become law.

9.26.2011

The Religious Right Doesn't Want A Theocracy, It Just Wants Christian Morality Enshrined Into Law

Frank Turek wants to make something clear. The Religious Right doesn't want a theocracy. It just wants its Christian morality enshrined into law.

If you're unfamiliar with Turek, he is an author, TV show host, and leadership trainer. He is perhaps best known as the guy who was fired by Cisco Systems and Bank of America for his public anti-gay tirades. Turek has consulted for a host of Fortune 500 corporations, including Aetna, Coca Cola, CIGNA, Home Depot, and The Hartford. He also appears regularly on TV and radio talk shows, spewing all sorts of anti-LGBT venom.

In the below video, created by The Oak Initiative, Turek says the religious right doesn't want to legislate their morality any more than progressives are trying to legislate morality, by, say, telling you "what kind of light bulbs you're gonna buy," or "what kind of cars you're gonna drive."

Turek, like so many Americans, doesn't seem to get it. Morality predates monotheism. Morality can be traced to the behaviors of many social animals (who, it should be noted, do not read The Bible). Morality does not require a religious basis.

Therefore, morality that is rooted in religious dogma (i.e. 'homosexuality is wrong'), does not have any place in legislation. Morality that is rooted in religious dogma which also has a secular basis (i.e. 'stealing is wrong') does. Morality that is not rooted in religious dogma, but which has a secular basis (i.e. 'women should have the right to vote' or 'slavery is wrong') does.

See how that works, Frank?



8.31.2011

Paul Stam is a Sad, Ignorant, Hateful, Little Man

In case you weren't aware, my wonderful home state of North Carolina is trying to ban same-sex marriage. Twice, actually.

It was already banned in 1996, via statute, but theocratic, insecure, folks like House Majority Leader Paul Stam (R-duh), feel it is necessary to put another nail in the coffin, via constitutional amendment, to be absolutely sure that the evil threat that is gay marriage does not rise from the grave to attack his children.

Paul 'Skip' Stam believes the following garbage:

  • If same sex marriage is allowed, it will lead ”next” to legalized “adult incest” and polygamous marriages since there’s no way to argue logically for same sex marriage and against state authorization of those other practices.
  • “Morality” and “biology” dictate that same sex marriage be proscribed.
  • Sexual orientation is a “choice.”
  • Same sex marriage will prove disastrous for all of our children and society generally because it will lead to the inevitable demise of marriage as an institution.
  • “All social science” demonstrates that it’s best to be raised in a marriage that features one man and one woman.

All of the above statements are completely devoid of scientific evidence, reality, and common sense. Not to mention that any 'moral' opposition to same-sex marriage is almost always has a religious basis, and therefore does not pass the Lemon Test.

Here's Stam spouting his insane 'gay marriage will lead to incest' baloney at a press conference on Tuesday:



Later, when asked how the ban would differ from misogyny laws, Stam served up this steaming pile of poo: “People can't change their race. They can't choose their race."

GOP leaders plan to take up the marriage amendment on September 12, when legislature resumes.