Skip to comments.Novel imagines Sarah Palin presidency ("Christian Nation")
Posted on 07/03/2013 11:52:00 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The McCain/Palin ticket lost in 2008, right? Fiction can change that.
Christian Nation is a new novel from lawyer Fred Rich that wonders what would happen if the Republican ticket won in 2008. But Rich goes even further than that, plotting a would-be Palin presidency after McCain passes away in the novel.
And although its fiction, Rich is dead serious about what a Palin presidency would mean for the country. As the title suggest, Rich is concerned about how religious extremists on the right could upend society.
If somebody like Sarah Palin, who holds so firmly to this conviction that America is and should be a Christian nation, what would happen if she actually had the power to implement it? Rich says his book paints a picture of what that path would look like.
How could the federal courts, which are the only defense against all the nonsense you see out of the state legislatures, how could the federal court system be neutralized? What legislative strategies could the Christian right pursue were they in control of the Congress? It shows that its not impossible or unthinkable for them to actually be able to implement that agenda.
What would happen, according to Rich and the book is a government that claims to speak for God and policies based solely on the Bible, which would overwhelming hurt gay Americans.
Rich says he used to be Roman Catholic, but now hes an atheist. And he used to be a Republican, but now hes an independent. And he says his book shouldnt offend all Christians, just the extreme ones.
This book is not intended to be a shrill, bombastic addition to this conversation. Its intended to be a much more thoughtful piece of work.....
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Fearmongering from the Marxist left that told us the Red Scare was unfounded hysteria about Soviet influence in American media and the State Department.
Breaking News: 34% of Your Fellow Citizens Want a Theocracy Posted: 06/18/2013 3:20 pm
by Fred Rich
Author, ‘Christian Nation’
I pity the poor butt pirates and rug munchers. Christians really don’t care what they do. We just don’t want to see it or hear about it. They think they’re so important and the topic of conversation. But the vocal ones are just immature attention whores. Like the author of this book.
Of course, the demonization of the left’s greatest fear starts well before the presidential campaign season.
I had to read this a bit to see where it was going. Opposite to what I first expected.
The U.S. has always been a “Christian Nation.” Up until now. And it wouldn’t have been a bad thing if a Christian had made it into the White House.
Sarah did NOTHING to impose Christianity on unwilling Alaskans. What her Christianity did was to teach her the difference between right and wrong—not a bad thing for a politician to understand.
But the left just doesn’t get that. They’d rather kill babies, have gay affairs, and smoke pot.
Here he is again, over at Daily Beast:
Were Not a Christian Nation
“Rich says he used to be Roman Catholic, but now hes an atheist.”
Don’t you just love it when non Christians, especially atheists, tell US what Christianity is all about?
I think its obvious that we are no longer a Christian nation.
Oh good grief!
Sarah may be a very Christian woman, but I’m fairly certain that she’s read the Bill of Rights, that includes that 1st amendment freedom of religion (or no religion) and would defend them to her dying breath.
Yea, yea, yea, Sarah’s all washed up, yesterday’s news... Snort!
Well ... I'm an extreme Christian. I'm not offended.
I am concerned for the state of his soul ... he seems to be on a path which will end badly. May God grant him the grace of repentance and conversion.
The answer from history is clear.
The country would look exactly as it was from 1607 until 1960.
Been there. Done that. Have the Constitution.
As great as she is, Sarah would not be able to reverse everything that is now ailing this nation in four years. Or in eight. Or in eighty-eight.
Then who do you propose?
It’s beyond the power of any one person or any short-term solutions. That was kind of my point. Frankly I don’t think it’s getting fixed in my lifetime.
Not to say it would not be a HUGE relief to see her there as opposed to the current occupant.
As someone who has outbred Sarah Palin by 100%, I can only say to Mr. Rich, “Sucks to be you, doesn’t it?”
They are still scared spitless of her. Not meant to be shrill, bombastic ... yeah, right.
Leftists imagine that conservatives will round them up and put them in camps because that is what they want to and will, given the chance, do to us.
A worthless target attracts no fire.
The fool doesn't understand the power of Palin's appeal to "that streak of libertarian." (Disclosure: I am not a member of the Libertarian party, as it has come to mutilate and distort true libertarian principle along the same lines as Romney mutilated and distorted "conservatism.")
Does the Christian who serves Christ advocate for law to seek and punish homosexuals? Does that Christian want to create law that would specify that homosexuals may not pretend to get married, and that they may not become adoptive parents?
OR does the Democrat party, the left, the liberals, progressives, facists, Marxists, Socialists, communists, atheists -- anybody not described as "conservative" -- does that faction of America advocate for law to seek and punish businesses, churches, schools, businesses, and adoption agencies that tell those homosexual to go somewhere else?
What kind of adoption agency would allow the precious childrens' souls entrusted to their care, to be taken up by such declared perversion? Catholic agencies in Masschusettes closed down before doing that. How long would an adoption agency last that did, before public pressure or vice cops closed it down? How well received would a civic organization for boys, such as the Boy Scouts, be if it openly embraced and welcomed people in leadership who declared a preference for homosexuality? Voluntarily, in a free-market social America with no laws specifically prohibiting and prosecuting such living-out of open homosexuality, how long would such pro-homosexual enclaves exist?
When Palin talks about "the libertarian streak" in Americans, I believe that a very large part of that group are Christians and moral, good Americans who just want the goverment, especially the Federal government, to get out of it. They know that limited government is what's needed for people to live morally -- right now, government acts against and seeks to prosecute certain moral choices, such as the one of peacefully discriminating against individuals who declare preference for homosexuality.
Yet there is a virulent strain of resistance to the truth that libertarian limited government principle and Christian morality can indeed coexist (and in fact have fairly well for the first 200 years in America before leftist government came in to enforce their view that it's immoral to peacefully, willfully descriminate against those who openly declare homosexuality).
There are some Christians, who all to often are defaulted to "conservative" status, who also crave government authority to prosecute their own definition of "bad" moral choices -- for America's good, of course! They hate libertarianism with a passion.
Palin was a Christian in her personal life, but not a “Christianist” in politics. So they got that wrong.
But never mind. the author claims he “used to be a Catholic” and “used to be a Republican”, but since most Catholics in the past were democrats, it makes me wonder about his agenda.
What’s so Amusing And dangerous. Is how deathly afraid some people seem to be of anybody they figure may be a sincere Christian or Jewish believer in God. These fraidycats remind me of Dracula when faced with a crucifix. So tragic a response So very sad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.