RECONSTRUCTION THEOLOGY AND HOME EDUCATION [Rushdoony, HSLDA, Gary North]

To more clearly understand the increasing divisiveness in homeschooling and the various leaders involvement in a political religion, it is necessary to become familiar with some of the facets of Christian theology and theocracy.

"Theocracy, the direct rule of a nation by God through divinely selected spokesmen, has many exemplars in the modern world. Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Iraq are nations with obvious theocratic tendencies. Israel's political parties exhibit growing theocratic patterns. In the United States, the Christian Reconstruction movement proposes the purest form of theocracy. Reconstructionism…believes that the law given for the political and legal ordering of ancient Israel is intended for all people at all times; therefore American is duty bound to install a political system based entirely on biblical law."

Reconstructionist theologian David Barton offered this definition: "The Christian goal for the world is the universal development of Biblical theocratic republics, in which every area of life is redeemed and placed under the Lordship of Jesus Christ and the rule of God's law."

The term 'dominion theology' comes from Genesis 1:26-28 of the Bible where God's purpose for man is stated: Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth." So God created man in his own image…And God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth." (RSV)

Sometimes termed 'dominion' or 'kingdom' theology, "dominionism revolves around the idea that Christians and Christians alone, are Biblically mandated to occupy all secular institutions until Christ returns. An earlier source of dominion theology was an evangelical philosopher named Francis Schaeffer…Schaeffer's 1981 book, A Christian Manifesto…remained one of the Christian Right's most important texts into the 1990's."

"Individuals from a wide variety of backgrounds and ecclesiastical communions are influenced by and committed to these ideals, from conservative Roman Catholics to Episcopalians to Presbyterians to Pentecostals, Arminian and Calvinist, charismatic and non-charismatic, high Church and low Church traditions are all represented in the broader umbrella of Reconstructionism, (often in the form of the 'Christian America' movement)."

Many of the leaders of the so-called hard or Christian Right are followers of the teachings of Rousas John Rushdoony. R.J. Rushdoony is the spiritual leader of Chalcedon Foundation, a California organization dedicated to Christian Reconstruction. According to the Foundation, a Christian Reconstructionist is a Calvinist, holding to the principles that God, not man, is the center of the universe and beyond; a Theonomist, believing that God's law is found in the Bible; a Presuppositionalist, believing that he holds to the Faith because the Bible says so and has no need to prove it; a Postmillennialist believing that Christ will return to earth only after the Holy Spirit has empowered the church to advance Christ's kingdom in time and history and a Dominionist taking seriously the Bible's commandment to the godly to take dominion in the earth. "The Christian Reconstructionist believes the earth and all it's fullness is the Lord's; that every area dominated by sin must be 'reconstructed' in terms of the Bible. This includes, first, the individual; second, the family; third, the church; and fourth, the wider society including the state."

The Dominion theology movement places Judeo-Christian biblical law above any and all constitutional law, including the U.S. Constitution. "Postmillienialists believe that righteous human beings, essentially servants of Christ, must achieve positions of influence in societies in order to prepare the world for the Messiah's return."

In his excellent 1996 book, With God on Our Side, William Martin used a sampling of the views of several noted Reconstructionists to give a sense of how a Reconstructed America would be: "The federal government would play no role in regulating business, public education, or welfare…[S]ome government would be visible at the level of counties…but citizens would be answerable to church authorities on most matters subject to regulation…income taxes would not exceed ten percent - the biblical tithe - and social security would disappear…[P]ublic schools would be abolished in favor of home-schooling arrangements, and families would operate on a strict patriarchal pattern. The only people permitted to vote would be members of 'biblically correct' churches. Most notably, a theonomic order would make homosexuality, adultery, blasphemy, propagation of false doctrine, and incorrigible behavior by disobedient children subject to the death penalty, preferably administered by stoning…a reconstructed America would have little room for Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, atheists, or even non-Reconstructionist Christians. 'The Christian', one Reconstructionist author has asserted, 'must realize that pluralism is a myth…R.J. Rushdoony, also regards pluralism as a heresy, since, in the name of toleration, the believer is asked to associate on a common level of total acceptance with the atheist, the pervert, the criminal, and the adherents of other religions."

Other noted Reconstructionists include Greg Bahnson, David Barton of WallBuilders, Inc., David Chilton, Gary DeMar of American Vision and Worldview Magazine; Ted DeMoss of Christian Business Men's Committee; Kenneth Gentry, Jay Grimstead of Coalition on Revival; James Kennedy of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church; Tim LaHaye of American Coalition for Traditional Values; Mrs. Connie Marshner of Free Congress Foundation; Rev. Joseph Morecraft; Gary North of Institute for Christian Economics; Mark Siljander of Global Strategies, Inc.; Randall Terry of Operation Rescue and Rev. Donald Wildmon of American Family Association. Dr. Kennedy, Rev. LaHaye, Mrs. Marshner, Mr. North, R.J. Rushdoony, and Rev. Wildmon are all members of the Council For National Policy.

"Whether it is acknowledged or not, Reconstructionism has profoundly influenced the Christian Right. Perhaps its most important role within the Christian Right can be traced to the formation in 1982 of the Coalition on Revival (COR)…Founded and headed by Dr. Jay Grimstead, COR has sought in this way to create a transdenominational theology…The COR leadership has significantly overlapped with the Christian Right, and has included: John Whitehead, Don Wildmon…Tim LaHaye and D. James Kennedy, Randall Terry…Steven Hotze, Rev. Glen Cole…Michael Farris…Robert Dugan…Bill Dannemeyer…Mark Siljander…R.J. Rushdoony, Gary North, Joseph Moorecraft, David Chilton, Gary DeMar… and Rus Walton."

It is difficult for secular homeschoolers to understand the apparent double standard when Christian homeschoolers are discriminatory against them at the local support group level, while at the same time, courting their efforts when it comes to state or national political causes. Understanding Reconstructionist Theology and Theocracy is important because it reflects understanding on the division in the homeschooling community between secular and religious members, and the theocratic motivations of politically manipulating the community.

Gary North declared, "All long-term social change comes from the successful efforts of one or another struggling organizations to capture the minds of a hard core of future leaders."

Reconstructionists believe that Christian schools and the homeschooling movement are the key to capturing those minds. Joseph Moorecraft said in 1987, that the Reconstruction movement was made up of a small number but expected a massive acceleration in 25 to 30 years 'when those kids that are now in Christian schools have graduated and taken their places in American society, and moved into places of influence and power.'

It's interesting to note that Reconstructionist Jay Rogers wrote, " A little known fact: R. J Rushdoony, aside from being the founder of Christian Reconstruction, is also the founder of the modern home schooling movement. Most people who deride the Reconstructionist movement for being 'too political' don't realize that." This declaration completely ignores the work of secular writers, such as John Holt, who promoted homeschooling as an alternative in the 1970's and '80's.

When it comes to politics, the principles are simple: "The long-term goal of Christians in politics should be to gain exclusive control over the franchise. Those who refuse to submit publicly to the eternal sanctions of God by submitting to His Church's public marks of the covenant--baptism and Holy Communion--must be denied citizenship, just as they were in ancient Israel."

"Gary North claims that 'the ideas of the Reconstructionists have penetrated into Protestant circles that for the most part are unaware of the original source of the theological ideas that are beginning to transform them.' North describes the 'three major legs of the Reconstructionist movement' as 'the Presbyterian oriented educators, the Baptist school headmasters and pastors, and the charismatic telecommunications system.' What this means is that hundreds of thousands of Pentecostals and charismatic Christians, as well as many fundamentalist Baptists, have moved out of the apolitical camp. Many have thrown themselves into political work - not merely as voters, but as ideologically driven activists, bringing a reconstructed 'Biblical world view' to bear on their area of activism."

The Home School Legal Defense Association/Foundation has many links to Reconstructionism. In his well-researched 1995 book, Home Schooling: The Right Choice, HSLDA attorney Christopher Klicka frequently quotes Reconstructionst writers, notably Rushdoony and Barton. In addition to including Rushdoony's "The Difference Between Christian Education and Humanistic Education", the book's forward was written by D. James Kennedy and many of the ideals expressed seem Reconstructionist, however, he does not state specifically that he is a Reconstructionist.

The relationship between President Michael Farris of HSLDA and Tim and Beverly LaHaye goes back to the early 1980's when Michael Farris was head of the legal department of Concerned Women for America. Tim LaHaye was attempting to start a television ministry that failed. In 1983 he started the American Coalition for Traditional Values which was similar to the now defunct Moral Majority, its goal being to mobilize Christians to register and vote. Some accounts indicate Michael Farris was deeply involved with ACTV while others do not mention his involvement. ACTV closed down shortly after the 1986 elections. Tim LaHaye withdrew from his television ministry when it was publicized that his church was funding an anti-Catholic group. In 1985 he further withdrew after it became known that CWA had accepted 'generous help' from the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church which teaches the divinity of the Rev. Moon in direct conflict with Christian teachings. In 1987 Rev. LaHaye was forced to resign as co-chair from Jack Kemp's presidential campaign because newspapers printed divisive passages from his writings, which were anti-catholic and anti-Semetic.

The New York Times profiled Michael Farris' campaign for Lt. Governor of Virginia as part of a series of articles about Christians in politics. It is noted that Michael Farris' name appeared as a co-author of a policy paper by Jay Grimstead's "Coalition on Revival, which has called for the United States to reclaim itself as a 'Christian nation.' (Farris says that he only worked on an early draft of the document and that the organization included his name without his permission.)"

Farris's name appears among ninety-seven Christian intellectuals who signed the Coalition for Revival's 1986 'manifesto' which declares, "We believe America can be turned around and once again function as a

Christian nation as it did in it's earlier years. The document lists Farris and…Virginia C. Armstrong as co-authors of the section entitled 'The Christian World View of the Law,' which states, 'We affirm that a society must inevitably choose between conflicting legal foundations and views of law and should choose Christian views and a Christian foundation because the Christian system is vastly superior to all alternatives." Farris denies ever signing the document or co-writing the section on a Christian view of the law although Armstrong recalls that she and Farris wrote different parts of the section and "he certainly seemed to be in general agreement" of the finished version.

Michael Farris, in his 1992 book, Where Do I Draw The Line?, addressed Reconstructionism. He quotes Francis Shaeffer's Christian Manifesto to explain our nation's slide into its current cultural condition but he also takes an opportunity to note that, "there are those who advocate the idea that America should enact the Old Testament law right down to the rules for conducting trials. I am not one of those people but I do believe the moral principles of God apply to every age."

However, when discussing classical education in The Future of Home Schooling, he recommends as "one of the best programs I have seen that offers a clearly Christian classical education is David Quine's World Views of the Western World…World Views is a three-year program that is built largely around the works of Francis Schaeffer. Students still read Homer, Socrates and Machiavelli. But these are balanced not only by Schaeffer's works, but also by St. Augustine, Luther and Calvin."

As homeschoolers we should be very careful not to assign guilt by association. It is probable that some of the individuals involved in homeschooling and/or HSLDA are Reconstructionists, while others who associate with them are not. Prominent Reconstructionists are often given a forum to advance their cause at HSLDA conferences but it is unknown whether HSLDA itself is a Reconstructionist organization. HSLDA has ties to the Reconstructionist movement through former employees such as attorney Doug Phillips, the son of prominent Reconstructionist Howard Phillips, founder of the U.S. Taxpayers Party and HSLDA founder James Carden who was instrumental in introducing the concept of home schooling to Bill Gothard of Advanced Training Institute of America, himself a prominent Reconstructionist. Carden was among the 100 families who piloted the ATIA program in 1984/85. Board member Jeff Ethell may have been influenced by Reconstruction ideas while a student at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia, where noted Reconstructionist Cornelius Van Til taught for nearly 50 years. In his 1959 book, R.J. Rushdoony lavishly praised Van Til's philosophy and the influence it had on him.

Christopher Klicka attended Regent University where 'longtime Dean of the Law School, Herb Titus…used Rushoony's book in his introductory law course… "Christopher Klicka, who has been deeply influenced by R.J. Rushdoony, writes: 'Sending our children to the public school violates nearly every Biblical principle…It is tantamount to sending our children to be trained by the enemy'…Klicka also advocates religious selfsegregation and advises Christians not to affiliate with non-Christian homeschoolers in any way. 'The differences I am talking about…have resulted in wars and martyrdom in the not too distant past.' According to Klicka, who is an attorney with the Home School Legal Defense Association, 'as an organization, and as individuals, we are committed to promote the cause of Christ and his Kingdom."

Former HSLDA employee Inge Cannon was previously employed by Bill Gothard's Institute of Basic Life Principles where she was involved with the development of ATIA's homeschool curriculum. Several of HSLDA's interns come from or plan to attend Oak Brook College of Law and Government Policy which is part of Bill Gothard's ATIA. Also, Tim LaHaye, considered to be a prominent Reconstructionist, is associated with Michael Farris' political action committee, Madison Project Fund Inc., as well as having ties to him through Concerned Women for America. Many of the ideals, particularly exclusivism and selfsegregation as promoted by prominent Christian homeschooling leaders like Christopher Klicka and Gregg Harris, are Reconstructionist in nature. As homeschoolers we must be careful when examining the religious motivations of our fellow homeschoolers not to attach labels which may not be appropriate. However, it would be more honest of HSLDA and others to define their belief status when placing themselves in positions of moral authority over homeschoolers, who are perhaps of other, contrary, beliefs.

1 Gary North, "Westminster's Confession: The Abandonment of Van Til's Legacy", Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1991, p. 227.

2 Derek H. Davis, "Religious Pluralism and the Quest for Unity in American Life", Journal of Church & State, Spring 1994, Vol. 36, Issue 2, page 245.

3 Frederick Clarkson, "Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence", The Public Eye, March and June 1994.

5 J. Ligon Duncan III, Moses' Law for Modern Government: The Intellectual and Sociological Origins of the Christian Reconstructionist Movement, Atlanta Georgia, October 15, 1994.

6 Rev. Andrew Sandlin, "The Creed of Christian Reconstruction", Chalcedon Foundation, (http://www.chalcedon.edu/creed.html.)

7 Alec Foege, The Empire God Built - Inside Pat Robertson's Media Machine, (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1996), page 176.

8 William Martin, With God On Our Side, (New York: Broadway Books, 1996), page 353-354.

9 PRO-S.O.C.S. (Separation of Church and State), "The Righteous Revolution: Could there be a theocracy in America's future?", 1996.

10 Sara Diamond, "Dominion Theology: The Truth About the Christian Right's Bid for Power".

11 "Council For National Policy Membership List", Institute for First Amendment Studies.

12 Frederick Clarkson, "Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence", The Public Eye, March and June 1994.

14 Jay Rogers, What is Theonomy?, ww.forerunner.com/theofaq.html, no date. Theonomy means "God's law".

15 Gary North, Political Polytheism: The Myth of Pluralism (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1989), p. 87.

16 Frederick Clarkson, "Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence," The Public Eye, March and June 1994.

18 William Martin, With God On Our Side, New York: Broadway Books, 1996, page 270.

20 Leslie Kaufman, "Life Beyond God," New York Times Magazine, October 16, 1994.

21 Michael Farris, Where Do I Draw The Line?, Minnesota: Bethany House, 1992, page 15.

22 Rozell and Wilcox Second Coming The New Christian Right in Virginia Politics, Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996, page 100-101.

24 Michael Farris, The Future of Home Schooling, Washington D.C.: Regnery Publishing, 1997, page 16.

25 "In Memoriam", Home School Court Report, Vol. 13, No. 3, May/June 97, page 10.

26 Bruce Barron, Heaven On Earth? The Social and Political Agenda of Dominion Theology, Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan, 1992, pages 37, 39.

27 Frederick Clarkson:, Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence, Part 3: No Longer Without Sheep.

Is Moore a reconstructionist?

I don't know, but I've read a lot about him and several of his writings and haven't seen that. Given his position, it wouldn't make much sense for him to refuse the aid of any Christian group just because he doesn't agree with their eschatology (theology of the end times). That, I imagine, is why he has worked with Catholics (Alan Keyes) and dispensationalists (I'm pretty sure that's Jerry's position) who don't have the same views of the end times.

Oh, I'm at my kid limit, thats for certain - not a socialist in the bunch, either. Good American materialists, who like the notion that they live in a nation where their opportunities are boundless, that they can pursue any career they want, and aren't trapped by their gender as women are in unenlightened cultures and societies.

I wouldn't think y'all would understand that.

You might be surprised what we'd understand. Christians, like conservatives, don't fit the stereotypes of the Washington Post.

At any rate, even if we didn't understand, that wouldn't matter, as the primary political aim of Christians is to be left alone to practice our faith without government meddling. We want a much smaller government (more money in your pocket). We want to end socialist education (no more property taxes and you can send your children to the market-accountable school of your choice and still have money left over).

Our strongest discipline is expulsion from the church, so we don't hold on to those, including women, who grew up among us but want to leave the church and pursue another path.

So what's so scary?

But now for the pleasantest part of my duty. It falls to my lot to propose on behalf of the guests the health of Principal Slubgob and the Tempters’ Training College. Fill your glasses. What is this I see? What is this delicious bouquet I inhale? Can it be? Mr. Principal, I unsay all my hard words about the dinner. I see, and smell, that even under wartime conditions the College cellar still has a few dozen of sound old vintage Pharisee. Well, well, well. This is like old times. Hold it beneath your noses for a moment, gentledevils. Hold it up to the light. Look at those fiery streaks that writhe and tangle in its dark heart, as if they were contending. And so they are. You know how this wine is blended? Different types of Pharisee have been harvested, trodden, and fermented together to produce its subtle flavour. Types that were most antagonistic to one another on Earth. Some were all rules and relics and rosaries; others were all drab clothes, long faces, and petty traditional abstinences from wine or cards or the theatre. Both had in common their self-righteousness and an almost infinite distance between their actual outlook and anything the Enemy really is or commands. The wickedness of other religions was the really live doctrine in the religion of each; slander was its gospel and denigration its litany. How they hated each other up where the sun shone! How much more they hate each other now that they are forever conjoined but not reconciled. Their astonishment, their resentment, at the combination, the festering of their eternally impenitent spite, passing into our spiritual digestion, will work like fire. Dark fire. All said and done, my friends, it will be an ill day for us if what most humans mean by “Religion” ever vanishes from the Earth. It can still send us the truly delicious sins. Nowhere do we tempt so successfully as on the very steps of the altar.

Your Imminence, your Disgraces, my Thorns, Shadies, and Gentledevils: I give you the toast of – Principal Slubgob and the College!

C.S. Lewis--"Screwtape Proposes a Toast"

The only people permitted to vote would be members of 'biblically correct' churches. Most notably, a theonomic order would make homosexuality, adultery, blasphemy, propagation of false doctrine, and incorrigible behavior by disobedient children subject to the death penalty, preferably administered by stoning…a reconstructed America would have little room for Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, atheists, or even non-Reconstructionist Christians.

If your strongest discipline is expulsion from the church, and that's how you like it and want it to remain, if you want school choice, if you want much smaller government, etc., etc. then this article is not even about you. I know this article isn't about me, and I'm a Christian; Southern Baptist, specifically.

It seems as if those are somewhat libertarian goals. The people on this thread which you are arguing with, while nice people, have a great fear of libertarianism/constitutionalism/small-government. Basically New-Deal fans domestically with strong foreign policy views.

The chancellor emphasized that none of his children were socialists; he doesn't seem to be a New Deal fan. Hopefully he'll correct me if I'm wrong. But if not, his views should be very compatible with a more biblical government.

You miss the same point everybody misses with "Reconstructionism". Here is a thought-experiment to clear things up for you.

If a legal election is held under the terms of our Constitution, and the Federal Judiciary sustains the decision of the ballot by a vote of the majority of the Supreme Court....is this "imposing tyranny?"

With all due respect, I don't understand the point. Do you mean that if enough of the American voting public can be convinced to repeal the First Amendment and turn the U.S. into a theocracy would this be imposing tyranny? If so, the answer would be yes. It is not a difficult question.

I mean, honestly, do you think it would be okay if the majority were to, say, take the franchise away from non-Christians, even if it changed our form of government first so as to be able to do so "legally?"

I'm not afraid this is going to happen, and I don't think that anyone who would advocate this is representative of Christians. But it's your thought-experiment, so I think it's only fair for you to follow it through. I am getting the impression that people are reacting more to a perceived agenda of some posters than bothering to stake out their positions. If no one here supports turning the U.S. into some sort of Christian nation where adherents of the official religion are favored, then this is just a not-very-interesting wrasslin' match between two fellow Freepers. Okay, I admit it, a strangely compelling wrasslin' match :-)

Those who do advocate such a program should be proud to come out and say so. Then the merits can be debated.

The article is hogwash on many levels and I'll not waste my time on a point by point but I'll give you just one example...

On the author's list of commited reconstructionists is Tim LaHaye.

You might have heard of LaHaye...he's the creator of the Left Behind series of books which express his theological views in fictional format.

Those views involve a pre-millenial rapture which is the antithesis of reconstructionalism.

Given that the author could overlook a phenomena as huge as the "Left Behind" books I am forced to conclude the s/he is to inept to have any clue what the rest of those folks believe.

Yes, Chalcedon is reconstructionist, perhaps many others there as well. But given the inclusion of LaHaye, there is no way way to trust the article on anyone else.

BTW: Speaking as a homeschooler who has not the tinyest delusion of reconstructionalism in his theology, I still think that America can return to the Christian WORLDVIEW held by her founders (I do NOT think she actually WILL, but I think it is possible) but that in no way means that I advocate the enforcing of Christian tenents by force of law - such would be anethema to me.
Likewise, I do not have the slighest temptation to install an Old Testament theocracy, but I can easily affirm that God's standards do not change. There is no contridiction in that.

So selectivly quoting Ferris (and probably others) carries practically no weight.

So, at the end of the day, the article undermines its own credibility and is thus - useless.

Wishful thinking. CP has been discredited, and this article repeatedly revealed for what it is. That is success.

And CP's basic premise has been derailed and forgotten. That is success.

CP's premise is very clear and to the point. All you have demonstrated is your inability to present an intelligent argument. Or for that matter any argument at all.

Your posts have shown that Reconstructionism Theology is backed by people with an inability to present an intelligent argument.

Why would you take such offense to this article unless you actually endorsed the tenets of Christian Reconstructionism and Christian Dominionism? Do you realize that CP simply chummed the waters of dogmatism? And that you and your friends didn't need to bite, but you did? Why? Do you really think these people who advocate disenfranchisement of those with which they disagree and rationalize stoning disobedient offspring are channeling the word of God?

And your primary sources for these statements are?
Any perusal of the speeches and writings of most of these men would show that their beliefs were contrary to our modern definition, at least, of deism. Even Franklin, who identified himself as a deist, either did not hold to our understanding of the term, or changed from it over time.
I have found that most of the souce material for such comments comes from lectures in the university, which are not generally footnoted well, as they can't be.
If you can provide me with primary source material concerning this, I would be delighted,
thank you

what's so scary?

I also don't get what's so scary about the big, bad Reconstructionists.

If I understand correctly, they envision an eventual world where Christ has opened the hearts of nearly everyone to the glory of His kingdom.

Shudder. A fate worse than death for some, it would appear. Can't have too much of that glory; we might lose sight of the really important stuff.

What is amazing to me is the folks that cannot see the difference between Christians who are political... and power hungry tyrants using the trappings of religious ideology to gain power over other people POLITICALLY.

After two years of discussing talibunnies, you would think we would recognise the "stone the sinners" crowd on a forum like this and across the nation. Dominion theology is wrong. Jesus said he would build his church. These folks want to take his job and hijack it to build political kingdoms for themselves... an Ozzie and Harriet eternal garden party where all who do not toe the line... are stoned, marginalized and ostracized... just like the whores and lepers of Jesus' day were treated by the Scribes and Pharisees.

We are allowing some private religious schools to train up these "punish all sinners" brown shirts, right here in America, while criticizing the president for not shutting down the sharia schools in Pakistan.

Chanellor is on to something here.
I know dozens of Christ honoring freepers on this site who see it just this way too. they see the dangers of the religious zealots posing as Christians, and bringing our religious freedoms to a halt... one day because of their virtual terrorist outlook.

Some folks who don't agree with stem cell research, openly discuss attacking schools, research centers and medical personnel with acts of violence. One day, when a kid who is under their tutelage actually does the deed... the circle will be complete. Christian extremists will have fully become the very thing they criticized in the islamic nutcake society... aka the talibunnies and al quaeda wearing crucifixes instead of turbans and burkas.

We can love Jesus, believe his words, and follow his commands without ramming down other's throats at gunpoint... or under the aegis of federal laws.

I don't believe these folks are actually Christians... wolves in sheeps clothing... maybe. Tyrannists in the making... definitely. CP and others are right to point these links and writings out.

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.