Posted on 03/20/2006 6:59:05 PM PST by Unam Sanctam
My underlying thesis in American Theocracy is that these are the three major perils of the United States in the early 21st century. First, radical religion – this encompasses everything from the Pat Robertson-Jerry Falwell types to the attacks on medicine and science and the Left Behind books with their End Times and Armageddon scenarios. Second, oil dependence – oil was essential to 20th century U.S. hegemony, and its growing scarcity and cost could play havoc. And third, debt is becoming a national weakness – indeed, the “borrowing” industry in the U.S. has grown so rapidly that finance has displaced manufacturing as the leading U.S. sector.
After George W. Bush narrowly won a second term in 2004, which meant four more years of Religious Right power, over-dependence on oil and over-involvement in the Middle East and the fattening of the debt albatross, I decided to shift my focus from the biases, failings and deceits of the Bush family, going back four generations, which had been my focus during 2004 in my book American Dynasty. The new book would concentrate on the three perils to the U.S. – all of which, however, were closely related to the re-orientation of the Republican party that occurred under the two Bushes. Here readers should keep in mind that from 1980 to 2004. Only one presidential election (1996) did not have a Bush on the ticket as the presidential or vice presidential nominee. Between 1988 and 2006, the two Bush presidents put a particular stamp on the GOP’s regionalism, religious pandering and fealty to oil and finance.
Forgot to excerpt. Click on link for rest of article.
The author does not appear to be asking a historical question.
Wahabbi Islam? Echo? Thanks for playing.
There are days that I question why I stand between Al Queda and these Moonbats...
The sad part is that the left has, at last, a perfect enemy in Islamic theocratic fascism that they've always wanted to oppose, and they can't be bothered to do so because it isn't the right enemies. Squinting real hard so that Bush and the Republicans appear that way is fine if all you're interested in is a fantasy world, but in the real one the wolf's at the door.
Man, the Left sure is scare of believing Christians isn't it?
Can't pray in schools, can't use vouchers to help finance private education, can't hold a Bible study in your dorm room if you're a college employee, can't hang the Ten Commandments in a govt. building, can't display a nativity scene or a cross on public property, can't guarantee the property rights of your church if the local govt claims "eminent domain", etc etc etc. I challenge anyone to name any public sector, especially civil government, that has seen a net increase in overt Christian morality or overt Christian religious activity in the last eight years.
Four more years of Religious Right power? Yeah, right.
Is this guy for real? I mean, Pat Robertson? Jerry Falwell? The End Time and Armageddon scenarios? Those are laughable, frat-house jokes of religious ideology compared to the outright, in-your-face evil of 21st century islam. Talk about not getting it.
Indeed. Conservatives in general and the "religious right" in particular have supported GWB. In turn, GWB has supported the Wahabi government in Saudi Arabia, and has presided over the establishment of two sharia governments (Afghanistan and Iraq), while he spends like a drunken sailor, suppresses political speech, and increases federal intrusion into schools. But it's all part of a grand strategy ... </sarcasm>
Your claims do not stand up to examination. 1. Every child can pray as he/she wishes, silently. Disrupting a class for a Christian or Islamic prayer or football cheer or similar public display is not permitted.
1a. Secular government means: "being neutral in all matters of faith belief"; no faith belief should be preferred over another. See Art VI in our Constitution: "no religious test shall be required..." This seems clear as to original intent. Do you have a different interpretation?
2. I oppose using taxpayers money to fund scientologists or for any religious cult. I oppose using taxpayer money to fund Islamic schools, Hindu schools, Sikh schools, or those of any other doctrine.
If you want our taxes to pay for your religious viewpoint, I don't think you will find support amongst Freeepers. Religion is a private matter, not for the government.
3. Public displays of piety and religiosity are not in the nature of honoring. Politicians and televangelists invoke God rerpeatedly, to get money. A stamp in the passport to heaven or to election. Read Matthew 6. "Be not as the hypocrites... use not vain repetitions... do not pray to be seen...." Read the Bible for yourself.
4. Your challenge as to "overt Christian 'morality'" is unclear. Please define "Christian morality" as you see it. Do you answer from a popist tradition or from a lutherian tradition?
5. I accept your challenge. Morality has increased in the last 50 years, I claim, despite efforts to subvert it.
Can anyone say STRAWMAN?
I'm impressed with that succinct and spot on analysis. May I copy it for 'rendering' on other sites I frequent? It's great.
Please post your evidence for the claim, thanks. I'd like to know how it is so (in your mind, at least).
Kevin Phillips is not a leftist.
These posters all would have adored him when he published "The Emerging Republican Majority". :)
I know.
I'm reading his book at the moment. IMO he's a little too tin-foily when he writes about the role of Big Oil in promoting the Iraq war, but so far his analysis of the influence of the fringe of the fundamentalist movement seems to be reasonably accurate.
So you believe that participation by traditional Christian believers in politics and their exercising their civic rights under our constitution constitutes a "threat"? So, was America a theocracy for the two centuries of its constitutional existence because almost all political officials have been believing Christians? Do you believe that Christians should somehow be excluded from the judiciary by religious tests such as that proposed by Senator Schumer (i.e., one who has "deep personal beliefs" that abortion is immoral should on that basis be excluded from the judiciary)? In any event, please cite one major traditional Christian public speaker who remotely says anything about overthrowing our constitutional system and imposing a theocracy. Please cite one scintilla of evidence that Christian believers in this country want to outlaw the practice of other religions or no religions or "impose" their beliefs on others the way the mullahcracy in Iran does or that of the Taliban did. And why is it that it is perfectly fine when liberals use the government to impose their moral beliefs on the rest of society, e.g., on sexual activity through public school indoctrination and government promotion of homosexual activity through civil same sex "marriage"? Liberals essentially want to "establish" their own liberal social religion and enforce it using the government. Just look at the hate-filled anti-Catholic and anti-Christian statements of the Board of Supervisors of San Francisco in recent days.
Depends. If they intend to use politics to overthrow the Constitution, yes. As we've seen in Afghanistan in the last week, democratic government isn't always consistent with civil liberties.
So, was America a theocracy for the two centuries of its constitutional existence because almost all political officials have been believing Christians?
At some points, in some parts of America, yes.
Do you believe that Christians should somehow be excluded from the judiciary by religious tests such as that proposed by Senator Schumer (i.e., one who has "deep personal beliefs" that abortion is immoral should on that basis be excluded from the judiciary)?
As you are well aware, I hope, religious tests for public office are unconstitutional.
In any event, please cite one major traditional Christian public speaker who remotely says anything about overthrowing our constitutional system and imposing a theocracy.
Gary deMar.
Please cite one scintilla of evidence that Christian believers in this country want to outlaw the practice of other religions or no religions or "impose" their beliefs on others the way the mullahcracy in Iran does or that of the Taliban did.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Reconstructionism
And why is it that it is perfectly fine when liberals use the government to impose their moral beliefs on the rest of society, e.g., on sexual activity through public school indoctrination and government promotion of homosexual activity through civil same sex "marriage"?
While I don't agree with same sex marriage, it sure isn't an imposition of moral beliefs on the rest of society. No one is forcing anyone to marry anyone of the same sex, as far as I know. It's very different from, say, executing homosexuals, adulterers, and disobedient children, as the CRs want to do.
I've never heard of the people you mention, and I very much doubt they are at all representative of the vast majority of traditional Christian believers in this country, who I believe support our democratic Constitution and liberties. Like so many anti-religious zealots in this country, you want to discredit Christians in general because of the voice of a few crazies. And there has never been a theocracy anywhere in the US in the history of our Constitution, despite the fact that most people in office and out in our history actually held the religious beliefs that you think are so threatening to American liberties. I just think the whole current attempt to demonize traditionial Christian believers is unwarranted hatemongering and if anything, directly contrary to our history of religious tolerance and liberty of conscience and respect for the rights of others to hold different opinions that is at the core of our Constitutional system. I believe it is the religion-haters who are far more intolerant of religious persons than the reverse in this present day and age.
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.