Saturday, July 21, 2007

Protestors for more "family values" arrested from the senate floor

Recently, I was once again made aware by the "family values" types that our founding fathers were all Christians, and that they had every intention of founding this country based completely on Christianity. Really? Let's check this out.

This recently came back into my thoughts as a result of three arrests made on the congress floor during a prayer offered by a Hindu priest. Here is the full article with video:

http://wizbangblue.com/2007/07/13/christian-extremists-act-out-in-senate-chambers.php

Oddly enough, I had spoken to the man in the group on an online forum that I have frequented for years, and way back when I was a fundamentalist on the
Charisma Magazine message boards. He was always very extreme in his beliefs, and heavily emphasized the King James version of the bible as the ONLY "real" translation. So it was no real surprise to me that he and his wife, along with their adult daughter, were arrested for disrupting the floor.

What really got me was the following statement by a Christian press:

WASHINGTON, July 12 /Christian Newswire/ -- Ante Pavkovic, Kathy Pavkovic, and Kristen Sugar were all arrested in the chambers of the United States Senate as that chamber was violated by a false Hindu god. The Senate was opened with a Hindu prayer placing the false god of Hinduism on a level playing field with the One True God, Jesus Christ. This would never have been allowed by our Founding Fathers.

"Not one Senator had the backbone to stand as our Founding Fathers stood. They stood on the Gospel of Jesus Christ! There were three in the audience with the courage to stand and proclaim, 'Thou shalt have no other gods before me.' They were immediately removed from the chambers, arrested, and are in jail now. God bless those who stand for Jesus as we know that He stands for them." Rev. Flip Benham, Director, Operation Save America/Operation Rescue


So, according to the above quote, our founding fathers would have "stood on the gospel of Jesus Christ" and never allowed someone of another faith to pray on the senate floor. Another quote:

Thursday's Hindu prayer was a major departure from the "thoughts and plans" of America's founding fathers. "We sing the song My Country 'tis of Thee, [saying] 'to Thee we sing.' The faith of our fathers, is being left behind," he contends, "and we're opening up to a bunch of religious ideologies and groups that were not part of our founding documents, were not part of our heritage."

Bynum says the farther America gets away from the faith of its founding fathers, the more troubled and confused the country will become. "The big deal is that up until just a few years ago, our Christian heritage has been respected as a nation," he notes. "Our Judeo-Christian documents -- the Old and the New Testaments -- have been the foundation of our law."


According to both of these quotes, our founding fathers (those men who assisted in founding the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and many of whom became presidents themselves) were all Christians who believed that only the Christian God should be allowed into the halls of government. But - well, where did that whole "separation of church and state" thing come from? Is it mistranslated? Does it mean simply that the government can't persecute Christians? Or does it mean, as I have been made to understand, that it goes both ways? Not only can the government not force people to believe what it wants, but the church can also not take over and run the government.

But hey, I might be wrong. So, I have studied quotes directly from our country's founding fathers. I'll only place a couple here, though you can look huge amounts of them up for yourselves.

Let's start with Thomas Jefferson. I'd say he was certainly amongst the founding fathers, and also became one of our country's presidents. What did he think about the whole church/state issue?

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for is faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."


What? He did mention separation of church and state? He wanted NO law to be made respecting ANY religion, or prohibiting the exercize of ANY religion? In fact, he went so far as to say that a proverbial WALL should be separating church and matters of state.

That's not what the Family Values folks would like for us to think. Oh, and by the way, Jefferson was a registered Episcopalian, but he was also a Deist - look it up. So was Ben Franklin.

So we have at least one of our founding fathers who apparently did NOT subscribe to the idea that ONLY fundamentalist christianity is allowable or acceptable in government.

When presented with the above, a Family Values type might say, "But the founders only meant that no DENOMINATION of Christianity should be put above another, but they still meant our country and government to be Christian."

Really? Let's take a look:

"Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience, or that one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform" (James Madison, Annals of Congress, 1789).


Did he say Christian? NO - he said that Congress should not establish a religion. Period.

Madison even became angry when a chaplain was assigned to Congress (a chaplain from the "majority" regarding Christian belief):

"The establishment of the chaplainship to Congress is a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles: The tenets of the chaplains elected [by the majority shut the door of worship against the members whose creeds & consciences forbid a participation in that of the majority. To say nothing of other sects, this is the case with that of Roman Catholics & Quakers who have always had members in one or both of the Legislative branches. Could a Catholic clergyman ever hope to be appointed a Chaplain! To say that his religious principles are obnoxious or that his sect is small, is to lift the evil at once and exhibit in its naked deformity the doctrine that religious truth is to be tested by numbers or that the major sects have a right to govern the minor. " (Memorial and Remonstrance)


To put it simply, he was angry that they would assign a chaplain to Congress at all - because though that chaplain might represent the "majority" of people in congress, he did not represent the religious minorities, which would give the majority more clout to lord it over the smaller groups. He said it was a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles. He called it evil. He said that this act itself would "lift the evil at once and exhibit in its naked deformity..."

Pretty strong language for someone who supposedly wanted this nation to be ruled by a Theocratic government.

There are myriads of quotes from our Founding Fathers that directly come against the Family Values folks of today and their insistence that this nation was supposed to be governed by Christian rules and principles. Google them - you'll be enlightened.

In the meantime, if any of you folks happen to read this and believe what those protesters did was right, and was the way our founding fathers would have it, let me ask you this.

What particular denomination of Christianity should Congress follow if it is going to be ruled on Christian principles? Catholicism? "Oh dear God NO!" say the Baptists, who think those Catholics are idolaters. How about Mormonism? "No again! They're a cult!" say several hundred other denominations. Methodists? Too liberal! Baptists? Too conservative! Since there are well over 500 denominations of Christianity out there, this could go on forever.

Before you consider a theocracy rather than the Republic/Democracy we have today (or at least had before the Family Values/Moral Majority groups got ahold of it), consider - do you REALLY want to have a majority denomination of Christianity setting the rules and standards for you and your church? Do you want their beliefs forced upon you and your children because Congress deems it correct to "found our nation on Christian principles," and therefore picks the dominant Christian denomination to rule?

If you're really thinking, you'll be terrified by the prospect. Good grief, what if Pat Robertson got to call the shots? We'd have blown up half of the rest of the world by now, and would not provide relief for any natural disasters because "well, they deserved it - it was God's punishment because of their sin."

Any THINKING Christian would be absolutely mortified by the thought of having a dominant religious body - even a Christian one - in control. That's what most of the immigrants to the New World were trying to get AWAY from, if you'll recall. Much better to be allowed to worship as you please, in whatever way you please, without government interference, I would think.

In fact, it is more of a concern, as Madison felt as well, that anyone at ALL prays to open Congress. Government practices should be free of religious trappings of any kind, lest the sect with the majority will gain control. NO religion or denomination should be pandered to. To be truly politically correct, not one single meeting of the government should have a prayer on the agenda. Not one single branch of government should be displaying religious sayings (such as the 10 commandments) on their walls. That is the ONLY way to make sure that each of us is truly able to worship (or not worship) in any way we choose.

Religion in government is a BAD IDEA. If you're still not sure of that, check out the history of any government ruled by a particular religious sect - see the kinds of atrocities performed in the name of whatever god rules that neck of the woods. It ain't pretty.

I haven't posted a blog in awhile. Seems that life, and work,

I haven't posted a blog in awhile. Seems that life, and work, and artwork have gotten in the way. I'll try to do something about that, as exposing the "family values" ilk for what it is - well, it's important.

Side comment, before the "real" post though. Tammy Faye Messner (formerly Bakker of the PTL/Jim Bakker debacle in the 80s) died a few hours ago. Of all the televangelists (or former ones), she was probably the only one I ever saw a genuineness of love in. She loved and did not judge. The woman, in the last ten years of speaking engagements, never once told the homosexual community anything but that God loved them. Period. Never spouted how they were sinners in the hands of an angry God, or that they should change or face hell fire. She just loved them.

I recently saw her on Larry King Live. She looked terrible (and I'm not talking about make-up). She was down to sixty-five pounds, and one could tell that she was in visible pain. Yet she kept her sense of humor and her love for people. If there is a heaven, I'm pretty sure she's there. She'll be the greeter, one can be certain.

Rest in peace, Tammy Faye.