LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

The Revealer has a great article about the aftermath of "Justice Sunday" with lots of great links to various opinions about it. Overall opinion? One big, fat, loud raspberry.

Justice Revisited
27 April 2005

By Kate Hawley

Two days after "Justice Sunday," the reviews are in: the Church telecast starring Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) that sought to end the use of a filibuster to block judicial nominees was, "a big mistake," "misbegotten," "fully ideological, largely partisan," "shameful," "a distressing new low," a "grotesque religio-political circus," and finally, "almost too stupid to rebut." Almost, but not quite.

Columnist Cal Thomas was one of the few to complain, "Why is the republic in danger only when conservative religious people speak and act? Why are only conservatives seeking to impose a 'theocracy' and liberals are never charged with such motives?"( Read more... )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

Many people in the Dominionist movement either homeschool their kids or send them to Christian schools. Many of these schools use David Barton's "America's Godly Heritage" as a teaching text about the founders of America and its supposed Christian underpinings. His book contains many quotes purported to be from our founding fathers- including Franklin, Jefferson, Washington, and others.

Barton's work has been quoted extensively by evangelicals, teachers, and even members of Congress.

But evidence and research has revealed that a good lot of what Barton has written is questionable, or even false. One Baptist site has even publised a critical commentary on his work.

David Barton, in his taped presentation called America's Godly Heritage, peddles the proposition that America is a "Christian Nation," legally and historically. He also asserts that the principle of church-state separation, while not in the Constitution, has systematically been used to rule religion out of the public arena, particularly the public school system. This is not a new argument, but Barton is especially slick in his presentation. His presentation has just enough ring of truth to make him credible to many people. It is, however, laced with exaggerations, half- truths, and misstatements of fact. His citation to supporting research is scant at best and at times non-existent.

The whole article including the refutations of his 'quotes' is worth a read.

This leads to the question: why are there so many charlatans who don religous plumage and so baldly lie to believers? They are present in many faiths, but it seems that evangelical Christianity attracts them like squirrels to nuts. Maybe it can be traced back to Paul himself, whom some critics peg as being the first evangelical flim-flam artist- after all, he never even met Christ in person, and he was avidly pursuing the destruction of the faith before his conversion on the road to Damascus. (Maybe it wasn't a 'conversion at all...) Maybe his model has pretty much set up the assembly line for those who follow him.
Thoughts?