LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY horvendile)

Jill Sobule has a song that is written to a Dominionist that I think people here would appreciate.

Waiting for the Rapture

by Jill Sobule

What if I’m right and you’re not correct
And there’s no hell fire when we are dead
Regretting, all the boys you could of kissed
All for nothing, it wasn’t a sin

You were busy getting ready for the rapture, warning us all

Whatif I‘ve been a really nice gal, followed the golden rule butnow,because I don’t believe in your best pal, you say I’ll burn forever
So let’s say that he’s real, but not like you sell
He’s more like the nice hippie in Godspell
Well, I’d think that he was swell, would that bum you out

So, I’ll give to you that there is a god
All powerful, he sees it all
But do you think that he’s that small
To care about your candidate or your football team or who you mate. No god is great

What if you’re wrong, but then so am I
And what really happens when we die
And what if L Ron Hubbard he was right
That would bum me out

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

This Blog from the Capital article talks about a nasty little House Act that is flying under the radar:

The Public Expression of Religion Act

HR 2679 would apply to any lawsuit regarding the estabishment of religion by state or local government, in violation of the Constitution--from forced school prayer to the public funding of religion. The law, now in committee, would keep plaintiffs in such cases from seeking damages or attorney's fees if they win.

Why would Congress consider putting that kind of limit on citizens who have been injured by the government in this way? Over the weekend, I watched the webcast of Thursday's House Constitution Subcommittee hearing on the bill to find out. (I know I know, it's a sad way to spend the weekend what can I say...). The panel consisted of 3 in support of the bill and 1 against, American Jewish Congress counsel Marc Stern.

I've picked out the choice quotes from participants and posted them below, but the essential message is this: PERA would embolden governments to err on the side of establishing religion; it would increase the financial burden on those whose rights have been violated should they decide to seek their day in court; and it could have a severe disincentive effect, reflected in an exchange between Mr. Stern and committee member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) [My transcription]

Nadler: Under this bill, what would stop a recalcitrant governing authority in a local government from violating a federal court order?

Stern: Nothing….It is an open invitation for people to defy the Constitution in the interest of political convenience at their will.

More quotes below the fold. You can also read Americans United response against the bill here. The American Legion supports the bill in a press release here.

Here's a quote from America United's site:

Americans United for Separation of Church and State today urged the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution to reject a bill that would cut off reasonable attorneys’ fees in church-state cases.

The measure, known as the “Public Expression of Religion Act” (H.R. 2679), would deny attorneys who get involved in church-state cases the ability to recover any of the legal fees and out-of-pocket expenses incurred in such litigation.

“This bill is a punitive measure clearly designed to scare Americans from participating in church-state cases,” said Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “It would have a chilling effect on every citizen’s right to access our courts and would be particularly harmful to religious minorities.”

Around the country, national organizations and individual attorneys sometimes file litigation on behalf of local plaintiffs who believe that government has violated their rights by unconstitutionally getting involved in matters of religion. If the litigation is successful, the law allows for the recovery of reasonable attorneys’ fees and out-of-pocket expenses. The sums recovered are usually determined after negotiations among all parties and a federal court.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY wyldraven)

Australian Christian Lobby & Paul Cameron

The first BOTG newsletter exposes the Australian Christian Lobby’s use of a disgraced scientist in their current homophobic campaign.

Paul Cameron specialises in publishing studies that offer anti-gay crusaders ‘scientific’ justification for their bigotry.

Expelled from the American Psychological Association, the American Sociological Association, and the Nebraska Psychological Association, Cameron still has ardent fans. His cooked statistics and preposterous assertions are exactly what the far right of the Christian political activist crew need to back up their queer-hating campaigns. And governments are only too willing to listen.

Will ours?

I have been really impressed with this site, and the sheer effort which obviously went into producing this newsletter is quite telling. Have a look.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

Slate Magazine has an interesting article about the problems that the "Christian Nationalists" are having in their ranks:

As evangelical Christians gain more political clout within the Bush administration, the ideological gaps between the factions of the Christian right are becoming more pronounced. It's not just environmentalism. Even gay marriage, that touchstone of the religious right, is a source of internecine tensions. Michael Farris, the founder of Patrick Henry College—an elite breeding ground for conservative Christians—opposed the latest constitutional amendment against gay marriage because it didn't go far enough in stripping gays of their rights. But the strains within the evangelical movement don't get much play in the secular media. For liberals, there's little difference between a Dobson, a Robertson, and a Cizik: They're all wing nuts in flyover states with bad hair and a gay obsession.

The specter of an American theocracy, the title of Kevin Phillips' broadside against the Bush administration, has obscured the signs of dissent in what can look like a Christian monolith. Michelle Goldberg, a Salon reporter and the author of Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, misses some of the signs, too, in her otherwise astute study. It's not just that she blurs the more fringe personalities, lumping together conspiracy-minded nut jobs (like theocrat Howard Phillips, who believes that "enemies of Christ in this fallen world must be conquered") with veteran conservative blowhards like William Bennett. As she describes how the Christian Right moved from the margins of acceptability to the Republican mainstream, she also overlooks generational tensions and large-scale dissatisfaction with the Bush administration among many conservative, white evangelicals (only 34 percent of whom, according to a June 6 Pew research poll, "strongly back" the president).

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY exotic_princess)

Opinions?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/28/obama.ap/index.html

( Article here )