LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

A bill meant to eliminate attorney fees in legal cases where government violated the constitutional separation of church and state is up for a House vote today. According to American Atheists , this is what the Public Expression of Religion Act does:

The bill, H.R. 2679, introduced by Rep. John Hostettler (R-IN) would amend a section of the United States Code and eliminate attorney fees in legal cases where government violated the constitutional separation of church and state. PERA is part of a battery of proposed legislative items dubbed “The American Values Agenda.” This includes measure to protect “unborn children,” ban cloning and penalize legal challenges to violations of the First Amendment’s establishment clause.

# PERA lowers the penalty bar when government is caught in flagrant violation of the Establishment Clause.

# The bill penalizes attorneys and organizations that defend the separation of church and state, but does nothing to prevent political leaders from draining the public treasury to defend unconstitutional practices in court.

# This legislation has nothing whatsoever to do with legitimate religious expression. It is all about government sponsorship and promotion of religion.

This was part of a slate of items that the Religious Right hopes to accomplish before the election. This bill should not be allowed to pass the House.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY 1400scale)

There's been some discussion here lately, particularly between me, Eiredrake, and Lihan regarding the future goals of the RR, and the potential future implications that more and more of us seem to be coming to understand, but something occured to me when I was discussing with Catvincent the phsychological motivations of authoritarian dominionists.

In an older post I stated this:

After a century and a half of false alarms, missed deadlines, and general apocalyptic disappointment, I think that the majority of them were finally forced to accept that they couldn't predict the timing of the Biblical End, no matter how much they may have wanted to (even Jesus said that "no man knows the day or the hour", including him). I suspect the psychological tendency was too strong to completely supress though, and it remanifested itself in a new theological paradigm; the idea that God may be deliberately delaying the End Times because True Believers (TM) had became too passive, and weren't doing enough.

It wouldn't be much of a leap to go from that to "we're mandated by Jesus to become proactive, fulfill prophecy, and usher in the End Times ourselves to set the stage for His Second Coming", I think.

A belief like that would also serve quite well to psychologically cloak any feelings of impatience with the manifestation of God's will and maintain an outward appearance of piety, and it would definately serve the ego.

And this:

I suspect more and more that they believe that all of the items on their agenda (restricting gay rights, stem cell research, non-abstinence-only family planning, moderate-to-liberal Christian and non-Christian belief systems, and ultimately merging church and state) are benchmarks that they've convinced themselves will, if they succeed in meeting each one, be successful steps in hastening the End Times and/or ensuring that when the Time comes, they'll be Raptured as a reward for their efforts.

An agnostic coworker of mine called them "Rapture Points" this morning, and I have to admit the term is catchy.

Then I thought about it, and realized the inverse could be true as well.

For example, if you'd been convinced that America had been destined to be an evangelical Christian nation, and that it was stolen out from under you by liberals, secularists, feminists, etc., you'd be pissed, sure. But what if you became convinced that you and others like you had been given a Sacred duty to keep the country morally clean, and had let it slide into degeneracy through complacency?

Some of the posts I'd exchanged revealed something I'd not known before; that many fundamentalists have a deep-seated fear of being Left Behind; they don't neccesarily feel secure in their salvation, even if they project the outward appearance of it. A letter-writer to Joe Bageant indicated that when she was a member of a dominionist church, no matter how much she prayed and fasted, and how pious and moral she tried to be, she never felt "saved" enough; Lihan has confirmed this feeling, along with one or two others.

This could go a long way towards explaining why they're getting so damn shrill, why they're pushing at so many things all the time, and why they hate the "other side" so much.

They feel emboldened, sure, but I also think they're afraid.

Not that secularism, gay rights, stem cell research, legal abortion, evolution, or anything else will eventually overshadow them; although that might be a factor; I doubt they're really worried about that.

I suspect they're scared that because they believe the End is so close (whether as a result of their actions or not), America's "sinful" nature may be putting THEIR chances of being Raptured in jeopardy; that their vengeful, zero-tolerance OT God will judge THEM guilty by association.

I think they hate us because they're afraid WE'RE going to get THEM Left Behind.

"For lack of a vote, a Kingdom was lost." (paraphrasing, obviously)

Thoughts?

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY rechan)

Quoting lurkitty:

Hopping over to the Republican camp, there is an interesting debate going on about Gov. Mitt Romney. He has been widely touted as a Presidential candidate in 2008, but has begun to meet a great deal of resistance from the Evangelicals due to the fact that he is a Mormon.

It appears that Evangelical Christians do not consider Latter-Day Saints to be Christians, even to the extent of excluding them from the National Day of Prayer in 2004. Mormonism, along with Jehovah Witness, Christian Science and Unity, among others, are considered by Evangelical Christians to be a cults. Do the Evangelicals have enough sway to exclude Romney from consideration as a candidate.

If Mormons aren't good enough to be Republican candidates for President, will they continue to support the Republican Party? It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the weeks ahead.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY rechan)

This weekend, some of the nation’s leading conservatives — from Tony Snow and Attorney General Gonzales to Sen. George Allen (R-VA) and Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AK) to Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity — appeared at the Family Research Council’s “Values Voter Summit.”

An hour and a half after Snow’s speech, Bishop Wellington Boone, founder of the Wellington Boone Ministries, took the stage and announced, “I want the gays mad at me.” Boone said that while “the gays” are “saying a few things” about him, “they’re not coming at me strong.” In an effort to change that, Boone declared:

Back in the days when I was a kid, and we see guys that don’t stand strong on principle, we call them “faggots.” … [People] that don’t stand up for what’s right, we say, “You’re sissified out!” “You’re a sissy!” That means you don’t stand up for principles. [Click HERE to listen to the audio.]

As Right Wing Watch notes, another speaker at the conference later claimed “the gay rights movement was inspired ‘from the pit of hell itself,’ and has a ’satanic anointment.’ … He suggested that the anti-Christ is himself gay, citing a verse from the book of Daniel saying the anti-Christ will have no desire for a woman.”

Quoted from ThinkProgress.