LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

Here's another look at the NYC conference from a conservative point of view. It's interesting how the different sides spin these things... I've taken the rare liberty of including my own remarks in [brackets] in the body of the article- being there and actually listening to what went on is definitely an advantage.

Conference shows deep divide of liberals, religious right

By RICHARD N. OSTLING, The Associated Press
Published: Saturday, May. 7, 2005

NEW YORK – A video screen showed President Bush boarding a plane for Washington. His purpose: to get to the White House and sign Congress’ bill asking federal courts to review the removal of Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube.

Joan Bokaer of TheocracyWatch.org offered her take on the action. “There’s something strange about the folks running our country,” she quipped. The audience of 500 people responded with some appreciative chuckles.

Bokaer, from a social action center affiliated with Cornell University, was speaking at a conference last weekend that denounced conservative Republicans on matters like mercy-killing, abortion, gay marriage, research using human embryos, broadcast indecency, Israel, Iraq, faith-based charity funding, judicial nominations and church-state relations. The book table sold assorted Bush-bashing titles. [I saw one or two, but the majority of books were about the Religious Right, the 'culture wars' and other subjects.- ed]

But the gathering wasn’t a Democratic Party caucus.

It was an academic conference at the City University of New York on “the real agenda of the religious far right” – and it offered a fresh example of just how venomous America’s conservative-liberal religious split has become and how entangled faith is with politics.( Read more... )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

A friend of mine linked to this page which contains some in-depth information about the roots of the Dominionist/Reconstructionist movement. Here is the article from the Bible Discernment Ministries page:

Notes on Reconstructionism*
Roots of a New "Christian" Inquisition?

- During the 1960s, a new movement began within the sphere of Reformed or Covenant Theology, primarily out of conservative Presbyterianism (Reformed and Orthodox). That movement has been called by three different names: Reconstructionism (because it advocates the reconstruction of society), Dominion Theology (because its theology teaches that Biblical Christianity is to rule every sphere of society), and Theonomy (a combination of two Greek words -- theos [God] and nomos [law] -- because it asserts that all of society is to be brought into the obedience to the Mosaic Law). It should be noted that this movement is not advocated by everyone within the realm of Reformed or Covenant Theology (12/90, Israel My Glory). "The Reconstructionist movement and its allies and offshoots, by substituting political and cultural action for the proclamation of the Gospel, by substituting eschatology for soteriology, and by mangling the Gospel itself, have become tools of Romanist political action" (3/02, The Trinity Review).( long, but worth your time... )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

Here's AlterNet's look at yesterday's "Justice Sunday"...

At the beginning of the event, Family Research Council President and event organizer Tony Perkins stated, "We are not saying that people who disagree with us are not people of faith." However, the flier promoting the event read, "The Filibuster against People of Faith: The filibuster was once abused to protect racial bias, and it is now being used against people of faith." This was not the only attempt to rewrite history during the telecast. In denouncing the filibuster, Frist claimed, "I don't think it's radical to ask senators to vote.... I don't think it's radical to restore precedents that worked so well for 214 years." In 2000, Frist was among a group of conservatives who voted to filibuster an appeals court judge nominated by then-President Clinton, because he had already decided Judge Richard Paez was "out of the mainstream of political thought and ... should [not] be on the court."

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

This Arkansas Democrat-Gazette op-ed asks some tough questions of the Religious Right. This article is notable that it's in a very right wing paper in a very red state.

Does it strike you as odd that persons calling themselves Christians are furious that the U.S. Supreme Court found executing juveniles unconstitutional? Do you find even odder that such individuals describe themselves, straight-faced, as adherents of the "culture of life"? Are you surprised to learn that people called conservatives would quote Joseph Stalin? Yes, that Joseph Stalin, the former Soviet dictator and mass murderer. And no, I am not making this up. It happened recently at a Washington conclave held by something called the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration. If not household names, many in attendance were familiar controversialists, representing right-wing groups like the Family Research Council, the American Conservative Union, etc. Catholic anti-feminist Phyllis Schlafly spoke, along with unsuccessful GOP Senate nominee Alan Keyes and Alabama’s Judge Roy" Ten Commandments" Moore. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, having fled the jurisdiction—er, left town to attend the pope’s funeral, addressed the group on TV. But the real headline-maker was Edwin Vieira, allegedly an expert in constitutional law.( Read more... )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

Although the main thrust of this Seattle Weekly article is a debate on whether Bush is the "AntiChrist" or not, it also hits on the hypocracy, and dare we say, heresy of the burgeoning Dominionist movement:

Bringing Back Heresy

Lang argues that followers of Jesus, not Bush, should call an Antichrist an Antichrist—or rather, its spirit. "The progressive church should bring back—and this sounds so crazy—the word 'heresy.' The end times theology and this other thing called Dominionism or Christian Reconstruction—those are heresies." [emphasis mine] Lang says not to believe Christian Coalition leader–turned–Whore of Enron–turned Bush/Cheney campaign lieutenant Ralph Reed when he claims the Christian right has no plans to upend the Constitution and impose its religion on civic life. "He's a liar," says Lang. "Dominionism is the notion that God has given the dominion, the governance of the world, to the church. And so Christians literally are born to rule, by force if necessary, to bring the Kingdom of God on Earth. I believe that the theology that drives the Bush administration affirms this." When Falwell preached, "We must take back what is rightfully ours," his ambitions did not stop at U.S. borders. This is a Church of a Law Unto Itself.

In the Greek, the word "anti" doesn't just mean "against." It also contains the meanings "equivalent to" or "a substitute for." Nero was anti-Christ because he falsely claimed to be God. The idea of deception is crucial. The Antichrist isn't the devil, the opposite of God. He's an evil human masquerading as a golden god. The Antichrist appears to humanity not as the hideous Beast but as handsome Nicolae Carpathia, who resembles Robert Redford without the facial erosion. "That could be our next Republican president," quips Lang.

In this sense, the Bush church is Antichristlike indeed. It is institutionalized deception, anti-American ugliness with a beguiling face, a neocon job. Only when necessary does it employ the perilous bald-faced lie, the outrageously transparent duplicity—the political equivalent of Robertson arguing that "Do unto others" indicates Christ's support of capitalist selfishness. More often, a smoothly dissembling surface is preferred. Rove notoriously emulates Machiavelli; the Christian right is a stealth movement, infiltrating school boards and mainstream churches and every institution of democracy like a thief in the night—in order to undermine, overthrow, and replace democracy with theocracy. Bush is the father of lies. The Union of Concerned Scientists proclaims Bush's lies about science "unprecedented." In With God on Their Side, Kaplan concludes, on mountainous evidence, "The goal is not to engage your opponents in the public square, but to kneecap them, or send them into exile."

"It is a conspiracy in the sense that they have not been public and accountable to their ideology," says Lang. "Follow the money! The same filthy-rich foundations that have funded the rise of neocons are funding the rise of the religious right." He suggests that you check out the exposé Web site The Yurica Report for the terrifying particulars.

I like the rational tack of this entire article- especially the insight about that the 'antichrist' really is. "Institutionalized deception"- a perfect phrase to encapsule what the next four years will be like if we don't holler "Heretics!" loudly enough to get the sleeping majority's attention. People like us might get kneecapped, but we'll be heard.