LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY redst8hairatick)

Greetings! I've been reading DC for months- I guess it's about time I posted...

I've been wondering what has happened with H.R #1070 and its companion bill in the Senate- you know the one- "Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-AL) has introduced the Constitution Restoration Act of 2005, which amends the federal judicial code to prohibit the U.S. Supreme Court and the federal district courts from exercising jurisdiction over any matter in which relief is sought against an entity of federal, state, or local government or an officer or agent of such government concerning that entity's, officer's, or agent's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government."
I found the most up-to-date information on http://www.cwfpac.com/index.htm. You can view the supporters of this monstrosity and email them directly, thanks to the Campaign for Working Families;) Though the percentage of supporters is rather small (45), it is still appalling that it has been introduced at all. If there is other news out there about this, please fill me in!

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

This Daily Kos diary talks about possible presidential candidate Mike Huckabee's speech to the "Center for Reclaiming America for Christ".

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. - Faith is not present enough in politics as candidates and elected officials try to court voters too broadly, fearing their values will splinter their base, Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, a Southern Baptist minister, said Friday at a Christian gathering.

Introduced as a "fine Christian American governor," Huckabee, who is considering a bid for the 2008 GOP presidential nomination, said he will always remain true to his beliefs.

"I don't think most Americans are turned off by people of faith. I think they're turned off by people who are phony," Huckabee said to a small group. He added that Christianity is not represented "nearly enough" in Washington.

Read the whole thing.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

In an article posted today on Talk To Action, writer Frederick Clarkson talks about candidate Jamie Raskin standing up to an overtly Dominionist legislator in the Maryland Senate:

Jeremy Learming, writing at the blog, Wall of Separation, tells the story of the Raskin's testimony (which was covered by The Baltimore Sun) at a hearing in the Maryland legislature on proposed state constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriage. Raskin, a professor of Constitutional Law at American University had been asked to testify by Equality Maryland, a marriage equality organization. More dramatic than his tesitimony was his exchange with Republican State Senator Nancy Jacobs who said, "As I read biblical principles, marriage is intended, ordained and started by God - that is my belief, ... For me, this is an issue solely based on religious principles."

Raskin replied:

"People place their hand on the Bible and swear to uphold the Constitution," Raskin said. "They don't put their hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible."

That quote is now on our front page, in the Wiki, and should be spread far and wide, because it is the quote which will take the Dominionist view of the law out of the picture, properly used.

Clarkson goes on to define Dominionism:

In a recent issue of The Public Eye, I noted that dominionism is a term used by outside observers to understand a complex yet vitally important trend. For people trying to figure out if a conservative politician, organization, or religious leader is a "dominionist," I noted three characteristics to listen for:

... Dominionists celebrate Christian nationalism, in that they believe that the United States once was, and should once again be, a Christian nation. In this way, they deny the Enlightenment roots of American democracy.

Dominionists promote religious supremacy, insofar as they generally do not respect the equality of other religions, or even other versions of Christianity.

Dominionists endorse theocratic visions, insofar as they believe that the Ten Commandments, or "biblical law," should be the foundation of American law, and that the U.S. Constitution should be seen as a vehicle for implementing Biblical principles.

To that last, it should be noted that dominionists believe that the Bible as an absolute, infallible source of God's word, and elevate it above even Christ and God. They worship the Bible. This is a critical difference, and when examining religious groups, their mission statements (or creeds) should always be checked to see where the Bible falls in their regard. If the Bible is first, then you are dealing with dominionists. Every change in the law they wish to force upon our government is driven by Scripture.

Go read the article. And its links. It's quite interesting.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sesby)

A class at Bell Shoals Baptist Church in Florida embraces an alternate history that advocates the United States as a nation by Christians for Christians.

The curriculum:

- Our Godly Heritage

- Our Founding Fathers and Original Intent

- Educational Revisionism

- Christian's Responsibility to Culture

- Understanding the Homosexual Lifestyle and Agenda, Part I

- Understanding the Homosexual Lifestyle and Agenda, Part II

- Protecting Traditional Family Values

- Anti-Christian Bigotry

- Sanctity of Life

- The Religious and Political Origins of Thanksgiving

- "What Is Rama-hanu-kwanz-mas?" Keeping Christ in Christmas


More, from the story in the St. Petersbug Times:

"John Stemberger (a guest speaker) is a lawyer from Orlando. His spare time goes toward Florida Family Action, a conservative lobbying group. Stemberger's topic tonight is homosexuals and their agenda.

"We find ourselves living in an age where there's no truth at all, according to secularists," Stemberger tells the class.

No one, he says, is saying that homosexuals shouldn't have a right to vote, a right to sell property. "This is about special rights."

Namely, marriage. Once gays can marry, he said, they will want to adopt, too.

"Now the picture is not two guys in holy matrimony, in bed together, so to speak. Now the picture is three little children sandwiched in between them."

"What are two lesbian moms going to teach a little girl about how to love a man?" Stemberger asks.

"Nothing," someone calls out.

"They have nothing to offer these children," Stemberger says.

Then he says, "Can we just pray for a second?"

"Father," he begins as the students bow their heads, "We want to be clothed with grace. We want to be clothed with humility. . . . There is nothing in us that should be self-righteous, that should be judgmental."

Read the whole story at http://sptimes.com/2006/02/24/Brandontimes/In_God_they_trust.shtml

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY wyldraven)

Casting Stones: An Army of radical Christian Reconstructionists is preparing a campaign to convert conservative fundamentalist churches. By David Holthouse of the Southern Poverty Law Center

Interesting, if somewhat sarcastic, analysis of Mark Rushdoony and the Chalcedon Foundation.

( Full Text behind the cut )

More about the Chalcedon Foundation, in their own words, can be found here and here.

Be certain to have a few grains of salt ready should you delve into the Chalcedon web site.

x-posted to my personal journal.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY another93)

Thy Kingdom Come
Posted on Thursday, February 16, 2006. From America’s Providential History, by Mark A. Beliles and Stephen K. McDowell, published by the Providence Foundation. The authors hold courses and seminars based on the book that were attended by more than 25,000 people in 2004. Originally from Harper's Magazine, February 2005.
Sources ( read more )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY gairid)

This is just insane. In reading this community I understand what the dominionists are doing and I know that their bleating about being persecuted is all part and parcel of the way they gather people to their cause, but Jesus Christ! Advocating murder is okay? It's sickening, it really is.



The American Family Association opened its airwaves to advocate for executing gays, adulterers, abortion doctors

Summary: Far-right Christian author and American Vision president Gary DeMar was the guest on the February 2 edition of American Family Radio's Today's Issues. In the past, DeMar has advocated the installation of a theocratic government in the United States in which homosexuals, adulterers, and abortion doctors would be executed.

Here's an excerpt of the interview:

DeMAR: The definition of Christian Reconstruction is simply this: The Bible applies to every facet of life. That means not just the judicial aspects of life, such as civil government, church government, but business, economics -- every facet of society. The Bible has something to say about each area. For example, on homosexuals: We do not believe that homosexuals ought to be executed. The Bible doesn't say that homosexuals ought to be executed. What it says is this: If two men lie together like man and woman, they are to be put to death.

PORTEOUS: What the hell do you think that is?

DeMAR: Well, wait a minute. If a guy comes up to me and he says, "I'm a homosexual," that doesn't mean he's to be executed. If you understand the Scriptures, it says very clearly: If a man comes up to you and says, "I've murdered somebody," that doesn't mean that person ought to be executed.

GONZALES: Oh, so what you are saying, Gary, is, if you catch homosexuals in the act, then the Bible says to execute them.

DeMAR: The Bible lays forth the severest penalty, which would be capital punishment for two men who publicly engage in sodomy.


http://mediamatters.org/items/200602140005

(crossposted to Talk2Action--as this is a fairly major development in the fight against dominionism in Ohio, and--if the pastors in question win--possibly nationwide)

Two particular churches which have been linked to the Ohio Restoration Project--World Harvest Church in Columbus and Fairfield Christian Church (also in Columbus)--may be in serious tax trouble.

An alliance of thirty moderate churches has teamed together to file formal complaint against World Harvest Church and Fairfield Christian Church for electioneering violations.

As groups such as DefCon America are gathering documentation of illegal electioneering in churches, it's very encouraging to also see mainstream churches finally standing up to dominionists attempting to hijack Christianity.

( More details, including a backgrounder )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

This excellent article from "In These Times" talks about what "character education" really is:

Although legally and fiscally independent, the CTI is for all intents and purposes a "secular" front group for Gothard's IBLP. In the last decade, the CTI has quietly gained entry into hundreds of elementary, middle and high schools, state and city offices, corporations, police departments and jails.

Though he never uses the term, Gothard's ideology fits into the framework of the burgeoning "Christian Reconstructionist" movement, which aims to rebuild society according to biblical mandates. Within the Christian Reconstructionist worldview, modern-day chaos is directly attributable to the division of church and state and the consequent degradation of individual character.

For Gothard, the solution is restoring the United States--and then the rest of the world--to something that he calls "The Sevenfold Power of First-Century Churches and Homes."

The concept of obeying God-granted authority runs through virtually all IBLP-published materials. "The key to understanding authority is identifying four areas of God-ordained jurisdiction: parents, government, church leaders, and employers," reads an introductory passage to Basic Life Principles Seminar. "When a decision is to be made, we must ask, 'Whose jurisdiction is this under?' God gives direction, protection, and provision through human authorities. If we rebel against them, we expose ourselves to the destruction of evil principalities. ... This is why 'rebellion is the sin of witchcraft.' "

According to Gothard's interpretation, first century Roman Centurions were admirable figures of authority who followed their orders without question--the prototypes for the kinds of police officers that CTI instructor Ray Nash, the sheriff of Dorchester County, South Carolina, wants to create in his state and elsewhere.

The whole article is worth your time. Think about this: this stuff is being taught to our police and military people.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY navytron89)

Snatched from twistedchick's blog

 For those of you who think that George Bush still has some idea of the nature of the Constitution, I submit this link and this quote: "It's just a goddamned piece of paper." That is a neoCon and revolutionary sentiment. That is not an understanding of the historical, legal and moral aspects of the founding document of this country.

WTF???? Has the President lost his marbles finally???  This type of shit is what can get someone impeached. Well if he goes down, I don't see Chaney stepping into his shoes after Plamegate and then DeLay won't be back from the trials anytime soon. So who next to lead us and hopefully have some smarts and sense to do the right thing???

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY thornewilder)

In the continuing research into potentially dominionist groups...The restoration movement (Stone Campbell) pops into view.

Neophyte Question of the Day:
In reading about this group, specifically in association to the Church of Christ, which I have heard has strong dominionist leanings, I wonder how does this fit - or does it - into the continuum that includes AoG and pente?
Also I have seen a distinction between pente and penta - costal in relation to the trinity. Was this a dream? (lately I've been having horrific dreams)

From Wikipedia:

Original Doctrinal beliefs of Stone-Campbell Movement

"Christianity should not be divided, Christ intended the creation of one church.
Creeds divide, but Christians should be able to find agreement by standing on the Bible itself (from which all creeds are human expansions or constrictions) instead of on the opinions of men about the Bible.
Ecclesiastical traditions divide, but Christians should be able to find common ground by following the practice (as best as it can be determined) of the early church.
Names of human origin divide, but Christians should be able to find common ground by using biblical names for the church (i.e., "Christian Church" or "Church of Christ" as opposed to "Methodist" or "Lutheran", etc.). It is in this vein that conservative members of the Churches of Christ object to the phrase "Stone-Campbell Movement"..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Restoration_Movement
then it moves on to the bell and whistle section

"Another schism which ultimately split the Churches of Christ again, was the Crossroads Movement which started in the 1960s and 1970s. The Crossroads Movement initially started as a somewhat radical, although largely accepted, movement within some institutional churches. Under the Crossroads Movement, each church was divided into "Prayer Cells". Each Cell had a "Prayer Brother" who was assigned newer members in the church. Within each prayer cell the members would confess their sins, in "Soul Talks", and offer support. Each cell's brother would then form Prayer Cells with other Prayer Brothers in a pyramid organization. The Crossroads Movement started at the 14th Street Church of Christ in Gainesville, Florida, which became known as "Crossroads Church of Christ", an incubator for the future International Churches of Christ. The Crossroads Movement spread across Churches of Christ as a means to revitalize smaller churches and evangelize college campuses. This movement appears to be directly related to the Shepherding Movement that was gaining influence in the wider Evangelical world at the time..."

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY navytron89)

Well twistedchick provided more information than I can here about the next Justice nominee and other things take a read for yourselves.

I read this about constructionist views and specifical Alito's views which look to benfit drug dealers (machine guns are not illegal) and abortion.

 I rather have someone like J. Harvie Wilkinson III , who still has his flaws but it a lot saner choice for Justice and the least likely to sympathize with dominionist values, he appears to be more in the center of the political field.

It looks like Theocracy and the Constitution-in-Exile format that the Dominionists are looking for would become a done deal, if Alito gets his appointment to the bench.

The other thing is there were rumors that Alito has basically viewed that blogging is unprotected speech from the First Amendment rights and that not only can you be hit for libel, that you can be held accountable for what other people say on your blog. 

Where are the Founding Fathers when you need them? 

I am trying to find an analysis of the Bob Jones University curriculum (I remember seeing it online but have, unfortunately, since lost the link).

However, Texas Freedom Network has done their own analysis of a "Bible Education Curriculum" promoted for use in public schools by the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools (NCBCPS).

Needless to say, the curriculum is supported by a who's who of the dominionist movement and is explicitly dominionist itself.

A plethora of Biblical scholars have issued a joint statement that even in use as a theology curriculum the NCBCPS material is woefully inadequate.

Full analysis is here (warning: PDF).

Several people mentioned this on other forums, and Nagisa specifically called it here, but now it's official:

http://www.local6.com/news/5052104/detail.html

Roy Moore--known Christian Reconstructionist and golden-boy of the dominionist movement--has officially announced his candidacy for governor of Alabama.

( a brief history of Roy Moore's hanky-panky )

There is already discussion on multiple forums--one which I think needs to turn into an organised campaign--to specifically see which churches and dominionist groups (with 501(c)3 non-profit status, such as how AFA and Focus on the Family are organised) are endorsing Roy Moore over the next few months and start filing reports to the IRS and state tax authorities of illegal politicking to have the tax exempt status of those groups revoked. (As Roy Moore is pretty much adored over and advocated/cheerleadered on by almost every dominionist group in the country--including a few specifically set up for the cheerleading of this idiot--it's possible that *most* dominionist groups could end up losing their tax exempt status if groups work in an organised fashion to monitor and report.)

EDIT: A fairly full history of Moore's misbehaviour is here.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY gleef)

My recent foray into Harriet Miers's church reminded me of a complex question I've had for a while.

How can an outsider tell what a church believes/teaches?

I mean, sometimes it's easy, Urbana Assembly of God Church is an Assembly of God church, and you can assume that it adheres pretty closely to the beliefs and teachings of other AoG churches.

Often, however, the churches are more coy about it, and just say they are "Christian" or "Non-Denominational". What ways are there to tell if a church is teaching Christian Reconstructionism? Or is Pentecostal/Charismatic (or some variation)? Or is supporting Dominionist causes and organizations? Or is preaching dangerous attitudes like "name it and claim it" prayer and regular "chastening" of children?

What should we be looking for when we run across a church? I mean, even if they want to hide their true nature from outsiders, they still want to attract like-minded people, so I assume they would keep their beliefs somewhat visible, even if it's encoded in some way, don't they? Or is that not a safe assumption?

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY seshen)

The Christian Nation Myth

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

If you sometimes get the feeling that the members of the Extreme Right dwell in a parallel universe, you might be right. Here are a pair of op-ed columns from the Ft. Wayne paper. The first is from a right wing theocrat, and the second one is the rebutal to the first. Both are fascinating reading.

Remember Puritan roots of liberty

The Independence Day we celebrate this weekend offers the occasion to get in touch with the mystic chords of American memory.

It is tempting to look only to Philadelphia and conclude it was the start of something big. The taproot is not there. Instead, the American Revolution that shaped our great country begins with the Puritans, those remarkable individuals who put forward ideals that still can motivate. The Pilgrims showed us the power of combining individualism and public spirit, giving us a religious republic comfortable with a wall and no established church.( Read more... )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

Reconstructionist crusaders don't fool God

THE LAST WORD
By Ole Anthony & Skippy R.
Issue #162 January/February 1999

King John of England made an unusual request on his deathbed.

John, an unsavory character, even for medieval royalty, had amassed a fortune in other people's gold. Yet he was so stingy that he allowed his wife only two dresses and a cape, while he dressed in finery and had jewels stitched onto his riding gloves.

His greedy land grabs made the barons so mad they forced him to sign the Magna Carta, forever limiting royal power. For a time he was excommunicated by the Church. Needless to say, the guy didn't have many friends.

As his life drew to a close, tradition says, he asked his attendants to dress him in a white crusader's tunic emblazoned with a red cross, in hopes of tricking St. Peter and sneaking into heaven incognito.

No doubt the ruse failed.

But a similar plan is alive among Reconstructionist Christians and other groups working for a "return to America's Christian heritage."
Their plan is to camouflage the whole United States of America and smuggle it into the Kingdom of God – all 50 states, from sea to shining sea, everything – including New Jersey and Congress – even our offshore oil rights and the interstate highway system.( Read more... )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY dandycat)

What are the differences between Christian Dominionists and Christian Reconstructionists? I've heard both terms tossed around almost interchangeably, but I'm not sure this should be the case. Thanks!

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

I found a link to a very interesting article about Dominionism (called here 'reconstructionism' by the writer) on the Mainstream Baptists site.

An excerpt:

Very few people in Oklahoma or in our entire country have any idea who Rousas Rushdoony was. Fewer still know the impact that his thought and writings are having on life in our society. Most of the people who have been influenced by him are loathe to admit that his ideas have had an impact on their thinking. Some, like John Whitehead who heads the Rutherford Institute and was a prominent advisor to George W. Bush during the legal battles in Florida after the last presidential election, acknowledged Rushdoony’s influence in their early writings, but have found it necessary to distance themselves from him as they acquired positions of public influence. Oklahoma is one of the few states where influential people have little fear that their credibility could be undermined by being openly identified with Rushdoony or with the Chalcedon Foundation that he started. I suspect that the Daily Oklahoman is the only major daily newspaper in the world to eulogize Rushdoony on its editorial page and State Representative Bill Graves of Oklahoma City is one of the few elected officials in the country who writes articles for the Chalcedon Report -- the Foundation’s monthly newsletter. Bill Graves has articles published in both the January and the March 2002 issues of the Chalcedon Report.

Openly identifying with Rushdoony and the Reconstructionist movement is problematic for people in the public eye because Rushdoony was an adamant opponent of the First Amendment to the constitution. His magnum opus, published in 1973, is an 800 page tome patterned after Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion that Rushdoony entitled The Institutes of Biblical Law. On page 294, Rushdoony gives an indication why he believes that the American system of pluralistic democracy is heresy. He wrote, “In the name of toleration, the believer is asked to associate on a common level of total acceptance with the atheist, the pervert, the criminal, and the adherents of other religions.” ( Read more... )