LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY lihan161051)

.. when I got an email on one of the lists I'm subscribed to, with a link to Lousiana Conservative's Why I am switching to the Democrat Party. I really hoped that maybe someone on the right had realized some of what I've realized about the philosophical similarities between the fundamentalists on the right and the ones on the left, and was reaching across the gap and striking a blow for tolerance, and maybe, just maybe, it was a sign of some unusual sanity and courage over there.

Then I clicked through and read it. Words fail me.

*sigh*

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY thoth_moon) A week or two back I posted an entry containing an article found on the website jewsonfirst.org about a Jewish family who were basically ran out of town by an uber-Christianist our-pointy-white-hoods-are-still-being-ordered school district and community who had harrassed the familly due to their faith.  So, here's a follow-up so far:

From the following article in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel:
( A new case of religiously motivated child abuse--warning, potentially triggering to walkaways )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY jamie_miller)

DeLay says he sees war on Christianity in U.S.

American society looks down on Christianity, U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay asserted Tuesday at a conference of religious conservatives, but God and Jesus Christ have chosen Christians to stand up for faith.

... The Sugar Land Republican said some commentators — the "chattering classes" — will argue that there is no war on Christianity in this country.

"But in a sense, there always has been and always will be," he said. "Our faith has always been in direct conflict with the values of the world. We are, after all, a society that provides abortion on demand, has killed millions of innocent children, degrades the institution of marriage and all but treats Christianity like some second-rate superstition."

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY millyfan)

http://millyfan.livejournal.com/156371.html#cutid1

I really don't understand how they can claim to be victims of a war or persecution. Honestly, I wish I could bring people from Darfur, from China, from Iraq to this conference, march them all in front of the rich, comfortable, well-fed, only in danger from their own fevered minds patriarch-wannabes, then announce to these wingnuts that THIS is what real victims of war, persecution, and marginalization look like, and until they sell all their goods to help these people, to kindly shut up about being "victims."

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY kalibex)

"Redemption Among the Faithful"

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY theonides)

from the Washington Post this morning: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/28/AR2006032801632.html

( War on Christians is alleged at 'conference'. See below cut for complete article. )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY jehovahsfitness)

Yeah, because having all three branches of government filled almost entirely by Christians isn't enough.
That statement from the Daily Kos article on Mike Huckabee in response to his claim that that Christianity is not represented "nearly enough" in Washington makes me wonder who in the three branches isn't Christian. I know Paul Wolfowitz, Rep. Bernie Sanders, and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are of Jewish background. I guess you could count the Catholics too, if you wanted, because everyone knows they're not real Christians. Actually, because of the popularity that kind of rhetoric, I was really surprised that the Protestant Harriet Miers was opposed by the Right while the Catholic Roberts and Alito had smooth sailing. Anyway, I'm off on a tangent. Any other non-Christians in the Executive or Legislative branches that come to mind?

Addendum: This site may come in handy, if you're interested enough, or in the future for research on the wiki.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY jmthane)

I'm still finding things to add to the Illinois section of "Bad Laws" on the Wiki, and I came across one that made me think. The religious type of jobs would like to be excluded from having to hire someone that doesn't follow their faith or belief systems - there's a bill pending that would make that so in Illinois.

I don't have a problem with that, really. If, say, a Baptist church doesn't want to hire a secretary that's a Pagan - I don't mind. (I also don't know how many Pagans want to work for a Baptist church, but that's beside the point.)

But I think there ought to be some equinamity to that. If you are applying for a public service position and your religion makes it impossible for you to perform that position as required in the job description, then you should not be hired for that job. Kinda like a conscientious objector in the Army. Or thought of in another way, if you're religion means you are anti-abortion, you can't become a pharmacist, because your religion is going to interfere with the full and complete performance of your job.

This would, of course, have the hypocritical fundies screaming "DISCRIMINATION"!!!"

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY kalibex)

The War on Christians and the values voter in 2006
March 27 -28, at the Omni Shoreham Hotel, Washington, DC

Confirmed Speakers Include:

Senator Sam Brownback
Senator John Cornyn
Congressman Tom DeLay
Congressman Todd Akin
Congressman Louis Gohmert

Rick Scarborough
Phyllis Schlafly
Alan Keyes
Gary Bauer
Janet Parshall

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY kalibex)

Christian Defense Coalition Disappointed and Troubled that President Bush has not Publicly Responded to Alabama Church Burnings

Why does the word 'useful as Kristalnacht' keep appearing in my head? Oh yes...that would be my extreme Cynicism...

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

ginmar found this hilarious blog and post. It's worth a laugh!

Spot the persecution

Many Christians are complaining about being persecuted for their religious beliefs. Are you? Take this handy quiz to find out.

For each of the following, select the answer that is NOT an example of religious persecution.

1. Because of our religious beliefs or identity, we have been
a) sent to the gas chambers
b) nailed to a cross
c) stoned to death
d) voted into office

2. When others found out about our religious persuasion, they
a) threw us in jail
b) threw us to the lions
c) threw us into slavery
d) threw us a nice tax break

3. In order to worship freely, have been forced to
a) leave our homeland
b) fight long, bloody wars
c) spend centuries crusading for our rights
d) find a parking spot

4. To inflict pain on us, our enemies have
a) burned us at the stake
b) stretched us on the rack
c) dunked us underwater
d) criticized us in an op-ed

5. When we have tried to pray, we have
a) had our tongues cut out
b) had our hands cut off
c) had our kneecaps broken
d) been asked to do so quietly so as not to disrupt class

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY kalibex)

Fascinating discussion over on D.U.:

The question seems to be: ought a gov't to protect members of a specific religious belief from challenges to their belief system by allowing them to 'opt out' of any secular public school teachings that pose such a challenge? The cutting af fine hairs and sematics aside, evolution theory, as the main example, is and will remain such a challenge to dominionists (among others).

The original poster seems to think that throwing the Bible Literalists a bone thus would weaken what he sees as their dominionist, defensive 'we must take over in order to safeguard our own community' ardor. (I suspect some on this list would rather cynically, and vigorously, disagree).

But, I still wonder....would allowing such 'opting out' be a dangerous step upon the slippery slope....or would it remove a large part of the dominionists' 'we're being coerced' ammunition, allow them to feel they've 'won' enough to back off from empire-building?

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY gairid)

Nicked from meta_quotes because I thought it deserved airtime over here.


Original post here: http://www.livejournal.com/users/dimethirwen/302503.html?view=1432743#t1432743



I live in a country where I am completely free to choose my faith. I can go to church, not go to church, pick my denomination, freely express my religious convictions and beliefs, become a religious leader, officially declare myself a Christian, and not worry about officials of the state bursting through my door and putting a bullet through my head while I pray on my knees.
Christians are not persecuted in the United States. Period.
...

To say that there is a war against Christianity in the United States is not only wrong, it's insulting. It's insulting to people who fight every day to stay alive and maintain their faith, and it's an insult to those who have died for their beliefs. "Oh no, some people have said they don't like Christianity in a public forum?" How about "Oh no, Christian believers were tortured and executed in China last week?"
Honestly, people. The next time you're at church, sit and listen. Hear that? That silence? It's the sound of people not coming to decapitate you because of what you believe.

I thought it could not have been put much better.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY kalibex)

"Damn. Christians rule this fucking place. And yet Right Wing Chrisitans still feel persecuted like they are some small little religion that is being beat up by us big bad secularists..."
-'Delaware Dem' (@ Daily Kos)

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY squidflakes)



Apparently there is some vast coinspiracy to oppress and persucute Christians all across America. That would definately explain all the churches that have been raided by the police, all the anti-Christian laws that have been passed lately, and the President himself getting on TV and proclaiming that Christians are somehow less than people.. under men is specifically what he said.

Oh, wait, I'm sorry, none of that is happening. Christian Underground, however, seems to be living in some strange alternate timeline where their religion is under attack.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY gleef)

Fran Quigley, executive director of the Indiana Civil Liberties Union, writes about how the Dominionist's unfounded allegations about the ACLU's alleged role in the alleged War on Christmas have led to a flood of angry phone calls, letters and emails against the ACLU (and presumably the state CLUs as well).

How the ACLU Didn't Steal Christmas

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY cheap_laugh)

Tackling the Myth of Christian Persecution

the gist of this highly illuminating post, is that the "persecuted christian" is not aware of American History, suchas the Treaty of Tripoli, where is stated:
"As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." This treaty was ratified by the US Congress when John Adams served as President.

I highly recommend this diary to all.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY kalibex)

Alliance Defense Fund 'advocacy group' follows usual tactics; cries 'repression' due to balking of Air Force Academy dominionists

(& no; that wasn't the headline - though should have been)

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

Chuck Currie offers an overview of last week's "Justice Sunday II":

Justice Sunday II Speakers Unleash Radical Rhetoric In Support Of John Roberts And In Opposition To Basic Civil Rights; Mainline Religious Leaders Reject Message

Justice Sunday II was held today in Nashville with charges shouted about that the federal courts represented a threat against the American people with so-called liberal activist judges working to tear apart the basic fabric of our society. The event was organized by leading religious right groups critical of federal courts.

Speaker after speaker told the audience in Nashville (and on television, radio and the web) that enemies of Christianity are at work in America to oppose religious values.

Viewers were asked to contact their senators urging support for President Bush’s nomination to the Supreme Court of John Roberts. (Related Post: More Background On John Roberts )

Tony Perkins, the religious-right activist who heads the Family Research Council - and who in his own political activities maintained ties with David Duke and other white supremacists - claimed that the courts had found “a right to kill unborn children and a right to homosexual sodomy,” but at the same time had limited religious rights and even “taken away the right for children to pray.”

The vision that Perkins articulated is far from the Kingdom of God. Perkins and his allies preach hate and fear when the Gospel calls for love and justice. He doesn't even bother with the truth. Children have not been told they can't pray in America. In fact, I led children in prayer just this morning and no government agent came to stop me.