LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY catvincent)

Orcinus made this post yesterday (it was International Coming Out Day):

' The religious right has always liked to pretend that its opposition to the "homosexual agenda" is purely a Biblical-law thing that isn't innately hateful -- remember "Hate the sin, love the sinner"? And their opposition to bias-crime laws really isn't about coddling people who commit violence, it's just about their free-speech rights -- even though the laws specifically are only about stiffening the sentences for acts that are already crimes.

Well, the facade is finally starting to crumble. The latest permutation in the religious right's anti-gay crusade appears ripe to take a decidedly violent turn.

Casey Sanchez at the SPLC has disturbing report about the coalition building between West Coast fundamentalist churches -- particularly here in the Northwest -- and a Latvian-based group of far-right fundamentalists who explicitly encourage, and in fact help manifest, violent gay-bashing thuggery.

One of the leaders in this growing coalition is a Seattle-area pastor, Rev. Ken Hutcherson, who has been involved in opposing civil rights for gays for some time. No doubt thanks to him, we in fact will be hosting a gathering of these thugs in Christian clothing next week just up the road from my home. '

The specific Latvian group is 'Watchmen on the Walls'. Their 'spiritual' father seems to be inspired by R.J. Rushdoony.

Clearly, international ties between magachurches are leading not only to a wider reach, but also importing/reviving the less subtle methods many Dominionists try to obscure. Note that they have delcared war not only against gay men and women, but 'homosexualists' - anyone who supports equality or consideration of LGBT people.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY thegrungediva) Ok, so here's where I'd like to talk to an actual dominionist, and have them explain this to me.

Point the first.  According to dominionists, liberals are bad.  Furthermore, they define a liberal as: “a person who believes a government should have more control over people's lives....” [“Rethinking Schools Online”, as quoted by dogemporer in his excellent analysis of the A Beka curriculum.]  We can dispute the accuracy of that definition, but this is what dominionists think.  They believe that government should have less control over people's lives. Nevermind that this begs the question, “more or less control than what?”  It is clear that dominionists feel that liberals want more government, and that we should instead have less government.

Point the second.  Dominionists advocate theocracy.  They think God should be in charge of all decisions.  Once again, this may seem a bit of a “duh,” but it needs to be said: dominionists, obviously, think God should have EVERYTHING to do with their lives, right?  I mean, pardon the crassness, but they would say they don't eat, drink, or shit without it being the will of God, wouldn't they?  Or at least, that would be the goal to which they aspire, would it not?  I think they'd agree it would.  This God should not only rule THEIR lives, but, according to dominionist beliefs, should rule EVERYONE'S lives.  Thus, theocracy.

Hello?  Is this not contradictory?

If all governments are ordained by God (as they believe), wouldn't it stand to reason, even their screwed up reason, that these God-ordained governments SHOULD have more to do with our lives?  Isn't that the reason they're trying to pass legislation enforcing their views on us?

And, if they don't think government should have anything to do with us, then why are they trying to pass legislation to make the government force us to live certain ways?

This is utter madness.  Can we not do something about these nuts?