Theocrats for Christ
Sep. 29th, 2005 12:37 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
litharrielTheocrats for Christ
Agnosticism/Atheism Blog
From Austin Cline,
Your Guide to Agnosticism / Atheism.
Stay up to date!
September 11, 2005
Theocrats for Christ
Some people object to using the word "theocrat" to describe members of the Christian Right and "theocracy" to describe the sort of society they seek. More and more of them, though, are becoming open and honest about the fact that this is exactly what they want: an America which is run according to their interpretation of what their god wants.
Stephanie Simon writes:
Through seminars taught by conservative college professors and devout members of Congress, the students learn that serving country means first and always serving Christ.
They learn to view every vote as a religious duty, and to consider compromise a sin.
That puts them at the vanguard of a bold effort by evangelical conservatives to mold a new generation of leaders who will answer not to voters, but to God.
“We help them understand God’s purpose for society,” said Bouma, who coordinates the program, known as the Statesmanship Institute, for the Rev. D. James Kennedy. [Los Angeles Times]
Read the emphasized passages again: a particular position on any vote is a religious duty, not a civic issue. Compromising is a sin (presumably because, with one particular position being a religious duty, it is thought that God demands a particular position and compromising means going against the will of God). Political leaders do not serve the people, they serve God.
If they don’t serve the people, what would be the point in seeking their votes? What would be the point in even allowing them to vote and, thus, giving them the opportunity to vote incorrectly? Wouldn’t it be a religious duty to ensure that the only ones in charge are always those who serve God, rather than the people?
The seminars proved a revelation. In one, [Myal] Greene [deputy press secretary for a Republican congressman from Florida] learned that ministers ran many of America’s earliest schools. He hadn’t thought much about education policy before that class. Now he plans to fight for history lessons on the Founding Fathers’ faith, science lessons drawn from the Book of Genesis and public school prayer.
And what about non-Christians? What about Christians who don’t agree with Greene’s interpretations? They don’t matter. For Greene, this is now a religious duty and compromise would be a sin. Greene serves God, not the voters in Florida. He will fight for legislation that he believes God wants, not what the voters want.
Now the director of the Eagle Forum, a conservative lobbying group founded by Phyllis Schlafly, [Jessica] Echard says Jesus would approve of a call for lower taxes: “God calls on us to be stewards of our [own] money.”
She dips into the Bible to explain her opposition to most global treaties, reasoning that Americans have a holy obligation to protect their God-given freedom by avoiding foreign entanglements.
“The Scripture talks of taking every thought and making it captive to Christ, and that’s what the Statesmanship Institute helps us do,” Echard said. [...]
Hannah Woody, for instance, came away from the institute’s seminars confident that abolishing the Department of Education is not just a Republican goal, but also a Christian imperative. The Bible gives parents — not some distant bureaucracy — the primary responsibility for raising children, said Woody...
Jessica Echard has absolutely no idea what Jesus would have thought about most modern political institutions. When Jesus spoke about taxes, he advised paying them — he said nothing about what the proper amount should be (and evidence indicates that taxes at the time were pretty crushing, so if he objected to high taxes, he managed to hide it). Jesus said nothing about global treaties and he certainly never mentioned America as a land with a “holy obligation” to do anything at all, much less an obligation to avoid treaties.
What people like Echard are doing is making their thoughts captive to a uniquely American view of Christianity. Other Christians around the world do not share these views, and perhaps that’s one reason why people like Echard don’t want to be “yoked” with them: they don’t want to be reminded too much that there are other, equally valid Christian positions on social issues.
Agnosticism/Atheism Blog
From Austin Cline,
Your Guide to Agnosticism / Atheism.
Stay up to date!
September 11, 2005
Theocrats for Christ
Some people object to using the word "theocrat" to describe members of the Christian Right and "theocracy" to describe the sort of society they seek. More and more of them, though, are becoming open and honest about the fact that this is exactly what they want: an America which is run according to their interpretation of what their god wants.
Stephanie Simon writes:
Through seminars taught by conservative college professors and devout members of Congress, the students learn that serving country means first and always serving Christ.
They learn to view every vote as a religious duty, and to consider compromise a sin.
That puts them at the vanguard of a bold effort by evangelical conservatives to mold a new generation of leaders who will answer not to voters, but to God.
“We help them understand God’s purpose for society,” said Bouma, who coordinates the program, known as the Statesmanship Institute, for the Rev. D. James Kennedy. [Los Angeles Times]
Read the emphasized passages again: a particular position on any vote is a religious duty, not a civic issue. Compromising is a sin (presumably because, with one particular position being a religious duty, it is thought that God demands a particular position and compromising means going against the will of God). Political leaders do not serve the people, they serve God.
If they don’t serve the people, what would be the point in seeking their votes? What would be the point in even allowing them to vote and, thus, giving them the opportunity to vote incorrectly? Wouldn’t it be a religious duty to ensure that the only ones in charge are always those who serve God, rather than the people?
The seminars proved a revelation. In one, [Myal] Greene [deputy press secretary for a Republican congressman from Florida] learned that ministers ran many of America’s earliest schools. He hadn’t thought much about education policy before that class. Now he plans to fight for history lessons on the Founding Fathers’ faith, science lessons drawn from the Book of Genesis and public school prayer.
And what about non-Christians? What about Christians who don’t agree with Greene’s interpretations? They don’t matter. For Greene, this is now a religious duty and compromise would be a sin. Greene serves God, not the voters in Florida. He will fight for legislation that he believes God wants, not what the voters want.
Now the director of the Eagle Forum, a conservative lobbying group founded by Phyllis Schlafly, [Jessica] Echard says Jesus would approve of a call for lower taxes: “God calls on us to be stewards of our [own] money.”
She dips into the Bible to explain her opposition to most global treaties, reasoning that Americans have a holy obligation to protect their God-given freedom by avoiding foreign entanglements.
“The Scripture talks of taking every thought and making it captive to Christ, and that’s what the Statesmanship Institute helps us do,” Echard said. [...]
Hannah Woody, for instance, came away from the institute’s seminars confident that abolishing the Department of Education is not just a Republican goal, but also a Christian imperative. The Bible gives parents — not some distant bureaucracy — the primary responsibility for raising children, said Woody...
Jessica Echard has absolutely no idea what Jesus would have thought about most modern political institutions. When Jesus spoke about taxes, he advised paying them — he said nothing about what the proper amount should be (and evidence indicates that taxes at the time were pretty crushing, so if he objected to high taxes, he managed to hide it). Jesus said nothing about global treaties and he certainly never mentioned America as a land with a “holy obligation” to do anything at all, much less an obligation to avoid treaties.
What people like Echard are doing is making their thoughts captive to a uniquely American view of Christianity. Other Christians around the world do not share these views, and perhaps that’s one reason why people like Echard don’t want to be “yoked” with them: they don’t want to be reminded too much that there are other, equally valid Christian positions on social issues.
