| Site links |
The Religious Right in the United States - by Wicasta Lovelace |
|
Where religious power comes from The celibacy of priests and nuns Atheist parent - church school Tricks of the
trade E-mail think@writeme.com
"There are 15,700 school districts in America. When we get an active Christian parents' committee in operation in all districts, we can take complete control of all local school boards. This would allow us to determine all local policy; select good textbooks; good curriculum programs; superintendents and principals. Our time has come!" Robert Simonds, Citizens for Excellence in Education, undated fundraising letter, circa 1984
"What Christians have got to do is take back this country, one precinct at a time, one neighborhood at a time and one state at a time. I honestly believe that in my lifetime we will see a country once again governed by Christians... and Christian values." Ralph Reed, Christian Coalition, Religious News Service, 5/15/90
"In no uncertain terms the [Supreme] Court must hear the words which express the pent up sentiments of Americans throughout this wonderful country....TEAR DOWN THIS WALL!" Keith A. Fournier, executive director, American Center for Law and Justice, Law & Justice, Winter 1992, addressing the idea of the separation of Church and State
"The strategy against the American radical left should be the same as General Douglas MacArthur employed against the Japanese in the Pacific... bypass their strongholds, then surround them, isolate them, bombard them, then blast the individuals out of their power bunkers with hand-to-hand combat. The battle for Iwo Jima was not pleasant, but our troops won it. The battle to regain the soul of America won't be pleasant either, but we will win it!" Pat Robertson, Pat Robertson's Perspectives, April/May, 1992
"Our culture is not equal to other culture; it is superior because the root of our culture is Christianity, Catholicism, the truth that makes men free." Pat Buchanan, annual Presidential candidate, speech to New Jersey Catholic Action Summit, [date], 1993
"Those who control the access to the minds of children will set the agenda for the future of the nation and the future of the western world." James Dobson, Focus on the Family, 5/23/93
"The Christian community has a golden opportunity to train an army of dedicated teachers who can invade the public school classrooms and use them to influence the nation for Christ." D. James Kennedy, "Education: Public Problems and Private Solutions," Coral Ridge Ministries, 1993
"The liberals talk incessantly about the separation of church and state even though it is not even in the Constitution... The First Amendment...certainly does not say anything about separation of church and state." Jesse Helms, Senator, U.S. Senate floor address, 10/5/94
"God showed me... that he was going to bless the Christian Coalition beyond our wildest expectations. Before the year 2000, the Christian Coalition will be the most powerful organization in America... We'll be back in 1995... We'll be back until we win it all." Pat Robertson
These are the sorts of people The Watch keeps a look out for. Somebody's got to do it! “Aside from a few media outcasts, if the media professionals you presently encounter are not physically in bed with homosexuals, baby-butcherers, and other varieties of legally sanctioned perverted pagan idolators, they are spiritually, morally and philosophically in bed with them.” A
quote from The Christian Gallery The Watch notes: A gem of a site. Christian paranoia to the 10th power. Has a newsletter with titles like “Faggots Defined.”
"A major function of fundamentalist religion is to bolster deeply insecure and fearful people. This is done by justifying a way of life with all of its defining prejudices. It thereby provides an appropriate and legitimate outlet for one's anger. The authority of an inerrant Bible that can be readily quoted to buttress this point of view becomes an essential ingredient to such a life. When that Bible is challenged, or relativized, the resulting anger proves the point categorically." Bishop John Shelby Spong, Rescuing the Bible From Fundamentalism, (San Fransisco: Harper Collins, 1991), p. 5.
"It is true, of course, that the phrase 'separation of church and state' does not appear in the Constitution. But it was inevitable that some convenient term should come into existence to verbalize a principle so clearly and widely held by the American people.... [T]he right to a fair trial is generally accepted to be a constitutional principle; yet the term "fair trial" is not found in the Constitution. To bring the point even closer home, who would deny that "religious liberty" is a constitutional principle? Yet that phrase too is not in the Constitution. The universal acceptance which all these terms, including "separation of church and state," have received in America would seem to confirm rather than disparage their reality as basic American democratic principles." Leo Pfeffer, Church, State, and Freedom (Beacon Press: Boston, 1967).
"The next time believers tell you that 'separation of church and state' does not appear in our founding document, tell them to stop using the word 'trinity.' The word 'trinity' appears nowhere in the bible. Neither does Rapture, or Second Coming, or Original Sin. If they are still unfazed (or unphrased), by this, then add Omniscience, Omnipresence, Supernatural,Transcendence, Afterlife, Deity, Divinity, Theology, Monotheism, Missionary, Immaculate Conception, Christmas, Christianity, Evangelical, Fundamentalist, Methodist, Catholic, Pope, Cardinal, Catechism, Purgatory, Penance, Transubstantiation, Excommunication, Dogma, Chastity, Unpardonable Sin, Infallibility, Inerrancy, Incarnation, Epiphany, Sermon, Eucharist, the Lord's Prayer, Good Friday, Doubting Thomas, Advent, Sunday School, Dead Sea, Golden Rule, Moral, Morality, Ethics, Patriotism, Education, Atheism, Apostasy, Conservative (Liberal is in), Capital Punishment, Monogamy, Abortion, Pornography, Homosexual, Lesbian, Fairness, Logic, Republic, Democracy, Capitalism, Funeral, Decalogue, or Bible." Dan Barker, Losing Faith in Faith: From Preacher to Atheist (Madison, WI: FFRF, 1992).
|
In the United States, there exists a highly vocal minority of people who are generally referred to as the "Religious Right." The "religious" part of their monicker refers to the fact that these people are, almost without exception, Christian. The "right" part is taken from "right-wing," and refers to their extreme conservatism and political leanings. Together, their title sums them up pretty well. They have a political agenda which is driven by a religious zeal. The combination is what makes them dangerous. Their intention is to instill, by legislation, their moral and religious belief into every other American. They are driven by a firm belief that they are engaging in a Holy War for the soul of the United States. They believe they are doing so in the name of God. As of the writing of this article, God could not be reached for comment. Many in the United States fail to see the danger of the Religious Right. The majority of Americans prefer to believe that "it can't happen here." After all, this is the United States of America, the free-est country in the world. Right? Right! Part of this misunderstanding and apathy comes from the general perception that the Religious Right are just another bunch of religious fanatics. They will go away. There have been other "preachers" who have come and gone. None of them got anywhere. Right? Right!
The Religious Right has a long history in the United States. Some believe that their religious zeal can be traced all the way back to the Pilgrims and Puritans who left England in the 1500's to settle the New World. These people had left England in order to establish their own theocratic paradises, free from the interference of the English Church. While these people were not a dominant power by 1776, when the U.S. Constitution was ratified, their long-standing influence was hard to deny. Some have even suggested that the strict separation between Church and State which was established by the Founding Fathers was put into place to guard against just such religious fanatacism becoming a dominant political force. Of course, others disagree. "The
separation of church and state is (1) Not a teaching of the founding
fathers; (2) Not an historical teaching; (3) Not a teaching of law (except
in recent years) (4) Not a biblical teaching. In summary, there should
be absolutely no 'separation of church and state' in America."
But before I get into the historical background of the Religious Right, I want to mention, for reference, some of the activities and agendas which make these people so dangerous. Why is it that the Religious Right should be feared? What can they really do? In January, 1999, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was granted a preliminary injunction against the "Child Online Protection Act," which was originally to go into effect on November 29, 1998. This law, passed quietly by Congress the previous October, made it a federal crime for commercial websites to communicate material considered "harmful to minors." Penalties included criminal and civil fines of up to $150,000 for each day of violation and up to six months in prison if convicted. This law, sponsored by politicians friendly to the Religious Right, and whole-heartedly supported by Religious Right groups, consisted of extremely vague language. It would have essentially made it possible for anyone bearing on their web pages any artwork or graphics consisting of nudity (even classical artwork) to be penalized as a pornographer. Webmasters could be held accountable for not protecting children from such twisted minds as Michaelangelo, Rodin, and Rembrandt. The law got as far as it did because it hid behind a favorite tactic of the Religious Right. Essentially, in order to protect the children, one must be willing to give up certain freedoms. The Religious Right are quick to present "protecting children" as the vindication of any political agenda. The Child Online Protection Act, however, was hardly the first assault on the Internet and public morality. It was popularly referred to as CDA II, meaning that it was, essentially, a reintroduction (with new wording) of a former proposed bill, the Communications Decency Act (which had been struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court a few years earlier). Another version of these plans was also introduced as the Childrens' Internet Protection Act. This re-dressing of the same agenda is a popular tactic of the Religious Right. They have done the same thing with other legislation. Most notably the failed Religious Freedom Amendment (a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which would have made it possible to reintroduce Christian prayer into public schools), which has been introduced in various guises. In practice, the idea is to re-submit the same legislation over and over again, in the belief that, eventually, it will be passed (because the "liberal" media can't be watching all the time). For instance, as anti-theocracy groups were celebrating the defeat of the Religious Freedom Amendment, it was already being repackaged. It has since been reintroduced as the Religious Liberty Protection Act, and the Workplace Religious Freedom Act. These bills claim to seek protection for people of faith against religious persecution. When you look closely at the sponsors and supporters of the legislation, you quickly realize that "people of faith" should probably read "Christians." In other words, Christians should be protected from religious persecution. The rest of us don't really enter into it. The Religious Right speak quite often of religious oppression against Christians in India, and yet next to nothing has been said about the wholesale slaughter of Muslims in Serbia and Kosovo. Violence against Christians in India is proof that the Religious Liberty Protection Act is necessary, and yet the plight of Kosovite Muslims is never mentioned. Why is that? Perhaps Pat Robertson sums it up best. "When
I said during my presidential bid that I would only bring Christians
and Jews into the government, I hit a firestorm. 'What do you mean?'
the media challenged me. 'You're not going to bring atheists into the
government? How dare you maintain that those who believe the Judeo-Christian
values are better qualified to govern America than Hindus and Muslims?'
My simple answer is, 'Yes, they are.' "What
you've got to recognize is [New Age] is Hinduism in another guise, and
what is Hinduism but devil worship, ultimately?" When Gary Bauer of the Family Research Council took a leave of absence from his duties as president of that organization in order to run for President of the United States in the 2000 election, he unwittingly confirmed what many people had tried to deny: The Religious Right movement in America has established itself as a potent political force, and can make a difference. Bauer's candidacy also underscores the frightening influence of the Religious Right on the Republican Party platform. Here is a man who has never held a public office, and yet is seeking the most powerful political office in the United States. What could possibly make Gary Bauer believe he had a chance? There are several possible answers to that question. Perhaps the most logical is, quite simply, that there are historical precedents. In 1988, Pat Robertson, owner and CEO of the Christian Broadcasting Network, founder of the Christian Coalition and the American Center for Law & Justice, host of the popular 700 Club television program (we won't mention his diamond mines or his satellite), also declared himself a candidate for President of the United States. While his bid failed, he was credited with proving that the Religious Right could muster considerable political power. He then converted the support base he had built with his Presidential campaign into the Christian Coalition, which was founded in 1989. It was later joined by the American Center for Law & Justice (Robertson's answer to the ACLU), the Christian Coalition's legal arm. In 1980, Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority were credited with much of the support enjoyed by Ronald Reagan. Falwell has since intimated that, without his help and those of other Christians, the "great man" might never have been elected. Ronald Reagan had been in bed with the Religious Right since his days as governor of Califorinia. His election is largely considered, among conservative circles, as the first proof of the power of the Religious Right. It goes back much farther than that, however. In 1919, Christian Evangelical, Fundamentalist, and Pentecostal leaders banded together, and, with the support of their congregations, and riding upon anti-alien and anti-Roman Catholic sentiment, pursuaded the Federal government to ratify the Eighteenth Amendment to the U.S Constitution. This was more popularly known as the Prohibition Amendment, and made illegal the manufacture or sale of alcohol. The enactment and enforcement of Prohibition laws came about because of political pressure from Christian churches and organizations, although these organizations were nowhere nearly as well-structured as the Religious Right groups to come later in the century. The Prohibition Amendment was not repealed until late 1933. The communist scare of the post-Word War II America, in the 1940's, and the McCarthy hearings in the 1950's (which intended to ferret out communist sympathizers), also had a strong religious backing. It's no coincidence that the term "Godless Communist" arose at this time. In some circles, if you were not Christian, you were automatically suspected of communist sympathies. The majority of those accused of communist activities were Jews and atheists. The most powerful politically active religious group in the 1970's was the Moral Majority, founded by Reverend Jerry Falwell. The Moral Majority was founded in answer to the "debauchery" of the 60's and the decadent culture of 1970s America. It is largely regarded as the predecessor of the Christian Coalition, and was very politically active. Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority received credit from networks and newspapers for being instrumental in helping Ronald Reagan win the White House, and in defeating five liberal Democratic senators. As writer Cal Thomas, a former intimate of Jerry Falwell's, has recently been quoted as saying, on the morning after the election a rally was held at Falwell's Liberty Baptist College to celebrate Reagan's vistory (which has been heavily supported by the Moral Majority and the burdgeoning Religious Right). "The college band struck up 'Hail to the Chief.' Someone might have thought that Jerry Falwell had just been elected president, not Ronald Reagan."
The Moral Majority's influence began to decline in the 1980's, however. It was overshadowed by the growing influence of more radical groups such as Focus on the Family, the American Family Association, Eagle Forum, and the Family Research Council. All extremely political in focus. And when the Moral Majority was finally disbanded in the late 80's, it was replaced by the Christian Coalition and Pat Robertson. Together, these groups have worked steadily to influence political thought, and have worked hard to establish themselves as a dominant factor in the Republican Party. Their influence within the Republican party is so profound today that when James Dobson of Focus on the Family threatened to pull his organization's estimated 20 million members' support from the Republican Party, Republicans quickly capitulated. What followed was the introduction of numerous bills and legislation aimed at curbing religious freedoms, denying equal rights to gays and lesbians, barring legislation against hate-crimes, re-inserting Christian prayer in public schools, and countless others. It is these groups who have tabled the slew of pro-Christian bills and proposed Constitutional amendments.
But perhaps the most chilling example of the influence of the Religious Right is the recent Impeachment of President Bill Clinton. The allegations and evidence which started it all were brought to the attention of Independent Counsel Ken Starr by the Rutherford Institute and its president, John Whitehead. The Rutherford Institute is a Religious Right group which serves as legal counsel to Christians embroiled in litigation. They are also well known for championing religious rights causes, in which Christians have been discriminated against. Mr. Whitehead's political aspirations are not known, but at the time of submitting the evidence to Mr. Starr, the Rutherford Institute was serving as counsel to Paula Jones in her sexual harassment lawsuit against President Clinton. Many find Whitehead's sudden submission of evidence to the Starr investigation to be highly suspect. It is widely believed that the force which kept the investigation of President Clinton going, and led to the impeachment process, was the power of the Religious Right, who exerted their influence over the Republican Party. They kept the investigation going in spite of the overwhelming belief of the American people that President Clinton had done nothing illegal. And in spite of the fact that the evidence that he had done so was circumstantial, at best. On the political front, the damage the Religious Right could have done has thus far been limited by the tireless activity of groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union, People for the American Way, and the Interfaith Alliance. Thus far the Supreme Court has overturned most of the Religious Right-inspired legislation which has been forced through a Republican controlled House of Representatives. That could easily change if a Republican President is seated in 2000. Again, Pat Robertson summed up the danger best in a 1992 statement: "We can see the day that children are allowed to pray in schools again, the Bible is once again honored as the basis for morality and law, secular humanism no longer reigns supreme in our public institutions, and hostility toward religion in the public arena is eliminated. With a conservative Supreme Court in place, we can change the laws significantly in the next few years." The activities of the Religious Right have not waned since then. Indeed, they are more active than ever. In recent months their rhetoric has been toned down somewhat. Especially since Paul Wyrich, an influential member of the Moral Majority was recently quoted as saying that he believes the Religious Right's agenda has been a failure, and that Christians should stop trying to influence the country by political means. A lot of people have taken this, and the ensuing restraint, as proof that the Religious Right is faltering. Personally, I believe they are simply regrouping. In the United States, the next Presidential election is in 2000. The Religious Right and the Republican Party have been firmly chastised by the American people, and are popularly viewed as intolerant, partisan, and vindictive. Now the Religious Right and the Republican Party are pursuing a kinder, gentler image. But we cannot forget what has gone before. Their beliefs and agendas have not gone away. They have simply found it more expedient to move with less raucous bluster. Ralph Reed, former president of the Christian Coalition, perhaps summed up this tactic best in a series of statements. "I want to be invisible. I do guerilla warfare. I paint my face and travel at night. You don't know it's over until you're in a body bag. You don't know until election night." "It's like guerilla warfare. If you reveal your location, all it does is allow your opponent to improve his artillery bearings. It's better to move quietly, with stealth, under cover of the night." "[Stealth is] just good strategy... You've got two choices: You can wear cammies and shimmy along on your belly, or you can put on a red coat and stand up for everyone to see. It comes down to whether you want to be the British army in the Revolutionary War or the Viet Cong. History tells us which tactic was more effective." It appears that the Religious Right has embraced this whole-heartedly. Ralph Reed himself has proven the most fervent adherent to this tactic. He has since resigned his post as president of the Christian Coalition. He now quietly serves as a political consultant, helping Religious Right candidates in their election campaigns. In closing, I can think of nothing else to say on the matter. The full record of the history and activity of the Religious Right in the United States is beyond the scope of this article. I have hoped to provide at least a glimpse into the long-standing struggle between the Religious Right and other Americans. It is a political struggle that only grows more dangerous as the Religious Right learns to manipulate not only the political process, but the popular perception of the public, as well. It is no coincidence that there are now organizations which are training college-level students in the means and tactics to be effective Christian lobbyists, lawyers, and legislators. I'm afraid the true battle is only just beginning. Suffice it to say that the Religious Right is more firmly entrenched in the American political landscape than at any other time in our history. It will get worse before it gets better. And it will only get better if Americans continue to refuse their advances. Sadly, that's a big "if." In summation, if anyone doubts their danger or agenda, I can only recommend that they read the words of the Religious Right. Though they are far quieter now than they ever have been, in the past they made no secret of their intentions. I'll let them speak for themselves, and hope that you will forgive my indulgence at quoting them here. (See left margin). Wicasta Lovelace April 15, 1999
“ We would rather die on our
feet than live on our knees.” |
Monthly
update
