The religious right presents a list of demands

The “[tag]War on Christians[/tag]” conference got underway in DC yesterday, and if there’s ever been a larger group of people with an unjustified victim’s complex, I can’t think of it. About 300 attendees were presented with “a gloomy picture of a war by ‘neo-pagans’ against ‘values voters.'”

“Let’s not say, ‘Oh, it’s not that bad,’ ” said the Rev. Tristan Emmanuel, director of the Equipping Christians for the Public Square Centre in Jordan Station, Ontario. Secularists, he added, practice “Christophobia,” which he deemed “an irrational fear of anything Christ-based.”

“When you listen to their rejection of our participation in the public square, it’s visceral,” he said.

Ron Luce, president of Teen Mania Ministries of Garden Valley, Texas, told the audience that only 4 percent of today’s “millennial” generation of teenagers are evangelical Christians able to transform the culture. “If we only have 4 percent, we all lose,” he said.

Of course, it wasn’t all just “neo-pagans” this and “Christophobia” that. The conference also marked the release of the “Values Voters’ Contract with Congress,” with a list of items the religious right groups, leaders, and activists want congressional Republicans to work on this year.

“It’s time for the values voters to tell the government what we expect of them,” said Baptist minister Rick Scarborough, who tried to create a mini-theocracy in his Texas hometown before creating Vision America, which organized this week’s “summit.” Scarborough added, “This contract tells Congress they can count on our vote if these things become front-burner issues.”

It was, in this sense, a threat as much as a demand. If congressional Republicans want far-right foot soldiers for the 2006 cycle, Scarborough argued, then the religious right expects certain wish-list items to get serious attention in Congress.

So, what’s on the list? The better question would be, “What isn’t?”

The “[tag]Values Voters’ Contract with Congress[/tag]” is billed as necessary because, as the document explains, “liberals” have “waged an insidious campaign to corrupt and destroy the moral foundations of our liberty.” The “contract” claims to have 10 items, but what it actually has is 10 headings with multiple requests each.

It’s far too long to republish, but the full list is here. It includes the religious right’s greatest hits ([tag]school prayer[/tag], ban on [tag]abortion[/tag], ban on [tag]human cloning[/tag] and embryo research, [tag]gay marriage[/tag] amendment to the Constitution), several items that are already legally protected (“[tag]under God[/tag]” in the Pledge, the right of churches to speak out on moral issues), and a few items that don’t seem to have any connection to a religious agenda at all (tax cuts, increased border security, restrictions on eminent domain).

Remember, before you laugh these folks off as fringe activists that no credible person should take seriously, take a look at the conference’s guest list, which includes three leading House Republicans (Tom DeLay, Todd Akin, and Louis Gohmert) and two leading Senate Republicans (John [tag]Cornyn[/tag] and Sam [tag]Brownback[/tag]), the latter of which is considered a credible presidential candidate in 2008.

In 2006, these fringe activists are taken seriously by the Republican establishment. It speaks volumes about the current state of the party.

Soon they are going to be trotting out the Nero comparisons…….

  • I’ve been on Scarborough’s listserv for a while– he’s the wingnuttiest. 🙂

    Seriously, this “war on Christians” silliness is not only an insult to people who actually *are* persecuted for their religion but it’s textbook persecution complex with a little Armageddon-fueled theocratic fantasy tossed in for good measure.

    I love these people as much as I loathe them. (I suppose that is why I was a professional right-wing researcher for 6 years.) Frankly it makes me happy to see people like DeLay, Cornyn and Brownback hang with these freaks– I prefer it when they’re out in the open about their nuttiness.

  • If these people really believed in their Bible, they wouldn’t spread such hate and ignorance. I think Jesus Christ was against that kind of shit.

  • Wow, a Neo-Pagan. Now that’s got a nice ring to it. Being an athiest just sounds so apathetic. And it’s a drag to belong to such a despised minority. But a Neo-Pagan! It’s old. It’s new. Traditional. Cutting edge. Encompassing all and committing to nothing. And ChristCo hates it. It’s perfect.

    No more Athieism for me. I’m going to be a Neo-Pagan.

    Let us play.

  • Well, you Neo-pagans go have fun. For myself, I’ll just be horrified by the Theocratic Reactionaries trying to recreate a Christian-America that never existed and really shouldn’t anyway.

  • The repubs do listen to these people, they just know they better not try to enact any of the laws. The sane voters would throw them out. They just pretend to care and then say, “Well, I tried to help, but ‘they’ wouldn’t let me”.

  • this is good stuff.

    Note to Values Voters – in the words of Our Leader – you are either with us or you are against us.

    Let’s see how many Rs endorse this Contract and how many Rs abandon the Values Voters. Let’s make the list public.

    This is a win-win.

  • Agree with the above.

    Call me a neo-pagan too…

    And I want to thank the values voters’s choice (Dick Cheney) for giving me a catchy curse phrase.

    Now… whenever something breaks or goes caddywampus I find myself uttering: “Go fuck yourself Cheney.”

    It’s a wonderful phrase.
    Give it a go.
    It’s rich.
    It’s satisfying.
    And you will find it working its way into your vernacular in no time.
    It’s far more earthy than darn, drat, dang-it, or damn.

    And of course… it has the value voters’s Vice President’s seal of approval.

  • I’ve always wanted to insist that the Washington Times/Revenend Moon (the Messiah) religious conservatives

    be forced to face off with the

    Pat Robertson/James Dobson religious conservatives

    and settle who has got it right before they be allowed to bother the rest of the United States.

    Right now they are just playing an indirect game of trying to show who can destroy liberty in American sooner. Winner gets the home field advantage in the final showdown. Sort of like the Sunni and Shia posturing to see who will get credit for destroying Isreal (not going to happen) or driving the U.S. out of Iraq (more likely every day).

    I say let them have it out between themselves first, and bother us later.

  • Carpetbagger,

    In a post yesterday called “Note to religous right: the GOP isn’t that in to you”, you wrote about how the GOP isn’t going to cave in to the more insane elements of the theocratic movement.

    “I think Bauer is being sincere; he genuinely doesn’t understand why James Dobson’s wish list hasn’t been embraced in full by the GOP leadership as Congress’ legislative agenda. The poor guy seems to have no idea that congressional Republicans believe that giving the religious right what it wanted would be electoral suicide.”

    And later, in your post titled “Too cynical vs. not cynical enough”, you wrote this:

    “I think Rove & Co. do sit around the West Wing trying to make Dobson & Co. happy. I think innocents face execution around the world, but the administration took a special interest in this case because of the political implications. I feel pretty confident that “calculating the political costs” is central to the way the White House operates.

    The relationship between the Republican political establishment (including the White House) and the party’s religious-right base is complicated. Dobson & Co. want serious policy advancements on issues like abortion and gay rights. Rove & Co. would prefer to just string the far-right along without delivering anything in the way of major legislative victories, but throwing the movement the occasion bone (Terri Schiavo legislation, for example).”

    In these kinds of posts, you seem to be arguing that the far-right social conservatives aren’t ever going to get what they want, it’s all just window dressing to keep them happy and voting the right way.

    Today, you write a post about how big name GOP officals are attending a convention for these kind of fundamentalists, and claim it is a sad comment on the state of the party, and claim that these activist are taken seriously by the GOP establishment.

    This brings to light a contradiction in your posts that I’ve been seeing for a while now. You can’t seem to decide if:

    A) The GOP is simiply exploiting the religous right, and intends to pay no more than lip service to them in exchange for motivated foot soldiers while Big Business still rules the inner circle, or

    B) The Republicans are actually working to install a theocratic government in Washington, and will attempt to do so before the next elections.

    Am I seeing double-think where it doesn’t exsist, or is there a reason for this contradiction?

  • “When you listen to their rejection of our participation in the public square, it’s visceral,” he said.

    “Christians” don’t seem to understand the visceral reaction comes not from the fundamentalists’ participation in the public square but their attempts to take over and transform the public square. The thing I don’t understand is how these “Christians” came to believe they speak and act for a majority of Americans, much less how they came to believe they alone have God’s favor.

  • Am I seeing double-think where it doesn’t exsist, or is there a reason for this contradiction?

    Ross, you raise a good point and I appreciate the argument, but I disagree with the idea that there’s a contradiction. The religious right has presented wish-list agendas like this, and Republicans will feign interest, but there’s no follow through. The GOP assumes the far-right base has no where else to go, and they don’t want to completely horrify moderates and independents, so they just string the religious right along without delivering much.

    The point about key members of Congress appearing with far-right lunatics is about symbolism, not legislation. Scarborough is a dangerous nut. So are most of the religious right leaders who’ll appear at the conference. Leading lawmakers from a serious political party shouldn’t get within 10 feet of such lunacy. They lend Scarborough credibility through their presence that he doesn’t deserve.

    You wrote that I suggested, “The Republicans are actually working to install a theocratic government in Washington, and will attempt to do so before the next elections.” But that’s not really my argument at all and it’s a far cry from what I actually wrote. I don’t doubt that the religious right base would prefer a vaguely theocratic government, but I don’t think, and haven’t argued, that their allies in Congress will help deliver one.

  • I myself don’t see any contradiction in Carpetbagger’s posts. I think he did a good job defending his posts.

    Keep up the good work, Carpetbagger.

  • Ah, now I understand. My mistake. I think you could go further with that argument, and not only say that it is a discrace that the GOP leadership should be seen at these events, it is actually dangerous, because it gives these peope ligitimacy and makes thier ideals seem mainstream.

    For the record, I don’t think the religous right desires a vauge theocracy, I think they want an explicit one.

  • “I don’t doubt that the religious right base would prefer a vaguely theocratic government, but I don’t think, and haven’t argued, that their allies in Congress will help deliver one.”

    I agree: your posts don’t contradict one another. But then the early ’30s industrialists in Germany thought it could exploit, and maintain control over, the handful of fringe “wing-nuts” that comprised the original Nazi Party.

  • As Chancellor Palpatine said, “Those who have power do not want to lose it.”

    The GOP has power. Why the religious right thinks that it will ever be able to convince the GOP to willingly give up the tiniest share of its power to them (and thus have to live under their straitjacket) is beyond me. All the more so because the GOP knows the zealots have no where else to turn. This goes to show just how irrational these guys are–do they even realize that they are bargaining with the GOP from a position of pathetic weakness? And then they issue demands like they own the friggin joint? Losers!

    Seriously, I think all this is is just a way for the grassroots nuts to vent a little bit. Then they’ll go back to being mindless GOP drones.

  • For a refreshing change of pace, I recommend “The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster”, now available at Amazon.com. For those who have not yet been enlightened, here’s the synopsis:

    “Behold the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM), today’s fastest growing carbohydrate-based religion. According to church founder Bobby Henderson, the universe and all life within it were created by a mystical and divine being: the Flying Spaghetti Monster. What drives the FSM’s devout followers, a.k.a. Pastafarians? Some say it’s the assuring touch from the FSM’s “noodly appendage.” Then there are those who love the worship service, which is conducted in pirate talk and attended by congregants in dashing buccaneer garb. Still others are drawn to the Church’s flimsy moral standards, religious holidays every Friday, or the fact that Pastafarian heaven is way cooler: Does your heaven have a Stripper Factory and a Beer Volcano? Intelligent Design has finally met its match–and it has nothing to do with apes or the Olive Garden of Eden.”

    Ramen!!

  • Two remarks. First, reading their marriage section, it’s hard not to notice something:

    2. TO SECURE our national interest in the institutions of marriage and family, we call for the passage of –

    * A constitutional amendment to completely protect the institution of marriage; and
    * The Marriage Protection Act to prohibit activist judges from forcing states to redefine the institution of marriage (H.R. 1100).

    If they were talking about abolishing divorce…I’m not saying they are…would the words be any different?

    Second. It really pains me that the so-called ‘limited government’ activists are still spending most of their time beating up the liberals, when the allies of the government are pushing to expand government in all of these ways. Do they believe that ‘raising awareness of the pain experienced by children before birth’ is a valid role for government? Why aren’t they speaking up about it?

  • I agree with CB’s take. Without the fundies, the
    Republicans would never win an election. They
    have to string them along, and feed them bits of
    meaningless scraps here and there. They know
    they’re not going across the aisle, but they can’t
    afford to have too many sitting at home sulking
    on election day. It’s quite entertaining, actually,
    to watch the Republicans fall all over themselves
    in this macabre dance.

    We must always remember, too, what the real
    game is about. Money and power. Corporate
    executives don’t even think about the silly issues
    that dominate the fundies. As a matter of fact,
    they don’t even agree with them. I ought to know –
    I was one for a long time, albeit the resident
    liberal in the corporate executive wing of my
    company. I took some good natured ribbing –
    in those days we got along much better, before
    the neocons came along.

  • “Dobson & Co. want serious policy advancements on issues like abortion and gay rights.” – Ross Taben

    Actually, that would be abortion and gay RECRIMINILIZATION.

  • I agree that the Theocratic Reactionary fraction of the Republicanite party desires to establish a theocracy in this country.

    They are being used by the business interests that fund the Republicanite party to create electoral majorities that would not exist otherwise. For this they are thrown the occasional bone, like Terry Schivo or the Faith Based Initiative. As their leaders are almost all hypocrites sucking money out of the ‘faithful’, this bone satisfies them. Baptist minister Rick Scarborough may be a true believer, in which case I’m sure Pat Robertson will be assigned to control him. But the current situation, while displeasing to the rank and file evangelicals, is fine for their ‘leaders’.

    I suggest if you should ever encounter a true theocratic reactionary hoping to overthrow the constitutional order in this country and create a theocracy, that you point out that the largest Christian domination in America is Roman Catholic and that a major of the Supreme Court are Roman Catholics. So I think an inside coup to be endorsed by the Supreme Court probably won’t quite end up going their way, and I doubt they have the muscle to actually pull off a violent revolution.

  • Ron Luce, president of Teen Mania Ministries of Garden Valley, Texas, told the audience that only 4 percent…

    Dontcha just love made up statistics? Ron Luce is wrong 89.9% of the time. He is only partially mistaken 74% of the time. Ron Luce is speaking 100% of the time when his mouth is open and issuing sounds, except the 2.9% of the time when he is clearing his throat.

    Ron Luce’s name is recognized by .00000000000000009% of Americans, although 99.999% of those don’t care. He has 0% name recognition among the great apes, 100% of whom prefer bananas to religion.

  • How exactly have “activist judges” legislated from the bench? Borwn v. Topeka Board of Education? Miranda v. the State of Arizona? Is it just Roe v. Wade, same-sex marriage, and the whole Pledge of the Allegiance flap that bothers them?
    And, Lance, they would just declare the SC agents of the Vatican, and therefore guilty of treason.

  • “And, Lance, they would just declare the SC agents of the Vatican, and therefore guilty of treason.” – 2Manchu

    Let the declare whatever they want, they are a minority of a minority. If they weren’t needed to get the Republicanites into power, they’d be ignored just as they deserve.

    As I said above, it’s not Abortion and Gay RIGHTS that is their issue, it’s Abortion and Gay RECRIMINALIZATION. Along with the RECRIMINALIZATION of adultery and pre-martial sex.

    To defeat such an enemy, it is necessary to properly define such an enemy (this being Bush’s problem with the Global War on Terrorism).

  • These guys may be fringe, but that doesn’t mean that can be discounted. Somewhere between 20 and 25 per cent of the country are firmly on board. Maybe another 20% are more or less sympathetic, responding sympathetically to the broad outlines of the program, even if stopping short of advocating their more extreme positions, such as the imprisonment or death of homosexuals.

    Unless and until Democrats understand the size and ferocity of this group, our civil liberties will continue to be bled away. You cannot compromise with them, you cannot meet them half way. They don’t compromise, and they have no intention of half-way measures. Besides, what is half way between civil liberties for gays and making homosexuality a capital offense? 20 years to life?

    The only way to fight them is to expose their extremism, to make it clear to the other 60-80 per cent of the country what it is they are really trying to do. Because, right now, this group of minority whack job lunatics controls all branches the US government. It is only fear of losing that control that puts any restraints on their demands at all.

    Oh, and this is not Christophobia. Christianity, like Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and the rest of the worlds religions, can be a force for good, moderation, tolerance, and stability. When Christianity, like Islam, becomes fundamentalist, then it most definitely is not.

    We are facing nothing less than a Disenlightenment in the US, a rollback of worldview to pre-Enlightenment times, a restoration of medievalism. Thank any god you may worship that it is only here in the US, but here it is, and we are going to have to deal with it.

  • Ross:

    For the record, I don’t think the religous right desires a vauge theocracy, I think they want an explicit one.


    Granted this is just one data point, but the following excerpt from a recent Rolling Stone profile of Sam Brownback, a potential Presidential candidate, is revealing:

    He tells a story about a chaplain who challenged a group of senators to reconsider their conception of democracy. “How many constituents do you have?” the chaplain asked. The senators answered: 4 million, 9 million, 12 million. “May I suggest,” the chaplain replied, “that you have only one constituent?”

    Brownback pauses. That moment, he declares, changed his life. “This” — being senator, running for president, waving the flag of a Christian nation — “is about serving one constituent.” He raises a hand and points above him.

    Interestingly, the “Values Voter” contract mentions the word “republic”. To which I can only quote Inigo Montoya: “I do not think it means what you think it means.”

  • The “increased border security” item shows what hypocrites they are. The Bible is full of injunctions to treat foreigners (“strangers”) equally and with hospitality. For every (scarce) mention of, say, homosexuality, the Bible has many, many verses that enjoin the faithful to give welcome to “strangers.”

  • Comments are closed.