Fundamentalism at Home

Candidates of BOTH political parties often attend church gatherings and are sometimes invited to speak from the pulpit; however, when they do, candidates of BOTH parties do not use that opportunity to make a blatant political statement — that is, they don’t attack or advocate one policy position or another. Now, clearly, this is a subtle distinction, since it goes without say that if a candidate of a given party is up at a pulpit, then most congregants can reasonably assume that there’s some sort of tacit endorsement being made. However, as I posted earlier from this article, what some activist fundamentalist Republican legislators are proposing goes beyond merely giving the church the ability to make “tacit endorsements.” Instead, what these Republican legislators are seeking is to completely obliterate the Church/State divide that has served our nation so well for over 200 years — which is what’s made us the most successful pluralistic democracy on earth. More specifically, the proposed Republican legislation would permit the clergy to ACTIVELY endorse candidates, and to ACTIVELY engage in other common political activities.

Now, from our current vantage, it may seem alarmist to suggest that we’re in the brink of a Theocracy; however, as an example, let’s acknowledge, as many have already pointed out, that the only reason why the federal government intervened in Mrs. Shiavo’s tragedy is because Republican politicians deemed it necessary to satiate the demands from the religious fundamentalists base within their party. Again, it’s not just some lone voices in the woods that are opining this; Republican Representative Christopher Shays said as much:

“My party is demonstrating that they are for states’ rights unless they don’t like what states are doing,” said Rep. Christopher Shays of Connecticut, one of five House Republicans who voted against the bill. “This couldn’t be a more classic case of a state responsibility.”

“This Republican Party of Lincoln has become a party of theocracy,” Shays said. “There are going to be repercussions from this vote. There are a number of people who feel that the government is getting involved in their personal lives in a way that scares them.”

Additionally, while we fight against Islamic terrorism, we’ve been engaged against fighting fundamentalism in Afghanistan and Iraq; and, too, our nation continually points at the perils of fundamentalism in Iran and Saudi Arabia. Meanwhile, it appears that while we fight abroad, some are perfectly happy and willing to institute our own brand of fundamentalism here are home. I, for one, cannot believe that the parallels are not being widely and publicly discussed. Finally, keep in mind that this is not about denying anybody their free speech right: the fact that our entire nation is enthralled by this tragic case is a clear example that no one’s free speech rights have been obstructed. Instead, the concern here is that adopting the fundamentalist tenets/values of one group puts in PERIL and UNDERMINES our pluralistic representative-democracy — basically, there’s a bunch of us living in our lovely country, with different religions, values, etc. and, if the arbiter between these groups (i.e., government) adopts one group’s fundamentalism over another’s, we run the risk of having a lot unhappy folks (running around questioning the legitimacy of the entire system). I’d hate to live in that type of society, and sincerely hope that we can avoid it.

Christian Evangelicals & Terri Shiavo’s Tragedy

Again, further background on the forces that have compelled the Republican party, which is in full control of the federal government, to intervene in this case (from Reuters):

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Christian evangelicals, a key component in President Bush’s Republican Party, believe the case of brain-damaged Florida woman Terri Schiavo may help inject new life into their long campaign against abortion.

“The right-to-life issue has been with us for over 30 years but never has it dominated the news headlines day after day as it is doing now,” said Louis Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition.

Republican leaders and President Bush had little choice other than to respond to Christian evangelical demands on the Schiavo case or risk alienating a crucial part of their political base, political analysts said.

[...]

Tony Perkins, president of the conservative Christian Family Research Council, said the furor over Schiavo was the direct result of years of campaigning against abortion.

[...]

Writing in the Wall Street Journal last Friday, conservative columnist and former White House speechwriter Peggy Noonan set out the stakes for Republicans.

“The Republican Party controls the Senate, the House and the White House. The Republicans are in charge. They have the power. If they can’t save this woman’s life, they will face a reckoning from a sizable portion of their own base. And they will of course deserve it,” Noonan wrote.

In campaigning for Schiavo to live, some Christian conservatives, including Sheldon and James Dobson who heads the influential Focus on the Family organization, also argue against the notion of a “right to die,” even in cases when an individual clearly states his own wish not to prolong life.

“I don’t believe in a right to die. I think that God is in control of our destiny,” Dobson said recently.

“Party of Theocracy”

I’m a bit reluctant to proceed with this, as I know that a lot of people do not want to appear to be “confrontational” nor “insensitive to/dismissive of” the religious values that many of our fellow citizens hold. However, we — the American public — should now be extremely mindful of what’s taking place and, too, of the nature of the debate that a certain faction of — let’s be honest — the Republican party has foisted onto the national stage. Before going on, let me be clear about one point, reasonable American’s of virtually all political stripes agree on one thing: the Terri Shiavo tragedy is a PRIVATE FAMILY MATTER in which the federal government should’ve never interfered in — PERIOD.

Reasonable Americans need to be FULLY aware about the nature of the federal government’s actions — at the behest of a vociferous faction — in deciding to interfere in this private family matter. Moreover, we should not be timid nor reluctant in confronting those that would jeopardize our system of laws, plurality (religious, ethnic, etc.) and federalism. Now, this may sound merely as an academic concern; however, it is through a series of small, incremental actions that policies and our national direction can be changed — interference in the tragic Shiavo case is such an example.

Now, to demonstrate that my concern — and the concern of others — is shared across party lines, here’s what Republican Representative Christopher Shays has said on this matter:

“My party is demonstrating that they are for states’ rights unless they don’t like what states are doing,” said Rep. Christopher Shays of Connecticut, one of five House Republicans who voted against the bill. “This couldn’t be a more classic case of a state responsibility.”

“This Republican Party of Lincoln has become a party of theocracy,” Shays said. “There are going to be repercussions from this vote. There are a number of people who feel that the government is getting involved in their personal lives in a way that scares them.”

Warning to “Moderate” Republicans

Terri Shiavo’s sad condition and subsequent intervention into it by the federal government (at the behest of the Republican leadership), should be extremely illustrative of what has become of the Republican party — and an indication of what faction of the social-conservative movement has taken control of that pary. Any moderate Republican, concerned with limited government, should be paying close attention at how social/cultural issues are being used by the social-conservative faction that’s at the helm of the Republican party to advance a narrow social agenda. Ladies and gentleman, what this faction of the Republican party is really after is imposing and codefying their brand of “morality” on us — and, to do so, the social-conservative wing of the Republican party is willing to enlist the full-weight of the federal government on its behalf; thus abandoning any long-held pretense of being the party of state rights and of limited government. If we — the citizens of this country — are not careful, we may very well see a federal government that is permitted into our bedrooms (i.e.,”Gay marriage”), is able to use surveillance on its citizens (i.e., expanded “Patriot Act”) and, now, it seems, the federal government is being urged to intervene into what should be a private of decisions — all because a certain faction within the Republican party deems it expedient to do so in support of their agenda and of ther base.

Again, I sincerely hope that so-called moderates everywhere are paying close attention to this case… because there’ll be more like it if we permit it.

“War of Civilizations”

Recently I was asked if I was aware of the Free State Project, and here’s my response:

Yes, I am aware of that particular group and, too, of the wider “secession” movement that exists amongst the fundamentalist Christian right. Many secularists and mainstream Americans are simply refusing to believe that such radicalism can exist in our country, but it does. And, from what I’ve observed, it is this right-wing Christian-fundamentalism that the Republican Party has tapped into to amass electoral power. Moreover, I think that the Republican’s “Southern Strategy,” now infused with strands of the fundamentalist Christian-right, while electorally successful, has the potential to tear our nation apart. As an example, like with the Free State Project, here’s another right-wing organization that advocates secession:

CHRISTIAN EXODUS
ChristianExodus.org is coordinating the move of thousands of Christians to South Carolina for the express purpose of re-establishing Godly, constitutional government. It is evident that the U.S. Constitution has been abandoned under our current federal system, and the efforts of Christian activism to restore our Godly republic have proven futile over the past three decades. The time has come for Christians to withdraw our consent from the current federal government and re-introduce the Christian principles once so predominant in America to a sovereign State like South Carolina. [ http://www.christianexodus.org/ ]

The president of that organization writes the following:

Mr. Jim Taylor and Mr. Cory Burnell founded ChristianExodus.org in November 2003 as a response to the moral degeneration of our nation and the lack of any determination by the Republican Party to return our nation to its Constitutional moors.

Now, this is but one organization, but clearly the fundamentalist Christian-right sees their electoral futures tied to one party, the Republican Party. And these groups would not be incorrect in presuming that they’ve been actively courted by the Republican Party, especially by the Southern strand of that Party. Again, I’m afraid that I and of my fellow secularists have been caught with our pants down on this issue, and now need to assert the rock-solid separation between church and state that MUST exist, or we risk a “war of civilizations” (euphemistically referred to as the “culture wars”) in our own backyard.