Where? Iran? No, try again.
Dubya is trying to create one right here.
Not only did he bypass Congress to establish religious offices in government agencies (including, recently, Homeland Security.)
Now he's trying to tell corporations to change their corporate charters to encourage more charitable giving to religious organizations. Source: NY Times.
I'm not all that bothered if companies want to conduct charitable giving, but I don't think it's proper for our President to be pushing and promoting religious organizations at every turn...and encouraging others to do the same.
When coupled with the fact that the Republican Congress is so cowed by this lame duck president that they're actually passing laws to retroactively make his illegal acts legal...well it starts to make me nervous.
New Supreme Court justices apparently are like new brides, chained to their writing desks sending thank-you notes to all the well-wishers during their confirmation process.
In this case new Justice Alito sent such a note to psycho-"Christian" Focus on the Family head, James Dobson. Dobson shared it with his group, and Alito may be wishing he hadn't.
In question: the following ambiguous sentence:
...as long as I serve on the Supreme Court, I will keep in mind the trust that has been placed in me...
You know something else that doesn't surprise me: apparently parental notification and consent laws don't drive the abortion rate down.
I am surprised to admit that I'm actually of two minds on these parents suing to try to prevent the teaching of intelligent design in an elective philosophy course in a public high school.
I mean, I can appreciate the whole "slippery slope" argument, but key words seem to be:
Elective
and
Philosophy (not Science or Biology.)
My high school certainly taught Mythology, for instance. And I studied both the Old and New Testament in college as part of a larger, broader Humanities program.
I agree that it seems suspect and wrong for the course description to include: "This class will take a close look at evolution as a theory and will discuss the scientific, biological and biblical aspects that suggest why Darwin's philosophy is not rock solid."
Certainly we didn't do any comparing of the Bible or Mythology to Science in those other classes.
So, while the set-up might be "intelligently designed" to be acceptable, the intent might be not-so-innocent. Still, why does it have to come to a law suit? Is that really the only way. Is this how class curriculum conflicts usually get solved? I must be naive to think there's a better way, huh?
From Brad DeLong:
"Darwinists have done a great deal to explain life's complexity. "Doubters" have done nothing at all to do so."
Science is science.
Faith is faith.
I really truly do not understand how we are letting some people equate the two in our public schools.
While our students fall behind the world in math and science.
Gee, wonder why.
How insecure do you have to be about the inherent appeal and value of your faith if you have to force it into masquerading as science?
The mind boggles.
It's instructive sometimes to look back.
Let's review, thanks to Jeff Jarvis, what Kennedy had to say about his religion impinging on his ability to be President.
Key excerpt:
"I do not speak for my church on public matters; and the church does not speak for me. Whatever issue may come before me as President, if I should be elected, on birth control, divorce, censorship, gambling or any other subject, I will make my decision in accordance with these views — in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be in the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressure or dictates. And no power or threat of punishment could cause me to decide otherwise."
And let's come back to the present and check out what Sandra Day O'Connor, who's no flaming liberal (after all her vote put Dubya in the White house in 2000) has to say:
"Earlier this year, she joined in a 5-4 ruling that said the display of the Ten Commandments in two Kentucky courthouses violated the constitutional mandate for separation of church and state.
O'Connor said yesterday that the lack of such separation has had "violent consequences" in so many other countries, "it's hard to see why we should give that up in the face of the success that we've had.""
Indeed.
I love Mario Cuomo, and not just because I met him once in the lobby of the San Francisco Fairmont and he asked me how I could possibly move away from the greatest city on earth.
I love him because he's articulate and intelligent and not afraid to be so. Because he knows how to traverse that church-state line and make it seem so easy and reasonable.
As he does in this piece, where he takes Dubya ever so gently to task for his illogical and restrictive position on embryonic stem cell research.
Does anyone else wish he had at least once tried to run for President?
This NY Times editorial, in all its rational glory, explores the insidious ways that the religious right is trying to inject religion into science in our schools. And, in the end, the NY Times can only hope they'll "come to their senses."
I hate to break it to the Times, but when it comes to the folks who dream of creating a right-wing theocracy in America...there are no senses for them to come to. I mean, duh!
First we had the pastor who kicked out members of his congregation who voted for Kerry.
Now we have a Catholic priest denying communion to anyone who wore a rainbow themed accessory to church on Sunday. Source: AmericaBlog
Seriously, a little girl with a rainbow ribbon in her hair was denied communion.
Because wearing the rainbow accessories expressed sympathy, solidarity...some manner of support...for gay Catholics.
First of all: gay Catholics need all the support they can get. And I thought even gay Catholics could take communion if they weren't having sex?
So the logic of this priest's actions...even in the context of religious dogma that may not be my own...completely escapes me.
According to the New York Times, the North Carolina preacher who ousted members of his church who didn't vote for Dubya has decided to step down.
The IRS is investigating whether to revoke the church's tax-exempt status, since he was preaching politics and endorsing candidates from the pulpit. Objectively is there any question? Realistically, do you think anything will happen to this church or the more than 60 other charities and churches accused of the same thing during the last election?
Cynical me...I think they'll all get away with it.
Did you hear the one about the Baptist preacher who kicked out members of his congregation who didn't vote for Dubya for president?
Well, you should, courtesy of the Associated Press.
Oh, just in case you had doubts, this post from Digby should confirm what you knew all along: it's the radical religious right wing that wants the filibuster removed...and they think it's owed them because they are how Republican officials "got there."
Luckily for them they have some officials who feel little or no qualms about going along with them.
And they have plans for those Republican officials who still have a conscious and enough love of country to try to stand against them.
Oliver Willis has a disturbing recap of all the inflammatory language the right is using against our judiciary.
And AmericaBlog reasonably asks if the mainstream media will make even as big a deal of it as they did when Whoopi Goldberg made jokes about Bush at a fundraiser last year (although I would submit this inflammatory talk is much, much worse.)
But let's not forget the filibuster is about more than judges being approved. David Sirota gives us a much-needed historical recap of the filibuster here.
Now that the bankruptcy bill passed through with hardly a whimper. now that Bush's energy bill is likely to do the same, along with countless poor appointments, like Rice...let's not get all excited that Bush is a lame duck because his Social Security plans seems to be on the back burner.
There's still this fight...and it's a very important one.
I have heard a lot about the blogger, Digby, but never read him. After reading this post, he's going on my subscribe list.
He discusses fundamentalism of all religious stripes.
Some of it is his own analysis; some of it pointers to other great analysis, but the entire post is a terrific summary not only of the evolution of fundamentalism, but its significance in today's geo-political situation.
Quote that really got me sucked in:
"One scholar suggested that it's helpful to think of fundamentalism as religious fascism, and fascism as political fundamentalism"
A couple of stories today have me shaking my head:
1. Networks won't run ads that preach tolerance
Let's see, the WaPo can run an insert from a rabidly anti-gay group; ABC can run a segment on those poor misunderstood murderers of Matthew Shephard, but the networks won't run an ad from a Christian Church because it preaches Jesus' "extravagant welcome"? I am not a Christian; I can't claim to understand it. But doesn't this seem truly off-kilter?
Read CBS' explanation. They actually cite the fact that "the executive branch" has proposed a constitutional amendment about gay marriage as a justification for not running the ad...which doesn't support or oppose gay marriage.
Scary. And so much for the Liberal Media, yet again.
Sources:
AmericaBlog (includes link to watch rejected ad.)
Worldwide faith News (A lot more detail in this link.)
2nd example in the extended entry:
2. Teen kills classmates, because they are "sinners"
Yes, I know crazy killers always cite crazy reasons. But, I think if we foster an intolerant society that declares that those who don't agree or share the same religious beliefs as our "leader" are unpatriotic, un-American and evil, then we can expect more crazy people to gravitate towards this particular crazy reason.
I don't think I'm exaggerating. This is how you slide into mass persecution...de-humanize the opposition.
Sources:
IndyStar.com
CNN
Note how CNN leaves out the little "sinner" motivation aspect altogether.
In case you were feeling like Bush had co-opted religion, check out the First Presbyterian Church of Palo Alto's post-election statement.
I have seen a great bumper sticker: "God is NOT A Republican, or a Democrat."
Amen.
It's even been turned into a jpeg that you can add to your email signature. And it is typically we Democrats that buy this bumper sticker or add this to our signature.
I am among those who are totally sick of the Republicans trying to claim they corner the market on morals, on patriotism, on love of country, and that they have God on their side.
All that being true, and if you want to go around quoting that bumper sticker...then don't make jokes about Florida and the wrath of God.
I actually saw someone who had a map of Florida's voting in the 2000 election, superimposed over a map of where the hurricanes hit. Yes, they were trying to show that the hurricanes hit in Republican-voting areas.
I think that's in very poor taste. I think if we're claiming God is not a Republican, then we shouldn't turn around and imply he is unloading his wrath on Florida because of the 2000 election.
Even as a joke.
It does not make me laugh. And it doesn't help what has turned into a really terrible situation there.
End of sermon. Off my soapbox.
Catholic John Kerry's pro-choice stance is likely to cause him trouble on both sides of the abortion debate.
As an avid pro-choicer I get a little nervous hearing him say life begins at conception. And pro-life Catholics and others would, I'm sure, prefer that he take that belief and act on it politically. But Kerry takes the only that makes any sense when he says:
"I can't take my Catholic belief, my article of faith, and legislate it on a Protestant or a Jew or an atheist," he continued in the interview. "We have separation of church and state in the United States of America."
Yup. he gets it.
The Bushies? They don't get the idea of separating church and state at all. According to the Washington post: President Bush's campaign said these instances are further evidence of what it says is Kerry's propensity for misleading flip-flops.
Given that I've talked to plenty of church-going Republicans who don't like Bush's greater loyalty to the religious right than to the American people's rights, I think the Bushies are misjudging the people and our beliefs about American democracy.
Here's a quote: ""I wish he was against abortion, but I don't think that'll get settled," said Helen Willenberg, 83, a Catholic who met Kerry later in the day. "But I still hope he wins."
Entire story in 7/4/04 Washington Post
Buy Viagra, Cialis or Levitra prescription from online pharmacy:
Viagra prescription
Buy Levitra
Buy Cialis
Two stories caught my eye today that aren't getting much attention. Both highlight the ever more blurry line between church and state. A blurring that I'm sure Bush is all in favor of.
Story #1: The Fake Abortion Clinic in Louisiana
This is a doozy. An anti-abortion activist is being sued for setting up a fake clinic that purports to refer women to get abortions. But then the guy stalls and delays the women until they're past their 24th week, when it just happens to become illegal to get an abortion in Louisiana. Lying...one of the great Christian values, huh?
Story #2: Reducing accountability for churches who mix political and religious activity
You may know that Bush recently sent letters to various congregations, asking them to recruit voters.
Well, what a tremendous coincidence...House Republicans are introducing a bill to ease penalties for churches that mix religious and political activity. It would not only reduce fines, but allow them 2 freebie incidents before their tax-exempt status is revoked...and then only for a year.
Just in time for churches to flout the tax rules to help get Bush re-elected, with little fear of consequences.
Did you hear these stories? Didn't think so.
Another great story today about what Bush chooses to focus on in these troubled times:
He is on the warpath to make sure religious organizations have access to federal grants to deliver social services.
Faith-based Initiatives, as you may have heard of.
But here are the things he's not so worried about:
-People having access to health care or affordable prescriptions
-Low-income students having access to 4-year colleges
-Companies not owned by his cronies having access to federal contracts in Iraq
-Soldiers having access to armored vehicles
-Veterans having access to benefits
-Victims of rape having access to abortion
Help me out here - I'm sure I'm missing some.
That's Bush: He puts his mouth where his money is, whether that's the actual dollar income from corporate interests or vote income from his religious right base.
