August 11, 2011

Just the latest of a long line


They've been working at it for years. This article references Rick Perry, but several current and recent Republican big guns fit well in this queue. Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Newt Gingrich and Mike Huckabee to name a few. Trace the history of the names found in this piece and you will find volumes of evidence displaying the homophobic, Islamophobic, supremacist nature of the Christian Dominionist cults these names represent.

The history of dominionism in America is long and sordid.

###

9 Comments:

Old NFO said...

So we should just roll over and let the Muslims have the US???

Mule Breath said...

NFO, that is a false dilemma if I have ever heard one. Your challenge implies that our choice is the devil or the deep blue sea... and that there is not other option.

The reason I post such articles as this is to point to the efforts by a determined and dangerous group (every bit as dangerous as their Islamic extremist counterparts) to overthrow the protections guaranteed to every American. If the dominionists gain control of this country it is only a matter of time before you will be able to kiss the First Amendment bye bye.

I'm atheist and don't have feelings one way or another about this critter the religionists call god, but I can tell you that his fan clubs scare me rather badly.

Old NFO said...

MB- I understand, but it IS a choice of the devil or the deep blue... Many of the groups in the pages you reference are hard left/socialist groups who 'assume' everyone believes and follows all the individuals listed, rather than the fact that very few actually BELIEVE as the few referenced do. I would challenge you to take a REAL look at Islam and the Koran and tell me they are not out to kill each and every one of us...

I have studied it, I've seen it up close and personal, and as far as they are concerned, anyone who is not Muslim does not deserve to live, and they are dedicated (fanatically so in many cases) to imposition of shira law world wide.

Mule Breath said...

Totally disagree. It is only a devil/blue sea choice if we assume we have to have some religion telling us what to do. I make no such assumption, and our Constitution specifically rejects it.

To begin with I take issue with the characterization of "hard left" with "socialist." To state emphatically that one equals the other is as wrong as equating hard right with fascism. Some is... but most on both ends of the spectrum is not.

I HAVE studied the Quran. An English translation has at one timegraced my shelfs, as have no fewer than five various versions of the bible, the Book of Morman, the Pearl of Great Price, and several other such texts speaking for a variety of mythological supreme beings.

Certainly I can understand the fear the language in the Quran evokes, but have you read the bible with the same critical eye you focus on the Quran? That book has much of the same language and evokes much the same fears in the hearts of non-xtians as you feel from the Quran. Most of the accounts of the gods are full of sanctioned blood and guts.

That the Quran is full of such venom does not make them the only enemy. If a dominionist majority takes control of this country it won't be long before a biblical version of Sharia law becomes the law of the land here. It will be slow at first. The politicians that sect has already elected have long been proposing and passing laws that limit personal freedom and inject myth into public education.

Your fear of Sharia law worldwide is mirrored by the fears of the rest of the world of imposition of biblical law worldwide. It is NOT the choice between them or us that the christianists and islamists want us the believe... the choice is between human freedom or the tyrannical domination of imposed theocracy.

We have a pretty good Constitution, written by men having first-hand experience with state-imposed religion. I say we heed their advice and reject ALL forms of religious dominion over man.

Theocracy sucks. Our Constitution rocks.

Old NFO said...

MB, we're just going to have to disagree on this one... I don't believe there IS any such thing as a dominionist majority, that is a fallacy dreamed up based on a bunch of single events. I'm truly sorry you consider Christians to be tyrannical...

Mule Breath said...

NFO, using superlatives makes for a poor argument. I didn't imply that these dominionist were representative, and neither have the individuals writing those articles.

All Christians are not tyrannical and neither are all Muslims. It is unfortunately true, however, that the moderates of each religion are enabling the would-be tyrants allowing them to gain ground. Those of us resisting these incursions recognize it won't take a majority to change the world.

The tail is wagging the dog. The faithful are ignoring and enabling the extremists, and the ambitious are using this as cover to gain power. With enough antipathy and a few fanatical supporters both groups are making headway.

Sounds like you're ending the debate, but I'm curious... this "fallacy" you state as "dreamed up" about christian dominionists... how exactly is that different from the fallacy promoted by christian extremists that all muslims are intent on domination? This is an age-old tactic. Demonizing the enemy makes it easier to get your people to hate and therefore accept killing them.

The threat from each group is real, but the solution is not going to be found by picking sides. The only solution is to resist those who would impose theocracy on the people. Theocracy leads to tyranny.

jeg43 said...

MB, you get an "A+" for that exchange!

Old NFO said...

It's obvious we disagree on this one, and I'm not going to change your mind, and you aren't going to change mine. I can only base what I know on my personal experiences and 40 years of travelling the world and seeing the different perspectives various people have. You see it differently, approach it differently and are set in your perception, so there is no point in continuing this discussion.

Mule Breath said...

NFO, our perspectives are not so different in many areas. There is still room for debate. Judging by some of your past comments we have a level of agreement on many things. In this debate we differ, I think, mostly on the topic of religion.

In my opinion we no longer need it. Religions are myths constructed to address human fears. Science has shed light on much of the unknown and dispelled much of the uncertainty that caused the fear. Science has taught us that our response to mystery should be curiosity... not fear.

This transcends into the political realm and explains why I target individual bad actors and specific groups of bad actors who have banded together rather than painting entire segments of humanity with some label.

All Islamists are not evil any more than are all Christians. Neither are right-wingers bigots any more than all on the left are socialists. There are wingnuts found in every segment of society. Perhaps it is easier to "profile," but to be true to our Constitution we should target the individual bad actor.

You're probably correct that neither of us will alter the other's perspective. I've travelled extensively as well, probably to many of the same locales, but apparently we've seen different things... or perhaps just seen things differently.

Please continue to visit, and feel free to comment. Debating with friends is fun and I enjoy it. Just ask AD.