evangelical Christians

by

Governor Ron DeSantis: Officially a Fascist


I am appalled by Florida’s new law regarding books in public (K-12) schools. Such a law harkens back to pre-1930 U.S. education when religious oranizations decided what children and adults should read. But even worse, it sounds like 1938 Germany when there were massive book burnings when the government decided what the public could or could not read. That was fascism in action. Please understand that my understanding of such methods and doctrines comes from the fact that I studied U.S. history at Harvard University where I got my master’s degree in that subject. But such history studies depend upon the student’s ability to have an understanding of the world around the United States during its history.

This also reminds me of George Orwell’s 1984 where the government of the United States had become intrusive to the extreme in every person’s daily life.

DeSantis has ordered that “media specialists,” who were once known in public schools as “librarians,” review every book in the school to determine whether there is any objectionable material contained. Objectionable material such as a book a 6th grader was reading in which two boys loved each other. His reaction was one of acceptance which is exactly what we should want of our children in today’s society. So much of the hatred that exists in our country today comes from one group of people deciding that another group are something beneath them.

Florida has also outlawed all A.P. black history classes. This too is what the Nazi’s did when their crusade against Jews, Gypsies, gays, and all groups defined as “undesirables” was put into action. Is this what we are seeing in Florida? It certainly seems so. The Nazis decided that all things connected with these groups must be deleted from the public’s view and they made that happen. This sounds too much like what is happening in Florida!

And while it would be, most likely, a bad decision to put Lady Chatterley’s Lover by D. H. Lawrence on a K-8 reading list, would it be improper to allow high schoolers to read the books? Shall we then include Uncle Tom’s Cabin by Harriet Beacher Stowe on such a list because its central characters are black? Or how about the high school senior who decides to do a book report on the biography of Margaret Sanger because she dealt with birth control in the early 20th Century? I can go on and on but I think I have made my point.

I did notice that the books of Raold Dahl were removed from the school library’s shelves that they may be checked for inappropriate material! Are you kidding me! You would have to be extremely ignorant to think that anything said in those books could be offensive for even the youngest grade schooler. And yet, a media specialist my review them.

And who is behind these moves, DeSantis himself? I doubt it. It is my guess, and my opinion, that if you look hard enough you will find that conservative evangelicals are the tail which is wagging the dog here. DeSantis needs this very conservative base to stay in office because Florida is not a deep red state but one which has a large strong liberal party as well.

It may seem odd to compare what is happening to Florida to the Supreme Court’s decision of what pornography is and who can watch it but the parallels are hard to ignore. In each case, a decision on the First Amendment comes into view. I do hope that there is some group in Florida that has taken the torch to fight this law in the Supreme Court on the basis of the First Amendment.

Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it. That is a paraphrase but a most appropriate one. In 1925, the Scopes Trial in Tennesse brough a high school teacher to task for daring to teach evolution to his students. This did not sit well with conservative church leaders and their followers. At that time too, Tennessee had passed a law known as the “Butler Act” which barred the teaching of evolution. Behind the trail were fundamentalist Christians. Clarence Darrow, who was the attorney for the defense, eventually lost the case but it brought into the public’s mind what was acceptable to be taught in public schools and the controversy quickly spread across the country.

Must we have another “Scopes'” style trial to deal with this? Are Floridians’ so numb to the political machinations of the Florida State government that they oppose nothing it brings into law? Where is the outrage? Where is good judgement? Certainly not in Florida! Florida has already barred the teaching of black history so what is next? Seminole history?

It is difficult for Americans who have been allowed only a narrow view of history to make good and well-informed decisions. Yes, Ron DeSantis calls himself a Republican but in truth, he is actually a Fascist.!

by

Politics and Religion Do Not Mix!


The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The First Amendment is actually very complex taking on no fewer than 5 separate issues. My interest here is in only one of them, religion. I will start with the man who wrote this amendment, James Madison. Madison was central to writing the base document as well. Madison was an Episcopalian. His colleagues in writing the basic document were:

http://www.internationalman.com/articles/framers-of-the-american-constitution

 

Adams was a Congregationalist, Dickinson a Quaker, Edmund Randolph was an Episcopalian, and Thomas Jefferson was a Deist which meant he did not adhere to any religion in particular. Such was the make-up of those who wrote the Constitution and helped with its first 10 amendments. But only a few of them could be found with any regularity at the church of their choice, except for Madison. The wisdom among each of these men was their ability to compromise because they recognized that to have the new country not only get off to a successful start, but to have a secure future. Going back to 1775, the only man of repute who helped get our country started but held disdain for organized religion was Benjamin Franklin. And yet to this day he is revered.

Strangely, the early 21st century, where politics is concerned, is sounding a lot like the early 19th century when America experienced the 2nd Religious Revival. Politicians from the Republican Party are particularly enamored allying themselves with Evangelical Christians. Curiously, only about 13% of the entire population clings to Evangelical beliefs. As a country, the US is about 71% Christian. Therefore, even among all Christians the Evangelicals can claim about 18%. Why is such a minority so important? When lawyers investigate certain types of individuals during a criminal investigation they are told to follow the money. I believe that it exactly what is happening in the Republican Party today and that is a real shame.

The historical man Republicans love the most is Abraham Lincoln, and for good reason. He brought the party back to life and gave it direction. But Lincoln never joined any particular religion. It was not important to him.

Why then, are today’s Republicans so intent on infusing their religious beliefs on American society in general? Follow the money! Even though I have no proof, I believe many of the Republican PACs are funded mostly, if not entirely, by Evangelicals. This needs to stop, now!

I am not a big fan of Bernie Sanders politics, not because I am a Republican which I am not, but because of his socialist beliefs. And yet he has done something truly remarkable. He is waging a pitted battle against Hilary Clinton but Bernie receives zero PAC money while Hilary relies upon it. But Bernie has made an extremely strong statement in the way he is funded and that is he does not owe a PAC anything. With the exception of Donald Trump who can fund his own campaign, all the rest of the Republican candidates are deeply indebted to multiply PACs. And they know that the Evangelical based PACs are particularly adept at energizing the public to support their candidate.

“Their candidate” should be seen as a curse to every American. The two people who run for president representing their political party should be our candidate. Bernie is on to something because he has shown that individual Americans are more than willing to support a candidate at a level that makes the candidate viable. I expect Hilary will eventually become the Democrat candidate for president and that she will ask Bernie to be her running mate. He is charismatic and will energize the public, particularly young people.

Religion has no place in the American government. Our first amendment says as much. But more importantly, Americans need only look to otherwise democratic countries which do allow religion to mix with the government. In general they are a mess.

It is really quite simple, Jews do not want my Catholic ideas impressed upon them. Southern Baptists have absolutely no interest in embracing Unitarian beliefs, and so forth.

I ask only one thing:

PLEASE KEEP YOUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OUT OF MY AMERICAN GOVERNMENT!

PLEASE KEEP YOUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OUT OF MY AMERICAN GOVERNMENT!

 

PLEASE KEEP YOUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OUT OF MY AMERICAN GOVERNMENT!

 

PLEASE KEEP YOUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OUT OF MY AMERICAN GOVERNMENT!

 

 

 

by

Who Hijacked the Republican Party?


The Republican Party can trace its roots all the way back to Washington.  While it is true that Washington and Adams both were Federalists, they were also the conservatives of their generation.  Jefferson, who became president in 1801, was the first “liberal” and his was the Republican Party.  The party of Jefferson, however, disappeared with the Whigs only to return as the party of Lincoln.

None of our first four presidents were religious men.  There is continuing discussion among historians as to what, if any, religion Jefferson truly ascribed to.  But it was a very conservative Adams, and equally conservative Madison, who made a point of distancing the federal government from any form of religion.  Their reasoning was simple and clear.  They remembered the heavy-handed dictates of the King of England insisting that his subjects be members of the Church of England.  It was this absolute separation of church and state, as much as anything, that brought the original settlers from England to America.  The second part of the first amendment is an affirmation of that fact.

Mitt Romney is a very conservative evangelical Christian.  His running-mate, Ryan, is a very conservative Roman Catholic.  The irony of those two being on the same ticket is that each of their chosen religions was a huge detractor of the other during the 19th and a good part of the 20th centuries.  Each religion based itself of certain absolute ideas and ideals over which they were unwilling or unable to find any middle-ground with dissenters of that particular belief.  In the late-20th century, at least one Mormon tel-evangelist referred to Catholics as evil in no uncertain terms.  To be fair, and having been brought up Catholic, we were led to believe that the only true Christians were Catholics.  I believe Romney is crafty enough that he realized such a division could be brought up during his campaign for president, hence his drafting Ryan.  To many, the charismatic Marco Rubio was a better choice of running-mate, but that would have put two evangelical Mormons on the same ticket.

Back in the 1970s and 1980s, evangelical Christians, lead by Jerry Falwell, formed what they called “the moral majority” and started a systematic takeover of the Republican party.  To be sure, they were conservatives all and well-financed.  But the “moral majority” fell apart when Jim Baker, and other prominent far right-wingers, were found guilty of marital infidelity and other such things.  But the Falwells were simply the figureheads for well-monied ultra-conservative Republicans.  They quite simply set an agenda and required all Republicans to buy-in or see their campaign funding dry up.

Not all Republicans have toed that line.  I do not believe that Scott Brown, a Republican US Senator from my own state, is of the ilk although I do think he has found himself in the position of voting for positions that are unpopular with his constituency rather than risk becoming a pariah.  Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has also shown courage of conviction to buck his party’s line.  Unfortunately, he is far from being a centrist.

The “Tea Party” has a hand in all this.  It is the answer to the Libertarian ideas of Ron Paul.  But unlike Ron Paul, it has a close alliance with evangelical America.  While Ron Paul takes a very pragmatic approach to reducing government, the Tea Party seeks quick draconian measures that would basically kill the middle class as it increases the gap between the rich and the poor.

I think everyone should be allowed to practice whatever religion they desire.  But I do not want their religion, or mine for that matter, being used as a basis for public policy and law.  Religion is one of the most personal things that exists.  Even among the most conservative group of people of a same religion, you will find differences in their beliefs.  And while these difference may seem minor, they are important to each individual.  How do you dictate what, religious in content, a country should hear, should have as a part of its public policy, and worse, a part of its law?

Good government and good government policy can only be built upon the absence of religious belief.  It is not unpatriotic, for example, to be an atheist, although ultra-conservative Republicans will have you think that so.  I demand freedom from your religion, as you should demand of me.  My First Amendment right says that will be so.  I do not, however, believe that is the plan of evangelical Republicans who have found a leader in Mitt Romney, and who have kidnapped the once proud and pragmatic Republican Party.  Please give back the Republican Party of Lincoln, of Teddy Roosevelt, and of Dwight Eisenhower.