Religious Right Watch

Religious Right Reacts To Komen's Latest Statement with Confusion, Anger and Warnings of God's Wrath | Right Wing Watch

Mona Charen of the National Review Online lamented that “it’s extremely disappointing that Komen has caved” but “it’s hardly surprising given the onslaught they’ve endured over the course of the last few days,” and NRO’s Daniel Foster charged Planned Parenthood with “gangsterism.” Of course, just days prior Kathryn Jean Lopez on NRO hailed Komen’s initial decision as a major victory, noting “this Komen-Planned Parenthood relationship has long been a target of pro-life activists.”

Catholic Family and Human Rights Initiative (C-Fam) president Austin Ruse told LifeSiteNews called potentially successful effort to have the Komen foundation reverse their decision defunding Planned Parenthood a “mafia shakedown”

via www.rightwingwatch.org

JFK vs. Romney & Santorum on Separation of Church & State

 

Frederick Clarkson's "A Tale of Three Speeches About Separation of Church and State" -

Both candidates have staged high-profile speeches to define themselves in relation to John F. Kennedy's famous 1960 campaign speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association - a speech that has served as the model for how politicians balance religion and public life for a generation. But when they stepped up to the podium to define themselves in the bright light of history, each pandered to the religious right.

via www.truth-out.org

(Photo: Gage Skidmore)

Rick Santorum: "the dangers of contraception in this country"

"One of the things I will talk about that no president has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea ... Many in the Christian faith have said, 'Well, that's okay ... contraception's okay.'

"It's not okay because it's a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. They're supposed to be within marriage, for purposes that are, yes, conjugal...but also procreative. That's the perfect way that a sexual union should happen. We take any part of that out, we diminish the act. And if you can take one part out that's not for purposes of procreation, that's not one of the reasons, then you diminish this very special bond between men and women, so why can't you take other parts of that out? And all of a sudden, it becomes deconstructed to the point where it's simply pleasure. And that's certainly a part of it—and it's an important part of it, don't get me wrong—but there's a lot of things we do for pleasure, and this is special, and it needs to be seen as special.

"Again, I know most presidents don't talk about those things, and maybe people don't want us to talk about those things, but I think it's important that you are who you are. I'm not running for preacher. I'm not running for pastor, but these are important public policy issues."

- Richard John "Rick" Santorum (b. May 10, 1958), sometime U.S. Senator representing the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Senior Fellow with the Ethics and Public Policy Center, and a contributor to Fox News Channel.

Hat-tip: MMA via dKos

Christianity Today Doubles Down on Samuel Rodriguez

A central feature of my work over the last four months has been exposing the contradictory positions of Samuel Rodriguez, and a major goal of mine has been to see both secular and religious institutions come to grips with his extremism and distance themselves from his work. Of particular concern to me is Rodriguez's standing within evangelical institutions that I have considered centrist or progressive. Like many writers and commentators I have considered Christianity Today a reliable bell weather of the evangelical center.

via www.talk2action.org

Statement by Jeremy Ben-Ami on Newt Gingrich Remarks on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict | J Street

J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami released the following statement in response to Republican Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich’s recent remarks about the Palestinians.

Newt Gingrich’s comments about the Palestinian people and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are ill-informed, irresponsible and frightening.

The former Speaker’s assertion that the Palestinians are an ‘invented’ people shows an appalling lack of understanding of the history of the Middle East in the last century following the break-up of the Ottoman Empire.

Gingrich further misunderstands the present-day politics of the Palestinian people, willfully blurring distinctions among Palestinian factions and demeaning the Palestinian Authority’s commitment to state-building, security cooperation with Israel and pursuit of a two-state solution.

Most dangerous, however, is the threat a Gingrich presidency could pose to the future of Israel and the region. Israel’s long-term security as a Jewish homeland and democratic state depends on the establishment of a Palestinian state living next door. Israel simply cannot retain control of all of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea and remain both Jewish and democratic.

This is a fact that Israeli Prime Ministers and US Presidents of all political persuasions have recognized for more than two decades. Achieving a two-state solution to the conflict is not simply essential to Israel, it’s also a fundamental American national interest. A truly pro-Israel President taking office in 2013 will do more, not less, to end this conflict in a two-state solution.

Newt Gingrich is recklessly pursuing political gain by throwing gasoline on the powder keg of the Middle East. The consequences will be dire not just for Israel but for the United States as well.

To us, the Speaker’s remarks are not what a pro-Israel politician should be saying. J Street calls on Speaker Gingrich to retract his comments and on other Presidential candidates – and the President himself – to push back strongly in the campaign to come against ideas like these that are far outside the mainstream of American foreign policy.

via jstreet.org

What does Michael D. Coe say about Mormonism?

Joseph Smith had a sense of destiny; ... this is how he transformed something that I think was clearly made up into something that was absolutely convincing.

Michael D. Coe (born 1929) is an American archaeologist, anthropologist, epigrapher and author. Primarily known for his research in the field of pre-Columbian Mesoamerican studies (and in particular, for his work on the Maya civilization, where he is regarded as one of the foremost Mayanist scholars of the latter 20th century), Coe has also made extensive investigations across a variety of other archaeological sites in North and South America. He has also specialised in comparative studies of ancient tropical forest civilizations, such as those of Central America and Southeast Asia. He currently (as of 2005) holds the chair of Charles J. MacCurdy Professor of Anthropology, Emeritus, Yale University, and is Curator Emeritus of the Anthropology collection in the Peabody Museum of Natural History, where he had been Curator from 1968 to 1994.^[1]

Coe worked for the CIA as a part of the front organization Western Enterprises in Taiwan created to subvert Mao's China. Reference Tim Weiner's book, Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA.

With over four decades of active research experience, Coe is a prolific author of scientific papers across a broad range of archaeological, anthropological and ethnohistorical topics. He has also authored a number of popular works for the non-specialist audience, several of which have been best-selling and much reprinted, such as The Maya (1966) and Breaking the Maya Code (1992). He also co-authored the book Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs (1962,sixth edition, 2008) with Rex Koontz.

Coe received his Ph.D. in anthropology from Harvard University in the early 1950s. Shortly after commencing his graduate studies program there, in 1955 he married the daughter of the noted evolutionary biologist and Russian émigré Theodosius Dobzhansky, Sophie, who was then an undergraduate anthropology student at Radcliffe College.

via en.wikipedia.org

 Coe on the Mormons.

Romney's Mormonism center stage at Values Voters summit

The uneasy relationship between Mitt Romney and the evangelical wing of the Republican Party over his Mormon religion has been part of the quiet subtext of the primary contest so far. On Friday, the quiet ended.

At the Values Voters summit in Washington, Robert Jeffress [pastor of the 10,000-member First Baptist Church of Dallas]* told reporters that Mormonism was a cult and that Romney was not a Christian.

“Mormonism is not Christianity,” Jeffress declared.

Jeffress is a supporter of Romney rival, Texas Gov. Rick Perry , and introduced Perry at the summit to rousing applause.

Jeffress began making his point during the introduction: “Do we want a candidate who is a good moral person, or do we want a candidate who is a born-again follower of Jesus Christ? In Rick Perry, we have a candidate who is a committed follower of Christ.”

The pastor revved up a sleepy crowd — as Perry himself said when he took the stage. “He really knocked it out of the park!” Perry said.

Speaking with reporters later, Jeffress made his allusion clear. “Mormonism is not Christianity,” he declared. “It’s not politically correct to say, but Mormonism is a cult.”

via www.washingtonpost.com

*At the time of this posting, The Washington Post was misidentifying Jeffress as the leader of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Rights Group Reports 3 Hanged in Iran for Sodomy

Three men were executed in Iran on Sunday for having gay sex, according to Iran Human Rights, an organization that monitors state news there.

The group noted in a blog post today that the state-run Iranian news agency, ISNA, reports that three people who were hanged had been convicted of sodomy and other crimes such as robbery. A Sharia judge is allowed to decide how to kill any man who violates the anti-sodomy article of the law.

via www.advocate.com

How Much Money Could the Department of Defense Save if it Stopped Trying to Save Souls?

[T]he Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) began an investigation into just how much money the DoD spends on promoting religion to military personnel and their families. What prompted this interest...was finding out what the DoD was spending on certain individual events and programs, such as the $125 million spent on the Army's Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program and its controversial "Spiritual Fitness" test, a mandatory test that must be taken by all soldiers.

via www.talk2action.org

Some DoD contract tax-dollar amounts.... Your tax dollars are work:

$28,000,000 for the Fort Hood "mega-church" project ($17,500,000 for its chapel complex and religious education center, and an additional $10,800,000 for its "Family Life Center");

$678,470 for Christian rock bands

$500,000 Oakridge Camp & Retreat Center for "Strong Bond" retreats;

Oakridge not only requires its employees to be Christians, but even goes as far as requiring on its employment application that the applicant state their views on issues such as abortion and homosexuality. While a private religious organization is free to impose a religious test on its staff, it is quite a different matter for a DoD contractor to do this. And, in the case of Oakridge, it is not only the facility's staff who must adhere to the its Christian beliefs, but all of its guests as well, including the soldiers attending Fort Sill's Strong Bonds and Spiritual Fitness retreats.

$12,346,333 to Military Community Youth Ministries (MCYM), "whose mission statement is 'Celebrate life with military teens, Introduce them to the Life-Giver, Jesus Christ, And help them become more like Him.'

$120,000 to Williamsburg Christian Retreat Center for Christian retreats, and also for Christian retreats: $75,000 to Baptist Association's Eastover Retreat Center, $53,000 to American Baptist Church's Canonicus Camping and Conference Center, and thousands more to other centers that "all hire only Christians, and many require in their employment applications that potential employees subscribe to a 'statement of faith' and provide their Christian 'testimony,' detailing when and how they were 'saved.'"

$80,000 to Unlimited Potential, Inc., a ministry "Serving Christ Through Baseball" by sending evangelical Christian major league baseball players to military events.

The above is just a small sample brought to light by Chris Rodda at the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), and is limited to only Department of Defense contracts; individual military bases also spend funds on Christian proselytizing programs and events, but that money is difficult to track given the over 700 US military installations in existence.

CNN's Blitzer & Cafferty: 'Never Heard of Dominionism'

In case we were wondering why the Religious Right often seems to get such uncritical, or at least misguided coverage from so much of the mainstream media -- we need look no further than a recent segment from CNN's Situation Room.  It is the single most startlingly frank admission of ignorance on the part of major figures in journalism I have ever seen.

via www.talk2action.org

Talk To Action's Frederick Clarkson on Dominionism and Blitzer's and Cafferty's (and others') numerous opportunities over the past several years to have learned about it. They seem now to at least know of its existence. Better late than never?

Clarkson:

Blitzer and Cafferty et al have had plenty of opportunities to learn about dominionism and Christian Reconstructionism. They could have read Michelle Goldberg's New York Times best-selling book Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism.in 2006. They could have read my 1997 book, Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy, or Sara Diamond's 1989 classic, Spiritual Warfare: The Politics of the Christian Right -- to name but a few that deal specifically with dominionism and Christian Reconstructionism. We were all widely in the media, including national broadcasts talking about this stuff. They could also read material from such well established and well known organizations that study and counter the American right, as Americans United for Separation of Church & State and People for the American Way, and Political Research Associates. (PRA published my study of Christian Reconstructionism in 1994.)  Religion Dispatches reports on these things all the time as well. They have been discussed in wider context in books by such scholarly best selling authors as Gary Wills, Harvey Cox, Jeff Sharlet and Kevin Phillips, to also name but a few, and in major articles in magazines as diverse as Reason and Mother Jones. (I even discuss Christian Reconstructionism on camera in the 2007 Hollywood film documentary on the politics of abortion, Lake of Fire. Watch it for free, here.)

To be fair, Cafferty does a good explication of the Daily Beast story. 

Yet, there are times that even those opposed to the Christian nationalism of Sarah Palin can somewhat sympathize--albeit for different reasons--with her admittedly cheap (but also clever) "lamestream media" retort.