Dominionism in American Politics – "Expanding the discussion behind the Headlines"
What IS Dominionism?
In a word - theocracy.
Think of this word as a big umbrella. Under the umbrella of Political Dominionism are numerous "franchises" or sects of radical Christian belief whose goal it is to take "dominion" over all things secular.
Just looked at your fancy website and have come to the conclusion that your mama’s must have bottle fed the lot of you and you missed the warm feeling of breast feeding. What a bunch of morons on the Trijicon non-problem. It is my hope you all get a case of the galloping trots and hemorrhoids to go with them. I don’t care how many islamic jihadists our troops send to allah and it’s obvious you are more supportive of the rag heads than our troops. Do us all a favor…take a long walk in the desert with no water and food, find a quiet place and lay down and die quietly. And rest assure NO ONE will say a prayer for you sorry self serving assholes.
As for me, I will buy several Trijicon sights and send them to the boys in the sandbox to make good terrorists out of live ones.
T.H.E. Bear
American Veteran
Okay…now back to this most excellent post by Hraf!
Imagine a world in which there is no neutral position. There is only FOR and AGAINST. Imagine that FOR and AGAINST mean GOOD and EVIL. If you’re not with me, you’re against me. If you’re not my friend, you are my enemy. This is a world without compromise, because compromise is surrender. And the Truth must win out. Clearly, in such a world, there can be no room for pluralism or diversity – or tolerance.
In a pluralistic society there will necessarily be many points of view, many perspectives. Compromise and a live-and-let-live attitude will be commonplace. Opposing voices will be tolerated. Debate will be possible. The right to disagree will be essential.
You can readily see that these two worlds cannot coexist.
Associated with the Columbine Massacre
That is the situation in which we find ourselves today. We live in a world where embracing plurality and diversity and tolerance are seen as attacks on the “Truth” and that freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of choice, are heresy. For heresy, in case you don’t know, means “to choose.” Can you imagine a society which enshrines as a central tenet the evil nature of having the right to choose?
Read the Old Testament, and you will see one. Go to Church on Sunday and you will see this society extolled and praised.
Look around you, and you will find those who wish to return to that society, to impose it upon American liberal democracy.
There is often a vast gulf between rhetoric and fact. We have been introduced to the term “talking point” but talking points have always existed in fact if not in name. According to my Oxford American Dictionary, a talking point is “a topic that causes discussion or argument.” But that’s not what talking points are really used for in public discourse – in fact, they are not used for discourse at all.
Talking points are used to propagandize; they are the embrace of argumentum ad nauseam, i.e. continuous repetition of factoids (usually not factual at all) until they are accepted as fact. It’s an appeal to an old tactic: tell a lie often enough and it will become believed.
We live in an ironic (and terrible) world where in the Crusade on behalf of Truth, lies masquerade as truth.
The means, then, are justified by the ends.
Surely this is not news to you.
We all know what the end striven for is: the “Old Testament” myth of a world of uniform religious belief – where choice is met with rocks. And we all know what gives way first, don’t we? Rocks crack skulls; choice perishes.
Unanimity through blunt force trauma.
Again, not a pretty picture.
We are all of us used to arguments that there is a war on Christianity or more specifically, a war on Christmas. We have all been exposed to the myth of Christianity as a persecuted religion. And I say myth because since the fourth century – that’s seventeen centuries by my count (the year 2024 will be precisely 1700 years since Constantine’s accession opened the war against choice) – Christianity has been not the persecuted, but the persecutor. It has ruthlessly exterminated (or done its best to do so) every alternative to itself for seventeen hundred years.
The people who subscribe to this point of view see freedom of religion, freedom of choice, as a stand against Christianity. What these people want is not freedom of religion. What they want is the privileging of the Christian message at the expense of all others. Any attempt to stand up for freedom of choice is interpreted as a “stand against God.”
And if not stones, it is the threat of hellfire we are bombarded with now. Sowing fear is a terror tactic, and that is precisely what these people are doing. They are called the “American Taliban” for good reason. An example is a letter of protest against MilitaryReligiousFreedom.org’s stand on the issue of biblical scripture on military scope sights:
“…if you force by coercion and terrorization and threats of retaliation the removal of the Scriptures from ‘anything’ you’re fighting against God and you’ll pay the price later if you don’t repent and trust in Jesus now.”
Choice is bad. Choice is the stick with which we are beaten again and again. It was choice, remember, that got us into trouble in the Garden of Eden, or so we are told. It is choice that is heresy. It is choice that automatically places you on the side of “relativism” against “Truth” and against God.
And in this case, we again see the either/or paradigm that was so prevalent under the crusader mentality of the Bush Administration: If you’re not with the conservative Christian viewpoint you are with the Islamic terrorists against America.
And ironically, speaking out against the conservative Christian viewpoint is not allowed. If you do, you attack freedom of speech. Yet conservative pundits on FOX have the right to speak out against anything they wish:
‘Since rachel maddow is bent out of shape about fox and friends news anchor comments, possibly she should move to saudi arabia too. i guess she doesn’t want him to exercise his freedom of speech.”
Again, it is not freedom of speech that is the issue for these people – it is freedom for conservative Christians to trumpet their bigoted and narrow-minded views without having to endure a dissenting voice or an inconvenient and unwelcome fact.
Their message is loud and clear: We can say whatever we want and hate whoever we want but if you take exception to our opinion you are showing yourself to be hateful and intolerant and an opponent of free speech.
Don’t even try to make sense of this. You won’t be able to. Smarter fellows than I have tried. The third century Pagan scholar Porphyry said of the Christian extremists of his own day that “it is easier to write words on water than try to use argument on a Christian.”
And contrary to their wishful thinking, the wall of separation is very real, whenever and however the words were used. If James Madison, who actually wrote the Constitution, had had his way, it would have been higher and more impenetrable yet and we might not have to deal with this nonsense today.
Not only is religion to be protected from government, but the government is to be protected from religion. The goal was that never should the twain meet. The Evangelicals of the 18th century understood this fact, and they supported Madison’s efforts – and yes, Madison was himself a Christian.
The people who speak out against the wall now are a perfect example of what Madison feared; they are the enemy the wall of separation was directed against.
Choice is not hate, my friends. It is freedom. When we started this great nation, our choice was that the government did not get to choose in matters of religion. When the government does choose, we lose that right ourselves.
Including the myopic bigots who can’t see that it is just as likely that when the government makes that choice it will make it on behalf of Christianity not to their liking. The Evangelicals of the 18th century could see it; why cannot the Evangelicals of the 21st?
But you might as well go write your objections on the surface of the nearest pond, because they’re not listening. They’re charging headlong into that very hell they’re threatening us with.
Speaking as a polytheist, problem child, I cannot tell you how much it means to me to hear that from an atheist. As I've said many times, we have far more in common (despite the whole god issue!) than we have differences because what it comes down to for both of us is the right to choose.
I think that the lines are skewed there is no doubt about that. Those who profess to be christians have indeed persecuted or have been persecutor’s but is is true that the Saviour taught such things ? Of course not and so we always mix those that profess to be christians in with those who actually follow Christ.
It would appear that your interpretation of certain historical documents and events have caused such an erroneous writing which just so happens to be the norm of the day. The hypocrisy of protection of government & religion but then the vast majority I’d dare to say 99.9% of the churches are in fact corporations that render unto the government. And so why would it not be normal for vasts amounts of “christians” to be involved in wars when they have had state doctrine banged into their heads every Sunday ?
Always too much for a comment so this should work to get somebody’s brain juices flowing.
When we succeed in revamping the non-profit IRS tax codes…I will delight in seeing the corporate purses disguised as churches and ministries truly render unto Caesar that which is Caesars!
And the number of authentic candidates who are churches that qualify as non-profits will dramatically change!
So very true. I was raised to believe that true balance and peace is not achieveable through tolerance alone, it takes acceptance and inclusion for minds to meet, hearts to heal, and wrongs to be righted. Your thought provoking post is much appreciated!
Thank you Hraf thats most awsome. This has touched me in that of late i find it hard to speak. Not for my lack of content but for a lack of an ear. Thank you i hear you.
You're welcome, Akjah. That is gratifying to hear. I have had the same problem as you, I think; I find it hard to find to find words to describe my reaction to the vitriol coming from the extremists. It's breath-taking to say the least.
You may already have read it, but some of your readers may not, so I'll take the liberty of citing Prof. Bob Altemeyer's The Authoritarians. It can be downloaded in full at http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drbob/TheAut…
Chapter four is entitled "Authoritarian Followers and Religious Fundamentalism," and is pertinent to your posting. I think that he pretty well nails it on page 117 (talking specifically about school prayer, but can be generalized):
So do fundamentalists believe in majority rights or minority rights? The answer is, apparently, neither. They’ll pull whichever argument suits them out of its file when necessary, but basically they are unprincipled on the issue of school prayer. They have a big double standard that basically says, “Whatever I want is right.” The rest is rationalization, and as flexible and multi-directional as a reed blowing in the wind.
Thank you, Makarios. As I said the other day on Heathen's Day, I can always count on you for a timely and pointed link which deepens our understanding of the debate.
Another thought–Fred Clark, of "Slactivist," has described what he calls the "Persecuted Hegemon":
I suspect that American evangelicals' persecution complex is an inevitable side effect of sectarian hegemony. Once you believe that your faith requires cultural dominance, and that it deserves it, then any threat to that dominance — even just the unwelcome reminder of the existence of alternative points of view — is perceived as a threat, as a kind of persecution. Thus, for example, Hannukah is perceived as a threat to, and an attack on, Christmas. . . . [They] come to believe, in the language of the First Amendment, that its own free exercise depends on such an establishment — that its free exercise is incompatible with the free exercise of any other religion (or of no religion at all).
Yes Hrafnkell, thank you for this incisive missive. I would LOVE to share it on FB, but due to the fact that most of my so-called collection of friends on FB are leftovers from my RR fundamentalist days, I doubt they would read it. Immediately, after reading the first sentence or two, they would assume another rant from an atheist or liberal and not consider the content. So now I have to take a different approach by simply asking a question. Then they respond with typical Faux News authoritarian soundbites and I ask another question. Then I simply state some observation to their faulty conclusion. Don't know if it will help open up dialogue or get them to think things through or not. Every once in a while when I detect someone who is interested in debate, I'll direct them here or wherever someone else makes a cogent, logical argument. It's definitely a battle.
I'm sorry to hear that, cri_de_coeur. I'm glad you liked the article, however. Your course of action sounds like the best one, though as you say, it's a battle. Certainty is a dangerous thing. And seldom to I get a cogent argument made in rebuttal – typically ad hominem attacks are offered instead. But then it's hard to come up with an argument when all the facts are against them.
And having read a lot of quotes from Rapture Ready, they seem even worse than the NARasites sometimes, since they sometimes sound like they don't want to do anything but fritter their lives away waiting for their messiah to come…and fantasizing…
Bear the "American Veteran"' represents a relatively new breed of "American" fundamentalist Christians. They are in actuality "Old Testament Christians". Case-in-point, the hope that we will be smote with "hemorrhoids" just like God did to his enemies in I Samuel chapter 5.
"But the hand of the LORD was heavy upon them of Ashdod, and he destroyed them, and smote them with emerods (hemorrhoids). 1 Samuel 5:6
So the people of Ashdod decided to send the ark to another Philistine city: Gath.
What shall we do with the ark of the God of Israel? And they answered, Let the ark of the God of Israel be carried about unto Gath. And they carried the ark of the God of Israel about thither.
And then God smote the people of Gath, the small and the great, with hemorrhoids in their secret parts. The hand of the LORD was against the city with a very great destruction: and he smote the men of the city, both small and great, and they had emerods in their secret parts. 1 Samuel 5:9
Of course, this was after God allowed 30,000 Israelites to be killed by the Philistines.
"And the Philistines fought, and Israel was smitten, and they fled every man into his tent: and there was a very great slaughter; for there fell of Israel thirty thousand footmen." 1 Samuel 4:10
Then came Jesus on the scene but they are not content with the God of the NT. Jesus: " And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." Matt 7:23 We can debate who Jesus is referring to, but they were people convinced they were doing good things in the name of Jesus.
Pledge Your Support & Help Expose Religious Extremism in American Politics
And if not stones, it is the threat of hellfire we are bombarded with now. Sowing fear is a terror tactic, and that is precisely what these people are doing. They are called the “American Taliban” for good reason. An example is a letter of protest against MilitaryReligiousFreedom.org’s stand on the issue of biblical scripture on military scope sights:
And contrary to their wishful thinking, the wall of separation is very real, whenever and however the words were used. If James Madison, who actually wrote the Constitution, had had his way, it would have been higher and more impenetrable yet and we might not have to deal with this nonsense today.
great post. thank you.
Thank you. I'm glad you enjoyed it.
Thank you from an atheist.
Speaking as a polytheist, problem child, I cannot tell you how much it means to me to hear that from an atheist. As I've said many times, we have far more in common (despite the whole god issue!) than we have differences because what it comes down to for both of us is the right to choose.
I think that the lines are skewed there is no doubt about that. Those who profess to be christians have indeed persecuted or have been persecutor’s but is is true that the Saviour taught such things ? Of course not and so we always mix those that profess to be christians in with those who actually follow Christ.
It would appear that your interpretation of certain historical documents and events have caused such an erroneous writing which just so happens to be the norm of the day. The hypocrisy of protection of government & religion but then the vast majority I’d dare to say 99.9% of the churches are in fact corporations that render unto the government. And so why would it not be normal for vasts amounts of “christians” to be involved in wars when they have had state doctrine banged into their heads every Sunday ?
Always too much for a comment so this should work to get somebody’s brain juices flowing.
When we succeed in revamping the non-profit IRS tax codes…I will delight in seeing the corporate purses disguised as churches and ministries truly render unto Caesar that which is Caesars!
And the number of authentic candidates who are churches that qualify as non-profits will dramatically change!
So very true. I was raised to believe that true balance and peace is not achieveable through tolerance alone, it takes acceptance and inclusion for minds to meet, hearts to heal, and wrongs to be righted. Your thought provoking post is much appreciated!
Thank you Hraf thats most awsome. This has touched me in that of late i find it hard to speak. Not for my lack of content but for a lack of an ear. Thank you i hear you.
You're welcome, Akjah. That is gratifying to hear. I have had the same problem as you, I think; I find it hard to find to find words to describe my reaction to the vitriol coming from the extremists. It's breath-taking to say the least.
It is absolutely true…so very true. You always have ears here, and we will make sure we reach out so that we are not simply speaking to the choir.
You may already have read it, but some of your readers may not, so I'll take the liberty of citing Prof. Bob Altemeyer's The Authoritarians. It can be downloaded in full at http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drbob/TheAut…
Chapter four is entitled "Authoritarian Followers and Religious Fundamentalism," and is pertinent to your posting. I think that he pretty well nails it on page 117 (talking specifically about school prayer, but can be generalized):
So do fundamentalists believe in majority rights or minority rights? The answer is, apparently, neither. They’ll pull whichever argument suits them out of its file when necessary, but basically they are unprincipled on the issue of school prayer. They have a big double standard that basically says, “Whatever I want is right.” The rest is rationalization, and as flexible and multi-directional as a reed blowing in the wind.
Thank you, Makarios. As I said the other day on Heathen's Day, I can always count on you for a timely and pointed link which deepens our understanding of the debate.
Thank you for posting that link! This is an invaluable READ! It explains so much about the Dominionist Movement and lends such greater understanding.
Another thought–Fred Clark, of "Slactivist," has described what he calls the "Persecuted Hegemon":
I suspect that American evangelicals' persecution complex is an inevitable side effect of sectarian hegemony. Once you believe that your faith requires cultural dominance, and that it deserves it, then any threat to that dominance — even just the unwelcome reminder of the existence of alternative points of view — is perceived as a threat, as a kind of persecution. Thus, for example, Hannukah is perceived as a threat to, and an attack on, Christmas. . . . [They] come to believe, in the language of the First Amendment, that its own free exercise depends on such an establishment — that its free exercise is incompatible with the free exercise of any other religion (or of no religion at all).
Full post at http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2009/0…
Yes Hrafnkell, thank you for this incisive missive. I would LOVE to share it on FB, but due to the fact that most of my so-called collection of friends on FB are leftovers from my RR fundamentalist days, I doubt they would read it. Immediately, after reading the first sentence or two, they would assume another rant from an atheist or liberal and not consider the content. So now I have to take a different approach by simply asking a question. Then they respond with typical Faux News authoritarian soundbites and I ask another question. Then I simply state some observation to their faulty conclusion. Don't know if it will help open up dialogue or get them to think things through or not. Every once in a while when I detect someone who is interested in debate, I'll direct them here or wherever someone else makes a cogent, logical argument. It's definitely a battle.
I'm sorry to hear that, cri_de_coeur. I'm glad you liked the article, however. Your course of action sounds like the best one, though as you say, it's a battle. Certainty is a dangerous thing. And seldom to I get a cogent argument made in rebuttal – typically ad hominem attacks are offered instead. But then it's hard to come up with an argument when all the facts are against them.
And having read a lot of quotes from Rapture Ready, they seem even worse than the NARasites sometimes, since they sometimes sound like they don't want to do anything but fritter their lives away waiting for their messiah to come…and fantasizing…
Bear the "American Veteran"' represents a relatively new breed of "American" fundamentalist Christians. They are in actuality "Old Testament Christians". Case-in-point, the hope that we will be smote with "hemorrhoids" just like God did to his enemies in I Samuel chapter 5.
"But the hand of the LORD was heavy upon them of Ashdod, and he destroyed them, and smote them with emerods (hemorrhoids). 1 Samuel 5:6
So the people of Ashdod decided to send the ark to another Philistine city: Gath.
What shall we do with the ark of the God of Israel? And they answered, Let the ark of the God of Israel be carried about unto Gath. And they carried the ark of the God of Israel about thither.
And then God smote the people of Gath, the small and the great, with hemorrhoids in their secret parts. The hand of the LORD was against the city with a very great destruction: and he smote the men of the city, both small and great, and they had emerods in their secret parts. 1 Samuel 5:9
Of course, this was after God allowed 30,000 Israelites to be killed by the Philistines.
"And the Philistines fought, and Israel was smitten, and they fled every man into his tent: and there was a very great slaughter; for there fell of Israel thirty thousand footmen." 1 Samuel 4:10
Then came Jesus on the scene but they are not content with the God of the NT. Jesus: " And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." Matt 7:23 We can debate who Jesus is referring to, but they were people convinced they were doing good things in the name of Jesus.