Tuesday, June 24, 2008

Famous Evangelicals and Conservatives as Grade School Teachers - How Would They Rate?

Would You Want to Be Staring at Any of These Faces in a Schoolroom?

Top Row: The one who will dare to discipline you - James Dobson; the one who will curse you and send you to detention (camp) - Michelle Malkin; the one who will spit at you wildly while you're having a slight problem of Parkinson's - Rush Limbaugh; the one who will recruit you and take your money - Rod Parsley; the one who will convert you to Christianity, but only if you're Jewish - John Hagee

Second Row
: the one who will make you scrub your face to look just like his - Tony Perkins; the two who will produce your multimedia classes and force you to use hairspray - Paul and Jan Crouch; and the one who will hear about as much as the Second Coming - Niccolo Machiavelli

The next two are team-teachers who will assault you one way or the other. One speaks to God (and He talks back!) the other one speaks to herself (since she is the only one worthy enough to hear)

Look at today's sidebar and just guess subject this post is about! That's right, its the holy day for secularists: prayer in public schools was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court on this day in 1962. Think of it: 46 years of not hearing a teacher telling you to bow your head or else!

Seriously, this is one day none of the above people will celebrate. And Barack Obama nailed it when he said yesterday, "Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?" Obama said. "Would we go with James Dobson's or Al Sharpton's?"

Yes, these Christofascists want ONLY Christian prayer in schools. After they get that back, it will be much easier to indoctrinate, uh, I mean teach children real values. What will happen to Buddhist children, Muslin children, Hindu children and even Jewish children? Let's just say that discrimination can works wonders for conversion.

Freedom. Enjoy it while it lasts. Here's a look at a former student who had prayer in schools:

Score: Obama, 1 - Dobson, 0

O.K., the photo on the right is a cheap shot, but it's the most appropriate one I could find in paralleling Dobson's philosophies. Put bluntly, we're dealing with a Christofascist here, not some ordinary Bible thumper.

Obama scored big today on his clash with James Dobson.

Way To Go!!

"I think he's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology," Dobson said.

Asked about Dobson's assessment, Obama said "somebody would be pretty hard-pressed to make that argument" that he was distorting the Bible.

Obama did NOT back down as I thought he might. Others might have, but he didn't. Of course, we have yet to see how this all plays out. Obama's aide told the press that Obama would like to meet with Mr. Dobson. Dobson's the one who refused - and is confused. As a devout Christofascist, Dobson cannot back down in any way. he's painted himself into a corner. Then again, talking reason to Dobson will be like talking to Fred Phelps. Maybe Dobson channels a little of Phelps whenever he gets into "theological" discussions like this. And if Dobson feels cornered in any way, things are going to get very, very nasty.

If you can continue to rebuke Dobson and not give in, I'm with you all the way, Barack Obama!

James Dobson on Barack Obama: Hypocrisy Incarnate!!

Judge Not, James Dobson, Lest You Be Judged
Did you get that? Or am I sitting here on this hard rock for nuthin'?

Hypocrisy Knows No Bounds for Focus' Dobson -
Especially When It Comes To Interpretation of The Bible

Today, James the Holy, James The Just, James the Family Guy Dobson lambasted Barack Obama in ludicrous fashion. Read the AP piece sent out last night about it:

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. - As Barack Obama broadens his outreach to evangelical voters, one of the movement's biggest names, James Dobson, accuses the likely Democratic presidential nominee of distorting the Bible and pushing a "fruitcake interpretation" of the Constitution.

The criticism, to be aired Tuesday on Dobson's Focus on the Family radio program, comes shortly after an Obama aide suggested a meeting at the organization's headquarters here, said Tom Minnery, senior vice president for government and public policy at Focus on the Family.

The conservative Christian group provided The Associated Press with an advance copy of the pre-taped radio segment, which runs 18 minutes and highlights excerpts of a speech Obama gave in June 2006 to the liberal Christian group Call to Renewal. Obama mentions Dobson in the speech.

"Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?" Obama said. "Would we go with James Dobson's or Al Sharpton's?" referring to the civil rights leader.

Dobson took aim at examples Obama cited in asking which Biblical passages should guide public policy — chapters like Leviticus, which Obama said suggests slavery is OK and eating shellfish is an abomination, or Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, "a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application."

"Folks haven't been reading their Bibles," Obama said.

Dobson and Minnery accused Obama of wrongly equating Old Testament texts and dietary codes that no longer apply to Jesus' teachings in the New Testament.

"I think he's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology," Dobson said.

"... He is dragging biblical understanding through the gutter."

Are you through gaping at the text? "His own confused theology?" Dobson really needs to take his 18 plastic honorary doctorates from Bible thumper schools and stick them all where the sun doesn't shine! Here's a former child phychologist (hasn't practiced in umpteen years) and leading Christofascist who has the entire holiness code of Leviticus sewn into every one of his hideous sportcoats so that he can use the Bible as a weapon against people, in particular, gay people. "Wrongly equating Old Testament texts" with Jesus' teachings in the New Testament is what Dobson and Focus on the Family are all about!! He should say that all of Leviticus should be thrown out, but he won't say that because it contains the most important AK-47 against homosexuals that Dobson has: "Thou shalt not lie with a man..."

It's his own worldview and interpretation that are, (sorry) F***ED. Dobson's exegesis always turns Leviticus into Leviticaca. Obama's statement are on target: Leviticus was always quoted by Southern Dixiecrats in favor of slavery. And yes, the Sermon on the Mount is Radical with a capital "R": it contains injunctions such as "resist not evil", "turn the other cheek" the Golden Rule", "judge not, lest you be judged" AND the sermon is one of the main sources of Christian Pacifism! Dobson's interpretation? I shudder to think of "Dare to Discipline" Dobson's interpretation of "turn the other cheek". And to him, the Golden Rule turns out to be Iron Rule in the worst Christofascist sense.

Senator Obama touched on a very thorny issue about Dobson when he spoke about expelling every non-Christian, because that is precisely what Dobson wishes he would live long enough to see.

Readers know that I don't normally go on a rant like this, but this blatant hypocrisy is just too much for anyone to bear. If Obama backs down on his (Dobson's) comments, I may lose some respect for him, but knowing the American public and knowing that Christofascists are powerful...

Bad News for Christofascists!!

"We Are The TRUE Religion" Doesn't Hack It Anymore With Americans

This just in:

(CBS/ AP) America remains a nation of believers, but a new survey finds most Americans don't feel their religion is the only way to eternal life - even if their faith tradition teaches otherwise. The findings, revealed Monday in a survey of 35,000 adults, can either be taken as a positive sign of growing religious tolerance, or disturbing evidence that Americans dismiss or don't know fundamental teachings of their own faiths. Among the more startling numbers in the survey, conducted last year by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life: 57 percent of evangelical church attenders said they believe many religions can lead to eternal life, in conflict with traditional evangelical teaching.

The "divine" message of religious intolerance is just not reaching the public as much as some of Christianity's leaders would like it to: Rod Parsley, John Hagee, Benny Hinn, Pat Robertson evidently aren't working hard enough to drive home hatred of "non-believers." What is this world coming to? We need people to man the gas ovens for "heathens" not pansy scribes to write love letters to infidels!

Christofascists know that everyone has capacity for hatred somewhere in their heart. This Pew study will only tell them that they have to work harder in reaching that hatred.

Sad but true.

Tuesday of Gay Pride Week

Well, it's Day 2 for an event-filled week, and readers should note that here in California, the anti-same-sex marriage protests are pounding out screeds of endearment (not) and carrying misspelled placards extolling Leviticus, Romans, and Ann Coulter. These are people who believe in not the institution of marriage, but the asylum of marriage. And, worse yet, they believe the one-man-one-woman-in-love institution lasted for at least 3000 years! Yet the idea of marrying for love and for raising a family is a hell of a lot younger than 3000 years. It isn't even 300 years old. Not 150 years.

"King Solomon loved, in addition to the daughter of Pharaoh, many foreign women, Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite, Sidonian and Hittite women, from the nations concerning which the Lord had warned the Israelites. "You must not cohabit with them, nor they with you, for they will certainly turn your hearts to their gods". Solomon held fast to them in love. He had 700 official wives and 300 concubines...." (1 Kings 11:1-3).

And how about the Middle Ages? Women were almost always treated as bartered goods. Marriage wasn't much of a sacred institution to them!

Spanish chastity belt

Moonlight and Magnolias? In the antebellum South: before marriage, Southern women had to pretend to be empty-headed waifs - after marriage, they were expected to run a plantation of 100 slaves or more while the menfolk went hunting.

Marriage - Sacred - Time-honored - Institution.

Some people spit into the wind of history.

They really haven't been together all that long.