The "Compassion" of Paul Ryan and The Right: "The Poor You Will Always Have With You - We'll See To It"

NOTE: Although I've posted this article under stressful circumstances  (see postscript below) the perspective presented is definitely appropriate and shared by many people in this country. I may not be writing for a week or two, so I hope that this article is passionate enough to suffice for a while. 

"But a certain Samaritan, as he traveled, came where he was. When he saw him, he was moved with compassion, came to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. He set him on his own animal, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. On the next day, when he departed, he took out two denarii, and gave them to the host, and said to him, 'Take care of him. Whatever you spend beyond that, I will repay you when I return.'"
— Luke 10:30–36, World English Bible


On Tax Day, April 15th, Rep. Paul Ryan had this to say about "his" budget:

Our budget offers a compassionate and optimistic contrast to a future of health-care rationing and unbearably high taxes. We lift the crushing burden of debt, repair the safety net, make America’s tax system fair and competitive, and ensure that our health and retirement programs have a strong and lasting future.[1]

There are people who would beg to differ with Ryan's statement, notably the people fighting his expansive social welfare cuts on Capitol Hill and in the White House. The fight has extended to the matter of the national debt and the next several weeks will be grueling ... and revealing. If you look at the fight in a simplified perspective, it becomes a battle for the existence of compassion: should it be sustained now (in a diminished form), or in the future? Republicans are already naming their form of "compassion" by calling it INTERGENERATIONAL JUSTICE. 


But whatever the outcome of the fight, we must not lose sight of the fact that the economic and financial  crises we now face are about people: some people will benefit, while others will not. Cost cuts to social welfare agencies are already showing results: the poor are not only getting catastrophically poorer because they have less money, but also because they have less access to housing and necessary subsidies. It is the same with healthcare reform: while decrying imagined atrocities of "Obamacare", not one conservative member of Congress has put forth any real solution for the uninsured. Republican actions in the House have, in fact, ensured us that none will ever be forthcoming. 


The conservative image has never taken such a beating as in this Congress. 


In the past, the conservative rich have always trotted out the defensive statistic that conservatives actually give more/do more for the disenfranchised than liberals because the liberals want the government to do their giving for them. They chafed when George Bush's "compassionate conservatism" was met with the label of "oxymoron." What liberals have always realized, however, is that most conservatives tend to give only to their own causes and many times those causes not only leave out whole groups of Americans, but actually sustain the gap between the haves and the have-nots. Conservatives must control where their money goes. Liberals do it too, but conservatives do it more often and on a larger scale.


TRUE COMPASSION


Giving to those in need comes down to true compassion. But what is "true compassion"? Who is more compassionate - a church elder making a cake for a church bazaar held for the homeless or the man who off-handedly gives a man on the street a dollar because he asked for it? Both are compassionate, but the church elder KNOWS to whom she is giving her time, money and effort to, while the anonymous man cares not who the needy person is (or even if the person is, indeed, needy at all). Conservatives would not call the latter's gesture compassion, but the mere foolhardiness of a "bleeding heart liberal."


In biblical terms, one could associate the Good Samaritan with true compassion: when the priest and the Levite saw the man they both passed by. Why? Perhaps because when they saw them they judged him immediately as not worth their efforts. Now, notice that Christ's story did not say that the Samaritan knew he was helping a Jew.[2] In other words, the Samaritan did not judge, nor did he know who he was helping. The Samaritan just did what he felt was the right thing- the human thing -to do.

In another belief system (not really a religion), there's the story of  bodhisattva  Quan Yin (correction: stories - hundreds of legends, but all of their central themes involve her compassion). The most popular is the one that after she was made an Immortal, Quan Yin started her ascent to Enlightenment (heaven), but heard the cries of people still in need, forsook heaven and descended to help them. There are many parallels given to Quan Yin's Christian counterpart, Mary, the mother of Jesus. (Aside: it is interesting to note that much of the non-denominational and Protestant denominational Christian Right consider prayers to St. Mary to constitute "Mariolatry" or idolization of the Virgin Mary. They are loathe to think of any intercessor to Christ for mercy.)


COMPASSIONATE CAPITALISM -
 ACCORDING TO RYAN & CO.


Just as true compassion does not need judgment, it does not need a reason except for helping someone to survive in the best way possible. Compassion need not come in the form of the Christian thing to do, nor even the right thing to do, but simply as the human thing to do. People in need do not have the luxury of determining from whence compassion comes.


The above statement of Paul Ryan is, to say the least, dripping with the disingenuous patronizing to the poor that many conservatives today deal out: the belief that capitalism in all its glory will ultimately benefit everyone.  The conservative mindset also believes that individual investment, individual charity, individual compassion will also prove supreme. 


They will not. Individual charity is subjective and can be manipulated. It can be focused on a number too few to benefit as many as possible. Philanthropy and charity have given the public many blessings, to be sure, but no matter how generous, they have always benefited only a portion of the truly needy. In most cases, the giving has been focused. In addition, many faith-based organizations are unfortunately too focused and their charitable agendas can be skewed: catastrophes, for example, have been used by what might be called "God's Ambulance Chasers" more intent on conversion to religious beliefs than relief.[3]


Of course, individual charity can be the most valuable adjunct to a society's governmental social services: it lets us know that - coupled with government - our society is doing everything it can to aid in our people's survival. Budget-slashing by the likes of Rep. Paul Ryan, however, puts a burden on individual charity that it cannot possibly sustain ... without neglecting hordes of our country's citizenry. Perhaps the truly sad part about the likes of  Mr. Ryan is that he knows it, and doesn't seem to care - hence the disingenuous statement above. Of course, he may not be entirely to blame, since his party is, after all, controlled by a very powerful group: the coalition of religious entities known as the Christian Right. 


AT A CROSSROADS


From what we've seen these last twenty years, can anyone truly say without a doubt that social conservatives (the Christian Right)possess true compassion? Their own "agenda" of condemnation exposes how they pre-judge people and groups, vehemently prejudicing against segments of society: for example, we have seen the great Southern Baptist Convention try to harm businesses that have supported the LGBT community and treated it with respect. And while some within the Christian Right community describe their compassion as "tough love" (Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association comes to mind) others beg to differ on that point: can "love" of any kind be borne of bigotry? [4]


So now our country's compassion is at a crossroads because of a budget crisis: should it be government (liberal) or individual (conservative) compassion? According to people like Ryan, America cannot have both. We could, but that might mean raising taxes while giving more to charity. A blogger at Hubpages.com put it well::

There are two kinds of compassion in this country. The compassion of the left and the compassion of the right. The compassion of the Democrat and the compassion of the Republican. The compassion of the government and the compassion of the individual.

Whichever one you choose, put your money where your mouth is.

With "slash and burn" Republicans goaded by Dominionists and corporations, the compassion of the Democrat may be gone entirely. And the other kind of compassion will be meted out to a select few. 


God help us.




1.The new terminology for Ryan's futuristic "compassion" is INTERGENERATIONAL JUSTICE. (!?)


2. Remember, the Jew was stripped and therefore not recognizable by any particular clothing. Also, Samaritanism and Judaism were very similar Abrahamic religions and shared the tenet of circumcision. 


 - The story of the Good Samaritan poses a conundrum for many in the Christian Right because it is sited as the epitome of compassion by many evangelicals and therefore is something they strive for; however, the Samaritan does not evangelize or proselytize in any way, leaving the audience of the story to wonder why evangelizing is necessary in order to do good.
  
3. In the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti, a faith-based organization spent $100,000 erecting electronic Bibles (60 loudspeaker systems from which Biblical verses were broadcast) among people who were still not receiving adequate medical treatment. Another example: after the horrendous Asian Tsunami, Jerry Falwell's Thomas Road Baptist Church sent food and clothing, along with 600,000 Christian scripture tracts (the cost of which totaled more than the emergency goods sent). Since the victims were mostly Buddhist and Hindu, the tracts were considered insultingly superfluous and respectfully sent back.


4. The concept of "love the sinner, hate the sin" is especially egregious: no other moral precept has ever been so misused as some ridiculous band aid for guilt. The phrase is always used while knowing that it goes against human nature: just as Jesus Christ new that the concept of "love thine enemy" was a hard sell, so to does the Christian Right know that LSHS falls on deaf ears, but it needs the phrase to sound more benign.


POSTSCRIPT





Parts of this article have been written while my former partner and best friend of fourteen years lies dying of liver cancer.  I have been his caregiver for six of those years, aided by his current partner and soul mate.  We live in San Francisco, (that bastion of liberalism and perversion!) certainly the most compassionate city in America. It was here that he was nurtured as an artist (award-winning theater director) and came to nurture other artists as well. It is in San Francisco that he is now comforted and cared for by an incredible extended family of friends, hospice workers, physicians, and therapists - many made possible by San Francisco and the caring state of California. I firmly believe that he could not have gotten greater "comfort care" anywhere else. He is passing in dignity as well. 


While there are conservatives who can be regarded as compassionate, I sincerely doubt that those in Congress (guided by today's Christian Right) would be as wonderfully human as the people I see around us. Ironic, isn't it - that such love and humanity should exist in the city they castigate most. 


We are put on earth to thrive from the knowledge that we have helped everyone else survive as best as possible. It is unfortunate that others do not see this purpose, because by being confined within boundaries of their own kind of compassion, they are depriving many people of the thing they need most: 


Humanity.  

The REAL Sissy Boys And What They're Doing To America

So will the SBC apologize? Gimme a break!

Four days ago, Anderson Cooper360 and CNN ran a series which focused on the tip of a proverbial iceberg: "The Sissy Boy Experiment" brought out the frustration and the compassion of America's psyche. It also brought out the hypocrisy of "reparative therapists" and their supporters in the Christian Right.


So why isn't anyone saying "we're sorry"?


Because the REAL "sissy boys" the ones so cowardly, so unmanly, if you will,  never apologize. Where some people see apology as a sign of strength/courage in admitting an error or sin, others look upon it as a weakness: e.g. why did it take the Southern Baptist Convention over 150 years to apologize for slavery? Why did it take the Catholic church 1700 years for a pope to cry at Jerusalem's Wailing Wall?


Over the last several days, we've viewed the ultimate in cowardice in George "rentboy" Rekers on CNN (The Sissy Boy Experiment): his reaction to news of the suicide of former patient Kirk Murphy was, at best, disingenuous, and his sloughing off of any responsibility was weak and unprofessional. And on the 15th, we'll witness the disdain of the Southern Baptist Convention in being asked to apologize for the persecution and suffering heaped upon the LGBTQ community.


I've already written on the Christian Right's refusal to admit its past errors (Christian Crime Line), but its more current misdeeds need further exploration: the establishment of ex-gay organizations and ministries, the support of Dominionist historians, pseudo-scientists and fear-mongering against any collective not within its small but powerful sphere threaten to undo the diversity for which our country is so celebrated.


It is as if the Christian Right has taken up shock talk host Michael Savage's call to battle: "Diversity Equals Perversity!" One can certainly see in Bryan Fischer's bombastic rants a lethal kind of homogenization (not assimilation) that will not only kill compassion for one another, but will surely lead to actual bloodshed. The last part of The Sissy Boy Experiment focused on Joseph Nicolosi and his group NARTH (National Association for Reparative Therapy of Homosexuals). CNN missed a particular salient point in its interview with Nicolosi: he is no longer a member of the American Psychological Association, since his ethics and theories were discredited by fellow members. In fact, Nicolosi and professional anti-gay Paul Cameron look as if they are in a contest to see how many professional organizations they can be expelled from!


Real Life Persecution


Besides sponsoring reparative therapy and ex-gay organizations, the Southern Baptist roots to LGBT oppression go back to the first decades of the AIDS crisis: many people were summarily kicked out of their homes while they were sick and dying. The situation, after all, called for righteousness and Southern Baptists wanted the world to know that they were the most righteous group of all. This show of righteousness came after President Bailey Smith's infamous statement "God Almighty does not hear the prayers of a Jew" and the dictum that women must still be subservient to their husbands.*


Among the most common of sins within (as well as without) the Christian Right is the blatant sin of demonizing, but who among the CR will acknowledge it? Will Lou Engle apologize for the death of Ugandan homosexual activist David Kato? Will Scott Lively do the same? Will Tony Perkins apologize for the rash of gay teen suicides last year? Will Bryan Fischer? Will Rev. Keenan Roberts apologize for psychological damage caused by Hell Houses? Will Terry Jones apologize for the death of U.N. volunteers after he burned the Q'uran?


One might posit the idea that they will never apologize, so why should we be concerned? The problem, as some see it, is that our recent religious-political system has been getting away with saying and doing anything it pleases. It never monitors itself: if, for example, Jones had not gotten the attention of the whole world, we would not have witnessed such an outcry from the Right - especially from the Christian Right. Proper chastisement is for the enemy. In any case, Jones was not really chastised since most of the churches with a Fundamentalist bent merely whispered "he's not one of us!"


Media's "sissy boys" have also written/broadcast half-truths and misinformation with impunity: even though FOX News' credibility has slipped, it continues to advertise itself as "fair and balanced."** Watch the piece Think Progress put together about Bill O'Reilly and his demonization of immigrants. It's almost musical in its rhythm, picking its own "fair and balanced" way through O'Reilly's righteous indignation.


In politics, some of the biggest "sissy boys" are bullies:

Gov. Scott Walker abruptly reversed course today and demoted the son of a large campaign contributor [Jerry Deschane] to his former job with the state Department of Regulation and Licensing. The move comes one day after the Journal Sentinel reported that Brian Deschane, 27, had landed an $81,500-a-year job in Walker's administration overseeing environmental and regulatory matters and dozens of employees at the Department of Commerce. The promotion amounted to a raise of 26%. The younger Deschane has no college degree, little management experience and two drunken driving convictions.

No cure, but a push back!


So the country's REAL "sissy boys" are practically everywhere, getting away with bullying and demonizing minorities, women, gays, the poor, and anyone else not fitting into their narrow spectrum. But like all "sissy boys" they are extremely afraid of some things: the facts, experts, and activists armed with knowledge (and creativity). 


Once confronted with their sins, they will try to shirk accountability, but like kids fighting in a schoolyard, the bullies will quickly become sissies when pinned down by determined, constant, intelligent presentation of reality to the public. 


You have to make the "sissy boy" scream "Uncle!"


*Reiterated by Pat Robertson more than several times.
** Joe.My.God: "According to a former managing editor at Fox News, chairman Roger Ailes installed bullet-proof glass on his midtown Manhattan office windows because he feared assassination by gay activists." 

The Putrid Politics of Jesse Kelly's Super-Ego

Let's face it, the Giffords shooting brought out both the best and the worst in us: President Obama gave a fitting speech while pundits and politicians fought to prove who was to blame - and not to blame. And amidst this spectacle, we gave short shrift to some details which are now only emerging. 

We all knew that Giffords' election opponent, Jesse Kelly, used gun imagery (literally) in his campaign against Giffords. And we know that he wasn't at all apologetic about it. We also know that know that Kelly fully intended to keep his campaign alive after the election:

From Tucson Weekly  - DEC. 28:

The GOP rumor circuit is buzzing with word that Kelly will announce his plans to run against Giffords as soon as mid-January.


And, depending on how things go at tomorrow’s hearing of the Commission on Appellate Court Appointments, he may end up with a friend on the Independent Redistricting Committee.

That "friend" is one Christopher Gleason, whose ties to a right-wing religious group, Vision 360, kept him from being considered. The group "plants" churches in major metropolitan areas.

Vision360 is committed to furthering the message, the movement and the cultivation of leadership. As a church planting organization, our mission is to serve and empower a collaborative church planting community in 500 global cities by 2025. We believe through an investment in gifted leaders, we can change the spiritual trends of our country and the world.

Church planter Steve Johnson, together with Al Weiss, President, Worldwide Operations, Walt Disney Parks & Resorts, felt a call by God to begin to multiply churches.  Originally the goal was to start 20 churches surrounding the city of Orlando, strategically using qualified and experienced church planters. 

The ministry's website also spouts fundamentalist biblical values which seem at odds with it other value statements concerning the now-pejorative social justice* (made so by Glenn Beck). To it's credit, however, it does not seem to ally itself with any fundamentalist denomination like the Southern Baptist Convention. Is it Reconstructionism in disguise? It's possible, since support of Jesse Kelly conveys the Reconstructionist premise of infiltrating government.

NO WORD


Tucson is oddly silent lately, maybe because Brian Miller, Pima County Republican Party chair, has called on everyone to take a break from politics for a while.. But with politics and politicians, nothing is really quiet from lack of activity. And while I haven't been able to find out any material on Gleason's appointment, sources say that Tea Partiers, Vision 360 and Jesse Kelly are busy laying the foundations of a new campaign. 

 

Of course, timing is crucial, but so is the strategy of not seeming too eager to pounce on the tragedy, especially with the poor judgment of his last campaign. So, in a sense, Kelly's future will hinge on several things: Vision 360's generosity and patience and the CD 8 constituents' patience and compassion for Giffords.

 

UPDATE: As of this writing, Jesse Kelly has taken on the job of development director of the website for Vision360 and is soon to host a new radio talk show called Spotlight Arizona, sponsored by - Vision 360. 

 

Sigmund Freud defined the super-ego as the moralizing role of the psyche. Behind Kelly's shoot-em up Tea Party campaign lies a super-ego that may be a far greater driving force than the hunger for mere political power. I wonder if we shouldn't be very watchful of Kelly's political moves and Vision 360's as well. Remember the motto of the unhinged (but dangerous) Repent Amarillo: "Politics Is Ministry." And we should remember this quote from Kelly in December:

“We have unfinished business here in southern Arizona. It’s time to finish what we started,” the e-mail flier to top donors in Tucson, Ariz., read. “I am running for Congress again, and I am asking you to join me. Early contributions will allow us to focus for two years on unseating Gabrielle Giffords!”

A strategy of Generosity - Patience - Compassion. A tall order for Kelly and his friends. A very tall order.

* Read Vision360's statement on "Social Responsibility"

Insanity Overload: Why Can't We Just Sit Back And Enjoy It?

I haven't watched a TV sitcom in the last five years. RSS feeds from blogs and news services constantly decorate my home page with more inanity than all the networks could come up with. But there are times when I suffer from a kind of "insanity overload." And the last several weeks made it seem as if we were living on the front pages of the old Weekly World News:

• According to World Net Daily, Gay parents are going to abort their straight babies
• Michele Bachmann insists that America was founded by people from all over the world and Thomas Jefferson plagiarized the Declaration of Independence from the Mayflower Pilgrims.
• Rick Joyner reports from a portal to heaven that the foundation of America is on fire.
• Wiley "Imprecatory Prayers" Drake wants to be President of the Southern Baptist Convention
• Jared Laughner pleads "Not Guilty." Who knew?
• Michele Bachmann pre-records a "rebuttal" to Obama's State of the Union speech even though she doesn't know what he's going to say.
• Some evangelists can't wait for the End Times - Definitely Happening on May 21st 
• And Cindy Jacobs still insists that God speaks through her when she says "gliddy glop gloopy nibby nobby nooby le-le lo-lo-lo"

"Insanity overload" leads to a kind of bizarre form of writers' block: it freezes the brain, like cryoablation, before attempting to  remove any sense of reality. Fortunately, IO doesn't last very long because one's reason usually takes all of the really stupid and insane things that have happened and organizes them into IO files safely in the back of the brain, to be used at a later time when dealing with the idiots who created the IO in the first place.

I know this last sounded smug, but have pity, please. I'm dealing with the likes of Cindy Jacobs, Rick Joyner and Michele Bachmann and other assorted, ah... people (he says, discreetly).

So in the last weeks we had:

DADT CAUSED BIRDS TO FALL FROM THE SKIES

Cindy Jacobs declaring that the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell is (probably) the reason why we had dead birds falling from the sky in Arkansas. She did it in that inevitable Cindy Jacobs way, peppering her speech with unintelligable words just to point out that she is better than the Oracle of Delphi (who didn't know what she was talking about either).

And speaking of people who don't know what they're talking about, The Huffington Post Reports:

BACHMANN TO GIVE HER OWN STATE OF THE UNION REBUTTAL

The Minnesota Republican's office confirmed to The Huffington Post that she [Michele Bachmann] intends to broadcast a prerecorded message through the Tea Party Express website once Obama is done speaking.

A pre-recorded "rebuttal." Is there an oxymoron somewhere in that? Anyway, to ponder that sublime piece of idiocy can turn one's brain green.

RICK JOYNER SEES THE END OF AMERICA - LITERALLY

Pastor Rick Joyner of Leading Way Ministries chimed in with his worldview on a Christian news station that he journeyed to Moravian Falls, NC where, as everyone knows, there is an actual portal to Heaven, then had a dream where he was shown the destruction of America. Remember, this is the same man who was taken up to heaven, had discussions with saints (whom he couldn't name) and saw William Branham (the man who preached the total subjugation of women through a doctrine called the "demon seed") sitting in the highest throne in heaven. He also said some of the saints were placed in wierd positions. Joyner is also a major investor in Heritage U.S.A. where you may still be batized while whizzing down a waterslide.

SBC IN TOTAL CHAOS

 

During the last week, we saw the Southern Baptist Convention, like alligators, eat their own: former president, Richard Land, was forced to resign from the Anti-Defamation League's Interfaith Coalition on Mosques because he stated that Muslims had a right to build mosques in this country and therefore "promoted Islam." Then we had Wiley Drake consider a run for Land's old job even though the Southern Baptist Convention practically disowned him for calling for prayers to end the lives of Obama and members of Congress:

In my opinion we have left our traditional BIBLICAL positions, and become a large group being led by a small group of leaders who are out of touch with what the average Southern Baptist desires for our ministry under the leadership of The Holy Ghost.

In other words, the SBC is living in the 21st century while it's members are really stuck back in the 14th century  - and want to stay there.

WORLD NET DAILY WARNS ABOUT GAYS USING ADVANCED GENOMIC DEVICES

 

If two homosexual men want to use in vitro fertilization to conceive a baby and then use genetics technology to ensure the baby is also "gay," while disposing of any "straight" embryos, would the law have any ethical problems with that? John A. Robertson of the University of Texas Law School is the chair of the Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and an advocate of what his book "Children of Choice" calls "procreative liberty."

This man doesn't believe that the world will come to an end May 21st.: his "example" comes in the form of a story set in the year 2025. Forward thinker. 

IF WE ELIMINATE LIBERAL VOTERS, WE'LL RESCUE AMERICA!

And last, but not least, on the Insanity Overload list, there's the tortured reasoning of Michael Voris, S.T.B., (see video below) who posits the theory that democracy is a failure and only the virtuous should have a right to vote since they're ...ah ...smarter? Since he's a devout Sedevacantist Catholic, he can never be attracted to Michele Bachmann. Pity.

Insanity Overload: watching the parade of the pompous and pious can be numbing enough without being assaulted to this degree. A TV sitcom is mighty tempting right now. After all, I have to have some grip on reality.

We Need a Christian Dictator

Uploaded by OnKneesforJesus. - News videos from around the world.

Demonizing America - Part 2: "Kill Them All! God Will Take Care Of His Kind!"

Like it or not, the concept of bullying has been with man since the very beginning of his existence. We called it "survival of the fittest," to rationalize terrorizing the weaker species. During ancient times, bullying took the form of slavery. It took the form of victors lording it over vanquished: male rape was seen as an excellent form of bullying as well as slavery, which, if one thinks about it, is perhaps the ultimate form of bullying. In the Bible,  the ultimate bully was embodied in Goliath, the man-mountain whom the Philistines sent out to daily harass and taunt the Hebrew armies. Some people argue, however, that the ultimate bully was the God of the Old Testament. Israel was His schoolyard. Look what He did to poor, defenseless Job!

On a bet with Satan.

Size and strength characterized bullies whether in personal size or number of soldiers in an army: Napoleon and Hitler were considered bullies by the relatively defenseless Eastern European countries: when Neville Chamberlain waved the paper treaty with Hitler in front of the Britons and declared "peace in our time,"  the Czechs cowered with the thoughts of the bully Nazi army  - which did, in fact, march into Czechoslovakia days later.

Whatever the form, however, bullying was always a state of the strong ruthlessly handling the weak.

Religious bullying is not new: if you think of one sect purposely taunting, terrorizing, then ultimately killing off another sect as bullying, then you're right. The first case of western civilization genocide was the bullying, then annihilation of the Cathars of Southern France. They were different than anyone else, wore different clothes, worshipped not in churches but out in fields, did not eat meat, did not believe in hierarchy such as bishops and were extremely good to their neighbors. Naturally, the pope hated them.

To publicize their heresy, they were forced by the Church to wear yellow crosses sewn onto their tunics (demonstrating that Hitler wasn't very original) and routinely had their hands cut off, the only reason being that the church considered them heretics. Their numbers continued to grow despite the vicissitudes imposed on them, until the pope had a plan: get together with the king of France, Louis the VIII,  take their lands and simply eradicate them. That's when the battle cry above was born: while beseiging the city of Beziers, one of Louis' commanders asked the papal legate how he could tell the 200 Cathars from the rest of the 15,000 Christian citizens of Beziers. The legate's answer went down in history: "Kill them all - God will take care of his kind." Louis and Clement's strategy claimed approximately 120,000 lives over a period of some 20 years, becoming the first genocide in modern history. It was known, of course, as the Albigensian "Crusade."* 

Revisionist "historians" of Christianity always seem to overlook the Albigensian Crusade, perhaps because it not only stained the church of the Middle Ages but because it also gave rise to another dark era of religious bullying: The Inquisition. For hundreds of years, men like the legendary Torquemada  carried out the bullying of Jews and Moors (Muslims) in Spain, Portugal, Italy, France and scattered places across the rest of Europe. 

I remember the evening I went to see the film adaptation of Dan Brown's The DaVinci Code. A nun was holding a makeshift sign that said "Lies, lies, lies!" But while the movie focused on the Church organization, Opus Dei, it did not touch upon the Albigensian Crusade to any substantial degree. That was, to me, the typical philosophy touted by almost all of America's religious leaders: never admit to anything and never, ever apologize. And if you have to apologize, do it when people won't remember what you're apologizing for. The Vatican recently apologized to a very dead Gallileo for imprisoning him, and the Southern Baptist Convention apologized for its part in the institution of slavery 140 years after the U.S. condemned and abolished the inhumane practice.

Just how many religious people in America know of the "dark side" of their religion?  The percentage would be closer to "0" than you think. Today's religion and yesterday's history aren't exactly friends, which is why we're seeing revisionists cropping up, so that people of faith need not apologize for anything. One wonders if people actually know about the first Christian theologian - Tertullian - and his last-minute conversion to Montanism or that many of the Vandals and Visigoths sacking Rome were Arian Christians.  How they would react to the stories about the concentration camps for pagans in Skythopolis, Syria?  Or the persecution of heretics? And for the last hundred years little has been made about Martin Luther's horrendous anti-Semitism (he wrote the seminal work, On The Jews and Their Lies)

Other instances of religious demonizing, then bullying, were the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre (40,000 "heretical" French Protestants massacred in one day), Native American Indian slavery ("ungodly heathens" forced to build and work on the California Missions - approximately 50,000), and Chatila (massacre of 1500 Muslims by Christian Phalangists). Bullying on a continuous scale came in the form of The Crusades (millions of Jews and Muslims killed in the an untold number of major wars, minor wars and massacres), Charlemagne's forced conversions of the Saxons (legend of Widukind) and in later years, the Russian pogroms and massacres of Jewish villages and settlements.

The worst incident at demonizing in history?  There are so many, but arguably the most vile was the "Blood Libel" of the Jews, so strongly entrenched into the European psyche that it took hundreds of years to convince Christians that Jews did not kill gentile children to drink their blood for secret ceremonies. (BTW, this gave rise to the Jewish Legend of the Golem)

DEMONIZING PWAs

Many people were demonized during the "Age of AIDS" (1982 - 2000).. PWAs ( People With AIDS -primarily gay men) were the new lepers since during the first years medical establishments and health organizations were uncertain about how contagious the virus was. There were a few faith-based agencies in San Francisco during the beginning and the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles stepped up to the plate in 1986, but so very many churches abstained from doling out compassion. They just weren't up to the courage of Father Damien.

The Christian Right's eagerness to demonize gays, politicians and non-Christians became evident with the like of Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority and Pat Robertson's 700 Club. Of course, statements from people like Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms didn't hurt either:

Americablog:

Sen. Jesse Helms says the government should spend less money on people with AIDS because they got sick as a result of "deliberate, disgusting, revolting conduct," The New York Times reported Wednesday....

Pat Robertson:

- I have a zero tolerance for sanctimonious morons who try to scare people.

- I know one man who was impotent who gave AIDS to his wife and the only thing they did was kiss.

Such was the fervor of the Moral Majority at the time, that it seemed as if they danced in the streets while people were dying in the streets: "Thank you God, you have sent a plague to our enemies."

THE LAST HOLDOUT?

Probably the most obvious (and the most vicious) holdout as far as demonizing PWAs is concerned is the powerful Southern Baptist Convention. Almost thirty years after the start of the epidemic, the SBC still cannot point to the sponsorship of any faith-based agency dealing with AIDS ...in this country. They lauded Mike Huckabee in 1996 when he wanted to quaranteen PWAs (the casual contact theory had been disproven years befor then, but Huckabee still pushed the quarnateen - to his own embarrassment years later). Today, they still follow Jesse Helms dictum that helping AIDS victims in Africa was fine because they were "all heterosexuals" while all AIDS victims in America were perverted sodomites.***

Next Up: 

Demonizing America - Part 3:  HELL HOUSES - Causing Teen Suicides Or Rescuing Souls?

* Scholar Steven Runciman wrote:

"High ideals were besmirched by cruelty and greed ... the Holy War was nothing more than a long act of intolerance in the name of God".

 **"That massacre, said Pope Gregory XIII, gave him more pleasure than fifty Battles of Lepanto, and he commissioned Vasari to paint frescoes of it in the Vatican"."

***I may be wrong on this since my research is over a year old. 

Emotional Vandalism vs. Freedom Of Speech: Will The Malice That Embodies Fred Phelps Prevail?

Note: On Wednesday, Oct. 6th, the Supreme Court of The United States will hear oral arguments in the case of Snyder vs. Westboro Baptist Church.

Fred Phelps has now gotten exactly what he's always wanted: notoriety. From the time he threw the first punch at an attendee of  a revival (at age 17, his first preaching gig was to a Mormon group and someone didn't exactly agree with him), he's always courted fame. Fame through controversy. Fame through hate.

I've followed Fred's trail for over 14 years. The first time I encountered Phelps was as a book publicist for Fr. Daniel Helmeniak, author of the book, What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality. Helmeniak is an eminent Jesuit scholar who knew about Phelps and his homophobic rantings, so I was able to get Daniel on a radio show in Kansas City, MO. with Phelps debating him on the subject. Phelps was in the studio while Daniel was on a phone hook-up.

The interview was a typical Phelpsian circus with the Phelps clan picketing the radio station (allegedly for broaching the subject of homosexuality). During the interview, Daniel played the sweet, but thoroughly academic professional, politely asking Phelps which "pages" his Biblical sitings were on (knowing full well that Phelps had made them up). Frustrated Phelps grew impatient when the time came for questions from listeners who seemed to share Daniel's knowledge and sophistication. He stormed out of the station in less than twenty minutes. The host, however, kept Daniel on - for a full 90 minutes  - because the call lines were heating up (the program had only been scheduled for thirty minutes).

Phelps deemed the radio spot a "success." He's a hit-and-run publicity man.

A year after Daniel's interview, I came across an unpublished manuscript attached to a deposition as Exhibit A in a court case. It was an unauthorized biography of Fred Phelps. I read all 140 pages overnight.

To label Fred Phelps as evil is ridiculous, simply because, much like any real monster, Phelps' persona is beyond labeling. If Phelps' soul can be labeled anything, the closest definition would be grotesque: it is misshapen, hideous in its deformity; repulsive. Visually, it is like The Elephant Man, but without the slightest trace of humanity. And while Hitler had a disfigured conscience, Fred Phelps seems to have no conscience at all. He delights in both hating and being hated. He is a true egotist.

And as such, he hungers not for blood, but for publicity.

It is true that he used his exemplary speaking skills to defend civil rights cases. However, upon close examination, his oratory was meant to focus only on himself: one of the breaches of ethics he was cited for  in his disbarment was that if a client couldn't pay Fred's fees after losing a case, he would automatically turn around and sue the client. So very many of these cases came up, it was rumored that Phelps's primary income was derived from these turnabouts. 

For the last half century, Fred Phelps and his clan have alternated between bizarre soap opera and embarrassing nuisance for Topeka, KS: addiction to amphetamines, charges of a Fagin operation (involving the Phelps children), beatings, starvation, threats of knee-capping (with a .48), severe whippings, extortion, insidious and violent revenge on colleagues and neighbors, thwarted flights to freedom - all emanating from the martinet  who refused to give his children Christmas presents, demanded that all of them have law degrees, chose their spouses ... and made them believe he was their only portal to heaven. 

There are times when hatred makes a person either crazy or stupid. Hatred is, after all, a very negating emotion, canceling out anything positive. Hatred is man's most insipid emotion simply because it is so counter to survival. In the eyes of America, Fred Phelps has not only done things out of pure hatred,  but a total disregard for any form of reason: call Phelps insane and he will laugh. Call him stupid, however, and he will rage. Perhaps the reason why Phelps and has brood have pressed on so doggedly on the Snyder case is because Phelps will prove to everyone that he is not stupid: everyone will know him and listen, whereas nobody listens to an idiot.

The Snyder Case

While many people deem the upcoming Supreme Court case to be one of horrifically poor taste vs. freedom of speech, instead it can be argued that it is really a case that stretches the limits as to how much harm a person can inflict on another and still hide behind the premise of free speech. To the rest of the country, Phelps actions were even worse than what he had intended to do at Mathew Shepard's funeral - dance on his grave. Fred and his family posse fully intended to cause as much emotional harm and stress as possible to the Snyder family. 

This is where the claim of emotional vandalism comes in.

Every invitation to a funeral begins with the phrase "For those wishing to pay their respects..." The invitation is not open to those who want to desecrate the grave or to dance upon it. The funeral, therefore, is not simply open to the public as the Phelps family contends. In this case, the Snyder family paid for a respectful funeral, during which the bereaved would be comforted by the presence of friends, not enemies. The funeral and the proceedings were the property of the Snyder family. The Phelps family's intent was to mar the funeral proceedings by making entrance and exit from the funeral a fearsome, distasteful affair. They desecrated the funeral with malice aforethought. Emotional vandalism. Willful intent to damage or destroy another persons property.

So far, I haven't seen that particular angle to the prosecution, and since it has not been proffered, it cannot be introduced into this case. In my humble opinion, I fail to see why it should not have been. There must have been a reason why it was not.

The Responsibility of The Christian Right: Don't bet on it.

Although the case of Snyder vs. Phelps will not be heard before the Supreme Court until Wednesday, October 6, the prospects for Al Snyder look grim. Chief Justice Roberts on freedom of speech: "It's certainly the responsibility of the Supreme Court to uphold freedom of speech, even when it's unpopular." 

We must all brace ourselves for the imbecilic grins of the Phelps clan. 

We must also brace ourselves for the slightly muted cheers of our Rightwing Christian friends such as the Family Research Council, the American Family Association, the Southern Baptist Convention, and in particular, people like Tony Perkins, Bryan Fischer and Lou Engle. In addition, all those who say "we're not like Phelps" but who do absolutely nothing to chastise Phelps for his obviously un-Christian demeanor. These people, with all their righteousness at-the-ready, who bray and bloviate about morals and family values will not use one ounce of courage to tell the nation that Fred Phelps' free speech is not worthy to be heard by the dullest of the dull. This sector of our country has a moment to prove themselves to be worthy of their purported religion. They will, however, either cheer, whimper ... or remain silent.

Remember.

Author's note: 

This article is based upon personal experience, Fact-Archive.com, wikipedia.com, and Exhibit A of  PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF (Pursuant to K.S.A. Chapter 60-1701 et. seq.) as requested by Jon Bell, June 2, 1994.)

The Greatest Story Never Told - Part I: When Did The Writ Hit The Fan For Other Evangelical Pastors?

(Note to Eddie Long: Sorry, Eddie. You weren't the first and most certainly won't be the last. Although you have topped Ted Haggard and George Rekers... BIG TIME!)

Yeah, I'm having some fun with all of this. Sorry, can't help it. Chasing down hypocrisy is hard work, so when a lulu of a story practically lands in your lap, it's best to burn rubber and enjoy the ride. 

"David and Goliath." That's the simile "Bishop" Eddie Long came up with to describe his plight. The audience (congregation) cheered. However, I perceive a seminal problem: just who the hell is Goliath? The media? The public? The plaintiffs? His sermon, in fact, left way too many questions unanswered and had a kind of senseless "win one for the Gipper" feel because he didn't base it on anything solid. I have a feeliing that he'll be repeating it over and over ad nauseum because (as he himself stated) his lawyers told him not to say anything else. Unfortunately in this case, caution will give sway to speculation.

Anyway, since Long's non-explanation opens up a whole plethora of theories, I'd like to save them for Part II of this saga. 

The history of evangelical sex scandals goes way back and although I can't educate the reader with dates and names, I'm sure that more Scarlet Letters were sewn on both bodices and lapels than the America-is-a-Christian-Nation people would like us to think. And while most of the scandals were heterosexual in nature (e.g. the FBI closely monitored MLK and his infidelities), the ones involving homosexual relationships were probably swept under the rug too many times to count. 

So here's a rundown of evangelical homosexual scandals in the last half decade:

Lonnie Frisbee 

Known as the first "Jesus Freak," Lonnie Frisbee was a self-styled Pentecostal "prophet." He actually some success as an evangelist, despite his appearance. He became THE key person of the Jesus Movement and was instrumental in establishing both Calvary Chapel and Vineyard Movement denominations. 

Lonnie felt the righteous wrath of God, however, when both churches disowned him because of his homosexual behaviour. Lonnie continued to preach up to his death from AIDS in 1993.

An Emmy-nominated documentary about Frisbee titled "Frisbee the Life and Death of a Hippie Preacher received numerous accolades and was released in 2007.

Billy James Hargis

The word that most defined Billy James Hargis was prolific: besides his show Christian Crusade being aired on 500 radio staions and 250 television stations (and in the 1950s and 60s), Hargis was a prolific author of more than 100 books fire-and-brimstoning their way through America with titles like Communism, Hypnotism and the Beatles. He also founded American Christian College. Unfortunately, he was allegedly prolific in other areas: a sex scandal erupted at the college involinv both female and male students. 

 In fact, a couple he married claimed to have found out on their wedding night that he had deflowered both of them.

Time, Feb. 16, 1976:

Hargis justified his homosexual acts by citing the Old Testament friendship between David and Jonathan and threatened to blacklist the youths for life if they talked.

Hargis faded from public life very slowly, broadcasting occasionally and publishing The Christian Crusade Newspaper as well as a number of books.

Interesting note: Hargis was inadvertantly instrumental in establishing the FCC's fairness doctrine. Hargis' programs promoted Barry Goldwater's run for president in 1964 and viciously attacked anti-Goldwater journalist Fred J. Cook. When Cook asked for equal time, Hargis refused. Cook took the case to court - all the way to the Supreme Court, in fact. The court then upheld the FCC's "equal time provision." Echoes of Tony perkins anyone? 

Perhaps it's fitting that Billy James Hargis, the penultimate hypocrite has also been referred to as the "father of the Religious Right."

Roy Clements

Roy Clements' rise to prominence within Britain's evangelical community included authoring popular evangelical texts. He taught and preached at Eden Baptist Church, Cambridge. He was immensely respected and served on several held boards of leading evangelical organizations. 

In 1999, Clements divorced his wife and revealed that he intended to live with another man. His books have since been removed from shelves. They are, in fact, very difficult to find. Clements now counts himself as a gay rights advocate and an activist for gay Christians.

John Paulk

Oh, what a tangled web: part-time escort and part-time drag queen gets religion, tries to become straight, marries an ex-gay woman, they become the "poster couple" for Focus on the Family, and ex-gay man becomes head of FOF's premiere anti-gay program, Exodus International.  All things are bright and beautiful until ex-gay man gets photographed in a gay bar. End of  job. 

John Paulk may still have a story to tell, but for the time being, he's still not really talking about it. He's focusing on his catering career and cooking show in Portland, OR. FOF has since warmed up to him enough to feature his recipes on their website. 

BFD.

Paul Crouch

There is little doubt that Paul Crouch and his wife Jan are, well ... creepy. As founder and president of the world's largest evangelical Christian network, Trinity Broadcasting Network, Crouch looks like death warmed over (clad in whatever he thinks makes for good fashion sense - it doesn't) and Jan ltries to look like a cross between Tammy Faye and Dolly Parton with lavender hair (BIG lavender hair). They've hosted homophobes like Rod Parsley and John Hagee on their own program Praise The Lord.


Ironically, all that makeup and hair, all that showmanship (Paul sits in what can only be construed as a gold throne) serve as a visible reminder that the Crouches are hiding something: transparency has never been their strong suit. In fact, Wallwatchers (a financial watchdog ministry) has consistently given TBN an F in financial transparency. 


In 2004, the L.A. Times did published an expose of Crouch's finances as well as a large settlement that went to a former TBN employee, Enoch Lonnie Ford as part of a  sexual harassment law suit. It also intimated that friends and colleagues Benny Hinn and Jack Hayford knew about the affair. Allegations of extortion went back and forth in the ensuing months, with Ford even taking a public lie detector test on the TV reality show Lie Dectector test (he passed). Ford offered NOT to publish a book about Crouch and TBN for $10 million.  


Meanwhile, back at the scandal mill: Crouch was sued for $20 million for plagiarism after he had written and novel which was suspiciously like someone else's book. There was an out-of-court settlement. 


The Ford saga has faded into the past just as the Crouches intended, but it might resurface. We're waiting.

Ted Haggard

Haven't heard of Ted Haggard? Well, I hope the rock you've been living under is comfortable.  Ted Haggard was at the top of the evangelical food chain: a mega-church pastor and president of the National Association of Evangelicals, Haggard boasted about weekly talks with George Bush. 

Male prostitute Mike Jones, however, took care of all that when he revealed that not only was Ted a frequent flier but earned more scandal miles by purchasing methamphetamines from Jones. Haggard's bumbling of the situation made it clear to his supporters that he was in no position to continue as an evangelical leader.  Although he announced that he was "cured" some months later,  his persona had been reduced to such a comic state that re-establishment in the evangelical community was  rendered moot. 

Haggard has begun a new ministry in the shadow of his old one - Colorado Springs. Although he still says he's "cured" he has become critical of the evangelical community that shunned him.

Paul Barnes

Paul Barnes saw his ministry grow from a basement to a 2100-member church he called Grace Chapel (in Douglas County, Colorado). It took him 28 years. When the Ted Haggard scandal broke, an anonymous caller to Grace Chapel voiced concerned that the same would happen to  Barnes. Barnes came forth, and in a video presentation to his congregation, resigned from his position:

"I have struggled with homosexuality since I was a 5-year-old boy. . . . I can't tell you the number of nights I have cried myself to sleep, begging God to take this away."

Lonnie Latham

What is it with the name "Lonnie"? Must be genetic. 

Max Blumenthal:

A notoriously anti-gay Southern Baptist Convention heavyweight who resigned his post for engaging in “offering to engage in an act of lewdness” (read: seeking meat whistle lessons from an undercover cop posing as a male prostitute), Latham has now asserted his right to solicit sex from that cop.

Amazingly, Latham was acquitted of the charge of "offering to engage in an act of lewdness". His high standing in the Southern Baptist Convention and rabid homophobic rants might have had something to do with it. In any case, SBC's pressure caused Lonnie to admit that he had actually done the deed and "needed help."

George Alan Rekers

George Rekers has a credibility problem. Check that: he has a problem in thinking that there are people dumb enough to believe him. His luggage boy rent boy story became the laugh riot of the internet and it was evident from the start that Rekers himself wasn't the profoundly intelligent "expert" in sexual orientation as he had been portrayed and that his work was criticized for skewing research results. Perhaps the most valuable thing that came out of the salacious story was that organizations like Family Research Council and America Family Association had been using Rekers as a "star witness" in cases involving gay adoption. The backpeddling of these organizations was classic: although Rekers was a founder of Family Research Council, current President Tony Perkins literally said "George who?"

Update:
Now we have "Bishop" Eddie Long, perhaps the most brilliant star in the fermament of homophobic hypocrisy. One of his accusers, Jamal Parris has appeared on television calling Long a "predator" and a "monster." In his Sunday sermon, Long likened himself to David battling Goliath:

 "I feel like David against Goliath, but I've got five rocks and I haven't thrown one yet."

"Predator," "monster." 

Eddie, you'd better start throwing those rocks now.