At This Point, God May Indeed Hate America: When Forming a "Dead Zone" May Be The Only Solution

The Life of Religious Hate  

and The Death of Decency

WASHINGTON (AP) -- 

"Speech is powerful. It can stir people to action, move them to tears of both joy and sorrow, and - as it did here - inflict great pain. On the facts before us, we cannot react to that pain by punishing the speaker," Roberts said. "As a nation we have chosen a different course - to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate."

"Public Debate" - has Fred Phelps and his clan ever had a "public debate" with America? Mindless hate can only debate with its opposite - meaningful love. And while Fred Phelps has always garnered the public's attention, America's "Church" has never really stepped up to the podium for that debate. We will hear an almost deafening chorus of "Although we abhor what Phelps does, we applaud the Court's decision."

A cowardly statement. A statement filled with relief. A statement filled with satisfaction. Free speech trumps hate speech.

Another chorus we will hear: "Phelps isn't really Christian. He certainly doesn't speak for us who are." We've heard that one before. Too little, too late: Phelps' rants have gotten notoriety for over 15 years, but few have ever actually chastised him in public. How many "faith-based" pickets have ever graced the outside of Westboro Baptist Church? How many have taken out ads in local or national papers denouncing Phelps' deeds? Not enough. When have the Baptist conclaves attempted to legally remove the name "Baptist" from Westboro Church? None that I know of. 

America's denominations and non-denominational churches have always done more harm to America by NOT saying anything, by NOT doing anything. I saw the results of their indolence in the faces of AIDS victims streaming into San Francisco. It was definitely passive/aggressive behavior on the part of the Christian Right.

Interestingly, as of this writing, neither the FRC nor the AFA have commented on the decision. As of 8:30PM (EST), when I googled Phelps ruling response, the only ones to come up were:

Democratic Underground
Free Republic
and The Moderate Voice


The response from the ACLU:

“The Court’s decision properly and respectfully acknowledges the Snyder family’s grief. But it correctly holds that the response to that grief cannot include the abandonment of core First Amendment principles designed to protect even the most unpopular speech on matters of public concern.”

The response from the Phelps clan was predictably giddy and dire at the same time:

"A leader of the Westboro Baptist Church told reporters Wednesday that the congregation would "quadruple" the number of funeral protests in the wake of a ruling by the Supreme Court.

"Let me tell you what this church does: Shut up all that talk about infliction of emotional distress..,When you're standing there with your young child's body bits and pieces in a coffin, you've been dealt some emotional distress by the Lord your God"

As is sometimes the case with her, Sarah Palin got defiantly confused and combined two parts of the First Amendment in her tweet about the decision:

This coming from a woman who was "anointed" by a "witch hunter" from Uganda. 

Emotional Vandalism

Speaking of freedoms, and what America will allow and not allow, the decision has paved the way for what I've called EMOTIONAL VANDALISM: that is the right to mar or disfigure in any way people's emotional state when faced with personal grief. While the Phelps clan believed that the funeral of Matthew Snyder was public, it was not: most invitations to funerals begin with the statement "For those wishing to pay their respects." The event of a funeral, whether lavish or plain, is the physical and emotional property of the deceased's loved ones presiding at the funeral. Again, the primary purpose of the Phelps' protest was not "public discourse," but to inflict true pain, true emotional distress on the loved ones. It was vicious and performed with malice-of-forethought. There are many churches in this country that have wished they could go as far as Fred Phelps, but have not dared to because of the possibility of misusing freedom of speech. 

They no long need to fear: they will be free to disrupt solemn gatherings and inflict as much emotional pain on others as they want. This case will bring out an impertinent plethora of screamers with placards coming dangerously to violence - violence which they may want to incite for purposes of publicity.

The "Dead Zone" Proposal

I've long thought about how to handle Phelps and his kind, but the answer always came back: the most effective disciplinarian would be the Christian Right itself. OK. Fat chance. But please hear this one out. The Christian Right is very fond of boycotting businesses that commerce with or support "evil" groups or even specific people. The one glaring fault of their tactics is that they have never, ever used them to censure - or "shun" - one of their own. Of course they don't view Phelps as Christian, let alone one of their own. But perhaps it's time for self- monitoring to give them the credibility they lack. A strong stance against the Westboro Baptist Church would tell the rest of the country churches will do more than just pay lip service to "righteousness." Let them take a small area around the Phelps's physical sphere (say 5 miles) and warn all the businesses that they will be picketed if they continue to provide services to the Westboro Baptist Church. After all, like many things the Church disapproves of, if someone's actions are "legal", they can still be immoral. I'm sure this has been proffered before, but if someone like Rick Warren (who still needs some good PR and has said that "God tells us to do away with evil-doers") were to spearhead a protest and boycott of nearby grocery stores, banks, ATMs, drug stores, gas stations, clothing stores on religious grounds ("it's against our religion to give succor to the devil"), Westboro would find out what life is like without even minimum support. Afterwards, the boycott could be expanded to all services the Phelps could receive via the internet. They would be busy with lawsuits, of course, but that's part of the strategy: they couldn't "quadruple" their efforts if they're too busy with legal briefs. 

It's time that America's religious community "quadruples" its actions in calling Fred Phelps immoral. And the churches of Topeka, KS must be tired of defending themselves, explaining to people that they are not hate groups. 

It's all rather draconian, of course, this concept of creating a "Dead Zone" around Phelps, this update of traditional "shunning"* but is there a better idea? His family can't hold picket signs if he can't get them printed up (or get his printer serviced). He can't travel much anywhere without gas. Shirley Phelps-Roper would have to go miles outside the compound to shop for groceries. 

One church's activism against another church on moral grounds is not new. The bickerings witnessed by the rest of the world are always seen as titanic clashes by their own congregations. They have been able, however to set those differences aside in favor of unison against what they think is an extreme evil. So isn't it about time churches set aside their consternation for gay marriage and abortion against a force doing evil under their very noses and insulting God by calling it "Christian?"

It is a challenge. And, dare I say it, a moral one at that.

* a concept as old as religion itself. 

Who Is Frances Fox Piven and Why Do Phyllis Schlafley and Glenn Beck Want Her Beheaded?

This story has "Righteous Assassination" written all over it!


Although her name's certainly not Alice, Francis Fox Piven  seems to have fallen down a rabbit hole and has found herself deep in  Right WingNutLand, with Phyllis Schlafley, the Queen of Draconian Hearts calling "Off with her head!!" 


The frumious mess all started out with Glenn Beck (must it always start with him?). He started to link Ms. Piven to the nastiest things imaginable: social justice and the lot. He named so very many nasty things that Ms. Piven has gotten tons of ... death threats. 


Seriously. Death threats. For which he steadfastly refuses to apologize for. And the threats can be quite easily be linked to him because they've always increased every time he's mentioned her on his program. They are a barometer of hate, if you will. 


So who is Frances Fox Pivon and why do Glenn Beck and (by extension) Phyllis Schlafley want her off the planet?

Frances Fox Piven was born (1932) in Calgary, Alberta Canada of Russian immigrant parents who, when she was one year old, moved to the U.S. and became a naturalized citizen in 1952. She received her B.A. in city planning, her M.A. and Ph.D. all from the University of Chicago. 

She married Richard Cloward and the two collaborated on a small article for

The Nation magazine in 1966. It was titled: "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty" It advocated encouraging the country's poor to take full advantage of all welfare programs, in order to "weigh" the system down, thereby forcing reforms to the system and lead to a guaranteed annual income. Although the Nation was, at the time, a very small publication, the article gained ground in sociological circles and the strategy came to be known as the "Cloward-Piven strategy." 

Her career as a sociologist and political scientist was highlighted by efforts such as founding Human SERVE (Service Employees Registration and Voter Education). And her writings on poverty (with Cloward) such as Regulating the Poor, Why Americans Don't Vote,  and Challenging Authority: How Ordinary People Change America. 

In 2006-07, she served as President of the American Sociological Association.

Her awards include: (from wikipedia)

• American Sociological Association Career Award for the Practice of Sociology (2000)
• Charles McCoy Career Achievement Award of the Caucus for a New Political Science of the American Political Science Association (2004)
• Mary Lepper Award of the Women's Caucus of the American Political Science Association (1998)
• American Sociology Association Lifetime Achievement Award for Political Sociology
• Tides Foundation Award for Excellence in Public Advocacy (1995)
• Annual Award of the National Association of Secretaries of State (1994)
• President's Award of the American Public Health Association (1993)
• Lee/Founders Award of the Society for the Study of Social Problems
• Eugene V. Debs Foundation Prize
• C. Wright Mills Award

When most people see Frances Fox Piven's curriculum vitae, they are astonished that they've never heard of her. Which may also be the reason Glenn Beck smells treachery and treason: Piven must be a kind of secretive socialist-anarchist. Look at her career and wards once more. Now think of what associations Beck has latched on to:

Russian immigrants  (Commie-pinko Russkies!)

University of Chicago (a veritable hotbed of leftist - horrors! - intellectuals!)

An article in The Nation (incendiary, at  the very least!)

A TIDES FOUNDATION award! (they love her leftist little heart!)

A EUGENE V. DEBS AWARD! (He was a SOCIALIST UNION ORGANIZER!!!)

(What a good thing patriot Beck discovered her when he did!)

The latest news in this horrendous contract out on Piven is her denunciation by none other than America's Rethuglican Sweetheart, Phyllis Schlafley. View the short video below and see just how, in a minute's time, Schlafley can render the coup de gras on Piven. The irony in Schlafly's speech is that she too created controversey - but at the other end of the political spectrum: In 2008, Washington University (St. Louis) produced a slate of honorary doctorates to be bestowed during commencement. The appearance of Ms. Schlafley on that slate caused a degree of consternation:

Students and professors contributed to the award controversey:

Fourteen university law professors wrote in a complaint letter that Schlafly's career demonstrated "anti-intellectualism in pursuit of a political agenda."

In other words, they thought Phyllis was too radically Right Wing (as well as stupid) to receive an award.


Both Schlafley and Beck now claim that Piven turned Obama into a socialist. A McCarthy-ite witch hunt can't be very far away. In the meantime, Piven still receives death threats every time Beck mentions her.* And he cavalierly eschews any thoughts of righteous assassination. Byron Williams may be in jail ...


but there are more where he came from. 




*I wonder if the threats are sent through the mail or if they're via email. If they're sent via snail mail, there may be some money to be made in this sad story - buy stock in Crayola!

Janet's Porter's FETUS MAY REFUSE TO TESTIFY!!

"Personhood" will now make its debut in Ohio. Janet Porter has seen to it. 


Think Progress had the best take on Janet Porter's latest Reconstructionist/oh-so-biblical stunt:

Admitting that “there is no scenario” in which this bill survives in court, Ohio Right To Life and the right-wing advocacy group Faith2Action are still going to absurd lengths for the sake of promotion. Tomorrow at a hearing on the bill, the House Health Committee will hear “testimony” from its youngest witness ever: a “nine-week old” fetus:

Two in-utero babies will appear live before the committee by an ultrasound projector which is able to not only show that baby’s moving arms and legs, but also display–in color–the baby’s beating heart.“When passed, the Heartbeat Bill will insure that once that heartbeat is detected, the baby is protected,” added Porter.

I've always said, however, that people like Janet Porter are NOT pro-life, but only PRO-BIRTH. There's a big difference: do you actually think Porter cares anything about the kid once it's born? She'll insist that the kid be born, but not fed, housed and educated at any decent level. Those things would cost waaay too much money!! I believe that Porter is also in favor of the death penalty. Pro Life? Not on yours!

Michelle Obama Sends Pedestrians Across the Country To Untimely Deaths!

That's right! Evil Michelle Obama has finally begun to commit genocide by having every American walk HEADLONG INTO TRAFFIC!

The Washington Examiner:

First lady Michelle Obama’s campaign to get people to exercise outdoors might be a factor in an increase in the number of pedestrian deaths during the first half of last year, according to the Governors Highway Safety Association.

It's all in their master plan, I tell you! Pretending to get America fit! Ha! Vicious attacks on childhood obesity! Scrawny kids mean socialism! 

Just about every First Lady has had some worthy cause to promote: with Jackie Kennedy, it was the rescuing of the White House from Mamie Eisenhower's ubiquitous pink. Lady Bird Johnson wanted us to plant more flowers alongside freeways.  Betty Ford's cause spawned a plethora of alcohol clinics. Rosalind Carter went mental ... ah, went with mental health treatment reform. Nancy Reagan's cause was drugs - anyone else's, that is.  Barbara Bush championed literacy by penning her dog's diary (that's "literacy" not "literature"), Hillary Clinton took up the cause of health care reform before anyone knew about "death panels." Laura Bush kept up her mother-in-law's literacy legacy by trying to prove that her husband could read. Even Dolley Madison had a worthy cause: ice cream.*   

Whatever the cause, however, no First Lady has ever been castigated for it...until Michelle Obama's cause: childhood obesity and national fitness. A worthy, if innocuous, cause you say? No, say some on the Right. The latest accusations bandy about the words "nanny state" "incredibly insulting to parents." and now "killing pedestrians."  When caught eating a barbecued spare rib, Michelle Obama was looked upon as a hypocrite by the biggest one of all: Rush Limbaugh. 

"Leaders are supposed to be leaders. If we are supposed to eat roots, berries and tree bark, show us how."
"Our First Lady does not project the image of women you might see on the cover of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit issue!"

Of course, comments like that have sparked a host of criticisms against Limbaugh, Bachmann, Mitt Romney and others who have taken pot shots at the First Lady. The comments are ludicrous, of course, but the real problems attached to these comments are that they are cheap shots, and smell of the "let's get Obama and the whole family or else!" 

Glenn Beck has made no bones about the fact that he hates and mocks the entire Obama family. Now with Limbaugh and certain politicos jumping on the "tear down anything" bandwagon, who knows who or what will be targeted next. 

Nasty is as nasty does. 

*On the history of ice cream, wikipedia:

One respected history of ice cream states that, as the wife of U.S. President James Madison, she served ice cream at her husband's Inaugural Ball in 1813.

This Is The BIG ONE! It Even Beats Eddie Long!: The Hypocrisy of the Year Award Goes To ...

An Anti-Decadence Pastor 
Accused Of Public Masturbation
And Pedophilia!

From WDSU in New Orleans:

METAIRIE, La. -- Grant Storms, a conservative pastor who has staged protests against New Orleans' Southern Decadence Festival, was arrested Friday on accusations of masturbating in a public park.

Great hypocrisy stories, like income tax refunds, should always be treated as windfalls. Journalists and bloggers have to take advantage of them because it would be ridiculous to waste a great story by relegating it to ho-hum regular news. And this one is a gem. 

Storms told deputies he was just having lunch at the park when he had to go to the bathroom, so he relieved himself in a bottle.

Imaginative stories like that can be the mark of desperation: two women were witnesses and they precisely testified that he wasn't urinating in any bottle!

Every day, dozens of google-alert "Pastor arrested"s fill my email box. So why is this one so special? Because of the adjoining copy:

Storms is known for staging protests against Decadence, an annual gay celebration in the French Quarter. In 2003, he organized a march in opposition of the event, calling it "nasty" and "depraved."

"Nasty." "Depraved." WTF? 

OK, let's step back: 

• Pastor
• Anti-gay activist
• public park
• children
• play ground
• masturbation
• urination. 

Couldn't get better on the hypocrisy scale, could it? Then there's his name: Storms. It can (and will) be linked to the story in a myriad number of ways. I'm trying to think of one now, but my head's still trying to fathom how stupid this guy is. Maybe he hated Southern Decadence because it was not the kind of "playground" he enjoyed. Maybe a long time (months or years, who knows?) of ogling kids in public parks has changed Storms' mind about what is "nasty." 

The REAL Southern Decadence

Alright, I'll eschew the sarcasm. It's just that I feel so giddy. 


Campaigning against immorality has been the stock-in-trade of the Christian Right for centuries. The tactics haven't really changed, it's just that today's media has made it closer. The media has also highlighted the faults of extreme religionists who do practically nothing but campaign against morality. The stridency of some people creates suspicion. Oh, the public may not always want to recognize hypocrisy, but covering it up has gotten increasingly hard to do. There are, of course, hypocrites who think that their titles and Bibles will shield them, but they are delusional. Eddie Long, the I'm-David-and-I-haven't-thrown-a -rock-yet pastor found out the hard way. But hubris is a drug to which many pastors become addicted and they tend to do stupid things with abandon.

Stupid things like masturbating in a public park, after you've become known as the most vocal enemy of a gay event that calls itself "Southern Decadence."

If you look up "decadence" in the dictionary, you're apt to come up with this definition: "a luxurious self-indulgence". Self-indulgence, however, is very relative: while most people think of self-indulgence as being sheer love of the body, e.g. sexual gratification, self-indulgence can be had by "luxuriating" in just about anything. Grant Storms was luxuriating in self-righteousness when he spearheaded protests against Southern Decadence. Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council luxuriates in demonizing people:

• Almost all child sexual abuse is committed by men; and 
• Less than three percent of American men identify themselves as homosexual; yet 
• Nearly a third of all cases of child sexual abuse are homosexual in nature (that is, they involve men molesting boys). - - This is a rate of homosexual child abuse about ten times higher than one would expect based on the first two facts. 

Actually, Perkins luxuriates in lies and is completely decadent with them: in 1992, A. Nicholas Groth, (then a major researcher of sex offenders) complained about his work being totally distorted by FRC:

Since your report, in my view, misrepresents the facts of what we know about this matter from scientific investigation, and does not indicate that my studies on this topic reach conclusions diametrically opposed to yours, I would appreciate your removing any reference to my work in your paper lest it appear to the reader that my research supports your views.

So, the Southern Decadence of Grant Storms' beautifully hypocritical scenario should not be lost on the public. And Eddie Long? Well, at least he didn't get caught with his zipper down and his eyes on little kids.

Eddie Long's All-Male Pajama Prayer Party: "Bring A B-i-i-i-g Offering!"

This one escaped me. I think Google Alerts isn't doing its job!


It's not nerve - it's sheer stupidity! A lot of people in Eddie Long's congregation are probably scratching their heads right now and murmuring "what was he thinking?" He's not fully returned to the pulpit, but he has surfaced in a video showing him promoting an all-male, overnight, prayer vigil. Yes, that's right, a ... (snicker, snicker) "prayer vigil." 

And what kind of offering does he REALLY want the twinks, ooops, I mean men, to bring? This is beyond the pale of the ridiculous. Doesn't he ever listen to advisors? Oh, that's right: the sure way for people to know you're not gay is by sponsoring an all-male meeting! 

Reverend Dan's Christian Crimeline

And to all the David Bartons and Rick Santorums out there: I'm not making this sh*t up!!

Let's get one thing straight: while I'm not trying to bash Christianity, the fact is that Christianity has never sufficiently apologized for its own sins. And while I consider myself a Christian, it's galling to me that some people paint Christianity's history as a (sometimes) misguided but devoutly focused, evangelizing mission, persecuted relentlessly along the way.


The picture of devoutly-driven Founding Fathers by David Barton, and the recent tongue lashing given out by Rick Santorum concerning the Crusades and the early Church's treatment of Muslims (everyone else is "anti-Christian) are both totally off the mark. 


Through the years, I have been researching what could be called a "Christian Crime Line." Yes, that's a bit nasty, but there's no other way we can look upon the actions in a different light, especially when stacked up on upon the other. True, the eras in between may have had some ameliorating qualities, but the fact remains that non-Christians were persecuted, and killed on a scale of much greater proportions than Christians were under the Romans, even before the Crusades. By the time Urban II gave his fateful speech, whole cultures had been wiped away "in the name of God."* 


So let's look at some aspects of Christian history most people have never been taught before:


313 - 
Constantine unites the Empire after the Battle of Milvian Bridge and officially recognizes Christianity as a legitimate religion and bans persecution of Christians  
314 - 
Christians begin to massacre pagans in Egypt and Palestine

319 - 
Christian clergy receives tax-exempt status

319 - 
Arian Heresy starts to spread throughout the Empire

325 - 
Council of Nicea is convened by Constantine to discuss date of Easter and deal wiith Arian Heresy. Approx. 300 bishops attended (out of 1800 in the entire empire, most of whom were in north Africa)

325 - 
Approx. 3000 pagans are killed immediately after the Council of Nicea

327 - 
"Christian" Constantine executes his son Chrispus in belief that he had sex with his step-mother, Fausta. He didn’t. After Constantine finds out the truth, he has Fausta boiled ... in her own bathtub.

330 - 
Constantine outlaws Christian conversion to Judaism

335 - 
Magicians and astrologers (astronomers as well) are banned and executed

336 - 
Arian Christians are persecuted

337 - 
Constantine is finally  baptized as a Christian … on his deathbed

350 - 
Riots break out between Arian Christians and Orthodox Christians

354 - 
Emperor Constantius orders all pagan temples closed

355 - 
Clergy exempt from being tried in secular courts

359 - 
Christians build world’s first “death camps” in Skythopolis, Syria for pagans and unconverted Jews**

391 - 

The Great Library of Alexandria is burned by a Christian mob

360  - 
Pagan sacrifice is declared punishable by death

412 - 
Augustine of Hippo, supports war against heretics

415 - 
Female philosopher Hypatia is brutally murdered

435 - 
Emperor Theodosius II order the deaths of all non-Christians except Jews

476 - 
Rome falls to the Goths

528 - 
Emperor Justinian outlaws the Olympic Games (considered pagan)

529 - 
Justinian closes Plato’s Academy and Aristotle’s Lyceum.

590 - 

After Pope Gregory I decrees celibacy for the clergy, infants are murdered

632 - 
Byzantine-Arab war

782 - 
Charlemagne orders the beheading of pagans

850 - 
Eastern Orthodox Empress Theodora orders execution of Paulicans (heretics)

1095 - 

People’s Crusade

1095 - 
First Crusade: Pope Urban II calls for a “Holy War” to "save the tomb of Christ from the heathen”

1096 -
During the People’s Crusade (as in all official nine Crusades) Jews are killed en route

1101 - 
Crusade of 1101

1144 - 
First “Blood Libel” used against Jews in England

1145 -
 Second Crusade

1189 - 
Third Crusade

1193 - 
Northern Crusade

1201- 
Fourth Crusade

1209 - 
Albigensian Crusade

1209 - 
The Inquisition as institution of Christianity is officially established

1212 - 
Children’s Crusade

1217 - 
Fifth Crusade

1228 - 
Sixth Crusade

1232 - 
Northern Crusades

1248 - 
Seventh Crusade

1251 - 
First Shepherd’s Crusade

1270 - 
Eighth Crusade

1271 - 
Ninth Crusade

1281 - 
Aragonese Crusade

1320 - 
Second Shepherd’s Crusade

1348 - 
Jews, believed to be the cause of the Black Death were massacred in Mainz, Germany

1365 - 
Alexandrian Crusade

1396 - 
Nicopolis Crusade

1398 - 
Crusades against the Tartars

After the last "Crusade," a variety of complex factors entered into the picture. Too many to go into detail here, so please forgive the next seemingly sweeping generalizations. 


Witch-burnings took hold in Europe and, along with The Inquisition, for the next 400 years killed approximately 1 million people. Auto de Fes (burning as many as a dozen "witches" at a time) were very popular in France, Germany and even England. Men and children were also burned as "witches." Then in 1492, Jews and Muslims were expelled from Spain just before the colonization of the Americas, India and Indonesia. When Cortez landed in Mexico, there were approximately 25 million Meso-Americans (Natives from California down to Peru). In the year 1650, it is estimated that there were less than 1 million. And while disease may have been a major factor of depopulation, slavery and forced-conversions played roles as well. Within a period of 800 years (not counting the Crusades), Europe's countries were involved in 782 wars, most of which were sanctioned by the Church. The Tai Ping Rebellion in China (supporting a man who claimed to be the brother of Christ) took over 20 million lives.*** 

Does the above make me seem incredibly anti-Christian? Of course. Most will think that I couldn't possibly be a Christian after reading such a litany. But I am steadfast in my beliefs and, in them, I remain a Christian. And I will not fill in the obvious blanks in the Christian history of the above because so many apologetics have done that before me. 


But, being human, I can't begin to forgive the past, until I hear a very loud apology.

*I think that killing anyone for any reason "in the name of God" is the height of blasphemy. Sorry.
** While the evidence for this is very, very slim, the concept of "concentration camps" was not new. Also, take into account the volume of pagans still in the Roman Empire: a minority, yes, but one that, at the time, still was the religion of at least 10% of the Empire.
***And at no time did any Christian entity try to stop it.