Religious Bigotry, Why it Will Backfire on You

I don't have a problem with fundamentalists who leave me alone. I do have a big problem though with fundamentalists (or any other crazy* people) who achieve a position of power. And all the more so when their crazy beliefs are applied to public policy.

According to Palin (reminiscent of Bush), it's God's will that a pipeline be built. It's God's will that a skating rink be built.

There is enough evidence for me to have reached an interim assumption (as voters must do as a matter of necessity on many matters) that she's a fervent fundamentalist and a rigid ideologue. And she easily could be POTUS in the near future Odin help us. (Her inexperience might be a blessing at that point, as we might be better off with an ineffective nut than an effective one.)

Corplinx, I agree with much of the OP; thanks for sharing your experience. (I do wonder if your experiences are representative, and how it is you are so certain about the makeup of all of the other AOG churches.) It's a bad idea to attack her religion as a matter of political strategy. But here we are on a skeptical forum (that is probably not frequented by many fundamentalists) discussing reality as best we know it, and that's how it should be.

* Definition of psychosis according to the Natl Institute of Health:
NIH said:
Psychosis is a loss of contact with reality, typically including delusions (false ideas about what is taking place or who one is) and hallucinations (seeing or hearing things which aren't there).

Symptoms:
loss of touch with reality
seeing, hearing, feeling, or otherwise perceiving things that are not there (hallucinations)
extreme excitement (mania)
confusion
mistaken perceptions (illusions)
false beliefs (delusions)
Click to expand...
ETA: I do not consider this religious bigotry.
 
Last edited:
BenBurch said:
Hey, I came from a jerkwater town. And you know what? Everybody there called it a jerkwater town. ...
Click to expand...


I grew up in a rural area very close to a small town. It is basically a jerkwater town, and most people referred to it basically as such. But, I remember something my grandfather once said. It basically was this - it's okay (not really) to kick my dog once in awhile, but just let someone else try it and see what happens.

Religion is not something you want to be poking a stick at come election time. It's a hornet's nest you best leave alone. A big turnout is what got Bush elected twice.
 
gtc said:
I would have thought it was obvious that I have not grasped your point. In my experience, people who have grasped a point seldom ask questions such as 'What is your point'.
Click to expand...

I think the point Dr A was making was that the comment that he quoted about Obama receiving a "free pass" regarding religion means that the poster must have slept through the months of Rev Wright clips looped back to back and the "secret Muslim" garbage.
 
varwoche said:
Corplinx, I agree with much of the OP; thanks for sharing your experience. (I do wonder if your experiences are representative, and how it is you are so certain about the makeup of all of the other AOG churches.)
Click to expand...

Aog churches socialize with each other frequently through children ministries, teen ministries, conventions, special events, church sports leagues, etc. You basically get all the good gossip about the other churches in your region and what are going on there.

Then again, I am guessing many american protestant denominations are that way (the southern baptists were as well).
 
Ausmerican said:
I think the point Dr A was making was that the comment that he quoted about Obama receiving a "free pass" regarding religion means that the poster must have slept through the months of Rev Wright clips looped back to back and the "secret Muslim" garbage.
Click to expand...

Well, he was talking about the Democrats' response to Obama's religion compared to their reaction to Palin's relgion. Rather than the Republicans response to Obama's religion.

It is a fair question to ask people in this thread why they are concerned by Palin's but not Obama's religion.

Clearly, Obama's religion wasn't a deal breaker for the Dems as he won the Primary.
 
Last edited:
gtc said:
Lastly, is she a convert? Do you mean that she wasn't raised Christian or that she started to attend church only later in life?
Click to expand...

"Sarah Palin's family joined the Wasilla Assembly of God, a Pentacostal Church, when she was a child; she was baptized there at age 12 and remained a member there until 2002, when she first ran for statewide office."
SOURCE: "A Palin Pastor Primer" by Esther Kaplan
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/9/103326/3656/Front_Page/A_Palin_Pastor_Primer


gtc said:
Do you have a link to suggest that her church is Dominionist?
Click to expand...

Last spring some folks heard of Liberation Theology for the first time. In fact, some may never have known that there is a Christian Left. Now, the Palin selection gives us all an opportunity to learn more about movements in the Christian Right.

Some of Palin's churches have been involved in a recent cross-denominational movement called the Third Wave Movement, also known as the New Apostolic Reformation, Joel's Army, and Manifest Sons of God. They are definitely Soft Dominionists (at least), and their military rhetoric is the kind that puts atheists like me on alert.

"Palin's Churches and the Third Wave", Parts One and Two

"Sarah Palin's Demon Haunted Churches - The Complete Edition" (here)

Palin herself appears to be a "Soft Dominionist", who doesn't seem to go so far as Christian Reconstructionism. For clarification of these terms (and related Christian movements), see "What is Dominionism? Palin, the Christian Right, & Theocracy". Here is the bottom line, and why it's important to use terms correctly.

In its generic sense, dominionism is a very broad political tendency within the Christian Right. It ranges from soft to hard versions in terms of its theocratic impulse.

Soft Dominionists are Christian nationalists. They believe that Biblically-defined immorality and sin breed chaos and anarchy. They fear that America's greatness as God's chosen land has been undermined by liberal secular humanists, feminists, and homosexuals. Purists want litmus tests for issues of abortion, tolerance of gays and lesbians, and prayer in schools. Their vision has elements of theocracy, but they stop short of calling for supplanting the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Hard Dominionists believe all of this, but they want the United States to be a Christian theocracy. For them the Constitution and Bill of Rights are merely addendums to Old Testament Biblical law. They claim that Christian men with specific theological beliefs are ordained by God to run society. Christians and others who do not accept their theological beliefs would be second-class citizens. This sector includes Christian Reconstructionists, but it has a growing number of adherents in the leadership of the Christian Right.

It makes more sense to reserve the term "dominion theology" to describe specific theological currents, while using the term "dominionism" in a generic sense to discuss a tendency toward aggressive political activism by Christians who claim they are mandated by God to take over society. Even then, we need to locate the subject of our criticisms on a scale that ranges from soft to hard versions of dominionism.
Click to expand...
For example, Palin's (or her speechwriter's) use of the term "servant heart" is not only Christian language, but also an evocation of the role of Christian women. This in turn connects to the notion of service held by worldwide Christian evangelism.
 
Last edited:
gtc said:
It is a fair question to ask people in this thread why they are concerned by Palin's but not Obama's religion.
Click to expand...
Are you getting a general sense here? Palin's religion espouses that the bible is the literal, inerrant word of God. Evolution is a lie. Creationism is fact. End times is approaching. (From the learn-something-new-every-day department, Alaska will be a refuge during end times! Brrr.) Prayer can cure the sin of homosexuality. God's will is knowable, given that God talks to you (in a language most of us know as gibberish). And through this gibberish, one apparently learns God's will on specific policy matters concerning the construction of pipelines and skating rinks, not to mention the Iraq war.
 
From the Assemblies of God USA website (except the bolded headers):

Bible = inerrant word of God:
We believe the Bible is the word of God written; it is the revelation of the truths of God conveyed by inspiration through his Servants to us. As such, it is infallible and without error.

Bible as science book:
Even though the Bible is not primarily a book of science, it is as trustworthy in the area of science as when it speaks to any other subject. We can have confidence in what it says concerning the origin of all things

Creation:
Assemblies of God believers hold that the Genesis account should be taken literally.

End times:
The Assemblies of God understands the biblical description of end-time events to be literal, not symbolic (as do some churches).

Demonic possession:
The spread of oriental religions and the occult in America has brought with it an increase in demon possession similar to that reported formerly by missionaries on foreign fields.

Faith healing:
FROM ITS INCEPTION the General Council of the Assemblies of God has recognized divine healing for the whole person as an important part of the gospel.

Many of us are going to a real Hell:
Assemblies of God believes in a judgment for every person, but a different kind for Christians than for those who have willfully rejected Christ as Savior. This belief gives credence to a correspondingly firm belief in a real heaven and a real hell.
 
varwoche said:
Are you getting a general sense here?...
Click to expand...

And not only that, but these folks think that social problems such as car accidents and crime are caused by demons and witches. :eek:

Folks like Pastors Thomas Muthee of Kiambu, Kenya, and Bob Beckett of Hemet, California promote intercessory prayer and "spiritual mapping" to drive out "Satanism, witchcraft, Moonies, Transcendental Meditation, and Scientology" as a way of solving social problems.

I'm no fan of Transcendental Meditation, but isn't bigotry to celebrate the burning down of one of its buildings? And isn't it irrational to connect that event with a(n alleged) decline in gang activity and the drug trade? Correlation does not automatically mean causation.

This isn't about laughing at Pentecostal rituals. It's about understanding the doctrine and potential influence of the Third Wave and the New Apostolic Reformation, and asking if a person with a head filled with these ideas can make rational leadership decisions.

"Wasilla Assembly of God, where Sarah Palin attended until 2002 and continues to visit, and Juneau Christian Church, where Palin attends when in residence at the capital, have close links to major leadership and organizations in this movement." ^ We deserve to know if Palin believes in this stuff. And if she doesn't, why does she keep going back to these churches which are led by members of this movement? Why then does she keep participating in their events and promoting them?

How would medieval notions like those promoted by the New Apostolic Reformation distort social policy in Washington? And how would foreign and military policy be affected by "End Times" beliefs?

What is her opinion on another movement, Joel's Army, infiltrating her denomination? How would they use a Palin election to further their agenda?
 
Well, I didn't really hear much criticism of Trinity's theology as much as criticism of 3-4 sound bites of Jeremiah Wright. The Hannitys of the world talked about the church's theology briefly.
 
Her praise of the Kenyan evangelist suggests a very superstitious element to her thinking. That is scary.

In a way, I consider some of the Republican political positions to be superstitious, like their insistance that some of Friedman's tewachings can actually be made to work.

Nothing like superstition to keep you stuck on stupid.
 
corplinx said:
Well, I didn't really hear much criticism of Trinity's theology as much as criticism of 3-4 sound bites of Jeremiah Wright. The Hannitys of the world talked about the church's theology briefly.
Click to expand...

It is interesting that a lot of the people here who thought that discussions of The Rev. Wright and his connection to OBama was off limits and an outrage are piling on Palin.
 
leftysergeant said:
Her praise of the Kenyan evangelist suggests a very superstitious element to her thinking. That is scary.

In a way, I consider some of the Republican political positions to be superstitious, like their insistance that some of Friedman's tewachings can actually be made to work.

Nothing like superstition to keep you stuck on stupid.
Click to expand...

Funny, a lot people consider that the Left's insistence that Marx's teaching are valid to be wack.
Nice straw man, Lefty,nice straw man.
 
dudalb said:
Funny, a lot people consider that the Left's insistence that Marx's teaching are valid to be wack.
Nice straw man, Lefty,nice straw man.
Click to expand...
What has Marx to with anything I have said here or elsewhere? Friedmanism, by contrast, I have addressed as a superstition.

Interesting that so many religious right-wingers endorse Firedman as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom