Exposing the religious right

[thaiboxerken]

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ed...olife_zealotry/

"SOME GOOD may yet come of Terri Schiavo's sad story. More of us will think hard about how we'd want to be treated if terminally incapacitated. More of us will write living wills, making clear who is in charge. And more people will gain a truer understanding of the religious right.

I can only hope that the religoius right comes out maimed from this.

 

[Ladewig]

I can only hope that the religious right comes out maimed from this.

I do not understand how the r.r.'s position on this issue will hurt them in the least.

 

[Psi Baba]

Re: Re: Exposing the religious right

I do not understand how the r.r.'s position on this issue will hurt them in the least.

-- Because, first of all, they don't care about Terri Shiavo in the least. All they care about are abstract principles, philosophies, and politics. Their only concern is that their "side" is right and the "opposition" is wrong. Their concern is not whether Terri Shiavo is allowed any dignity and peace, but with keeping a piece of meat alive.

-- Secondly, they think that the law and the idea of upholding the law should be thrown out the window so that they can have things the way they want them. When their own legislators and president that they put in power can't or won't give them what they want, they attack the judges with slander, ostricizing, and threats (Judge Greer, a conservative Christian, has been excommunicated from his church and has received death threats).

-- Several of the protestors' signs make statements that are flat-out, bald-face lies. (BTW, don't these people have jobs to go to?)

-- Hypocrisy is running rampant. Rep. Tom Delay thought it was okay to take his father off life support. Pat Buchannon, a Holocaust denier, is comparing Terri Shiavo's dying process to Dachau victims.

-- People are going on camera making wilder and more bizarre statements of what Terri Shiavo is "doing" and "saying." One friend who visited her described her as "verbalizing." Verbalizing! One person said, "Just give her some water and she'll be fine." Yeah she'll be fine. Other descriptors include "responsive," "fighting," "communicating." Next I expect to see "Baghdad Bob," the Iraqi Information Minister representing the Schindlers saying things like "Mrs. Schiavo is doing much better--just moments ago she was playing checkers and riding an excercise bike."

But, Ladewig, you're probably right. None of this will hurt the religious right, because this is all just business as usual.

Edited to add: Thaiboxerken, thanks. I had already formed all these thoughts in my head this morning, and I was looking for an appopriate thread to put them in.

 

[Ladyhawk]

Re: Re: Exposing the religious right

I do not understand how the r.r.'s position on this issue will hurt them in the least.

I can see where it might. I can see where some folks will interpret the actions of the Bush Brothers and Tom DeLay as being influenced by the RR....which, to some degree , they were in order to cater to that constituency. If people perceive that fundamentalist Christians believe that their faith based initiatives are above the law and justify the law being manipulated at will in order to placate any one person, it is certainly possible that their reputation could get hurt. I realize that the RR never publicly demanded this kind of intervention by Bush...but then, they never protested it, either.

If nothing else, I hope all Americans will take a second look at the influence the RR does have in this country and especially with this administration. Even the most devout of Christians may take issue with any one faction of the country attempting to play with their personal choices and rights.

I guess time will tell.

 

[Ladewig]

Re: Re: Re: Exposing the religious right

If nothing else, I hope all Americans will take a second look at the influence the RR does have in this country and especially with this administration. Even the most devout of Christians may take issue with any one faction of the country attempting to play with their personal choices and rights.

I guess time will tell.

And if all Americans do notice the influence the RR has and if devout Christians do take issue with a faction of this country attempting to force their morality on everyone, so what? Nothing can be done to stop such influence on Republicans because both the Republicans and the RR say that the last presidential election was decided by the RR. The RR will continue to do the things they believe in despite the opinions (or even the protestations) of the rest of the country.

 

[Ladewig]

Re: Re: Re: Exposing the religious right

Pat Buchannon, a Holocaust denier, is comparing Terri Shiavo's dying process to Dachau victims.

Pat Buchanan is a holocaust denier?

Can you post some evidence?

 

[crimresearch]

I'm guessing that some folks might be referring to this:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buchanan, Pat: "Dividing Line." _New York Post_, Saturday, March 17,1990
This so-called "Holocaust Survivor Syndrome" involves "group fantasies of martyrdom and heroics." Reportedly, half of the 20,000 survivor testimonies in Yad Vashem memorial in Jerusalem are considered "unreliable," not to be used in trials.

Finally, the death engine. During the war, the underground government of the Warsaw Ghetto reported to London that the Jews of Treblinka were being electrocuted and steamed to death.

The Israeli court, however, concluded that the murder weapon for 850,000 was the diesel engine from a Soviet tank which drove its exhaust into the death chamber. All died in 20 minutes, Finkenstein swore in 1945.

The problem is: Diesel engines do not emit enough carbon monoxide to kill anybody. In 1988, 97 kids, trapped 400 feet underground in a Washington, DC tunnel while two locomotives spewed diesel exhaust into the car, emerged unharmed after 45 minutes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is an article he wrote on whether or not John Demjanjuk was the real Ivan the Terrible, as opposed to Ivan Marchenko..it was not specifically a Holocaust denial piece.

But combined with his other writing along the lines of 'Hitler had some good ideas', and Buchanan falls into the category of 'looks like, walks like, quacks like'.

 

[Suddenly]

Not that it matters, but some of the protestors seem to have interesting pasts...

Details and links in a thread over at SC... thread may contain potty-mouth language...

http://www.skepticalcommunity.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=5541

 

[RandFan]

Re: Re: Re: Exposing the religious right

-- Because, first of all, they don't care about Terri Shiavo in the least. All they care about are abstract principles, philosophies, and politics. Their only concern is that their "side" is right and the "opposition" is wrong.

I think many of these people don't at all care about Terri anymore than the activists at an execution care about a condemned prisoner. Your description is apropos for any group of protestors.

Their concern is not whether Terri Shiavo is allowed any dignity and peace, but with keeping a piece of meat alive.

I'm not convinced that they believe that Terri is a piece of meat. I have watched the videos of Terri smiling and apparently responding to her family. It is quite tempting to believe that she is what she appears to be and not in fact in a PVS. It requires proactively looking at the facts to come to the conclusion that this woman's responses are just an illusion. I understand why many are responding the way that they are. I simply think that they are wrong and perhaps unwilling to find the truth that is there.

-- Secondly, they think that the law and the idea of upholding the law should be thrown out the window so that they can have things the way they want them.

But this is typical of most people. In California many of our referendums are challenged in court because someone wants the law thrown out the window for the very same reason.

-- Several of the protestors' signs make statements that are flat-out, bald-face lies. (BTW, don't these people have jobs to go to?)

Protest is a founding principle of America. I'm usually on the opposing side of protests. I always recognize that the protestors are proof that my country truly has free speech.

 

[RandFan]

Very often I think the religious right works to denigrate the party that I am a member of. That being said I'm not particularly comfortable with demonizing the religious right as a group. However I certainly understand the sentiment. I simply could not believe the rhetoric surrounding this issue from people who clearly should have known better (Conservative pundits and leaders).

 

[Psi Baba]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Exposing the religious right

Pat Buchanan is a holocaust denier?

Can you post some evidence?

The citation crimresearch posted is exactly what I had in mind. I read it in Shermer and Grobman's Denying History and unfortunately I don't have the book with me at the moment. Thankfully, crimresearch found the reference for me. Oh, and I hate when I misspell someone's name, even someone I don't like.

 

[Psi Baba]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Exposing the religious right

I think many of these people don't at all care about Terri anymore than the activists at an execution care about a condemned prisoner. Your description is apropos for any group of protestors.

Agreed. Many people on both sides were losing sight of the original issue.

I'm not convinced that they believe that Terri is a piece of meat. I have watched the videos of Terri smiling and apparently responding to her family. It is quite tempting to believe that she is what she appears to be and not in fact in a PVS. It requires proactively looking at the facts to come to the conclusion that this woman's responses are just an illusion. I understand why many are responding the way that they are. I simply think that they are wrong and perhaps unwilling to find the truth that is there.

While I think that some of these people want to keep anything even remotely human alive, no matter its state, you are correct in that most of them have actually deluded themselves into believing that there was more going on there than there really was.

Protest is a founding principle of America. I'm usually on the opposing side of protests. I always recognize that the protestors are proof that my country truly has free speech.

I didn't mean to imply that I believe otherwise.

 

[RandFan]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Exposing the religious right

I didn't mean to imply that I believe otherwise.

And my appology if I implied that you didn't.

 

[KelvinG]

I can only hope that the religoius right comes out maimed from this.

Hey, I've been waiting for years for the religious right to finally be exposed for what they are. It hasn't happened yet, and I ain't holding my breath.

 

[Ladewig]

I can only hope that the religoius right comes out maimed from this.

Throw out a yellow flag if you think I am piling on, but in late 2001, Falwell said that the 9/11 attacks were the result of "the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians ... and the ACLU." Two days later he "apologized" by saying that he believed that these people "created an environment which possibly has caused God to lift the veil of protection." Meanwhile Pat Robertson blamed it all on the Supreme Court which took "your Bible away from the schools. They've forbidden little children to pray."

If crap as bizarre as that doesn't make America blink an eye, then the T. Schiavo circus isn't going to make the slightest difference at all.

 

[Ladyhawk]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Exposing the religious right

And if all Americans do notice the influence the RR has and if devout Christians do take issue with a faction of this country attempting to force their morality on everyone, so what? Nothing can be done to stop such influence on Republicans because both the Republicans and the RR say that the last presidential election was decided by the RR. The RR will continue to do the things they believe in despite the opinions (or even the protestations) of the rest of the country.

So what? Well, for one thing, if enough people wake up to the dangerous agenda that the RR poses to individual rights and the intergrity of State Law, who knows? How about, maybe the RR won't be able to 'decide' the next election? I've gotta believe that the Bush Brothers, Jeb and DeLay are looking at the RR through a little different microscope this time around. Soon as those new polls came out indicating that anywhere between 68- 80+% of Americans disagreed with Bush's actions, they each got pretty quiet.

Sure, the RR will continue to do what they want, despite any opinion, but, if their agenda becomes less popular among voters, they won't have the 'buying power' they currently have.

I know... but I can dream can't I?

 

[Ladyhawk]

Re: Re: Exposing the religious right

Throw out a yellow flag if you think I am piling on, but in late 2001, Falwell said that the 9/11 attacks were the result of "the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians ... and the ACLU." Two days later he "apologized" by saying that he believed that these people "created an environment which possibly has caused God to lift the veil of protection." Meanwhile Pat Robertson blamed it all on the Supreme Court which took "your Bible away from the schools. They've forbidden little children to pray."

If crap as bizarre as that doesn't make America blink an eye, then the T. Schiavo circus isn't going to make the slightest difference at all.

You've got a very valid point Ladewig....but consider this...Falwell and Robertson were just spouting off their usual rhetoric. The reason I think the Schiavo case carries more weight is because THIS time, the Bush Administration actually screwed with the law. This hits people a little closer to home, don't ya think?

 

[Ladyhawk]

Sorry, sorry....one more thing.

This article presents an interesting view on the power of the RR..from Economist.com

Take a look at this

 

[RandFan]

Re: Re: Re: Exposing the religious right

THIS time, the Bush Administration actually screwed with the law. This hits people a little closer to home, don't ya think?

Possibly but I really don't think that one can make such conclusions. I think if most people had thought that the case were something other than what it was then they would have supported screwing with the law. If I had to place a bet I would say sentiment was more due to the fact that people believed this was a personal matter between the husband, his wife and her doctors. Bush was seen as interfering with that (assuming one can draw such inference at all). Be careful on placing meaning on such polls.

I do agree with you that the Bush's went silent after public opinion went against them. If 80% had been on the side of intervention I believe the results would have been different.

 

[Ladewig]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Exposing the religious right

So what? Well, for one thing, if enough people wake up to the dangerous agenda that the RR poses to individual rights and the intergrity of State Law, who knows? How about, maybe the RR won't be able to 'decide' the next election? I've gotta believe that the Bush Brothers, Jeb and DeLay are looking at the RR through a little different microscope this time around. Soon as those new polls came out indicating that anywhere between 68- 80+% of Americans disagreed with Bush's actions, they each got pretty quiet.

Why should the Bush brothers look at the RR any differently? The RR wanted them to do something, they did it, non-believers will forget all about it in time, and the RR folks will remember that the Bush brother went to bat for them during a crisis. GW and Jeb Bush can call on the RR vote whenever they want. I can't imagine that the top Republicans thought they were going to stop the removal of the feeding tube. They saw it as something that should be fought for and they fought for it.

Sure, the RR will continue to do what they want, despite any opinion, but, if their agenda becomes less popular among voters, they won't have the 'buying power' they currently have.

I know... but I can dream can't I?

I don't think their "buying power" will ever diminish. When the Republican primaries roll around, candidates who ignore or challenge the RR will find themselves polling behind the candidates who, when asked to name the political philosopher who most influenced their thinking, respond: Jesus Christ.