An Open Letter To The Christian Church: Please Stop Sharing Right Wing Propaganda Instead Of Scripture

So yesterday as I was driving home from my son's house, I passed one of our community churches, whose name and denomination doesn't really matter. The billboard had a message, in big bold letters:

"God blesses those who labor."

The first thing to know, this isn't a Bible verse, which is why there is no chapter and verse given after the phrase.

It's not so much the written message that I take offense to. It's the unspoken message. I read this for the silent slap in the face to my disabled veteran spouse, that it is. If you say "God blesses those who labor," you reinforce the message that our society (evil and materialistic as it is) is constantly bombarding disabled men with, "If you don't work you're worthless."

I say this because I have been here with and stood beside more than one man who lost his ability to work. Not just my spouse who has struggled with his disability for years, as it slowly took away his health and ability to earn a living. I have watched his pride wither with a broken heart, not because he lost his ability to work, but because the society we live in told him that he lost his value as a person, when he lost his ability to work.

This is not the message of God, this is the message of men and it doesn't belong on a church. Almost all men will grow old, someday. Almost all of them will lose their ability to labor as they did in the days of their youth. This message is just reinforcing the damage already done to so many men who have had the "American work ethic" beat into them since birth.

I watched my grandfather and then my father grow old. I watched their health wither and their ability to do work along with it. I've seen my young son beaten with wounding words, because health problems have kept him from holding a job for the past few years. And we live in a society full of selfish, materialistic young women, who are all too eager to berate a partner who is unable to provide for the family, or who choose a partner based solely on the amount of money he brings in.

What a sad state of affairs, when the church itself delivers these messages, which are not of God.

What a sad state of affairs when the church wounds the wounded, and plays along with the world's game, shares the messages of the world, rather than those of God.

What does God say about labor? Let's look at Psalm 127:1 and 2

Unless the LORD builds the house, They labor in vain who build it; Unless the LORD guards the city, The watchman keeps awake in vain. It is vain for you to rise up early, To retire late, To eat the bread of painful labors; For He gives to His beloved even in his sleep.…

The church has no business carrying the propaganda of men. The Bible does not reinforce a message that men earn what they are given by God. The Bible teaches a message of faith, not of works or of work. The words of Christ in Mathew 6, verses 28 and 29:

"Consider the lilies of the field, they neither toil nor spin, yet I say to you that not even Solomon in all his glory clothed himself like one of these."

The church needs to stop delivering the messages of the world. It needs to start standing on the word of God. The entire message of blessings through work (or works) undermines the true message of faith and love that God intended the church to deliver. The message of Jesus Christ is AT CONFLICT with the messages of the world. When there is no conflict between the the world's ways and the ways of the church, I am confident in saying that the church has lost its way.

I'm not singling out any denomination or church, because almost of them are now incorporated. Almost all of them have adopted the ways of the world as their own, and almost all are choosing to deliver the world's message, over the message of the Christ. It doesn't matter if the church is teaching a doctrine of work as worth, a doctrine of "prosperity" and materialism, or the false doctrine of Christian Dominionism, it's all false doctrine.

What did Abraham 'do' to deserve his status as the father of nations? He believed God. He did not do anything else.

We know that Jesus earthly father, Joseph, was a carpenter by trade. Absolutely nothing in the Bible reinforces the idea that Jesus was a carpenter, but the feeble minds of men can't seem to cope with the idea that Jesus didn't have an earthly trade, he didn't labor under an employer. Jesus did not need an earthly trade, He was God. But I've seen the church push the narrative that Jesus would have learned his father's trade, because that's what was done in Jesus' times. That's a pretty dismal and small view of the person you claim was God, a view that says "He must have worked to earn His living."

I realize that human beings have relatively small minds in the scheme of things. I realize they tend to put everything into a box that makes sense to them, according to the world they live in and know and are accustomed to, but seriously, the work thing is not Biblical, and it's not a message that is all inclusive, it's a message that is directed to a very specific set of people, able bodied, young, healthy. It's also a message that excludes many other people and adds insult to injury, whether intentional or not.

If you look at the Biblical history of work, you will find that hard work and labor were not a part of God's plan for people. In fact, labor and toil, along with DEATH, came about AS PUNISHMENT FOR SIN.

Genesis 3:17-19

17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

It's not just a coincidence that work and hard labor came into the world at the same time as sin and death. It's symbolic of a later time, when Christ would come to set men free of the consequences of sin, which include both hard labor and death. To say that "God blesses those who labor," is almost the same as saying God blesses those who are under a curse. (Galatians 3:10 "For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.") 

Throughout the Old Testament, hard labor was used as a symbol of bondage to the devil. Yet God repeatedly promised to set his people free from all of their hard labor and he promised to give them rest. Then at last, He sent His only son into the world, to pay the price for men's sins.

Jesus said in Mathew 11:28:

"Come to me all you who labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest."

The message of Christ is one in which we are to cease from our labor, and live by faith in God. We are to stop trying to earn our way.

"It is by faith you are saved, not of works, lest any man boast." (Ephesians 2:8-9)

Let's be honest, humans LOVE to boast in their work. They 'take pride' in what they consider to be their own accomplishments. (By the way pride is a sin.) People like to believe that they deserve things and that everything they have has been gained through their own efforts and their own hard work. The society we live in reinforces that idea."Hard work pays off."

Just about everyone in the world is secretly (or openly) a Nebuchadnezzar, walking along the roof of his own castle, saying to himself:

"Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty?" (Daniel 4)

Of course Nebuchadnezzar was punished severely for his pride.
For these reasons, work is a trap, much like the law is a trap, because it cannot save, only condemn.
The righteous will live by faith. (Romans 1:17, Galatians 3:11, Hebrews 10:38)

To understand this theologically, requires a deeper reading of scripture, because it is symbolic of the difference between a doctrine of works and one of grace, through faith. This is a recurring theme throughout the Bible, and one that has a very deep spiritual significance. The question of whether men earn through work or works (and therefore deserve) what they are given by God, is answered time and time in scripture, and the answer is no, men do not earn God's love, and no, they do not earn God's blessings through work.

Image Credit: Summit Woods Baptist Church

The Republican Platform: "We Break Promises, So Trust Us"

It occurs me to that there is a very basic lack of integrity in the republican party. I know what you're thinking: "No kidding," right? 

Of course it seems obvious when you step back and view the philosophy, motives and methods used by those on the right. Right wing philosophy is based on Ayn Rand (fiction) with a wide range of conspiracy theories thrown in for good measure. 

Selfish Motives

The obvious motives for all of the positions held by the right are selfish in nature. They place themselves ahead of the rest of society, demanding that our country's policies benefit them personally, while patently disregarding what's best for society as a whole. It's easy for anyone who is paying attention to see that republicans are not about doing what is right for the the country. Anything done for the common good (and not their personal good) is labelled as 'Communism,' or 'Socialism,' and somehow connected to something that is evil, in spite of the fact that the policies will clearly accomplish good. 



When looking at individualism (Ayn Rand doctrine) verses collectivism, it really comes down to whether it's ME or it's US. There are many different ways to spin the 'Virtues of Selfishness,' and the crowd that is seeking permission to be wholly selfish and self-centered, has found what it's seeking in the likes of pseudo-preachers and Koch puppet politicians, who've devised their own theories and justifications for doing the wrong thing, while still convincing yourself that it's OK. 


This absolutely includes their 'right to life' nonsense. When you boil it all down, the only 'human' that it is totally free to care about, is one that it isn't born yet. An unborn embryo actually requires nothing from anyone, except for the body that carries it. What it requires from that body is very basic, nourishment and safety. I find it quite sick that republicans refuse to help provide nourishment or safety for pregnant women, while at the same attempting to limit their right to choose what happens to their body, claiming they care so deeply about the lives of the unborn. To take it one step to the further extreme, while they oppose maternal healthcare and supplemental nutrition programs which can help pregnant women have healthy babies, they are not opposed to keeping a brain dead woman alive on life support, against her wishes and that of her family, even as the fetus inside the dead body grows more and more deformed and unrecognizable. That is not pro-life, that is purely twisted and sick.


If you think I'm off on this point, just observe the behavior of any republican who is asked to contribute to maternal healthcare, or medical treatment for an unborn fetus. The first and only response they have is "Why should I pay for that?" Again, look at their attitude toward the federal Women Infants and Children food assistance program (WIC), which only provides the most basic, life sustaining food items for pregnant women and children under six. Look at their attitude towards the family leave act, toward equal pay for women and toward labor laws, which ensure a safe working environment for men and women, including pregnant women. There's no sense in looking at their attitude towards war. It's all too clear that their desire to save life ends the moment their leaders tell them their own necks are in danger. Baby killers? Of course they are. They kill with tanks, bombs, guns, poisons, depleted uranium, they kill by destroying water supplies and blowing up infrastructure and turning a blind eye to the true body count that results from their violence, too busy pointing fingers at others to notice the blood that's all over their own hands. It is very plain to see that their 'compassion' and 'passion for life' begins and ends at their wallets. It's not speculation, it's a fact. The claim that they care about the unborn is as bogus as their claim that they care about vets or the poor or kids or anyone else. The caring begins and ends at the point where a contribution is required.

Dishonest Methods

As far as the methods that right wing uses to accomplish its goals are concerned, you'll find the entire spectrum of dishonest tactics, from doctored videos to studies based entirely on pseudo-science. You'll find a party that believes there is nothing it can't get away with, and in truth there isn't anything they can't get away with, as long as they can convince the simpletons that follow them that it's all in the name of God. From robbery to murder, and everything in between, through manipulation they easily get their base to go along with the most vile of acts, either by convincing them that God ordains it, or by telling them that their very lives and freedoms will be forfeited if they don't go along. They come in the name of Jesus: "Hallelujah. Amen. Drill baby drill, steal baby steal, kill baby kill."


They've perfected their methods, learning to exploit the masses through fear; fear of others, fear of change, fear of government, fear of medicine, fear of God, fear of men, fear of everything. They pander to religious fervor and right wing zealotry. They appeal to the selfish nature of some men, who think in like terms, especially the Christian Dominionists, whose desire for power and control, combined with their greed and doctrine of selfishness, has already corrupted both church and state. They've perfected the dog whistle, sending out signals that appeal to the lowest common denominators, drawing the KKK and the white supremacists, along with the closeted bigots and racists, to their side in no short order every time. They party is like a magnet, drawing the worst and ugliest elements of society to itself.

Promising to Break Promises

And all of this is just the introduction to what I really wanted to write about today, which is the republican platform of promise breaking. Here's the truth. No man of integrity can run on a platform that is entirely based on breaking promises. No person worthy of trust advocates for breaking commitments, or promotes the idea that promises are made to be broken. Just think about it. 


As a nation we've made commitments to our veterans, to our senior citizens, to our children, to our poor and to ourselves. The entire platform that republicans are running on is 'Sorry, but promises don't mean anything'. 


Sorry veterans, we promised to take care of you when you came home from war, but you know, we just can't afford it. Sure, we promised you an education, we promised you that if you were wounded we would see to it that your healthcare needs were met. We promised to be there for you, because you were there for us, but you know how it is. Now that the war is all over, now that you're injured and emotionally scarred, we realize we just can't afford to do what we said we would. Sorry about that. Thanks for everything though, really.

The fact that republicans have consistently voted to cut funding for veterans programs and services is nauseating. Some advocate for doing away with the VA altogether, because, you know, we just can't afford it now that our vets have fulfilled their end of the bargain. There's no money for veteran's jobs programs or training programs or mental health treatment or homelessness prevention. Funny, if you ask them they'll tell you there's always enough money for more wars, but never enough money to take care of those they send to fight them. 

There's always money for recruiters in high schools, for radio and televisions ads telling American kids that the military is the road to success, the way to get ahead. Yet, there's never enough money to back up those ads by actually doing what was promised. How's that for integrity?

Social Security?

And our seniors? "Yes we took your money throughout your working life in the form of social security payments. I know we promised to give it back when you reached retirement age, but you know, that's just not working out now. Sorry about that. Thanks for everything though. You're on your own".

Pensions? "Oh those, well sorry again. Thanks for the lifetime of work in your city, state or country. Sure we made promises. We really did intend to keep them, honest we did. But sometimes you just have to break your promises. That's just how it is, no big deal."


Republicans have, somewhat successfully, convinced Americans that the programs they've paid into their entire lives are just 'entitlements.' The very word entitlements somehow has been transformed so that it implies something people are actually not entitled to. Something they don't deserve. Something they're getting for nothing. Except that every person in the United States who has a job pays into Social Security, and no-one who has not worked and paid in can get anything back. Every person whose pension is being robbed worked for years to accrue that pension, on the basis of a promise. Those things are not entitlement. Those are program that people have paid for, and republicans want to steal from. Pure and simple.

To balance the budget by going back on your word is not fiscal responsibility. It's theft of services. It's no different than if you hired the kid down the street to mow your loan, promising to pay him $50 when he was done, but then deciding after the fact that you don't want to pay him. Not because he did lousy job. Not because anything, except that you know you can get away with it. 

It's sad but there are a lot of people in the world who will eagerly engage in that kind of behavior. It's why few business establishments extend credit any more and why most service providers now get their money up front. I imagine that most republicans are the type of people that are always on the lookout for someone to exploit in some way. I suppose that's why it's so easy for them to accept this type of behavior from their political representatives.

Education

Public education is a promise that we as a society made to our children and grandchildren. It's a promise that we made to the future of our nation. It's also a promise that we need to keep if we hope to compete in a global economy. But all across the country republicans are raiding the children's coffers to pay their banker friends and provide more tax breaks for their wealthy donors. The entire premise behind what they're doing is a lie. It's theft. 


The taxpayers are charged for the schools, then the funds are spent on something besides schools. As a result, the schools are driven into economic ruin. Doors are closed and then the private sectors moves in. In this way private corporations with no education experience are getting their greedy hands on public money, money which was originally meant for the public schools. It's criminal. 

What kind of lowlife, greedy scum steals from kids? The republican kind. Not to worry, folks, they're doing it all for the glory of God! If you believe that, I bet you're also on their list of folks who want to buy a piece of that bridge in California...

The promise that every child in America will receive a free education is just one of many that we cannot allow republicans to break. To go back on that promise will devastate the country, throwing us further and further behind in every area in which our children will need to be able to compete. Education is an investment in the future of our America because today's kids are tomorrow's Scientists, inventors, developers, business owners, product manufacturers, service providers and on and on and on. An uneducated population cannot build a strong economy, solve the world's problems, advance the fields of medicine or technology, write the next great novel, discover the secrets of the universe etc... We owe it to the next generation and the one after that and after that, to make sure that our government keeps this basic promise to all children.

Labor

In the early to mid 1900's life in America was horrible for the average citizen. Survival was the basic tenant of life. Men, women and children were willing to do even the most grueling and dangerous work for mere pennies, just to try to survive. The promise of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness was far off for the vast majority of people. 

But the labor movement rose up and people banded together, tired of watching their friends and families lose life and limb, working long hours in dirty and dangerous environments, just to live in the poor house, in spite of it all. When we talk about our nation's founders, we should never forget our less than famous ancestors, the men and women who risked everything to bring us the promise of a minimum wage, a safe working environment, a chance to rise out of poverty and to live a life that includes something apart from morning, noon and night servitude to the company stow. 

Some of those promises are still in tact today, many are not. Our children have been robbed of the rights that our parents and grandparents risked everything to give to them. Republicans claim that the rights of working men and women are job killers. They claim that we can solve unemployment by getting rid of workers rights, safety and yes, the minimum wage. 


The promise that, in America, if you work hard you will be able to provide for yourself and your family has been undermined by the lie of trickle down economics and the ever advancing agenda of corporate fascism, which comes in the guise of 'economic freedom.' 

Republicans tell us that we can best achieve our goals by forfeiting our rights. We can best fulfill the American promise, by breaking the promises already made. If we give up more, we'll get more. It's all double talk. If trickle down is real, why is it that the people who are supposed to be giving back never stop taking, no matter how much we give them? 

The social safety net

The social safety net, which includes things like food assistance, cash assistance, unemployment insurance and health insurance for children, the disabled and senior citizens is another promise that republicans want to break. It's a promise that our nation has made to those who are struggling, to the family members of those who are struggling, to the working poor, to the disabled, to those who have reached retirement age. The promise is that if you fall on hard times or if you are too young, too old or physically, mentally or emotionally incapable of providing for yourself, we won't just let you rot. I personally believe in that promise, because it's not just good for those who receive benefits, it's good for society in general. 


What's not good for society? Letting our children go hungry. Letting our working poor live in tent cities or in cars or abandoned buildings. Forcing our disabled citizens to resort to begging on the streets to survive. Letting people die on the streets. Letting them freeze to death in alleys or die from toothaches, because they couldn't afford to see a dentist. What's bad for society is filling our jails with homeless people who committed no crime beyond existing. It's bad for society to arrest poor people for being poor and to use our criminal justice system as the only means of dealing with the mentally ill. We pay for the police and the courts and for the jails too. We pay to feed and house the homeless and the mentally ill in jails, why can't pay to feed and house them out of jails? We pay for their healthcare in jail, why can't pay for it outside of jail? 

The social safety net is good for the businesses that also reap the benefits of government food, housing and cash assistance. It's good for communities that reap the benefits of lower crime rates, when people are not backed into corners so that crime becomes their only means of self preservation. 

But republicans run on a platform of throwing the weakest and most vulnerable among us under the bus. Their promises focus on breaking our promises to our own people, diverting the tax dollars meant to help the poor to the richest people in this country. And what then happens to those dollars? They're used to create jobs in China or they're stashed in foreign bank accounts, while the corporations that got them are allowed to exploit prison labor, paying wages of just pennies an hour. 

If we break our promises to the poor, we deserve what we get. If we can't step back and see how insidious all of this is, how we're allowing our fellow citizens to be exploited, how our lack of compassion and our lack of concern for our fellow man is becoming our own downfall, then maybe it's already too late to save the soul of our nation. 

Freedom of religion

One of the first promises ever made in this country was the promise of freedom, expressly the freedom of religion. The Constitution clearly says that Congress shall make no law in regards to religion. Republicans are more than eager to break that promise. We have right wing politicians that claim our country needs "laws based on the God of the Bible." (Michele Bachmann) We have others who claim that this is a Christian nation, in direct contrast to what the Constitution clearly spells. 

The fact of the matter is that this country was founded in no small part by people who were fleeing a government that persecuted its citizens, based on personal interpretations of religion. The US was founded by intelligent men, who realized that nothing would destroy the country faster than laws that were based on religion. Men who spent far too much time listening to the various 'Christians' argue over whose interpretation of the Bible was correct and whose wasn't, and those who did not accept the existence of a God, arguing against the threatened oppression of those who did. 

Our Constitution wasn't created lightly, and it wasn't created by idiots who didn't know what they were doing. It was created by men who had seen the abuse of the state, as it was directed at those who didn't accept the state religion. It was founded by a group of men who had challenged the official interpretation of religion, some members of Christian sects that did not believe in the teachings of the Catholic church, some who were free thinking men that denied the existence of God altogether and who wished to be able to do so freely and without fear of persecution. It was founded by men who were entirely suspicious of both church and state and hoped to keep the two as far away from each other as possible. Those men included representatives from various groups of Christians, from the Quakers to the Ana-Baptists, who came to this country to escape the persecution of the Church of England. To say that anything else is true is just a flat out lie.

The freedom of religion is the most fundamental promise that we have as American citizens. It's a promise that the state will not intervene in matters of conscience, or in matters of spirituality. We now have a group of religious zealots in government that are promising to break that promise. These are the people that want their interpretation of religion to be placed into the text books that our children read in school. These are the people that want indoctrination into their various religious cults, to replace the educational system altogether. These are the people that demand that everyone follow the God that they perceive to be real, the people who would surely take away your rights to question their God, to research other views, or to seek God in your own way and in your own conscience. 

Unlike the founding fathers, these are not men of conscience. They're people who seek to use religion to subjugate others, to silence people they don't agree with, to eliminate the need for critical thinking, to destroy everyone's ability to find out for themselves what they believe is true and is not. Basically they're the people many of the founders of this country fled from, centuries ago.


Freedom of conscience is not just a right that was granted by the Constitution. If there is a God, then free will is a right that was quite obviously granted to men by that God. Throughout history, various religious groups have sought to take away people's right of conscience and the right of free will. But it's impossible to do so, since by nature people are created with independent minds. Sooner or later every nation that has attempted to suppress freedom of religion has been challenged by men of conscience, such as those who helped to found this country. 

The danger of allowing the state to assume powers to interpret religious teachings is all too obvious. Historically such governments have severely abused their power to suppress dissenting views and persecute 'heretics'. And yet throughout history, only after much bloodshed, freedom of religion has been achieved by men who refused to blindly accept the official state doctrine of religion.


On the right there are many hypocrites who are all too happy to claim that the state has no right to interfere with the church, while at the same time screeching that the church does have the right to dictate state policy. No it does not. In fact the church enjoys tax exempt status in the United States as part of the promise of the separation of church and state. 

There are more than 450,000 churches in the United States. As of 2007 there were 33,000 different denominations of Christianity alone. All of these people disagree with one another on interpretations of the Christian Bible, yet somehow republicans claim to represent all 33,000 different types of Christians? And they would impose a single interpretation on the other 32,999 groups that don't see things the same way that they do. And those are just the various Christian groups, not including those who embrace a religion that is not labelled 'Christian' such as people of the Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu faiths. 


As of 2013 there were 6.6 million people of the Jewish faith living in the United States. Republicans would gladly impose Christianity on those citizens, as a matter of law. What about the anywhere from two to seven million Muslims living in the US? Again, forcing their beliefs on others is the primary focus of the fanatical right wing. 


More than 26 percent of Americans identify themselves as atheist, agnostic, having no religious affiliation and/or embracing a religion other than Christianity. Additionally, ever growing numbers of people who do identify as Christian do not embrace the type of Christianity espoused by the right wing. In fact, a survey conducted by Pew Research in 2013 shows a very large number of Christians rejecting the narrative of the right wing. Today, Christian conservatives make up only 28 percent of the population, while those who identify themselves as progressive Christians or the Christian left are increasing in number each year, now accounting for 19 percent of the population. Additionally, a full 83 percent of young people reject the politics and severe religious views of the Christian right. That fact suggests that these views are soon to go out altogether, in the same way that humanity once moved beyond the extreme state and church doctrine that led to the Spanish Inquisition and the Salem Witch Trials. 


When we think of what it means to be an American citizen, most of us think of the promises that our country was built upon. The freedom from religious persecution being one of the most fundamental promises there is. Yet republicans want to destroy this promise, in essence assuming the role of a man's conscience and inserting themselves into everyone's relationship with God. 


To me this is the biggest threat that the right wing represents. The double sided argument that the government cannot be trusted, therefore we must give the government the power to dictate spiritual matters, is probably the scariest thing I hear coming out of their mouths. It is not the job of the state to enforce religious doctrine on its citizens. Yet we see republicans slowly undermining our freedom of religion in all areas of life, as they seek to give employers, public businesses and state entities the right to discriminate (read persecute here) against others, based on religious views. 


Again, it is not about what is best for everyone with them. It's not about what's best for the country, for the community or for society as a whole. Instead it's about self interest, their perceived right to not have to come in contact with anyone who holds a different point of view, practices a different religion or maintains a different lifestyle. It's about their perceived right to never be uncomfortable, never face their unfounded fears and never allow anyone 'not like them' to enjoy the same rights they claim for themselves. 


Is it really based on their religion? There's little by way of the New Testament to back up their views. Jesus said things like "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," and "Love your enemies and do good to those who spitefully use you." These are commandments that they prefer not to follow, so they've written them out of their religion altogether, replacing those teachings with ideas from the Old Testament, and from the Testament of right wing nut jobs such as Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck.


Throughout this country's history many people have come to the United States to escape persecution on religious grounds. It's a fundamental right and a promise extended to every citizen of this country. It's also a promise that republicans are chomping at the bit to go back on, although they seem not to realize that their own churches exist solely because of the separation of church and state. Newer versions of Christianity, such as Christian Dominionism, practiced by such right wing fanatics as Ted Cruz, Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry, and even older religious sects like Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses would have been quickly stomped out by a government controlled by Catholics or Baptists or Lutherans or Presbyterians or some other denomination of Christianity. If we approach the subject with the same amount of historical relevance that the founders did, we come to the realization that whenever Christians do succeed in suppressing all non-Christians, the next step is to begin suppressing other Christians. It's happened time and time again, but those who don't learn from history are bound to help the religious fanatics of the world repeat it. That's what worries me. As a follower of Jesus and not right wing doctrine, I am already under attack by them. They claim my liberal views are a threat to their way of life, and you can believe that, even though I am a Christian, they hate me as much as they hate any Atheist or Muslim or Jew. 

No promise is too big to be broken

The republican mantra seems to be that no promise is too big to be broken. The idea that a good portion of our population thinks it's a good idea to put their trust in people who are literally running on a platform of 'promises don't mean anything' is quite astonishing to me.


It's astonishing not just because I believe in the promises that we've made as a nation to our children, to our elders, to our veterans and to each other, but because I believe that promises should be kept and our word is our honor. It's hard to imagine myself putting my trust in people who flat out tell me that promises have no meaning. That alone has to be the standard by which cognitive dissidence is measured. It goes two steps beyond ignorance,  highlighting how easy it to manipulate a dumbed down society, through fear, through selfishness, through hate, through division and through religious exploitation. 

"Dear America, we're here to tell you that promises don't mean anything. And by the way, we promise to do right by you, and of course you can trust us to keep our promises..."

Yes, I do find it amazing that people vote for this double-speak. I do find it amazing and appalling that even one person in this country puts their trust in the party that literally runs on a platform of breaking America's promises.

(And 2013 and 2014...)

image credit thelastofthemillenniums.com

Meet The Democrat Who Could Replace Eric Cantor

The Tea Party might have actually done something to help the country this week. Of course, if they did it was purely accidental, but we'll take what we can get.

 On Tuesday, June 10, an unknown Tea Party candidate, Dave Brat, defeated House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in a primary election. This was the best thing that could have happened for democratic challenger, Jack Trammell. Up until now, there was little hope of a victory in the district, simply because it's much more difficult to beat an incumbent than an unknown candidate, in any election.

The Virginia primary election was decided by a very small minority of the electorate, in a low turn-out primary election. The tea party's defeat of Cantor during the primary could help ensure a win for democrats in November. The most recent polls show that support for the tea party has plummeted since 2010, reaching an all time low, even among republicans.

Just last week Gallup released a new poll showing that most republicans do not support the tea party. So while Cantor's former district may be solidly republican, that fact may have little bearing on whether or not the district will support a hard right, tea party candidate. Moderate republican voters will be faced with a choice, support a democratic candidate, or support a tea party candidate. The fact that many republicans feel the tea party is destroying the republican party itself, makes it hard to predict which of the two 'evils' (in their minds) they will choose.

To make the race even more interesting, according to CNN Trammell and tea party candidate Dave Brat are both professors and they both teach at the same liberal arts college. Trammell teaches disability studies and is also the director of Disability Services at Randolph-Macon College, in Virginia.

Where Trammell formerly worked for Bill Clinton's election campaign in Kentucky, Brat has no previous political experience, whatsoever. Additionally, Brat's hard right political views are a stark contrast to those of Trammell.

Brat has already made it very clear that he will do nothing to support the federal government, a stance held by most tea party obstructionists in Washington, and one that an overwhelming majority of Americans are tired of.

Trammell seems well aware of the fact that voters are tired of the do nothing's in Congress. In a public statement made shortly after Brat won the GOP nomination Trammell said:

 "I am running because I believe Virginians are hungry for a radical change from the dysfunctional and reckless politics being practiced by those in Congress." 

He went on to say that he views the results of the GOP primary election as proof of that.

Aside from his teaching position, Trammell is the owner of a small farm, and the father of seven children. He's also the author of nearly two dozen different books, on a variety of subjects, and a former Washington Times columnist. 

Here's a link to Tammell's facebook page, Jack Tammell for Congress, which already has nearly 12,000 followers. No doubt Tammell will be getting support from around the country, as he seeks to claim the House seat occupied by Eric Cantor, one of the country's most despised elected officials. 

image credit Jack Trammell for Congress on facebook

Suck It Humphrey: Why Gender Role Brainwashing For Babies Is Bad

"Humphrey has 1 red car. Humphrey goes on an adventure to see Daddy in the shed at the bottom of the yard. Humphrey looks after his little car very well.
Humphrey's Daddy has 2 big shoes. When Humphrey grows up he wants to be just like Daddy. Bye-bye Mommy, I'm off to work."

(Learn with Humphrey, 1,2,3, Sally Hunter, Hothouse Press, 2012)


Dear Humphrey; Are you for real?

Humphrey pretty much annoyed the hell out of me, before I'd even had my second cup of coffee this morning. I see no reason to brain wash children with gender roles and stereotypes, before they are old enough to count 1,2,3. But as a society, this is what we do and it's harmful, not just to women, but to men as well.

Bye-bye Humphrey. You can drive your little red car right to the dumpster, as far as I'm concerned. I don't want your bad ideas about the roles of men and women in society to infect one year old Ella, teaching her that Mommy stays home with the babies while Daddy goes off to work. That's not the reality of her life. In her world Mommy and Daddy both go to work, and they both change her diapers, they both feed her and bathe her and play with her. Sometimes Mommy works and Daddy stays home. Sometimes Daddy cooks dinner while Mommy goes out to the shed.

It's hard to imagine that Humphrey was written in the year 2012, or that in the year 2014, I got stuck reading Humphrey to two year old Oden, before I had my second cup of coffee. Considering he's being raised by a single dad, Humphrey really doesn't belong in our world. The only good Humphrey has done for our family is inspire this blog post, which is going to be about how brainwashing kids to fulfill gender roles is both harmful and anti-Christian.


Most people at least get why gender stereotyping is bad for girls and women. Even the hardest right man, if he is worth a grain of salt, will somehow become more of a feminist the first time he holds his new born daughter in his arms. But very few people address why the feminist movement is as much about boys and men as it is about women and girls.


Raising boys to be the provider and the strong, alpha male, is totally setting them up for failure. At some point in his life, nearly every man will fail to fulfill those roles. Life is full of circumstances that we cannot control. What happens to men when they lose their jobs, when they become sick, injured or disabled, when they can't find work or any one of a hundred other things beyond their control happens in their lives? They become depressed, self loathing, angry, disappointed, even suicidal. How can they not? They've been raised since birth to believe that their worth is based on their ability to provide and protect. When they fail at this, as they certainly will at some point in their lives, it isn't just their job or their health or their physical ability that they lose, it's their entire sense of self worth.

I'm tired of listening to our society's justifications for what we do to our boys and men. I tend to believe that our patriarchal society is harder on men than it is on women. All of the burdens are placed on their shoulders and when they fail to live up to social expectations, it's devastating. For some men it happens early in life, for others it's during middle age or later, when they become too old to do work that is 'of value' to society. Those who believe that it's God that places such heavy burdens on the shoulders of our sons are just flat out wrong. Jesus said "Come to me all you who are burdened and heavy laden and I will give you rest." It's not Him that places burdens on the shoulders of our children, it's US.


It's hard to believe that in 2014 we still have parents who are gender stereotyping their children from the day the are born. But girls rooms are still traditional pink and boys are still traditional blue. Newborn girls get the pink layette and boys get the blue, and precious few parents would dare to cross those lines, or swap it out, even for a single day. Heaven forbid our baby boys should wear pink or our girls should wear something blue with trucks and planes on it. What if they did? Would that really be a crime and would it have the mental and emotional affect of causing them to break free from their gender roles?

Of course society tells us that this is what's normal and that's what's normal. Anything different is horrible, earth shattering and, according to some, anti-God. It seems to me what is anti-God is forcing people into the roles we determine that they should fill. It's anti-God to insist that girls wear dresses, when they want to want to wear jeans, to demand they play with dolls, when they want to catch bugs, to give them the toy kitchen, when they want the tool bench. And to do the opposite with boys. It's anti-God to take what God has made and spend so much time and energy trying to mold it into something else.

It's not God's will our children are fulfilling when they conform to the gender stereotypes we lay out for them, It's our own and that of our patriarchal society. If we were allowing children to grow up as God intended, there would be no need to force them into any gender or social roles. They could grow up to be whatever God intended them to be.

Galatians 3:28 says "there is no male or female." Look it up. Society says otherwise, and far too many religious leaders are way too hung up on 'traditional' gender roles. Roles that aren't based on anything Jesus said. Gender roles are not the 'very foundation of our society', as some on the right are still teaching. If this is the foundation of our society, then our society really needs a new foundation. Perhaps it should even be built on something less superficial...

Maybe if we as a society stop raising boys to be 'boys' and girls to be 'girls', we could start raising people who would grow up to be the people they were really born to be. It's unbelievable to me that in the year 2014 we're still publishing books that are filled with gender stereotypes for children who can't even count yet. It's unbelievable to me that 60 and 70 and 80 year old men are still preaching sermons based on their ideological ideals about social norms, and people are still listening to that drivel. They claim that if women are not feminized and men are not forced into roles of provider and protector, society as we know it will collapse. Get real.

It's as if there's some superficial God up in heaven worrying about what we wear and what gender roles we're fulfilling, rather than a God who is concerned with our spiritual life and our inner self. It's society that tells boys they have to be strong and manly, not God. It's society that tells girls they have to be weak and feminine, not God. Those of us who challenge the traditional stereotypes and gender roles that are forced on children are not anti-God, we're just pro-human.

So suck it Humphrey.

image credit somewhereinbetweenblog