Religious Bigotry, Why it Will Backfire on You

[corplinx]

Some long time readers of these forums might be familiar with my history which I've alluded to in other threads.

I was raised in a religious fundamentalist household. We were devout baptists who switched to the Assemblies of God when the tempo of the music at the Baptist church got too fast for my mother's liking. Eventually, I grew out of creationism and fundamentalism through research and knowledge. My atheism is a constant source of worry to my mother, but then again, she also worries that I'm not eating enough bacon nor the right brand of it.

I see a lot of what I consider to be religiously bigoted material on this subforum lately regarding Sarah Palin. Here are some clues for the clueless:

1. In every AG church, about 90+ percent of the audience just shows up and goes through the motions. Its their community, family, and friends. Most of them don't take it too seriously.

2. In every AG church, there are some nutjobs, drama queens, closet government conspiracy kooks, and of course the one guy who sees every dropped pen as a sign of the end times. If you are recording footage of this church, the guy jumping up and down versus the hundreds sitting or standing quietly in the pews make for better video.

3. The one thing that rallies these people to the polls in droves is being mocked, demeaned, and condescended to. The worst thing you can do is put them on a crusade. When you attack her church, you become part of the secular humanist movement that is out to discredit God and churches. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy in a way. You make fun of them and snipe about how they claim everything is "God's will", then when they decide that electing Sarah is God's will because of your opposition, you are vindicated. Sorta. In a retarded way.

The best thing you could have done was not attacked her religious beliefs. It is a strategic mistake. Mockery of evangelicals makes them show up at the polls.

[Puppycow]

Yes. The dems need to make this about the economy. Counter the cultural populism with economic populism.

Thomas Frank writes (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122161053317045669.html):

Like every other culture warrior before her, Mrs. Palin presents herself as a person looked down on and sneered at by the high and the mighty, defined as the liberal elite. Look down on or sneer at Mrs. Palin and you have merely reinforced the story, offered an illustration of what the lady is talking about.

When Republicans cry class conflict, it only seems fair that they get class conflict in return. And at this particular economic juncture it is the Democrats, not the GOP, who have all the weapons. Now if only they can be persuaded to use them.

Consider the current economic catastrophe, which has been building for a year. Just as it has taken down Countrywide, Bear Stearns, Indymac, Freddie, Fannie, Lehman, Merrill and Lord knows who else in the weeks to come, it has also pulverized the reigning conservative shibboleths of the past 28 years.

There is simply no way to blame this disaster, as Republicans used to do, on labor unions or over-regulation. No, this is the conservatives' beloved financial system doing what comes naturally. Freed from the intrusive meddling of government, just as generations of supply-siders and entrepreneurial exuberants demanded it be, the American financial establishment has proceeded to cheat and deceive and beggar itself -- and us -- to the edge of Armageddon. It is as though Wall Street was run by a troupe of historical re-enactors determined to stage all the classic panics of the 19th century.

By the way, this is the same system the Republicans would still apparently like to put in charge of Social Security. The same system that is minting millionaire CEOs, that is holding the line on wages, and that we will be bailing out for years.

On Monday, John McCain blamed the disaster on "greed by some based in Wall Street." It's a personal failing of some evil few, in other words, and presumably capitalism will start working again once we squeeze the self-interest out of it. In the weeks to come, maybe Sen. McCain will also take a bold stand against covetousness and sloth.

But the structural changes of the past 28 years that have made all this possible -- the waves of deregulation, the takeover of government itself by business interests -- these haven't made too much of an impression on him. In March Mr. McCain actually called for more deregulation in response to the crisis, and at the Republican convention two weeks ago an ebullient Mitt Romney promised that Mr. McCain would take "a weed-whacker to excessive regulation." Just for good measure, this former management consultant also called for yet another round of attacks on the unionized federal workforce, deploring its "tyrannosaurus appetite."

[bozothedeathmachine]

she also worries that I'm not eating enough bacon nor the right brand of it.

Breakfast at your house must have been an awesome experience.

[BenBurch]

Who gives a damn if she handles snakes and yammers in tongues? That doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that she might become President when she isn't even able to run a small jerkwater town properly.

[Meadmaker]

Who gives a damn if she handles snakes and yammers in tongues? That doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that she might become President when she isn't even able to run a small jerkwater town properly.


And the reason she might become President is because her opponents tend to call her supporters' home in rural Alaska, or more importantly rural Ohio, "jerkwater towns".

The day after The Speech, I had to do some travelling, and so I had an opportunity to listen to more radio than average. I cringed as I listened to Air America, as they insulted her and were still amazed at McCain's incredible blunder at picking this rube. (No one actually used the word "rube", but that was the tone.) Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh was glowing. He was explaining that the left will absoulutely hate Sarah Palin because she stood up and exemplified middle America, and the left would savage her for having the audacity to actually be the sort of person they hate. Meanwhile, their vicious attacks would invoke a sympathy backlash, or as he said, people would see attacks on Sarah Palin as attacks on themselves, and not want to vote on the same side as the attackers.

I really hate it when I have to agree with Rush.

ETA: The assault on religion is all part of that. Most people aren't freaky fundies, but that includes most people who go to churches with freaky fundie members. When people launch assaults at those who attend those churches, they correctly perceive those attacks as attacks on themselves.

[boloboffin]

Some people call it religious bigotry, some people call it a desire for reality. Eh.

[uk_dave]

Some people call it religious bigotry, some people call it a desire for reality. Eh.

You're canadian?

[Ziggurat]

You're canadian?

How do you spell Canada?

C - Eh - N - Eh - D - Eh

[Ausmerican]

And the reason she might become President is because her opponents tend to call her supporters' home in rural Alaska, or more importantly rural Ohio, "jerkwater towns".

The day after The Speech, I had to do some travelling, and so I had an opportunity to listen to more radio than average. I cringed as I listened to Air America, as they insulted her and were still amazed at McCain's incredible blunder at picking this rube. (No one actually used the word "rube", but that was the tone.) Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh was glowing. He was explaining that the left will absoulutely hate Sarah Palin because she stood up and exemplified middle America, and the left would savage her for having the audacity to actually be the sort of person they hate. Meanwhile, their vicious attacks would invoke a sympathy backlash, or as he said, people would see attacks on Sarah Palin as attacks on themselves, and not want to vote on the same side as the attackers.

I really hate it when I have to agree with Rush.

ETA: The assault on religion is all part of that. Most people aren't freaky fundies, but that includes most people who go to churches with freaky fundie members. When people launch assaults at those who attend those churches, they correctly perceive those attacks as attacks on themselves.

I agree with you about calling towns like these "jerkwater" towns. I am also not too worried about anyones religious beliefs within reason. What I am sick to death of is the whole "small town values" garbage.
What exactly are these small town values that make them superior to city values? From what I have read Ms Palins small town has a meth problem and teens get pregnant there. Sounds a lot like small town values dont end with much different results than big city values.
Religious bias, homophobia and racism are at least as well represented in small towns as big cities. And yet over and over we hear "small town values" extolled as if growing up in one conferred sainthood.

[RPG Advocate]

1. In every AG church, about 90+ percent of the audience just shows up and goes through the motions. Its their community, family, and friends. Most of them don't take it too seriously.

...

3. The one thing that rallies these people to the polls in droves is being mocked, demeaned, and condescended to. The worst thing you can do is put them on a crusade.

If most of them don't take it too seriously, then there shouldn't be a crusade. Lack of seriousness and the zeal of a crusade don't go together.

When you attack her church, you become part of the secular humanist movement that is out to discredit God and churches.

I do want to discredit God and churches. Religion breeds authoritarianism and slows progress.

[corplinx]

If most of them don't take it too seriously, then there shouldn't be a crusade.

Voting is so easy it makes them feel like they accomplished something.

[dudalb]

ETA: The assault on religion is all part of that. Most people aren't freaky fundies, but that includes most people who go to churches with freaky fundie members. When people launch assaults at those who attend those churches, they correctly perceive those attacks as attacks on themselves.

What lot of people do not understand is that
A. A lot of people who do not have strong religous beliefs themselves do not like to hear religon attacked and
B. The inability of the Dems to reach small town and rural voters is one reason they have lost the last two Presdential elections. The Kos Kids and Moveon.org like to deny this because they have real comtempt for rural America, and like to think there is a way they do not have to soil there hands appealing for their votes. As long as groups like this have heavy influences on the way the Dems run their campaigns the Dems will continue to lose the Presidency.
3.Losing an election is a high price to pay for the fun of ridiculing "Stupid Hicks".

[dudalb]

Some people call it religious bigotry, some people call it a desire for reality. Eh.


Your "Desire for Reality" might cost you guys the election.
It seems to me that keeping your mouth shut for a few months about what you really think about Religon is a reasonable price to pay for winning the White House.
And dont' forget, for all the circle jerking going on on Athiest/Secularists web pages, you are still a small minority in the American Population. If you think appealing to them will win you the election, you are dead wrong.

[joobz]

The best thing you could have done was not attacked her religious beliefs. It is a strategic mistake. Mockery of evangelicals makes them show up at the polls.
I think you are right here. People tend to become very much "us vs. them" when they think their religion is being threatened.

When talking to my mom (whose greek orthodox, but doesn't attend church often) about creationism vs. evolution, she gets a knee jerk sympathy for the creationists. I must explain that evolution ISN'T the opposite of god's creation. It's just an observation of the universe, she becomes more understanding.

[Meadmaker]

What exactly are these small town values that make them superior to city values? From what I have read Ms Palins small town has a meth problem and teens get pregnant there. Sounds a lot like small town values dont end with much different results than big city values.
Religious bias, homophobia and racism are at least as well represented in small towns as big cities.

To comment on the last sentence, my experience growing up in one is that they are more represented there, and we didn't have a meth problem when I was growing up, just pot, coke, and heroin.

As to the question, I would find it difficult to answer, but it is there. I'll give it some thought and see if I can put it into words.

[daredelvis]

What exactly are these small town values that make them superior to city values? From what I have read Ms Palins small town has a meth problem and teens get pregnant there. Sounds a lot like small town values dont end with much different results than big city values.
Religious bias, homophobia and racism are at least as well represented in small towns as big cities. And yet over and over we hear "small town values" extolled as if growing up in one conferred sainthood.

I have spent much of my life in largish cities (Tucson was the smallest) and my wife is from a town of 1,200. One example that I know of is that when you see a meth-head on the street you see a weak minded criminal, when that meth-head is the son, daughter, brother or sister of someone you know (as is likely the case in many small towns) you see a personal/family tragedy. That is at least one difference between small town and city values. In my experience there is little actual difference between the two. You have great people and jerks in both settings.

Daredelvis

[dudalb]

The "Small Town Virtues" is sort of a reaction to the "Stupid Hicktown" attitude of a lot of city dwellers.
The fact is both like to think that a lot flaws that exist in both only exist in other guy's place of residence.
I have lived in both Big Cities (LA,San Francisco,Denver) and small towns and both have their advantages and disadvantages. If you want to go to new play or see a big show, you have problems or a long drive if you are in a small town. If you like to get out into the country and are fond of wilderness, you have the same problems with the Big city.

[dirtywick]

I agree with you about calling towns like these "jerkwater" towns. I am also not too worried about anyones religious beliefs within reason. What I am sick to death of is the whole "small town values" garbage.
What exactly are these small town values that make them superior to city values? From what I have read Ms Palins small town has a meth problem and teens get pregnant there. Sounds a lot like small town values dont end with much different results than big city values.
Religious bias, homophobia and racism are at least as well represented in small towns as big cities. And yet over and over we hear "small town values" extolled as if growing up in one conferred sainthood.

It comes down to priorities rather than values, that's probably a better way of looking at it. Keeping the local factory that sustains the town from going overseas and the price of gas low because there's no public transportation is a lot more important than a drug problem that's behind closed doors and not in the streets and poverty in a place where cost of living is low.

The values are the same, just in a different order.

Figure if things weren't that way, though, Democrats wouldn't do as well in big cities either.

[joobz]

I have spent much of my life in largish cities (Tucson was the smallest) and my wife is from a town of 1,200. One example that I know of is that when you see a meth-head on the street you see a weak minded criminal, when that meth-head is the son, daughter, brother or sister of someone you know (as is likely the case in many small towns) you see a personal/family tragedy. That is at least one difference between small town and city values. In my experience there is little actual difference between the two. You have great people and jerks in both settings.

Daredelvis
Also, the magnitude of a city magnifies the jerky quality.

Let's say 0.1% of the popluation are pedophiles (I do not know the actual numbers).

In a town of 1000 people, that's only 1 pedophile.

However, in New York City, you have ~80,000 pedophiles forming NAMBLA.

[Puppycow]

Who gives a damn if she handles snakes and yammers in tongues? That doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that she might become President when she isn't even able to run a small jerkwater town properly.

What meadmaker said. Also, what Thomas Frank said. I'll post it again:

Like every other culture warrior before her, Mrs. Palin presents herself as a person looked down on and sneered at by the high and the mighty, defined as the liberal elite. Look down on or sneer at Mrs. Palin and you have merely reinforced the story, offered an illustration of what the lady is talking about.

I assure you, you will not win over any swing voters with that attitude. People in "small jerkwater towns" vote, too.

[leftysergeant]

The problem is that Palin is a religious enthusiast, and it is the enthusiasts who control which way the mob moves.

So the rest of the congregation is luke-warm. They don't make the decisions. It is the enthusiasts who do.

So Palin's religion is a bigger factor than is Obama's in evaluating their mental state and the impact it will have on their ability to lead in a rational manner.

[gtc]

How do you know she is more enthusiastic about religion than Obama?

[leftysergeant]

How do you know she is more enthusiastic about religion than Obama?

What programs has Obama pushed to re-inforce religious teachings in the schools?

AO sex education and creationism are intended to use the public facilities to teach a religious view.

[Whiplash]

How do you know she is more enthusiastic about religion than Obama?

This is a fair point. Palin came on the scene and didn't immediately start stating the virtues of religious beliefs or anything. The attacks on her for religious reasons came at her full force before she could even consider doing so.

And yet Obama is also supposed to be religious. He was aklso a member of a church for many years.

I can't help but notice the bias in that with Obama, he gets a full pass on any of that. It doesn't even seem to cross anyones mind. Maybe the assumption is that he just pays lip service to religion but is really a secular atheist underneath it all.

But Palin, the moment she hits the scene, it's religious attack after religous attack. Both of them have a religious background, why the knee jerk attacks on her, but a total pass on Obama?

I know I said I was going to avoid this forum, I was just reading a few messages while waiting to see if anyone responds to my long post in Shemps thread, and wanted to weigh in on these things, but my most recent posts I have bent over backwards to be calm, polite, and reasonable. But I will probably be walking away from this forum for the most part after tonite.

[Alferd_Packer]

The issue is not how religious either of them is, it is how they allow religion to affect their public policies.

[Whiplash]

The issue is not how religious either of them is, it is how they allow religion to affect their public policies.

Ok that is fair, so I assume that the attacks on Palin mean there is good reason to think she will allow religion to affect her public policies, but Obama will not?

[applecorped]

Ok that is fair, so I assume that the attacks on Palin mean there is good reason to think she will allow religion to affect her public policies, but Obama will not?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH5ixmT83JE

[Whiplash]

Ahh, good ole' Rev. Wright. I can't ever get enough of him.

[MarkCorrigan]

Ok that is fair, so I assume that the attacks on Palin mean there is good reason to think she will allow religion to affect her public policies, but Obama will not?

In my very humble and very British opinion, the very fact that Obama is (as far as I'm aware) not a creationist and Palin is is cause for concern.

She might well not let it affect her, but IF she does, it will mean something bloody awful.

The fact she's hugely pro-life MAY not be an issue, but IF IT IS....

The fact she's AO sex ed minded....

etc.


It's not so much that I personally fear she absolutely WILL bring these in (although I'm bloody sure she will for AO and her pro-life stances) it's what will happen IF she does.

[RPG Advocate]

What meadmaker said. Also, what Thomas Frank said. I'll post it again:

[quote about sneering at rural America]

I assure you, you will not win over any swing voters with that attitude. People in "small jerkwater towns" vote, too.

I admit to having this prejudice. After thinking about it, I found that I've associated rural America with ethnocentrism. I wonder if on average, people in small towns really do ostracize non-whites, (legal) immigrants, gays, non-Christians, and eccentric people more than big city folks do.

More to the point, Palin is a religious fundamentalist, which actually has a proven association with ethnocentrism, so even if my prejudice about rural America is incorrect, I think it's more likely to be correct for Palin in particular.

[BenBurch]

Hey, I came from a jerkwater town. And you know what? Everybody there called it a jerkwater town. You should have seen Bartlett IL back in the 60s. One catholic church, two bars, one general store/pharmacy, one hardware store, two gas stations, and a railroad station. Literally was a jerkwater town as it existed primarily because there the Milwaukee Road trains took on water. (That is the origin of the word.) It was not a whole lot smaller than Wasalia was when Caribou Barbie ran the place. And if you could screw up running a small town like that, you have no business being President.

And Hell, all of Alaska has a population 1/5 that of Chicago. Do you think Mayor Richard M. Daley is qualified to be President, then? Eh, Wildcat? By that measure he is five times as qualified as she is.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Religion breeds authoritarianism and slows progress.

Right, which is why the most religious western nation is the scientific and technological superpower of the modern age. :p

[Meadmaker]

The fact she's AO sex ed minded....


The "fact" that she is AO sex ed minded is not a fact at all. She isn't.

She once answered a questionnaire in such a way that suggested she might be, but it was basically a push-poll style questionnaire. The alternative was (from memory) "explicit sex education and contraceptive clinics in schools". She supports teaching contraceptive use to teens.

My source for this is a document compiled by Tony Knowles, her Democratic opponent for governor. If you want a link, you'll have to google it yourself.

[Meadmaker]

I have been trying to decide what "small town values" really are, and the only phrase I came up with is "pride of place". That can be good, or bad. It breeds patriotism, and bigotry. It breeds a sense of community, and a need to look after neighbors, but it also breeds nosiness, holier than thou attitudes, and self righteousness.

Someone noted that numbers make a difference and that in a small town, one in 1,000 pedophiles means only one pedophile. Not quite true. It means 0 pedophiles. He'll have to leave town once he's caught, even if he gets out of jail.

[Nyarlathotep]

I admit to having this prejudice. After thinking about it, I found that I've associated rural America with ethnocentrism. I wonder if on average, people in small towns really do ostracize non-whites, (legal) immigrants, gays, non-Christians, and eccentric people more than big city folks do.

I grew up in a town in a town of about 10,000 residents, I currently live in a town of about 50,000 residents. The answer to your wondering is, no, at least not in any small town I havve lived in. People in small towns are just like everywehre else, some are idiotic ****wits, some are not.

[corplinx]

I admit to having this prejudice. After thinking about it, I found that I've associated rural America with ethnocentrism. I wonder if on average, people in small towns really do ostracize non-whites, (legal) immigrants, gays, non-Christians, and eccentric people more than big city folks do.

Most southern small towns have healthy minority populations unless the small towns were created by white flight.

[Dr Adequate]

And yet Obama is also supposed to be religious. He was aklso a member of a church for many years.

I can't help but notice the bias in that with Obama, he gets a full pass on any of that. You can say what you like about the Politics forum, it's always entertaining.

[leftysergeant]

That Palin gets a pass from Eagle Forum is cause enough for concern. Bunch of crazy people with a Dominionist leaning. Her church is also Dominionist in its teachings. She was a convert from another religion, as I recall reading somewhere. That can be scary. Converts get carried away more often than is safe for rational society.

At least with Obama, we need not worry that he will nuke Iran just because he thinks God wanted him to.

[gtc]

leftysergeant.

Do you have a link to suggest that her church is Dominionist? Also can you provide evidence that converts are more likely to get carried away than others? 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?

You can say what you like about the Politics forum, it's always entertaining.

What is your point?

[Dr Adequate]

What is your point? Just beyond your grasp.

[Hokulele]

People in small towns are just like everywehre else, some are idiotic ****wits, some are not.


The real trick is being able to distinguish between the two.

[gtc]

Just beyond your grasp.

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'.

[varwoche]

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: 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) ETA: I do not consider this religious bigotry.

[Pookster]

Hey, I came from a jerkwater town. And you know what? Everybody there called it a jerkwater town. ...


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.

[Ausmerican]

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'.

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.

[Darth Rotor]

At least with Obama, we need not worry that he will nuke Iran just because he thinks God wanted him to.
No, he'd nuke them because he thinks AIPAC wanted him to, which is obviously OK, right? :D

DR

[corplinx]

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.)

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).

[gtc]

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.

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.

[leftysergeant]

No, he'd nuke them because he thinks AIPAC wanted him to, which is obviously OK, right? :D

DR

No. He wouldn't nuke them because he would know it was a no-win option. He would not be expecting Jesus to bail us out.

[varwoche]

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

[G-K-4]

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?

"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


Do you have a link to suggest that her church is Dominionist?

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 (http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/5/0244/84583/Front_Page/Palin_s_Churches_and_the_Third_Wave) and Two (http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/5/03830/11602)

"Sarah Palin's Demon Haunted Churches - The Complete Edition" (here (http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/8/114332/7479/Front_Page/Sarah_Palin_s_Demon_Haunted_Churches_The_Complete_ Edition))

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 (http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/4/175739/4820/Front_Page/What_is_Dominionism_Palin_the_Christian_Right_amp_ 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.For example, Palin's (or her speechwriter's) use (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94258995) of the term "servant heart" is not only Christian language, but also an evocation (http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/5/12945/98680/Front_Page/Sarah_Palin_and_the_Servant_Heart) of the role of Christian women. This in turn connects to the notion of service held by worldwide Christian evangelism.

[varwoche]

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

[varwoche]

From the Assemblies of God USA website (http://ag.org/top/Beliefs/Position_Papers/index.cfm#) (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.

[G-K-4]

Are you getting a general sense here?...

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 (http://www.csmonitor.com/1999/0923/p15s1.html) of Kiambu, Kenya, and Bob Beckett (http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/20/171755/145) 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." ^ (http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/20/171755/145) 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 (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/29/163234/559/495/579213) by members of this movement? Why then does she keep participating (http://www.alaskaag.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=34) 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 (http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2008/09/what-goes-around.html)" beliefs?

What is her opinion on another movement, Joel's Army (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=964), infiltrating her denomination? How would they use a Palin election to further their agenda?

[corplinx]

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.

[leftysergeant]

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.

[dudalb]

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.

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.

[dudalb]

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.

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.

[leftysergeant]

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.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.

[varwoche]

Palin switched to the Wasilla Bible Church (http://wasillabible.org/) a few years ago, I speculate for political reasons. There's not much of anything on the website. Plus the church blocked itself from internet archive (http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://wasillabible.org/):

We're sorry, access to http://wasillabible.org/ has been blocked by the site owner via robots.txt.

[varwoche]

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. It wasn't unreasonable for Obama to be questioned by the press about the beliefs of his church. And when questioned, he distanced himself from those beliefs.

I welcome Palin to do the same. (Except she hasn't been questioned nor will she.)

eta: on topic NPR piece (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94332540)

[eeyore1954]

The problem is that Palin is a religious enthusiast, and it is the enthusiasts who control which way the mob moves.

So the rest of the congregation is luke-warm. They don't make the decisions. It is the enthusiasts who do.

So Palin's religion is a bigger factor than is Obama's in evaluating their mental state and the impact it will have on their ability to lead in a rational manner.
So what do you believe Obama was doing in church? Is he a religious man or was he just there to garner votes and support. I'm leaning towards the former.

[eeyore1954]

It wasn't unreasonable for Obama to be questioned by the press about the beliefs of his church. And when questioned, he distanced himself from those beliefs.

I welcome Palin to do the same. (Except she hasn't been questioned nor will she.)

eta: on topic NPR piece (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94332540)

So you would be happier with someone who was going to church for some reason other than their beliefs.

Why do you think she won't be questioned about her beliefs or the beliefs of her church? She has been attacked for most other things.

[Dr Adequate]

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. Autosatire is funny.

[Dr Adequate]

So you would be happier with someone who was going to church for some reason other than their beliefs. Another statement that is obviously untrue.

[Dr Adequate]

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. The real world is even more interesting.

You might glance at it now and then.

[corplinx]

It wasn't unreasonable for Obama to be questioned by the press about the beliefs of his church. And when questioned, he distanced himself from those beliefs.


He was questioned about remarks, not beliefs. I think you might be playing dumb for the sake of arguement here.

Most people probably still have no idea what Black Liberation Theology is or that Obama went to such a church for 20 years.

[eeyore1954]

Another statement that is obviously untrue.

Which part is obviously untrue? I didn't even make an assertion in the quoted statement I asked varwoche a question. Although I did forget the question mark.

[varwoche]

So you would be happier with someone who was going to church for some reason other than their beliefs. I'm unhappy that someone who is so severely delusional could become president, period.

Why do you think she won't be questioned about her beliefs or the beliefs of her church? She has been attacked for most other things.Because of political correctness.

[varwoche]

He was questioned about remarks, not beliefs. A distinction without a difference. But to play along, I'd like Palin to comment on the remarks from the AoG site I quoted, and whether she agrees with them.

I think you might be playing dumb for the sake of arguement [sic] here. Nope.

[varwoche]

Back to the NIH definition of psychosis. Assuming that Palin is a devout pentecostal, here's my assessment* of her per the NIH list of symptoms:

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 check
seeing, hearing, feeling, or otherwise perceiving things that are not there (hallucinations) check
extreme excitement (mania) check
confusion check
mistaken perceptions (illusions) check
false beliefs (delusions) check
*As a lay person / voter.