I’m going to come right out and say something that could land me in a world of criticism, depending on how it’s perceived. It’s something that I’ve wanted to say for a very long while and I think the time has come…
At some point, the United States is going to have to take action against its right-wing evangelical problem.
And I’m sorry to say, it is a problem.
I have nothing against Christians, because we are a country that cherishes freedom of religion, and I respect their right to worship in any way they choose. What I take issue with is their continued insistence on legislating their view of morality upon the masses. Much like their wealthy counterparts, which many times are now one and the same, they feel they are entitled to a certain form of dictatorship because they happen to be a member of the majority religion, and their religion seemingly turns them into anti-American cheerleaders.
Take this comment from Franklin Graham, offered in an interview with Newsmax:
“What has happened is we have allowed ourselves to take God out everything that we do – and I believe that God will judge our nation one day. Maybe God will have to bring our nation to our knees – to where that we just have a complete economic collapse. Maybe at that point, people will again call upon the name of almighty God.”
WATCH the entire interview, if you can stomach it (story continues below):
In what sane world, in the 21st Century, do you wish for your country, which you profess to love, to suffer through a complete economic collapse that would decimate the citizenry just to prove a religious point, and how big of a self-absorbed prick are you to propose such a thing?
Not to put too fine a point on it, but Graham’s comments are in direct opposition to this country’s founding principles, and I would go so far as to say, treasonous. Graham is willfully advocating for the destruction of the U.S. economy, and by extension, the lives of its citizens. In modern terminology, we might even call him a terrorist wanna-be, an enemy of the state.
I’m sorry, but in my book, he should be brought up on charges for sedition. He clearly wishes for the destruction of the Union through economic means, and his aim seems to be the overthrow of a democratically elected government in favor of a theocracy, which flies in the face of the First Amendment, which reads:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Those words seem fairly clear to me, not a lot of ambiguity there.
Which might explain a new lawsuit filed against the Internal Revenue Service:
A federal lawsuit filed by a Wisconsin-based group representing atheists and agnostics argues that the Internal Revenue Service is violating the U.S. Constitution by allowing tax-exempt churches and religious organizations to get involved in political campaigns.
The Freedom from Religion Foundation argues that churches and other religious organizations have become increasingly more involved in political campaigns, “blatantly and deliberately flaunting the electioneering restrictions.”
Its lawsuit filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Madison argues that the IRS is not enforcing the federal tax code, which prohibits tax-exempt religious organizations from electioneering. Not enforcing it is a violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment and a violation of equal protection rights because the same preferential treatment is not provided to other tax-exempt organizations such as the Freedom from Religion Foundation, the lawsuit contends.
Let’s break it down, shall we? And let’s get all freakin’ wonky about it, too. According to the IRS, non-profits, namely religious organizations, are prohibited thusly:
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.
Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.
On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.
So, let’s use Franklin Graham as an example. Graham is the CEO of, among others, Samaritan’s Purse, a 501(c)3, tax exempt organization. Under IRS regulation, as stated above, “all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.”
Now, one could argue that Graham’s above comments came after the election, but what about his comments before the election?
From February 2012:
“All I know is under Obama, President Obama, the Muslims of the world, he seems to be more concerned about them than the Christians that are being murdered in the Muslim countries. Islam sees him as a son of Islam… I can’t say categorically that [Obama is not Muslim] because Islam has gotten a free pass under Obama.
“Now he has told me that he is a Christian. But the debate comes, what is a Christian? For him, going to church means he’s a Christian. For me, the definition of a Christian is whether we have given our life to Christ and are following him in faith and we have trusted him as our lord and savior.”
From May 2012:
“While the move to pass amendments defining marriage is relatively new, the definition of marriage is 8,000 years old and was defined not by man, but by God Himself. In changing his position from that of senator/candidate Obama, President Obama has, in my view, shaken his fist at the same God who created and defined marriage. It grieves me that our president would now affirm same-sex marriage, though I believe it grieves God even more.”
From August 2010:
“I think the president’s problem is that he was born a Muslim, his father was a Muslim. The seed of Islam is passed through the father like the seed of Judaism is passed through the mother. He was born a Muslim, his father gave him an Islamic name. Now it’s obvious that the president has renounced the prophet Mohammed, and he has renounced Islam, and he has accepted Jesus Christ. That’s what he says he has done. I cannot say that he hasn’t. So I just have to believe that the president is what he has said.”
Each and every one of those comments is a call to a litmus test, of sorts…a religious litmus test, which is strictly forbidden by the Constitution, via Article VI, paragraph 3, which reads:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
So, if you want to get down and dirty about it, if President Obama were a Muslim, it shouldn’t matter one iota. Nor should it matter if he was a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Pagan or an Atheist.
Franklin Graham, and the churches that follow his line of thought, and who have injected their religion into public policy, are operating in direct opposition to the Constitution of the United States of America.
They place their religion before their country and they are traitors, plain and simple, and it’s time to classify them as such and revoke their tax-free ride on the backs of the Americans they claim to love, but simultaneously want to see destroyed for the sake of their phantasmagorical ideology.
About Beth
Beth, good for you. It is about time the news media and the public start paying attention to these fanatics or we will end up as a dictotorial theocracy. Since most major media companies, if not all, are now owned by people who sympathize with them, that is not likely to happen. It is time to end this lunacy. We deparately need more journalist like Soledad O’brian of CNN who seems unafraid to call lies and stupidity like it is.
Thank you for your comments, Ron.
I want to enlarge on my earlier comments. This is a subject very important to me and the future of my grandchildren. More than fifty-five years ago, as a young teenager I was reared in the Pentecostal Assembly of God church. Pentecostals are a splinter group of the Southern Baptist movement and share most of the same beliefs in the Bible as the literal word of God. Their only disagreement between the Pentecostals and Southern Baptists is the pentecostal or “holy roller” experience.
The Pentecostal movement began in earnest in the South during the depression and from the start, they opposed progressives like FDR and Harry Truman and have consistently sought to turn America into a theocratic nation. They capture their congregations by constantly preaching to them that, if you listen to those who believe differently from us, you are listening to Satan and will go to hell. Mind you, it is not, “if you join them” it is if you even listen to them.
In my youth, we were a minority group without much influence. Often, when I and other teenagers in the church were encouraged to go door to door to proselytize we met with the same disdain and rejection that LDS and Jehovah’s Witnesses often experience in their door to door proselytizing. What we failed to understand, or care, was that the First Amendment protected our faith. Today, the same people are determined to destroy that protection for any group that disagrees with them.
Billy Graham, “America’s Pastor” and his huge audiences are largely responsible for both the growth of the Southern Baptist and Pentecostal faiths. Franklin Graham is simply following in his father’s footsteps; but he is even more fanatical about his faith than his father was until Billy Graham’s decline into senility. Today, these evangelicals have become a significant part of “mainstream” religion.
Do not fool yourselves; these people are far from “mainstream.” Other churches, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Episcopal and Catholics had best take warning. These people are not your friends. They are willing to form alliances with some of these churches, especially Catholics, until their ultimate goal is reached – the complete transformation of the United States into a theocratic nation. Once that happens, these people will return to their anti-papist beliefs. Their cause is the advancement of the Kingdom of Heaven to precipitate the second coming of Christ. Some label them as dominionists.
Civil libertarians should not take this lightly. This evangelical movement has a definite goal and they will not cease their political activities until it is reached. These people are driven and fanatical. If you value liberty and your freedom to worship, or not, as you please, you should oppose them and their politics.
Speaking as a Christian, I firmly believe that at some point, God is going to address these people thus: “Depart from me, ye cursed, into the eternal fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was hungry, and ye did not give me to eat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me not in; naked, and ye clothed me not; sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.” These people do not base their life on Scripture or Jesus, but on Capitalism, or in other words on usury, a practice prohibited by all three Abrahamic religions.
However, until then, we owe it to the innocent to provide them some protection. I think it would be incredibly difficult to prosecute these people successfully on sedition charges, and self-destructive to try. IRS regulations are an entirely different story. I wish spectacular success to the Freedom from Religion Foundation in this lawsuit; I even go so far as to say “God bless the Freedom from Religion Foundation.”
How can we who still believe in the First Amendment help? Well, they are accepting donations at http://ffrf.org/get-involved/donate/, which may be designated for their legal fund. Also, most of us belong to or support other groups which might be persuaded to file an amicus curiae. The ACLU comes to mind. I hope others will post other groups who have an interest in this issue.
We need more people like you, Joanne. Thank you for your comments.
Thank you for verifying what I had been very troubled about when the God issue started to be uttered heavy during the Bush compaign, now in this Years Presidential Election it got even more influenced that it is not funny. Republicans attaching themselves to the GOP/TP ideologies is the ultimate reason why this country is getting divided so heavilly that they can not even govern this nation for the whole best interest of all Americans. All the messages of disinformation, misinformation and lying propaganda. The “We Will Not Not Fact-Checkers Dictate Our Campaign” slogan reminded me of how Hitler got into political power to the point where they even started to justify thier Inhumane Actions by creating their own Laws to Justify their Actions.
Separation of Church and States should be taken very seriously and keep church out of politics!!!
From your comments, Kitalaq, it’s nice to know I’m not alone. I agree 100%!
The thing so stupid about their argument is that no one can take religion out of your heart or mind. Nobody took anyone’s right to pray in school away – anybody can pray in school (ask any student facing exams) – the point is that you can’t force everyone else to listen to it. Nobody can keep anyone from voting according to their interpretation of what their faith requires – you’re just not allowed to preach about it from a tax-exempt public forum.
Freedom of and from religion is not the threat. The Religious Reich trying to trying to forcibly change that and they are using their tax exempt privileges and their supposed “can’t touch me” status to do it.. Either be a religion or a political movement – you’re not allowed to be both in this country, and we’re not going to allow anyone to change that.
Amen, Sister!
There is nothing any more maddening about religious figures than their expectation that they will be deferred to anytime they open their mouths just because they stick the word “reverend” ahead of their name. If Franklin Graham has such a monopoly on truth, then he owes it to humanity to get all his fellow believers on the same page and, until he accomplishes that, stop making suggestions as to how the country should be run.