February 2012

When it comes to the Religious Right, seemingly nothing can prevent the movement from willingly and endlessly repeating a known falsehood. 

Case in point: several weeks ago we wrote a post about a situation in North Carolina where a preschool student had her homemade lunch confiscated by government bureaucrats who forced her to eat the less healthy lunch provided by the school.

That was, at least, the Religious Right's version of what happened ... and that version was, of course, utterly untrue. 

But, as we said, untruth has never been much of an impediment to the Religious Right, which eagerly repeats these sorts of myths ad nauseum until they have become an accepted part of the narrative.

So it comes as no surprise to see that John Hagee has recorded a special message to voice his outrage about it, citing it as proof of this country has finally fully descended into socialism:

Now comes the federal government telling a mother in North Carolina that her child must eat a chicken nugget dish approved by the Federal Government. The mother was told that her child could not eat what her mother had prepared for that child and the child was forced to eat what the government mandated what the child must eat. Ladies and gentlemen, this is socialism at its ultimate pinnacle, telling you what you can eat and taking from you your basic freedoms of decision.

For the record, not one thing that Hagee said in this statement is even remotely true ... but that doesn't matter since Hagee's primary objective is to mobilize viewers to vote against President Obama, which explains why the video ends with Hagee declaring that "November 2012 will be the opportunity for you to express yourself" in opposition to just this sort of "robbery of America's freedom."

Yesterday on Today’s Issues, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins and American Family Association head Tim Wildmon hosted New York City Councilman Fernando Cabrera to discuss the city’s decision to prohibit church groups from using public school buildings, which was recently overturned by a federal judge. During the interview, Cabrera attacked gay rights advocates for supposedly siding with the city government, to which Perkins replied that “homosexual groups” want “to silence the church. They want the church to go away because they don’t want that moral voice in the community.” Cabrera even claimed that gay rights supporters “want to censor language and speech”:

In another part of the program, Perkins said that while President Obama apologized for the burning of Qurans in Afghanistan his administration “is silent when Christianity is attacked in this country.” Later, Wildmon said that “Islam is not a religion of peace. That is not true.” Wildmon lamented, “President Obama on this issue, you’d at least like him to speak out on the violence committed against Christians around the world, but you don’t hear anything about that.”

However, last May President Obama defended the rights and freedoms of Christians in Egypt in a speech about the political crisis in the Middle East and earlier this week the State Department released a statement condemning Iran for giving him a death sentence because of his refusal to recant his conversion to Christianity. In fact, the State Department’s International Religious Freedom Report documents and denounces the persecution of Christians in countries such as Afghanistan, Egypt, Iran, Iraq and Pakistan.

We are surprised to find that it actually took some Religious Right activist almost a whole day before publicly blaming Monday's tragic shooting at Chardon High School in Ohio on the lack of school prayer, as what Jerry Newcombe of Truth in Action did in an op-ed for Crosswalk yesterday: 

There were never school shootings when prayer was in school. Nothing even remotely like it. But now, for the most part, God has been thrown out of our public schools, and they have had to install the metal detector instead. Even that is not fail-proof ... I find it ironic that yesterday’s shooting would occur in the shadow of the 50th anniversary of the infamous school prayer decision. In June 1962, in Engel v. Vitale, the Supreme Court ruled that schools could not officially participate in prayer.

Specifically, the High Court banned this seemingly innocuous prayer: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessing upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country."

...

As long as our schools don’t have a prayer, I suppose some of them need to have a sign installed out in front: Enter at your own risk.

After failing in his campaign to overturn marriage equality in Washington D.C., Bishop Harry Jackson is now leading an effort to repeal a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in Maryland that will be signed into law tomorrow. We last saw Jackson raising money for the Maryland Marriage Alliance at “A Gathering of Eagles,” where he led the congregation in spiritual warfare against the demonic Queen of Heaven, who he said was responsible for gay rights and “perversion.”

In an interview with the Christian Post yesterday, Jackson baselessly claimed that Washington D.C. public schools are teaching “children – young children – to explore and examine the differences in heterosexuality, homosexuality and transgender lifestyles,” lamenting, “To say that it's okay for Heather to have two mommies is not biblical.” He also said that activists trying to repeal marriage equality are “not trying to impose our views on others” but said gay rights advocates “are trying to impose their agenda on us.”

“It is an oxy-moron,” Jackson said about same-sex marriage, “Two people of the same sex who marry and try to indoctrinate children into that lifestyle does nothing to strengthen marriage or families.” He also predicted victory in a potential referendum on marriage equality, maintaining that marriage equality supporters “are overplaying their hands and only harming our culture.”

CP: I want to start out by asking in light of Maryland's recent debate and upcoming legalization of same-sex marriage, tell me why you are willing to take such a pronounced and visible stand to defend marriage?

Jackson: First, we as people of faith are not trying to impose our views on others. We are simply using God's Word, given to us by the scriptures, to stand up for what is right. Instead, those who are advocating for what they call "marriage" that does not involve a man and a woman, are trying to impose their agenda on us.

The reality is, if you change the definition of marriage, you change the definition of the family, then you change what is taught in schools – that it's okay for Heather to have two mommies – and exploring your "sexual awareness" as a young child is acceptable; and it's not.

CP: Can you expand on how families will be impacted when same-sex marriages are legalized?

Jackson: Yes, let's use Washington, D.C. as an example. It's encouraged in public schools to teach children – young children – to explore and examine the differences in heterosexuality, homosexuality and transgender lifestyles. Now you and I both know that children should not be encouraged to examine these types of issues, especially in public schools. To say that it's okay for Heather to have two mommies is not biblical.

…

CP: Supporters of same-sex marriage say one of their primary goals is to educate the public that gay marriage does in fact strengthen families. How do you respond to that comment?

Jackson: It is an oxy-moron. Two people of the same sex who marry and try to indoctrinate children into that lifestyle does nothing to strengthen marriage or families. Again, it only attempts to redefine what marriage is and what a family should be. A mother and a father best raise children. There are factors in our society that interrupt that process and that is unfortunate, but gay marriage will not strengthen marriage.

…

CP: Do you believe the efforts to repeal same-sex marriage in Maryland will be successful?

Jackson: Yes, I do. To use a phrase from Muhammad Ali, "We float like a butterfly, but sting like a bee." But I must say that the opposing side has waged a brilliant public relations campaign. They want the public to believe the debate about gay marriage is only a religious battle, but it's not.

We are 31 for 31 on gay marriage when it's been put before the voters of different states. They are trying to press the issue in different states hoping to advance their cause with the Supreme Court. Still, when people examine what marriage is and should be, they tend to vote overwhelming against gay marriage.

But let me say this to conclude. I feel our opponents have become so aggressive on this issue, that they are overplaying their hands and only harming our culture. Yes, they may win a battle or two here and there but our side will prevail in the long run.