Jeff Sessions Cites Bible to Justify Mistreatment of Immigrant Families

I have been familiar with Jeff Sessions since my early days fresh out of law school when we were both in Mobile, Alabama.  As noted in numerous posts, the man was reprehensible back then - he refused to prosecute KKK members who lynched a young black man in Mobile (fortunately, a later prosecutor did and won convictions) - and always came across as a hypocrisy-filled, falsely pious churchgoer.  Now, Sessions embodies the worse aspects of the so-called "conservative Christian" crowd that packs church pews on Sundays yet supports a hate spewing, serial adultery in the White House and in general behaves in a manner that is the antithesis of living the Gospel message of Christ.  Indeed, Sessions is cherry picking Bible passages to justify the horrific treatment being visited upon immigrant families along America's southwest border where children are being forceably ripped from their parents and being kept in cages in many instances. If one wants an example of why one would flee Christianity, Sessions and his supporters are a prime example.  Both NBC News and Time look at Sessions perversion of the Bible to justify human rights violations.  Not surprisingly Mike Huckabee's always lying daughter rallied to Sessions' defense. First these highlights from NBC:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Thursday offered a full-throated defense of the Trump administration's policy of separating children from their parents at the border, saying that having kids does not give migrants immunity from prosecution — and found justification for his policies in the Bible. Sessions . . . made his latest remarks in a speech to law enforcement officers in Fort Wayne, Indiana, telling the group that the migrant families were to blame for their own break-ups and that his department's separation of families was not "unusual or unjustified." "If you cross the Southwest border unlawfully, then the Department of Homeland Security will arrest you and the Department of Justice will prosecute you. That is what the law calls for — and that is what we are going to do," Sessions said. . . . "Noncitizens who cross our borders unlawfully, between our ports of entry, with children are not an exception," . . .
 In his remarks, Sessions hit back at the "concerns raised by our church friends about separating families," calling the criticism "not fair or logical" and quoting Scripture in his defense of the administration's tough policies.

"Persons who violate the law of our nation are subject to prosecution. I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13 to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained them for the purpose of order," Sessions said. "Orderly and lawful processes are good in themselves and protect the weak and lawful."

Later Thursday, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders doubled down on Sessions' comments, saying it is "very biblical to enforce the law."

"That is actually repeated a number of times throughout the Bible," she said, responding to a question about Sessions' comments about Scripture's supporting the administration's policies.Many of the children separated from their parents have ended up in enormous facilities that more closely resemble prisons, where they spend 22 hours per day during the week locked inside overcrowded buildings.

The attorney general also defended his ruling this week that fear of domestic abuse or gang violence is not an acceptable basis for granting asylum.   He claimed that he had not made new law and that he had "simply restated and implemented what Congress has passed: Asylum is generally not for those who have suffered a private act of violence."

Time has this in part on Sanders' foul defense of inhumanity which, in my view stems from one thing and one thing only: the targets of the policy have brown skin:

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Thursday that she hadn’t seen Sessions’ comments but affirmed that the Bible did back up the administration’s actions.

“I can say that it is very biblical to enforce the law. That is actually repeated a number of times throughout the Bible,” she said. “It’s a moral policy to follow and enforce the law.”

In an unusually tense series of exchanges in the White House briefing room, Sanders wrongly blamed Democrats for the policy separating children from parents and insisted the administration had made no changes in increasing the use. Until the policy was announced in April, such families were usually referred for civil deportation proceedings, not requiring separation.

Fundamentalist "Christians" and Muslims: United in Anti-Gay Hatred

Pink News is reporting that the Islamic executioner responsible for having numerous men suspected of being gay thrown from rooftops of tall buildings has been captured by Iraqi security forces.  These horrific murders were motivated by ISIS' selective reading of the Koran which is not consistent with Islam during its golden age.  Back here in America, Right Wing Watch ("RWW") is reporting on the efforts of self-style fundamentalist Christian "leaders" to “re-horrify society about the sin of homosexuality."  Like their Islamic extremists counterparts, this effort is based on a selective reading of the Bible which transforms the Bible into a message of hatred.  Indeed, the only difference between the two groups is the degree of violence - at least so far - the "Christians" are willing to use against gay individuals.  As is the norm with these "Christians" mentioned by RWW, neither Linda Harvey nor Peter LaBarbera - both of who I have had email debates with in the past - have any legitimate credentials to qualify them as experts on sexuality, mental health or medical issues.  Both merely set up "ministries" that allow them to shrill for money while disseminating hatred.   Here are highlights from the Pink News piece:

Security forces in Iraq have captured a ISIS executioner who was notorious for homophobic murders.  Thousands of LGBT people have been displaced in Iraq and Syria, as the terrorist group known as ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) continues to actively target and execute gay men. 

The terrorist group has taunted the West with a string of  ‘death to gays’ execution videos, showing men accused of homosexuality being thrown off buildings and pelted with stones.

One of the ISIS executioners who most aggressively targeted gay people was captured this week.  Abu Omer, a senior jihadi executioner known as ‘White Beard’, had ruled the city of Mosul with an iron fist until the city was retaken by security forces last year.  . . . . according to The Times, he was arrested on January 1 after officials were tipped off about his hiding place in the city.

Among the vicious attacks: ISIL has tied nooses around these men’s necks and dragged them behind trucks, burned them alive, thrown them off buildings and stoned them to death.

The report states: “ISIL has unleashed a reign of terror against civilians and vulnerable minorities living in areas it has seized, including barbarous violence against LGBTQ people.  “ISIL’s extreme ideology is interpreted by its followers to require the death penalty for those who engage in sexual relations outside of heterosexual marriage, including same-sex sexual relations.”

Turning to the Right Wing Watch article, note how these parasitic American Taliban members repeat the lie that gays are sexual predators (most are, in fact, heterosexual men):

On a recent episode of her “Mission America” radio show, Linda Harvey interviewed fellow anti-LGBTQ activist Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality about the importance of working to “re-horrify” society about the sin of homosexuality.

The two lamented that homosexuality is now widely accepted in America, with Harvey voicing her alarm that it is even welcomed in public schools where “predators” are allowed to use LGBTQ clubs to target children for recruitment.

“So many of these groups are predators,” she said. “I believe that the homosexual clubs in schools are just red flags for predators. I think that they exist there as an audience to continue to fast track kids into the lifestyle, network with adults—I mean, who knows what goes on there.”

“How do we re-horrify people about the sin of homosexuality?” she wondered. “People are becoming so comfortable with this, even people on our side. We need to re-horrify them.” 

From my past interactions with both Harvey and LaBarbera, in my opinion, they are mentally unbalanced and might benefit from a mental health intervention. 

Researchers Discover Genes Linked to Male Homosexuality

While no completely definitive biological cause for homosexuality has been conclusively proven, researchers continue to inch closer to categorically debunking the Christofascist myth that one's sexual orientation is a "choice."  Of course, these scientific strides will mean nothing to those who actively celebrate ignorance and embrace a book written by uneducated, ignorant Bronze Age authors such as Colorado baker Jack Phillips. But for sane individuals who live in a fact based reality, the new discoveries provide further proof that one is (i) justified in looking down on Christofascists as the vicious individuals that they are in fact and (ii) supporting legislation to ban fraudulent "ex-gay" reparative therapy.  The Daily Telegraph looks at the development.  Here are excerpts:

Genes linked to homosexuality have been discovered by scientists in the biggest ever study into the genetic basis for sexual orientation.  For the first time, researchers looked at the complete genome - a person’s entire DNA code - for more than 1,000 gay men and compared it to genetic data from a similar number of heterosexual males.

They discovered that DNA was different for gay and straight men around the genes SLITRK5 and SLITRK6.  SLITRK6 is an important gene for brain development, and is particularly active in a region of the brain which includes the hypothalamus.

The hypothalamus is crucial for producing the hormones which control sex drive, and previous studies have shown parts of it are up to 34 per cent larger in gay men.

The researchers, from North Shore University Health System’s Research Institute, in Illinois, US, also discovered differences in the TSHR gene, which is linked to the thyroid, another area which has previously been associated with sexual orientation.

“Because sexuality is an essential part of human life – for individuals and society – it is important to understand the development and expression of human sexual orientation,” said lead author Dr Alan Sanders.

“The goal of this study was to search for genetic underpinnings of male sexual orientation, and thus ultimately increase our knowledge of biological mechanisms underlying sexual orientation.

“What we have accomplished is a first step for genome wide study on the trait, and we hope that subsequent larger studies will further illuminate its genetic contributions.”

-- Participants in the study were rated for sexual orientation based on their self-reported sexual identity and sexual feelings.

Men were asked to provide DNA by blood or saliva samples that were then genotyped and analysed.  Although previous studies have pointed to a genetic predisposition for homosexuality, it is the first time researchers have studied the entire genome of individuals and so is the most comprehensive assessment of the genetic basis of sexuality ever undertaken.

However British experts said more work was needed before it was possible to identify ‘gay genes’ because the genetic differences could point to other traits shared by the homosexual respondents. 

Prof Robin Lovell-Badge, Group Leader at The Francis Crick Institute,said: “The topic of this paper is important if we are to learn more about the influence of genes on aspects of our behaviour, but this is one that is notoriously difficult to study.

“Even if a gene variant does show some correlation with sexual orientation, this does not mean that the gene is in any way responsible for being gay – it just means it has some association with a trait that is more likely to found in the relatively few people involved as subjects in the study.

The research was published in the journal Scientific Reports.

Ask any LGBT individual and they will assure that no "choice" is involved.  They are who they were born to be.

Christian Extremists and Islamic Extremists - There is Little Difference

Some will immediately that offense with the title of this post and immediately mount an argument of why I am wrong in my point of view.  But in my view, there are three traits common to Christian extremists and Islamic extremists: (i) hatred of others who are different, (ii) an unfounded sense of self-righteousness and piousness, and (iii) a fear, if not hatred, of modernity and modern knowledge. The only difference that in current times, Christian extremists have not been willing to resort to wholesale murder and violence.  Such, however, was not always the case and one need only look at the genocide committed by white Christians against Native Americans, both in North and South America, the Crusades, Europe's wars of religion, the massacre of "Old Believers" in Russia, the murder of Muslims in Nigeria at the directive of an Anglican archbishop, or the relatively recent murder and destruction of Catholic versus Protestant in Northern Ireland to realize that the relative peacefulness (at least compared to past atrocities) of Christians is not the historic norm.  In modern times, of course, gays are a favored group for attack by both Christofascists and Islamic Extremists. A piece in Patheos sums up what Christofascists think of LGBT individuals:

Baptist Church Senior Pastor Robby Gallaty told his large congregation that Christians should never stop discriminating against homosexuals, claiming that gays could choose to be straight if they only accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.
Gallaty explained why gays should be put to death:

God said that the sins of the people had infected the very land in which they live. So what happens to people who engage in this activity, this sexual immoral activity? Go to Leviticus 20, God gives us the punishment for engaging in these sins… ‘If a man sleeps with a man as with a woman, they have both committed a detestable thing. They must be put to death. And their blood is on their own hands.’

Pastor Gallaty tried to justify his Biblically inspired hatred for gays and lesbians by repeatedly trying to argue that being gay is a choice, and some sort of rebellion against his imaginary God’s divine plan.

And let's not forget that a number of the Republican presidential candidates last year attended a rally hosted by another "man of god" who supports the murder of gays.

Now, travel half way around the world to the Islamic Russian Republic of Chechnya where a pogrom to kill gays is underway.  Like Pastor Gallaty, pro-Kremlin leader, Ramzan A. Kadyrov, views gays as an affront to Allah that need to be eliminated.  Indeed, he has declared that gays will be eliminated from the republic by May 26, 2017, for the start of Ramadan.  The New York Times looks at the horrors taking place.  Here are excerpts:

GROZNY, Russia — It was supposed to be a night out. But for the young man who calls himself Maksim, as for scores of other gay men arrested in a pogrom this month in Russia’s Chechnya region, it pivoted into nearly two weeks of beatings and torture.

Maksim said it had started with a chat room conversation with “a very good old friend who is also gay,” and who suggested that they meet at an apartment. When Maksim arrived, however, he was greeted not by his friend but by agents who beat him. Later, they strapped him to a chair, attached electrical wires to his hands with alligator clips and began an interrogation.

“They yelled, ‘Who else do you know?’” Maksim said, and zapped him with current from time to time. “It was unbearably painful; I was hanging on with my last strength,” he added. “But I didn’t tell them anything.”

Gay men have never had an easy life in Chechnya. But the targeted, collective punishment of gays that began last month under its pro-Kremlin leader, Ramzan A. Kadyrov, is a new turn in the region’s long history of rights abuses.

The sweep has been widely condemned by Western governments, the United Nations and rights groups. Activists in Russia have set up an underground network to spirit the victims out of Chechnya and to protect them from potentially violent reprisals from their families and others. The victims use assumed names in their everyday dealings. Homosexuality is taboo in Chechnya and the mostly Muslim surrounding areas of the Caucasus region in southern Russia. “This society is highly homophobic,” said Ekaterina L. Sokiryanskaya, Russia project director for the International Crisis Group and an authority on Chechnya. “Homosexuality is condemned. It is believed Islam considers it a great sin.” Among the fatalities documented by the organization were one man who succumbed during torture and two others who died in “honor killings” by relatives after the police released them. In a televised meeting with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia on Wednesday, Mr. Kadyrov characterized as “libelous” news reports that the security services in Chechnya had been persecuting gay men.

Two different religions, yet the same mindset.  It should come as little surprise that Vladimir Putin is looking the other way in Chechnya since his anti-LGBT laws were enacted as part of his effort to win support from the vitriolically anti-gay Russian Orthodox Church. 

Christofascists point to Leviticus as justification, even though it was written by ignorant, uneducated authors of over 2500 years ago and most of its other prohibitions are completely ignored by the "godly folk."  In the case of Islam, the Koran was largely authored by an individual who in modern society would be placed in a mental institution.   Religion is truly a curse on mankind.

Quote of the Day - Calling Out Christofascist Misogyny

My blogger friend Bob Felton - a straight man living in North Carolina who is an engineer by training - and I have never met.  We have read each other's blogs for years now and occasionally exchange e-mails or Facebook communications.  Like me, Bob holds a very dim view of religion, especially fundamentalist and evangelical Christianity.   He credits me with changing his thinking on gays and gay rights.  He often comes up with very apt summations of the evils of religion and the foulness of the "godly folk."  He hit a bulls-eye with this quote responding to one of my posts:

WE DO KNOW now that there is a lot more to sexuality than plumbing, that sexual orientation is a biological switch that is set before birth; virtually every biologist and medical researcher on earth will tell you that. The refusal to accept that, and instead constrict the lives of others in deference to the things written by some Bronze Age anonymity, goes to character.

Let me elaborate so that there is no confusion about what I’m saying: When Pastor Bubba or your Auntie Grizelda howls and bellows that it doesn’t matter what scientists say because Leviticus says everything anybody needs to know about the subject, he or she is exhibiting bad character and decent, educated adults should avoid them.

In addition to taxing churches, one of the main ways the evils of fundamentalist Christianity is to make its adherents social and political outcasts.  Truly decent people should avoid them and give them no deference whatsoever.  

When Will the Media Condemn All Homophobic Denominations?

If one takes the time to research the origins of homophobia, it always eventually traces back to Christianity and some of the ugliest passages of the Old Testament.  While many are quick to point to Islam as the main source of anti-gay animus in the wake of the Orlando massacre of 49 gays and gay allies, that assessment is ultimately incorrect since Islam adopted the homophobia that increasingly permeated Christianity.  Before this adoption of Christianity derived animus, Islam was relatively tolerant of those of different sexual orientations.  And while much progress been made in many Christian denominations in terms of how LGBT individuals are treated, the root causes of anti-gay hatred and animus remain alive and well in the Bible and the Old Testament in particular.  This fact made clear after the Orlando horror as a string of "Christian" pastors lauded the murderous rampage and others could not even bring themselves to note the sexual orientation of the victims - and their own complicity in maintaining an anti-gay atmosphere in society.  A piece in the New York Times looks at this lingering poison that taints Christianity.  Here are highlights:

After the massacre in Orlando, Fla., American religious leaders spoke in a largely unified voice, condemning the killer and mourning the dead. But at some extreme conservative Christian churches, there was another message: good riddance.

In the weeks since 49 people were slaughtered at a gay nightclub, remarks by pastors celebrating the deaths have brought attention to several outposts of anti-gay hostility across the country that until now had been operating mostly under the radar.

“The tragedy is that more of them didn’t die,” Roger Jimenez, a Sacramento preacher, exhorted his congregants on June 12, the day of the assault. “The tragedy is — I’m kind of upset that he didn’t finish the job! Because these people are predators! They are abusers!”

Rebecca Barrett-Fox, a visiting assistant professor of sociology at Arkansas State University who has researched Christian extremists, said she had tracked about five churches — in California, Texas, Arizona and Tennessee — where preachers had endorsed the killings in Orlando.

Many of the preachers identify themselves as so-called independent Baptists, meaning that they are not a part of any of the denomination’s groupings, such as the Southern Baptist Convention. Dr. Barrett-Fox said the Baptist emphasis on church autonomy — recognizing no central authority — allowed pastors to interpret the Bible for themselves.

The independent Baptist churches where anti-gay hatred has flourished tend to have small congregations, more likely to number in the dozens than the hundreds, experts said.

Sermons posted online since the attack have been interspersed with dehumanizing labels for L.G.B.T. people reminiscent of those used by the perpetrators of historical genocides. The Orlando victims were “sodomites,” “reprobates,” “perverts” and “scum of the earth,” preachers have said.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups, said it was alarmed by the comments of extremist pastors after the mass shooting in Orlando. Heidi Beirich, the center’s director of intelligence, warned that they should not be dismissed as empty rhetoric.

“I think it is entirely possible that someone could be inspired by this and kill gay people,” Ms. Beirich said. “This kind of message is exactly akin to Hitlerian ideas of exterminating Jews. It’s that extreme. It’s basically genocidal toward a population.”

However, while many conservative Christian leaders no longer want to be seen as anti-gay, the change in tone should not be interpreted as full acceptance, Dr. Barrett-Fox said. The “love the sinner, hate the sin” approach to homosexuality continues to be deeply woven into Christian thinking.

When all is said and done, Dr. Barrett-Fox said, “They don’t really believe that these people had a right to be peacefully doing what they were doing, partying at a gay bar.”

The bottom line is that until denominations fully and loudly reject the "love the sinner, hate the sin" approach to LGBT people, they remain an enemy and a threat.  Until the theology is fully repudiated, we cannot be lulled into thinking "they're not really so bad"  This applies to the Southern Baptist Convention, the Roman Catholic Church (not withstanding Pope Francis' latest disingenuous statements) and many other denomination. Saying words of condolence when we are murdered doesn't wash away the guilt that comes from the failure to reject anti-LGBT dogma.  Dogma that is based on ignorance and Bronze Age levels of knowledge. 

Religion: The Underlying Source of Evil

Like most in the nation's LGBT community, I remain in shock over the massacre on early Sunday morning at Pulse, an LGBT club in Orlando, Florida.  So many mostly young lives snuffed out by a terrorist claiming allegiance to the Islamic extremists of ISIS.   Perhaps equally shocking is the reaction of far too many Americans to the slaughter, including pastors and some Republican politicians: they are either celebrating the deaths of so many LGBT individuals or saying that they deserved death for their failure to adhere to Bronze Age myths and babbling of ignorant herders from 2500 years ago.  

ABC News has a compilation of past violence against LGBT venues and ALL were perpetrated by those at least nominally Christian.  While foul individuals like Ted Cruz try to point the finger at Islam, he conveniently forgets that he himself shared the stage last year with a Christian pastor who advocates for the execution of gays.  Cruz is not much better than the gunman in Orlando when it comes to clinging to ignorance and religious based hatred.

Pastor Steven Anderson

Here's a sample of a sample of what some "godly" pastors have been saying via Patheos:

Pastor Steven Anderson, whose hate knows no bounds, celebrated the deaths of 50 people at a gay nightclub in Orlando in a 4-minute mini-sermon that cited the Bible as justification for why they needed to die. (And if it didn’t happen via a shooter, it should have happened by way of government execution.):

The good news is that there’s 50 less pedophiles in this world, because, you know, these homosexuals are a bunch of disgusting perverts and pedophiles. That’s who was a victim here, are a bunch of, just, disgusting homosexuals at a gay bar, okay?

But the bad news is that this is now gonna be used, I’m sure, to push for gun control, where, you know, law-abiding normal Americans are not gonna be allowed to have guns for self-defense. And then I’m sure it’s also gonna be used to push an agenda against so-called “hate speech.”

The Bible says that homosexuals should be put to death, in Leviticus 20:13. . . . these people all should have been killed, anyway, but they should have been killed through the proper channels, as in they should have been executed by a righteous government that would have tried them, convicted them, and saw them executed.

Sadly, this type of misogyny has probably been uttered from countless fundamentalist pulpits.

But the hate isn't coming just from church pulpits.  Politicians are stepping up as well, such as Texas Lt. Governor Dan Patrick tweeted Bible verses seemingly approving of the slaughter.  This from the New Civil Rights Movement:

At 8 AM EDT Sunday morning news was spreading that 20 people had been shot to death in an Orlando, Florida gay nightclub, Pulse. The death toll has now been raised to 50 dead.

Also at 8 AM, then 30 minutes later, Texas Republican Lt. Governor Dan Patrick, who has been working hard to position himself as a national leader against the LGBT community, posted two tweets.

The first bible verse, "Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows," from Galatians 6:7. The next, from Psalm 37:39: "The Salvation of the righteous come from the Lord; He is their stronghold in time of trouble." The second included the message, "Have a blessed Sunday!"

Texas Lt. Governor Dan Patrick

And if one truly wants to be sick, read some of the comments on places like here.

Closer to home, we have politicians like Randy Forbes who have repeatedly supported anti-gay legislation and organizations.  Indeed, one of the few things Forbes has done in all his years in Congress is to push resolutions that would grant special rights or recognition to Christian extremists. Right Wing Watch has a compilation of some of Forbes' anti-gay, pro Christian extremists activities. 

Anti-gay zealot Rep. Randy Forbes

Personally, I am done with religion other than opposing the hate and bigotry and violence it condones. 

Marco Rubio's Frightening Religious Beliefs

Like most of the GOP clown car, Marco Rubio has been relentlessly prostituting himself to the Christofascists in the GOP base who increasingly have a stranglehold on the nomination process of the party.  As is the norm, gays have been among the favored targets of such self-prostitution efforts.  But a piece in Salon makes the case that while Rubio is acting like many of his rivals, the difference is that he believes the batshitery that he is spouting.  The last thing that America needs is another president that clings to a simpleton religious belief system who then seekd to be guided by it rather than objective reality and facts.  Here are article highlights:

One of the most annoying things about religious folks is that they just cannot keep their “good news” to themselves.

Not two weeks into the new year, the frocked and beanied capo dei capi of the Catholic Church, Pope Francis, chose to impose upon humanity a book of his own authorship, “The Name of God Is Mercy.”. . . . do we really want to hear about mercy from the Pope, who, phony liberal pretensions notwithstanding, oversees an organization whose “men of the cloth” have, for so long, and so mercilessly, subjected the youngest and most vulnerable of their parishioners to rape and other varieties of sexual abuse that they may well be guilty of torture? (A United Nations committee is investigating this.)

Yet we can choose to ignore such papal dreck. Not so with the theocratic strivings of members of our own judiciary, which may, depending on who wins the White House later this year, eventually impinge on our lives through Supreme Court rulings.

[F]aith-derangement syndrome afflicts the undeniably young and intelligent, and most notably, among the Republican contenders for the White House, Senator Marco Rubio. Rubio once converted to Mormonism but currently two-times with both the Catholic Church and the extremist, anti-gay, pro-exorcist Christ Fellowship. He has just put out a television campaign ad entitled “Marco Rubio on His Christian Faith.”

He uses his campaign ad to talk only about religion. Aren’t campaign ads supposed to at least have something to do with politics? 

Anyway, let’s dissect Rubio’s message line by line. He opens with a statement that is presumptive, irrelevant to the office he seeks, theologically contentious, and tritely tautological. . . . . Whether the senator believes in such nonsensicalities is really none of our business: Article VI of the Constitution states that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” There’s no need for him to drone on about his faith to the electorate.

[M]ore to the point, though, why should “salvation” be a matter for discussion on the campaign trail? . . . .He is, after all, appealing for support to Christians alone – not Jews, not Muslims, not Buddhists or Hindus. The Founding Fathers, to thwart sectarian influence in governance, wrote the aforementioned Article VI. Sectarian pandering should play no role in running for public office. 

Next: “The purpose of our life is to cooperate with God’s plan.” . . . . Straightaway we can discount the Bible – a mishmash of texts authored during barbarous ancient times by unknown humans who knew nothing of biology, physics (Newtonian or quantum), the empirical method or a posteriori knowledge, or even why we should wash our hands after using the bathroom. We immediately reject “personal revelation” as unverifiable and subject to falsification.

The crushing banality, the overwhelming unoriginality of everything Rubio says in his commercial evokes something akin to astonishment. Absolutely any convinced Christ-worshipper could have uttered the exact same words, which are nothing but boilerplate pulpiteer’s patter. That Rubio chose to speak thus before the camera shows just how abysmally low the expectations of the faith-addled are: proffer mind-deadening insipidities and sit back and await the hosannas and hallelujahs that are sure to issue from the segment of the public that will not think for itself, but has to be told fairy tales to feel comfortable about voting for a candidate.

 

It’s time we point out a few things to the senator.

Rationalists, Senator Rubio, find themselves compelled to draw disturbing conclusions from your ad. Children eventually stop believing in fairy tales, yet you persist in accepting the veracity of a book of fables, and, more problematically, you conduct your life in accordance with them. You choose to address a similarly deluded portion of your electorate, ignoring reasonable people and discounting their sensibilities. You present your faith in said fables as buttressing your qualification for the highest office in the land, at a turbulent time in history when the United States needs a serious, clear-minded adult commander-in-chief. 

You have, Senator, a constitutional right to profess belief in whatever you want. But you have no right to do so unchallenged by those tasked with ferreting out the truth and conveying it to the public. Unfortunately, though, you can broadcast such views throughout the land with little fear of being called out by journalists, who will shy away from religion as too sensitive and personal a topic.

Times are now too perilous for such squeamishness.

Rubio, Scalia and Moore have thrown down the gauntlet. Journalists need to pick it up – and fast.

Religion, in my view, has no place in serious political discourse.  Indeed, the "deeply religious" by their own admission demonstrate that they are unfit for any elective office. We need leaders who are in touch with reality and will act and make decisions based on facts and not a belief in myths and fairy tales. Rubio seemingly cannot rise to this level.

In defending Kim Davis, Huckabee and Santorum Flunk Their Own Religion

Numerous surveys have found that many atheists know more about the Bible and its contents than most far right Christians who make a show of worshiping the Bible yet in fact know little about it other that the favored cherry picked passages used to disparage and denigrate others.  And this phenomenon is not limited to bottom feeders of the GOP base.  One need look no farther than flailing GOP presidential candidates Mike Fuckabee Huckabee and Rick Santorum (a hysterical closet case, in my view) who, in their desperation to see their names mentioned in the media, have rallied to the defense of Kim Davis, the four times married, adulterous Rown County, Kentucky, clerk.  These two parse the Bible seeking snippets to justify the hate and bigotry they promote towards others.  Meanwhile, they ignore more serious passages that show that their rants and claims of "deeply held religious belief" are BULLSHIT.  A piece in Salon looks at their hypocrisy.  Here are excerpts:

Kim Davis and her supporters, such as Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum, don’t seem to know much about the American legal system, and they don’t know much about the real meaning of marriage.  They also don’t know much about Christianity. 

Of course, when Davis says that issuing a marriage license to gay couples violates “my faith,” she might be defining faith in purely personal terms, and so might Huckabee and Santorum. But they all seem to be referring to Christianity. If they actually read the New Testament, however, instead of invoking Christianity as an excuse for discrimination, they would realize that it contains no prohibitions of the sort they claim.

Kim Davis isn’t being asked to personally approve marriage licenses. She is being asked to issue a state marriage license to someone who has met the state’s requirements for marriage. To use two more telling examples: People who are remarrying after a divorce are violating a Catholic clerk’s principles, and Jews who get married without acknowledging the divinity of Christ are violating both a Catholic and a Protestant clerk’s principles. Presumably, those clerks would refuse to officiate at religious ceremonies of divorcees or Jews. But that’s not what they are being asked to do. They are being asked to issue a document created and defined by the government. The same applies to Kim Davis.

During the 1st century, Greek and Roman temples sacrificed animals to the gods. Not being fools, those in charge of these temples had decided that what the gods wanted was the nice white, glistening fat, not the brown bloody meat. So after they had burned the fat as a sacrifice, the temples wound up owning a lot of meat, which they typically served at ceremonies or sold in the market. Members of the church of Corinth, which was founded by St. Paul, write to him to ask whether Christians can purchase or eat meat from an animal that has been sacrificed to the pagan gods.

Paul begins by saying that there is nothing wrong with the meat that should stop a Christian from eating it. It has been sacrificed to an idol, but an idol is nothing, so the meat is just plain meat. The problem lies in appearances; a Christian who buys or eats the sacrificial meat may seem to be participating in a pagan ceremony, and that may confuse or weaken other Christians. Under those conditions, it is better to abstain.

Christians differ about whether same sex marriage violates the principles of their religion. But that doesn’t matter, according to Paul, if they are simply doing business or providing government services to gay couples. What matters is whether one participates, or appears to participate, in the ceremony. If one doesn’t appear to participate, then these activities are fine, whether the marriage violates Christian principles or not. So even attending the ceremony would be acceptable; in our society, people attend marriages of friends from different faiths all the time, and no one interprets their attendance as observance or belief. Business relations — and government services — are clearly outside Paul’s prohibition.

In his response to the Corinthians [1 Corinthians 10:29-31], Paul is not only explaining Christian doctrine, but also providing good practical advice. The Roman Empire, like modern America, was a pluralist society, with dozens of different religions. People couldn’t function within it if they could only deal with those who followed their own religious principles.

In short, Davis, Huckabee, Santorum and their allies aren’t obeying Christian doctrine; they are using it as an excuse for bigotry. They are simply too narrow-minded to accept the fact that some people have preferences and commitments that are different from their own. Their claims of conscience are really excuses for mistreating other people, and, in the process, they are mistreating the Christian religion as well.

Resistance to Gay Marriage Follows Path of Old Style Racists

Anti-gay Christofascists take huge offense - at least in public - at rightly being compared to the segregationists of the 1950's and 1960's (and beyond) in the manner in which they (i) use cherry picked Bible passages to justify hate and discrimination against others and (ii) are refusing to recognize the legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges last month.  Frankly, if you engage in the same type of behavior and use the same tired religious claims to justify bigotry, then the comparison is valid.  A piece at ABC News lays out the continued parallels between Christofascists opposition to interracial marriage and same sex marriage.  Here are highlights:

Legal experts suggest that history might hint at how the coming months will unfold, as a handful of defiant clerks across the South and Midwest refuse to abide by the Supreme Court's ruling last month that legalized gay marriage.

The first test is set to begin Monday in a Kentucky courtroom. The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, who cited her Christian faith on June 30 as she refused to issue marriage licenses to any couple, gay or straight. Other county clerks rallied around her, demanding the government protect Christians from having to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

The aftermath of the Supreme Court's 1967 ruling Loving v. Virginia played out in similar ways, according to Sam Marcosson, a constitutional law professor at the University of Louisville. Now, once again, scattered patches of resistance will force the courts to intervene.

In 1967, Liane Peters and James Van Hook, turned to the NAACP, which sued the county and won. The couple received a license the following year.

They are still married, 47 years later. Van Hook is 82 and his wife is 76. They have two sons and three grandkids, she said. They still live in a little house with a big yard and garden they bought soon after their wedding.

Interracial couples across the South also had to sue, said Peter Wallenstein, a history professor at Virginia Tech who wrote a book called "Tell the Court I Love my Wife" about race and marriage in the United States. The legal battles dragged on for years.

In 1970, three years after the Supreme Court's decision, an Alabama judge denied a marriage license to a white soldier stationed at Fort McClellan and his African-American fiancee, Wallenstein wrote. The federal government sued to force the county to comply.

The question is how long they can stall and make mischief," said Kenneth D. Upton, senior counsel for Lambda Legal, a law office that specializes in LGBT issues.

Some take offense at the comparison between interracial marriages five decades ago and the religious objections to same-sex marriage that clerks are raising today.

Others scoff at the thought of letting elected officials decline to do part of their job. Marcosson compared the situation to the Catholic Church's refusal to marry people who have been through a divorce. The church and its followers have the religious freedom to decline to recognize those marriages. But a Catholic clerk in public office has no right to deny a civil marriage license to someone who has been divorced, he said.

Republican US Senators Kill Anti-LGBT Bullying Bill

Despite the major triumph the LGBT community experienced in the Obergefell marriage ruling, we sadly remain less than human in the minds of the Christofascists and, as a result, open game for abuse and bullying.  To the "godly folk" the lives of LGBT individuals simply do not matter and since, the Republican Party are the tawdry whores of the Christofascists, are lives and safety mean nothing to the GOP.  This reality was underscored by GOP action in the United States Senate led by Lamar Alexander - a proven douche bag - that killed proposed federal legislation that would have protected LGBT students from discrimination and bullying.  Stated in simple form, Alexander's excuse for killing the bill was a formulation of the "states' rights" bullshit that has been used in the past to justify slavery, then discrimination against blacks under Jim Crow, and now gays.  The New Civil Rights Movement looks at this disappointing anti-gay action.  Here are highlights:

For years, Democratic U.S. Senator Al Franken has been trying to pass a bill to protect LGBT students in public schools from discrimination. And for years the bill, known as the Student Nondiscrimination Act, or SENDA, failed to even get voted out of committee.

The two-term junior Senator from Minnesota tried a different approach, today attaching his legislation to a revision of the No Child Left Behind Act.

Led by GOP Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Republican Senators just voted it down, 52-45. 60 votes were needed to pass.

Franken's legislation had 40 cosponsors, including one Republican, Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois. Franken knew the vote would be "very close," but hoped for passage.

“Kids have these protections for race, national origin, gender and disability,” Franken told Buzzfeed. “We want to extend to LGBT kids the same right that other kids have.”

Bullying of LGBT students is “becoming an epidemic,” he said, citing three boys who committed suicide after they were being harassed by classmates who believed they were gay. “You can’t learn if you are afraid,” he added.

Franken's legislation is amendment #2093 to S1177, aka the "Every Child Achieves Act of 2015."

The Washington Post reports Senator Alexander "urged his colleagues to vote against the amendment, calling it a federal intrusion into matters best handled at the local level."

Here is a breakdown how voted voted to allow the bullying and abuse of LGBT students to continue:

Here's the list of all U.S. Senators who this afternoon voted to allow our nation's LGBTQ youth to continue to be bullied – these are the NAY's. You'll notice that each NAY is from a Republican Senator, headed by Sen. Alexander:

Alexander (R-TN) Barrasso (R-WY) Blunt (R-MO) Boozman (R-AR) Burr (R-NC) Capito (R-WV) Cassidy (R-LA) Coats (R-IN) Cochran (R-MS) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Cotton (R-AR) Crapo (R-ID) Cruz (R-TX) Daines (R-MT)

Enzi (R-WY) Ernst (R-IA) Fischer (R-NE) Flake (R-AZ) Gardner (R-CO) Grassley (R-IA) Hatch (R-UT) Hoeven (R-ND) Inhofe (R-OK) Isakson (R-GA) Lankford (R-OK) Lee (R-UT) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Moran (R-KS)

Paul (R-KY) Perdue (R-GA) Risch (R-ID) Roberts (R-KS) Rounds (R-SD) Sasse (R-NE) Scott (R-SC) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Sullivan (R-AK) Thune (R-SD) Tillis (R-NC) Toomey (R-PA) Vitter (R-LA) Wicker (R-MS)

Here's the list of all the US Senators who voted to help protect LGBTQ youth from bullying – these are the YEAs:

Ayotte (R-NH) Baldwin (D-WI) Bennet (D-CO) Blumenthal (D-CT) Booker (D-NJ) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Collins (R-ME) Coons (D-DE) Donnelly (D-IN) Durbin (D-IL) Feinstein (D-CA) Franken (D-MN) Gillibrand (D-NY)

Heinrich (D-NM) Heitkamp (D-ND) Heller (R-NV) Hirono (D-HI) Johnson (R-WI) Kaine (D-VA) King (I-ME) Kirk (R-IL) Klobuchar (D-MN) Leahy (D-VT) Manchin (D-WV) Markey (D-MA) McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR) Mikulski (D-MD) Murkowski (R-AK) Murphy (D-CT)

Murray (D-WA) Peters (D-MI) Portman (R-OH) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Sanders (I-VT) Schatz (D-HI) Schumer (D-NY) Shaheen (D-NH) Stabenow (D-MI) Tester (D-MT) Udall (D-NM) Warner (D-VA) Warren (D-MA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR)

I'm sorry, but to my mind, a gay voting Republican is akin to a 1930's German Jew supporting the Nazi party.    Candidly, I hold today's GOP in almost the same level of contempt as I hold for the "godly folk" who use the Bible to justify evil.

Today's "Religious Liberty" Claims Mirror Those of Segregationists

It seems the Christofascists and their allies have little desire to cease pushing their specious "religious liberty" claims through which they seek to exempt themselves from compliance with non-discrimination laws and even having to serve those they don't like even if they are governmental officials.  This tactic is actually nothing new and in the 1968 decision of the Supreme Court in Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, the Court rejected the claims of a barbecue chain that claimed that it could refuse to serve black people (in violation of an anti-discrimination statute) because the owner’s “religious beliefs compel him to oppose any integration of the races whatever.”  The Court, in fact, allowed the plaintiffs to recover attorneys fees against the restaurant chain.  A piece in the Washionton Post looks at the Christofascist demand for special rights under the deceptive claim of "religious liberty."  Here are highlights:

Don’t like same-sex marriage, contraception, HIV testing or even child labor laws? Never you worry: Just say that a higher power has exempted you, even if your exemption means trampling on other people’s rights. 

Texas’s attorney general recently encouraged public officials to deny same-sex couples marriage licenses if doing so violated their religious convictions. Other state politicians and companies have also recently tried to cite religious belief as an excuse for refusing to serve gay men and lesbians or to treat them equally under the law, even in states where sexual orientation is a legally protected class.

“Religious liberty” has been invoked to circumvent other laws, too.

“Religious liberty” torchbearers speak as if there is a rich tradition of accommodating any citizen who says that a law burdens her faith, regardless of the societal fallout. But the actual history of religious accommodation looks different.

[R]eligious exemptions to laws have been granted only within very prescribed bounds — including the principle that you’re entitled to religious accommodations only if they don’t burden or harm others, or otherwise create havoc in the legal system.  

[I]n 1985 the court also struck down a different state law requiring employers to honor whatever holy day their workers chose. Why would the court say that workers’ holy days deserved deference in one case and not another? The government has to allow you to practice whatever religion you choose — and observe whatever holy day you wish — but it will not protect your right to excessively burden other citizens (here, employers and co-workers who must accommodate your schedule) in the name of that religious belief.

The court has used similar logic when considering whether faith can exempt people from civil rights and public accommodations law. Bob Jones University lost its tax-exempt status because it refused to admit students engaged in or advocating interracial relationships. The school had claimed that it should be exempted from anti-discrimination law because its leaders “genuinely believe[d] that the Bible forbids interracial dating and marriage.” 

In the case perhaps most directly comparable to the latest arguments made about religious liberty and gay customers, 1968’s Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, the Supreme Court affirmed the principle that a barbecue chain could not refuse to serve black people, in violation of an anti-discrimination statute, simply because the owner’s “religious beliefs compel him to oppose any integration of the races whatever.”

Constitutional and statutory protections of religious liberty give Americans the right to worship whomever they choose, however they like, on whatever day they like. But there are well-established limits to weaponizing those beliefs against your fellow man.

Fundamentalist religions and those who use religion to harm others and deprive them of their rights are a plague on the world.  They and their claims need to be rejected and tirelessly opposed.

Pope Francis Just Destroyed the GOP’s Religious Con Artists

As regular readers know, I view Pope Francis with a great deal of skepticism.  I've even noted that he seems bi-polar as he swings form rational, progressive statements to again embracing the Church idiocy in the form of 13th century understanding of the "natural law."  But I do enjoy seeing Francis lob bombs at the Republican Party's agenda of vulture capitalism and environmental destruction.  And as a piece in Salon notes, Francis' new encyclical on climate changes will certainly expose the con-artist hypocrisy of a number of Republicans, including a number of the occupants of the GOP 2016 clown car.  Here are article highlights:

Over the past few weeks, we’ve heard the initial cannon volleys from the parapets of the GOP hurled in the direction of Pope Francis. But as of yesterday, when the Pope delivered a major encyclical on the climate crisis, there was a thermonuclear freakout, from not just Fox News and AM talk radio, but nearly every Republican with internet access. Already, Greg Gutfeld from Fox News Channel’s The Five referred to the Pope as the “most dangerous man in the world.”

Pope Francis’s encyclical was specifically intended as a call to action on man-made global warming. And this particular call to action contains, among other things, the following groundbreaking line:

We are not God. The earth was here before us and it has been given to us. This allows us to respond to the charge that Judaeo-Christian thinking, on the basis of the Genesis account which grants man “dominion” over the earth (cf. Gen 1:28), has encouraged the unbridled exploitation of nature by painting him as domineering and destructive by nature. This is not a correct interpretation of the Bible as understood by the Church.

That low rumbling noise you just heard was the sound of a million paleoconservative collapsing on their fainting couches. The Pope, here, is completely undermining the religious cornerstone for the entire GOP position on the climate, as well as pollution, animals and nature in general. Simply put: Sorry, no, the Bible doesn’t give us the power to ruin the planet for humans or other forms of life.

This of course presents a massive problem for Catholic Republicans everywhere, not to mention the handful of Catholic Republicans who are running for president, partially on an anti-climate platform.

At this point, there are three candidates officially bungee-corded into the overstuffed clown car that is the GOP primary: Rick Santorum, Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush. Catholics Chris Christie and Bobby Jindal haven’t declared yet. All five Republicans deny that human activity has precipitated the crisis. In fact, both Santorum and Jindal believe the whole thing is a hoax.

[I]f there’s one crucial aspect of this which ought to be hammered by anyone within shouting distance of the Catholics in the race, it’s the issue of faith and consistency. Simply put: If it’s okay for Bush, Santorum and Rubio to simply waive the Church’s teachings on the climate crisis, why is it impossible for them to do the same when it comes to their religion-based positions on abortion, contraception and same-sex marriage?

Why is it okay for persons of faith to ignore the crap they don’t like, while outright legislating the crap they do like?

It’s really no wonder the Republicans hate this Pope in spite of their self-branding as religious zealots. Bottom line: Francis makes them look ghoulish. I’m not religious now, but I was raised Catholic. I don’t like every word that comes out of the Pope’s mouth, but I much prefer Pope Francis’ God, and don’t have any interest in knowing Rick Santorum’s God.

The ultimate incongruity is this: The Pope has consistently, though not always, illustrated exactly how people of faith can serve the common good, while the GOP is more interested in exploiting religion to oppress, restrict and demonize. This really what’s freaking them out. And after Thursday, the rage will be thick and it’ll set new records for ugliness.

The Anti-Gay Far Right Can't Run Forever From Its History of Bigotry

As noted in the previous post, Bruce Jenner's coming out will likely prompt more spittle flecked rage from the Christofascists.   Hate is the one constant with the Christian Right - these people hate virtually everyone who doesn't look like them and cling to the same sick, perverted version of Bronze Age and 1st century myths.  And if one inspects the current "family values" organizations, most have antecedents in white supremacy groups that have fanned racism and often sought to marginalize anyone they deem as "other."  Scratch the surface of The Family Foundation here in Virginia, and you find the descendants of those who supported Massive Resistance who closed down the public schools rather than allow black children attend.  Many of the christian schools that are part of TFF's network of hate trace back to Massive resistance.  Simply put, these folks are not nice or decent people and their history needs to be exposed.  Blogger friend Alvin McEwen has piece in Huffington Post that reminds of that these people need to be held accountable for their history of hate and bigotry.  Here are excerpts:

There is a brazenly dishonest new tactic emanating from the anti-gay right which must be called out on a larger scale. That lie is the idea that somehow the progression of marriage equality and popularity of the LGBT community is suddenly making them isolated and derided for supposedly simply stating their opinions. Suddenly the LGBT community is being portrayed as bullies seeking to shut anti-gay figures down and deride them for speaking against marriage equality and LGBT equality. It's a skilled talking point helped along by think tank finances, intellectuals paid by these finances and a "news" network which mistakes omitted information, one-sided interviews and sloppy (probably in some cases deliberately sloppy) journalism as conservative opinion and ideology.

Almost weekly, we read or hear about anecdotal incidents drudged up by Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council, Ryan T. Anderson and the Heritage Foundation or Fox News personality Todd Starnes about supposed innocent Christians who are besieged by aggressive gays. 

The anti-gay right seem to be painting a portrait of victimhood in anticipation of further progress by the LGBT community and the goal is most likely to stop this progress.

But I have one question. How in the hell can anyone forget how we got to this point? I mean really.
For decades, anti-gay organizations and their supporters have portrayed the LGBT community as child molesting, diseased, sexually aggressive miscreants whose sole desire is to cause chaos before being sent to the lower pits of hell after we die for our supposed sins. Through lies, distortions and bad science, anti-gay groups made it difficult for laws to be passed to protect our interests, health and families. They created and repeated ad nauseam the false mantra that we are a "public health hazard" and our lives are fraught with pain, sadness, loneliness and early death.

But suddenly, . . . . anti-gay groups are attempting to rewrite the so-called culture war. . . . .  They want the world to forget all of the ignorance they exploited, the lies they told and the tactics they undertook to dehumanize the LGBT community.

They want us to forget the times when folks like Anita Bryant accused LGBTs of "recruiting" children to "refreshen" our ranks.

They want us to forget the officials in the Reagan Administration who kept the president from adequately addressing the AIDS crisis in its early days.

They want us to forget the names and faces of people whose lives were destroyed via homophobic violence or suicide most likely spurred on by the nods of societal homophobia.

Sorry guys, you are not victims. You never were. . . . . you can't erase your history of being bullies.

LGBTs don't forget and we don't let others forget, either.

For but one example of the lies Alvin is call out, look no farther than Mike Huckabee - a detestable individual in my view who would happily be another Himmler if he could to implement a "final solution" for gays and non-whites.  This from The New Civil Rights Movement:

The likely 2016 Republican presidential candidate who has spent a large portion of his time since his term as Arkansas' governor ended attacking the LGBT community, on Thursday spoke on a conference call organized by Tony Perkins' anti-gay hate group, the Family Research Council.

“Christian convictions are under attack as never before,” Huckabee old listeners. “Not just in our lifetime, but ever before in the history of this great republic. We are moving rapidly toward the criminalization of Christianity.”

Huckabee and those like him deserve to be social outcasts and pariahs.  They are a blight on decent society.