Robert Meyer
The new Jihad: The attack against Christianity
By Robert Meyer
If I need a round of amusement, I no longer turn on the comedy channel, I just go directly to any newspaper. There you will find some chest-pounding dissertations, from a bevy of syndicated columnists, or local "enlightened" editorial writers, warning about how some fanatical extremists are trying to cram their morality down your throat.
Our founders never would have tolerated this religious stuff — why didn't they want to keep religion out of goverment. The First amendment tells us so Doesn't George Washington warn us about the dangers of mixing religion with politics in his farewell address? "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great Pillars." Whoops! If that wasn't bad enough, Washington makes it sound like being irreligious is unpatriotic Maybe our second president, John Adams can right this ecclesiastical mutiny. In his inaugural address he says "...I feel it to be my duty to add, if a veneration for the religion of a people who profess and call themselves Christians, and a fixed resolution to consider a decent respect for Christianity among the best recommendations for the public service...." And in his younger days he contemplated, "Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only law book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God.... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." Ouch!
Ah, but the Supreme Court and judicial review will reverse the pandering of these non-pluralistic bigots. The first Supreme Court Justice John Jay stated "providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the priviledge and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." And how about the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court, in the famous Trinity decision."These and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation. It seems we just can't find much evidence for that secular society, our founders supposedly wanted.
All these "nervous" secularists and civil libertarians keep forgetting a few important details There was no "separation of church and state" codified into public law before 1947. Bible reading and prayer were legal until the early 1960's. You could post the Ten Commandments in schools until 1980. The Ten Commandments were proudly displayed on public property until recently You could sing Christmas carols at school when I was a kid, and the Gideons came to pass out Bibles to elementary school children.
The point is that all these "radical" Christians, who are demonstrating for the posting of the Commandments and the acknowledgement of God, aren't trying to put religious influence in places where it never before existed, but to restore it as it was. If somebody had in mind a religious theocracy, where infidels on every stripe would be hunted down and lynched, I happen to think they would have tried it when all the above practices were still the statis quo.
All this points to my thesis that religion is the one area where the most demeaning intolerance imaginable is routinely accepted. Say reparations are bad, your a racist. Claim homosexuality is wrong, your a knuckle-dragging bigot. Stand up for sexual purity, your a witch-burning puritan. Lobby for adoption over abortion, your against women's rights. Want to cut taxes and reduce government intrusions, your insensitive and uncompationate. Stand against any evil, your unenlightened and judgmental. Of course the irony is that if the Christian path were followed, many of societies greatest ills would be curtailed to minor anomalies.
This is the essense of the new Jihad, an unholy war against religion in general and Christianity in particular. It is a place where newspaper columnists shamelessly compare Christian activists to the thugs that fire-bombed the twin towers. Where President Bush is Hitler's more evil twin. Where cinematic productions constantly contort Christian themes with some deranged persona, such as the movie "Seven," where the villian embarks on a murderous, judgmental rampage against victims who epitomize the seven deadly sins. Or a movie I watched lately, "The gift," where the antagonist is always talking about Christian morality, but is actually a wife-beatin'-gun-totin'-beer-drinkin'-cheatin' son of a gun. The typical Christian we're told, is the guy who greets the compationate abortion doctor with the cold barrel of a 12-gauge shotgun.
What was it that the ancient Hebrew prophets said, "Woe unto those who call evil good, and good evil." Woe indeed.
© Robert Meyer
If I need a round of amusement, I no longer turn on the comedy channel, I just go directly to any newspaper. There you will find some chest-pounding dissertations, from a bevy of syndicated columnists, or local "enlightened" editorial writers, warning about how some fanatical extremists are trying to cram their morality down your throat.
Our founders never would have tolerated this religious stuff — why didn't they want to keep religion out of goverment. The First amendment tells us so Doesn't George Washington warn us about the dangers of mixing religion with politics in his farewell address? "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great Pillars." Whoops! If that wasn't bad enough, Washington makes it sound like being irreligious is unpatriotic Maybe our second president, John Adams can right this ecclesiastical mutiny. In his inaugural address he says "...I feel it to be my duty to add, if a veneration for the religion of a people who profess and call themselves Christians, and a fixed resolution to consider a decent respect for Christianity among the best recommendations for the public service...." And in his younger days he contemplated, "Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only law book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God.... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." Ouch!
Ah, but the Supreme Court and judicial review will reverse the pandering of these non-pluralistic bigots. The first Supreme Court Justice John Jay stated "providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the priviledge and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." And how about the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court, in the famous Trinity decision."These and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation. It seems we just can't find much evidence for that secular society, our founders supposedly wanted.
All these "nervous" secularists and civil libertarians keep forgetting a few important details There was no "separation of church and state" codified into public law before 1947. Bible reading and prayer were legal until the early 1960's. You could post the Ten Commandments in schools until 1980. The Ten Commandments were proudly displayed on public property until recently You could sing Christmas carols at school when I was a kid, and the Gideons came to pass out Bibles to elementary school children.
The point is that all these "radical" Christians, who are demonstrating for the posting of the Commandments and the acknowledgement of God, aren't trying to put religious influence in places where it never before existed, but to restore it as it was. If somebody had in mind a religious theocracy, where infidels on every stripe would be hunted down and lynched, I happen to think they would have tried it when all the above practices were still the statis quo.
All this points to my thesis that religion is the one area where the most demeaning intolerance imaginable is routinely accepted. Say reparations are bad, your a racist. Claim homosexuality is wrong, your a knuckle-dragging bigot. Stand up for sexual purity, your a witch-burning puritan. Lobby for adoption over abortion, your against women's rights. Want to cut taxes and reduce government intrusions, your insensitive and uncompationate. Stand against any evil, your unenlightened and judgmental. Of course the irony is that if the Christian path were followed, many of societies greatest ills would be curtailed to minor anomalies.
This is the essense of the new Jihad, an unholy war against religion in general and Christianity in particular. It is a place where newspaper columnists shamelessly compare Christian activists to the thugs that fire-bombed the twin towers. Where President Bush is Hitler's more evil twin. Where cinematic productions constantly contort Christian themes with some deranged persona, such as the movie "Seven," where the villian embarks on a murderous, judgmental rampage against victims who epitomize the seven deadly sins. Or a movie I watched lately, "The gift," where the antagonist is always talking about Christian morality, but is actually a wife-beatin'-gun-totin'-beer-drinkin'-cheatin' son of a gun. The typical Christian we're told, is the guy who greets the compationate abortion doctor with the cold barrel of a 12-gauge shotgun.
What was it that the ancient Hebrew prophets said, "Woe unto those who call evil good, and good evil." Woe indeed.
© Robert Meyer
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
