YOU, Failing to Get Vaccinated, Violates MY Rights

"I'm losing my COVID patience.  I've tried to reason with the unvaxxed.  I've directed some to medical pros.  I don't judge but hear them out and steer them to facts.  The unvaxxed love to say it's about choice.  But do you know who doesn't have a choice?  My three kids under 5.  

"Blah,  blah, blah, you have a right not to get vaxxed.  Fine.  Then business and government have a right to tell you that you're not welcome to patronize or you can't get on a plane.

"Because what right do you think you have to expose my kids to your COVID?  As parents, lets own the outrage.  The looney carnival barkers at school board meetings DO NOT reflect where most parents are.  Your unvaxxed status is creating new variants.  So get your damned shot.  Or stay inside your house.  But don't mess with my kids."  Congressman Eric Swalwell, California District 15

This is a guy who needs to be front and center for Democrats.  

He's exactly right.  Thank you, Congressman, for standing up and saying so.  I've lost my COVID patience as well.  I caught it from someone who refused to wear a mask and showed up at work with symptoms, only to find out the next day that he had tested positive.  How considerate.  He knew enough to go get a test, but not enough not to show up at work until he got the results back.  Five people, including me, came down with it over the next few days.  I spent eight days of the following two weeks in the hospital, sicker than I can ever remember being.  Well, I'm not that far away from being classified as a senior adult, so I guess I can be sacrificed, so that others can have their "rights."  

"The Sanctity of Human Life" is Nothing More Than Politics to Republicans

Republicans have been laying claim to the title of "party of righteousness" since Reagan in the 80's, largely because of their support for ending abortion and reversing the Roe v. Wade decision that made it a constitutionally protected right.  Their claim, based on the Christian belief that life begins at conception, is that the unborn, once conceived, have a right to life from that point on, and even though they remain in their mother's womb until birth, should be considered as separate persons.  They've put the defense of the unborn due to the sanctity of life in their political platform.  

But that's not out of any real conviction or belief in the sanctity of human life.  It's just a very emotional, easily manipulated issue that can be used to get votes.  If they really believed in the sanctity of human life, they would be putting as much effort into protecting people from a deadly virus that is fatal in 2% of the cases, and debilitating in another 6%, as they do into trying to get the Roe v. Wade decision overturned.  The fact that many high profile and well known Republicans, who also happen to be Evangelical Christians, are so vehemently opposed to doing anything to protect people from the spread of this virus betrays their hypocrisy.  

Someone who believes in the sanctity of human life would be moving heaven and earth, so to speak, to protect the most vulnerable people from catching it, and would be doing everything within their power to keep it from spreading and mutating.  Isn't that what they are doing to protect the rights of the unborn?  But it goes nowhere after that, which makes them as evil and wicked as they claim abortion supporters are.  They are much less concerned about saving the lives of the unborn as they are about electing politicians who support their agenda to office and using an alleged pro-life position as leverage.  

So comparisons are off the table in this discussion.  You can't be pro-life and anti-vax at the same time.  End of discussion. 

America, the Land of Oz

I don't want to carry that analogy too far, but we do have a Wicked Witch of the West, and a Wicked Witch of the East in the persons of Congresswoman Lauren Boebert, from Colorado, representing the West, and Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, from Georgia, representing the East.  These two despicable racists are either deserving of an academy award for their acting ability portraying a hateful and deplorable lack of integrity and in their roles as Klansmen Without Hoods, or they really are all of those things.  There are people in Congress who play the role that they think their base wants them to play.  Ultra-conservative and "pro-life" Congressman Tim Murphy, who represented the 18th district of Pennsylvania, was forced to resign after pressuring his mistress to get an abortion after she thought she was pregnant.  So much for being pro-life.  

So if I gambled, I'd be willing to bet that both of these shrieking nut jobs are vaccinated.  They won't put their own lives at risk, but they don't care about anyone else!  And sanctity of human life is out the window.  Their involvement in January 6 is an endorsement of attempts to "hang Mike Pence," and their racist rhetoric is violent.  Their only regret is that most of the people who have died from the virus in their districts can't vote for them.  

Or can they?

Dr. Fauci or Ted Cruz?   

"That's OK," said Fauci in a response to Ted Cruz' call for him to be prosecuted.  "I'm just gonna do my job, and I'm gonna be saving lives and they're gonna be lying."  

Well Trump, after accusing his father of involvement in the Kennedy assassination and calling his wife an ugly whore, did call him "Lyin' Ted."  A man of integrity would have turned his back and walked away.  But Cruz isn't that man.  

So I believe Dr. Fauci.  There's plenty of evidence he knows what he's talking about and he's willing to admit when he doesn't know something or when he's made a mistake.  Cruz' call to "prosecute" him, aside from making him look like he's a real donkey, is irresponsible and hateful.  The only proper reference to the term "prosecute" should be applied to him for his role in January 6th. 

Whose Rights are Most Important? 

The problem of "equal treatment" here on this issue is that the consequences of not getting vaccinated and of not taking any real steps to stop the spread of the virus is that not doing so contributes to its continued spead.  Many of them exhibit an "I don't care" attitude about it.  The consequence of that is that some pretty high profile anti-vaxxers are now dead from the COVID infection they caught.  But the other consequence is that the virus continues to cause pandemic conditions with a high death rate, continues to spread and puts kids under 5 at risk because they can't be vaccinated and don't have a natural immunity.  And that kind of lack of concern for the rights of others is unAmerican, selfish and downright rude, not to mention criminal in that it has cost some lives.  

So that's an infringement on the rights of those who follow solid medical advice and get vaccinated.  You should not be able to get into my space and infringe upon my rights.  It's the role of government to make that determination.  I've heard conservatives at the airport complain about having to get on board a plane with a woman wearing a hijab, because she might be a terrorist with a bomb.  If you're not vaccinated, deliberately choosing not to be, then you are every bit as much a terrorist as you think that Muslim woman might be. In fact, you are more of one because they aren't going to blow up the plane, but you have the potential to infect everyone on it.  

Refusing to get vaccinated puts others at risk of serious illness or death.  Getting vaccinated even though you don't want to do it doesn't put you at risk.  So it's obvious whose rights should prevail. 

The Biden Administration and the Democratic Party-Controlled Congress Are What Good Government Looks Like

Browsing through a bookstore on Sunday afternoon, the music being piped into the store gave way to a news broadcast from the USA Radio Network.  If you're not familiar with it, USA Radio News is a network that caters its broadcasting mainly to right wing Christian radio stations, though because its subscription rates are so low, some small-town stations also pick it up.  It was founded by Marlon Maddoux, whose radio talk show "Point of View" was once a fairly popular program on Christian radio, a call-in talk show that criticized leaders among Evangelicals who didn't act according to his preferences.  

They were letting some Republican member of the house spout off on the Build Back Better bill that is being consdered by the Senate.  During the tirade, which is typical of what that network allows when it comes to comments, he made a statement to the effect that "we're getting this kind of legislation because that's what happens when a career politician who has been in there too long always wants to do."  

I'd have to agree with that.  

We're coming out of an administration that failed in just about every way a Presidency can fail, mainly because those who voted for him ignorantly thought that electing someone without government experience would be a good thing.  I doubt that would ever be the case, but even if there were a possibility that someone who lacks experience in government could actually know how to get things done, electing someone like the Orange Menace was a guarantee that it would not accomplish anything of substance, certainly nothing that protected or benefitted the people who are the theoretical authority over government.  Through his ignorance of and opposition to the limits of the Constitution, his general incompetence, and his failure to acknowledge facts and relate to the real world, Trump failed as a President, in every way there is to fail in the presidency.  

It's been a real pleasure to see a Presidential administration work to protect people, push legislation that will create jobs, increase prosperity, vastly improve the infrastructure and which doesn't do what its opponents claim it will do to the economy.  But beyond that, this administration is determined to see this country through the COVID-I9 pandemic, in spite of some of our really ignorant and uninformed people.  Instead of trying to control the process himself, President Biden has left the details up to those who understand the science and know what they're doing.  

In spite of all the Republican babbling about the cost of these "expensive" government programs, the stock market, which is one of the financial bellwethers when it comes to measuring the impact of the "debt" that will accumulate as a result and its ultimate effect on the economy, is soaring.  The stock market, much to the delight of the GOP, took a dip on Friday when news of the spread of a new COVID variant was made public, but contrary to the Republican whine, these two bills, one of which is already done, the other of which will more than likely pass without too many modifications, didn't trigger the downturn.  And today, the market came roaring back, wiping out Friday's loss, largely because of the prospects of the Build Back Better bill passing the Senate.  

And suddenly, we're seeing and hearing a lot of conversation about private sector job growth, which is roaring, and unemployment, which is dropping like a stone in a well.  The Biden administration has created more private sector jobs in its first year than any previous Presidential administration, far surpassing Trump's whole term, which saw jobs drop by 5% and unemployment soar to over I2%.  Sure it was largely due to COVID but if he'd planned in advance and done something, it would be a lot different than the mess he made of it.  And didn't he once say COVID was a hoax?  If that's so, then Trump has to take all of the responsibility for the economic recession it caused.  

Joe Biden is an experienced politician, familiar with the workings of Congress to the point where he knows exactly what to do to get things done.  The biggest problem he has is promoting his triumphs.  He doesn't lack humility, like Trump did, and he's not a self promoter or glad-hander.  

Way to Go Dr. Fauci

Did you see Dr. Fauci's response to Senator Cruz' call for him to be "prosecuted"?  Speaking on Sunday's edition of "Face the Nation," Fauci , after slamming Senator Cruz for his role in the January 6th Trump Insurrection, he said, "That's OK.  I'm just gonna do my job, and I'm gonna be saving lives, and they're gonna be lying."  

You go, Dr. Fauci.  Lyin' Ted.  Isn't that what the Orange menace called him?  On national television?  After humiliating his wife?  

Snark seems to work for the GOP.  Maybe it's time to see if it works for Democrats, too.  I was glad to see that Representative Ilhan Omar refused to get down on the low level from where Congresswoman Lauren Boebert attacked her, and simply walked away after she realized Boebert wasn't going to shut her pie hole.  We need to see more of that, especially if the Republicans aren't going to practice common courtesy.  Winning the public relations battle means that Democrats need to keep having these kinds of confrontations, and take the high road. 

We Are Committed to Continued Support

This blog will continue to put information forward to its readers, about I,500 people a month, that supports the Biden administration and the Democratic party agenda in the Congress.  In our small way, we hope to drive voters to the Democrats and motivate them when elections come along.  The Democrats must keep control of the House and Senate in order to preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States.  

Let's do this.

Being "Woke", Critical Race Theory, Social Justice and Other Terms Taken Out of Context by the Extreme Right

We are past the one-fifth of the way through the twenty-first century mark.  Racial equality is still one of the most divisive political issues faced by our country.  Even the statement, "We've made a lot of progress" is not commonly accepted, especially among people who belong to the largest non-white racial group in America, African-Americans, or among those who belong to the largest ethnicity among Caucasian Americans, those of Hispanic or Latino origin.  

We've just had verdicts handed down in three high-profile trials in which race was most definitely an issue.  Kyle Rittenhouse's victims were white, though they clearly had taken a side that was quite different from that of Rittenhouse, running counter to his clearly stated reasons for showing up in Kenosha, Wisconsin with a high powered rifle.  But in the other two cases, one related to the "Unite the Right" rally in which a counterprotester was killed and where white supremacist groups had gathered in opposition to the removal of statues of Confederate General Robert E. Lee, the other the Ahmad Arbery murder case in Brunswick, Georgia, race was a major factor in the crimes committed.  

How Much "Progress" Has Been Made? 

These three recent, high profile cases, with results that are equivocal at best when it comes to measuring the progress this county has made when it comes to embedded racial bigotry, do show some progress.  Very little, given the circumstances and the time in which we are living, but progress.  But the goal should not be "to make progress," the goal should be to ensure that every American citizen has equal protection under law.  And that is clearly not the case. 

That's why there is, in the twenty-first century, a new civil rights movement in the United States. That's why Black Lives Matter, in the form of both the organization itself, and the larger movement of people who recognize that racial prejudice still exists, especially in matters related to law enforcement and policing, has florished to the point where it influences elections and policing policy.  That's why people are "woke," a term that generally applies to the awareness of racial prejudice and bigotry and which indicated favor toward legislation of social policy that guarantees equal rights for persons who are of a minority race or ethnic background.  

The guilty verdict in the trial of Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd is not a sign that a goal has been reached.  It does represent progress, but that trial took place in one of America's most politically liberal cities.  The fact that it was such a rarity for a police officer to be found guilty in the murder of a black man is proof that bigotry and racial prejudice is still a major social problem and in spite of all of our resources and our education, is still a long way from being resolved.  

The Rittenhouse verdict simply endorsed the practice of vigilantism.  That's a huge step backward, as far as I am concerned, nullifying the whining and complaining done about the violence of the protests that occurred in Kenosha following the shooting of Jacob Blake by police.  I don't condone violence or destruction of property as part of a protest, that accomplishes absolutely nothing except fuelling more hatred and creating more innocent victims, including those that Rittenhouse killed and injured.  

The Rev. Roy Peeples, Pastor of the Turning Point Life Church in Kenosha, said after the protests, "We're all living in trauma, but when I see the fear that was on the faces and on the minds of the white citizens, it reminded me of one thing:  It's that you endured maybe one week of this and you understood what that did to the body.  Everything reacted to that and it was so hard.  But look from my viewpoint--I've had generation after generation of this trauma, because I'm African American."  

That's why we have to listen to you, Rev. Peeples.  Listen, and not talk so much.  

Listen Before Speaking 

A Republican candidate for governor of Virginia was elected by what eventually turned out to be fewer than 65,000 votes out of over 3.2 million cast.  The exit polling shows that a major factor which drove Republican turnout was the non-existent teaching of "Critical Race Theory" in Virginia's public schools.  Ask someone who thinks they know something about CRT and what they will most likely tell you will be completely inaccurate, especially if they start using adjectives like "socialist" or "Marxist."  Conservative Christian denominations and churches dismiss it because "it does not have its origins in Biblical teaching."  

If Christians in the political right think they have the answer to resolving racial bigotry and prejudice, then let's see where that's been put into practice in the churches.  If that's the case, then integrated, racially and ethnically diverse congregations where everyone shares leadership equally and where pastors who aren't white are accepted as spiritual leaders by everyone in the congregation should be the norm, while churches made up of one predominant race should be rare.  Oh, so that's not the way it is?  Then perhaps, before making a judgement or condeming CRT, or using it to get votes, developing an understanding of what it really is and more specifically, understanding the experience of the people, should come first.  The widespread segregation that exists in American Christianity, most notably among conservative Christians, nullifies any criticism of Critical Race Theory.  

CRT doesn't have "Marxist" origins, nor is it "socialist" in its philosophy.  And I'm pretty certain, given the extent to which African American Christians have developed their theology and doctrine, that they don't see CRT as anti-Christian or anti-Biblical.  It originates from their own experience. 

Being "Woke," is nothing more or less than having an active awareness of the extent of racial bigotry and prejudice, particularly against African Americans, in all of the aspects of society where it exists, including government and politics, law enforcement, education and in the church.  Black Lives Matter is one of several groups in what is a new wave of the civil rights movement, a general response to bigotry but a specific reaction to it among law enforcement and in government.  Oppression gets a response and it is neither realistic, nor moral in my humble opinion, to claim that African Americans ought to be grateful for the changes and progress that have occurred and should be expressing thanks that it's not worse, instead of protesting for continued change.  

Those Who Fail to Understand History are Condemned to Repeat It

Racial and ethnic bigotry is one of the most deep-seated problems humanity faces.  Minority groups within a specific culture become easy scapegoats for economic or political problems, pandemics, wars, poverty and crime.  Little consideration is given to the root causes of the problems, including circumstances which caused a particular minority group to develop a separate culture from the majority, because of segregation and isolation. 

Slavery, which came to America in I6I9 shortly after the first settlement was established, ended with the passage of the thirteenth amendment.  Ironically, it was two Union states, Delaware and Kentucky, where slavery was still in effect after the end of the war but the constitutional amendment took care of that.  So the most immediate problem became what to do with five million newly freed slaves.  The devastated, collapsed Southern states did not have the resources to take care of what amounted to a third of their total population.  

Abolition of slavery was one thing, assimilation of the former slave population into American society and culture was quite another, and not all of those who pushed to abolish slavery were willing to consider plans which allowed for the integration of five million former slaves, of African American descent, into the culture.  So the plan that was developed, which we now know as Reconstruction, was designed to keep most of them where they were, in the South, and to punish the Southern states for the rebellion.  

Reconstruction did not lead to any kind of assimilation or integration of former slaves into the culture.  It simply increased resentment and led to hatred against them, because property and resources to support them were taken from others who were also struggling to survive economically.  African Americans did benefit from Reconstruction, especially prior to the southern states being re-admitted to the union.  They were given land from former plantations, jobs working for the government rebuilding the ruined towns and cities, railroad lines and other infrastructure, and a measure of freedom which encouraged some African Americans to run for, and be elected to, government positions, as long as most former Confederates were not allowed to vote.  

But Reconstruction only lasted for a decade.  Even with the heavy hand of the federal government forcing the issue of equal rights for former slaves, it was pretty clear that southern society would remain segregated.  And even though the Republican party likes to claim credit for freeing the slaves, in just over a decade after the Civil War ended, I876 to be exact, they were willing to trade off Reconstruction and equal rights for African Americans for political gain, basically, a "deal" that would give Rutherford Hayes enough electoral votes to claim the White House over Democrat Samuel Tilden, who actually won the election and also laid claim to the disputed votes. 

In exchange for those 20 electoral votes, the Republicans would end Reconstruction.  As a result, the few gains made by African Americans were wiped out.  They were terrorized, driven off the land they had aquired, lost their voting rights, job opportunities and in many cases, found themselves worse off than they had been under slavery, where at least food, clothing and shelter had been provided for them.  Many of them migrated to the north, where there was still discrimination, segregation and poverty.  As it turned out, while some of those who advocated for the abolition of slavery were ready and willing to support equal rights and opportunity for African Americans, most people still believed in white supremacy and a segregated society.  

It would be ninety years before the Civil Rights movement would gain enough traction and support to start making a difference.  It took time, even in the northern states, for African Americans to gain political influence to the point where things started to work for them.  While they did have political allies among whites, and their influence grew post-World War 2, virtually all of the gains and progress that was made was dependent on the effort made by African Americans on their own behalf.  The initiatives for change have all come from leaders within the African American community, the majority of them pastors and church leaders.  Black Lives Matter is just a continuation of the movement for equality, along with theories for resolution of the problem, like Critical Race Theory. Accusations that these movements and what they've produced are "Marxist" or "socialist" fall short of being able to prove their contention.  Those are buzz words, aimed at keeping progress on this issue from moving forward, just like the aim of every attack against the Civil Rights movement.  

A Moral Failure

The continued inability of America to recognize the equality of African Americans and dismantle a segregated society is a moral failure.  Communities are still segregated and people still exhibit fear of venturing out into neighborhoods and areas where the popuulation is made up of a majority of people of a different race.  In spite of efforts to integrate public schools, middle class whites simply moved into school districts in suburban areas wherer they were the racial majority.  Evangelical Christian churches and denominations are so segregated, they are identified separately, with "White Evangelicals" being distinguished from "Historically African American" churches and denominations, in spite of having most doctrine and theology in common.  

African Americans are as much a part of the history and development of the United States of America as whites are.  They did much of the hard labor in gathering the resources and building this nation.  They are not outsiders, they are as American whose roots go as far back as any white, European descended Americans do.  They are expressing their desire for equality and offering ideas about how to achieve that goal and instead of attacking it, calling it "Marxist" or dismissing it as "socialist," they are entitled to be heard.  

So wake up, be "woke" and listen to voices like Roy Peeples. "I've had generations of this trauma, because I am African-American."  

It's time for the trauma to end.

Major Scandals, Divisions Among Trump-Supporting Evangelicals Are Taking a Toll

 If anyone is causing divisions among you, give a first and second warning.  After that, have nothing more to do with the person.  For people like that have turned away from the truth.  They are sinning and they condemn themselves.--The Apostle Paul, Letter to Titus, Chapter 3:I0-II, NLT

When you have something against another Christian, why do you file a lawsuit and ask a secular court to decide the matter instead of taking it to other Christians to decide who is right?--The Apostle Paul, First Letter to the Church at Corinth, Chapter 6:I, NLT

The Wheels are Coming Off

The incongruity between some Evangelical Christians and their leaders, and Trump's lifestyle, which reflects a total lack of the kind of values and morals Evangelicals believe are the product of, and evidence of a Christian lifestyle, has always been difficult to explain.  I've never bought the claim some Evangelicals make, that they aren't voting for a "pastor-in-chief", to excuse or explain their Trump support, mainly because it is not consistent with multiple passages found in the Bible, which Evangelicals claim is their sole authority over their theology and doctrine.  Nor do I accept the reasoning that Trump, in spite of his own clear testimony to the contrary, at some point "converted."  In most Evangelical doctrine, a conversion experience involves conviction and repentance, leading to spiritual transformation and conversion.  Trump denies having to "repent" or ask forgiveness, claiming he has not done anything to require it.  

In a previous post, entitled Behind the Scenes, Among Trump Supporting Evangelicals, It's a Mess, similarities between the behavior of the leadership and Trump's behavior pattern were noted.  In the Southern Baptist Convention, not all of the issues are directly tied to Trump support, though the pressure put on Dr. Russell Moore, because he was an outspoken "Never Trumper," amounted to what he called "psychological terror."  He was the object of two SBC executive committee "investigations" aimed at ousting him from the directorship of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. 

Moore, in a letter written prior to his resignation from the ERLC and his leaving the Southern Baptist Convention, said, "I have been attacked with the most vicious guerilla tactics on such matters, and have been told to keep quiet about it by others."  What he is referencing is the ERLC's activity in response to a massive sexual abuse scandal among Southern Baptist pastors, church staff and denominational employees reported in an expose released by The Houston Chronicle in 20I9.  But his "never Trumper" stance, based on Christian convictions supported by Biblical doctrine, also caused a round of what he calls "intimidation tactics" including death threats to him and his family.  Russell Moore Resignation from the SBC ERLC, Washington Post    Religion News Service Story on Moore's Resignation

"Vicious guerilla tactics" and "psychological terror"?  Is this a Christian denomination of which we are speaking?  And though it was the sexual abuse scandal to which Moore directed most of the activity of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission over the past three years, the attacks on his leadership started when he expressed his convictions about Trump's candidacy, which are completely consistent with a conservative Biblical interpretation of the Bible.  

Now, the conservative group which has leveled its criticism at Moore is supporting a "documentary film" that levels accusations at one of the six seminaries owned by the convention, claiming it is becoming "woke," LGBTQ friendly, and is teaching "Marxist" ideology in its classrooms.  That's because one of the group's founders is the former president of that seminary, ousted for his multiple failures, at both seminaries where he served as President, to handle charges of sexual abuse and rape in accordance with seminary policy and with the law.  The conservative group claims that "though we did not produce the film," in an attempt to absolve them of responsibility, but they're OK with promoting its showing at a seminary they recently endorsed. I've seen the trailer, and if this film meets the Christian standard of "glorifying God" and "lifting up the name of Jesus," I'll post a link.  It looks like trash and fits the Trumpian lack of ethical standards perfectly.

New Developments:  Pastor who Chaired Executive Committee Investigations into Moore is Suing Him 

Pastor Sues Russell Moore for Defamation

Taking note of one of the Bible verses cited at the beginning of this post, Mike Stone, the Georgia pastor who was chair of the SBC executive committee, and who recommended launching two investigations into Moore's leadership at the ERLC, is suing Moore after being named in letters he wrote prior to tendering his resignation.  Both letters were "leaked," by whom it is not clear, since there are those on both sides who could benefit from such an action.  

Stone ran for President of the SBC at the 202I annual convention in Nashville this past June, and was defeated on a second-ballot election by Ed Litton, an Alabama pastor who has been supportive of the ERLC's efforts under Moore regarding the handling of the sexual abuse scandal. The character assassination and attacks on Litton, his character, ministry and family, have been vicious and merciless.  Stone supporters and members of a group he helped organize, in part to help his campaign for the SBC presidency, have also come out with a whole new perspective on interpreting the Apostle Paul's words about lawsuits.  Granted, we live in a much different time, and under a much different court system than he did, but I've seen a lot of complete reversals in previous hard-line, literal interpretations of this verse, held by conservative Southern Baptists, until now, of course. It looks like Trumpism is changing the mission and purpose of the SBC.

In all fairness, there are many Southern Baptists, at this point a majority of those who participated as messengers at the 202I convention meeting, who are still rejecting the influence and relevance of right-wing, Trumpian politics into their Christian denomination.  They elected a president committed to veer far, far away from those influences and to get to the bottom of the sexual abuse scandal.  The new chairman of the Executive Committee, Dr. Rolland Slade, a member of the SBC's African American fellowship and pastor of Meridian Baptist Church in San Diego, California, has completely refocused the executive committee, a task made easier by the resignation of multiple members over issues associated with the independent task force investigation now looking into the executive committee's response to specific incidents of sexual abuse.  There is also evidence of "never Trump" support for Moore.  

The Liberty University Mess

The moral schizophrenia that has become the M.O. at Liberty University is also working its way through a sexual abuse scandal, mainly a campus culture that suppressed attempts at supporting victims, blamed them for causing the incident and exonerated the perpetrators.  This isn't something new that's just popped up there since Trump, it's been going on for a long time but the repressive rules and policies of the school, which literally protect the property boundaries from any outside intrusion on the claim that what they do is all covered by "religious liberty" have prevented any awareness of what has been happening on the campus.  

David French: The Moral Collapse of America's Largest Christian University

You can't make this stuff up.  

Growing up Baptist, I could see that there were different sets of rules for "clergy" and certain self-appointed, prominent leaders, and "laity" even though Baptist churches frown on using those terms.  Grady Nutt, a Texas Baptist pastor/evangelist who used humor as a communication tool would tell about his experiences at a conservative Baptist university in West Texas, where he said you had to sign a pledge card stating that you wouldn't smoke, drink, dance or "want to."  Liberty's students must sign a similar, strict code called "The Liberty Way," that, among other things, forbids the drinking of alcohol, and any sexual activity outside of marriage.  

But clearly, that did not apply to Liberty's President, Jerry Falwell, Jr., who took the reins when his father, Jerry Sr., the founder, passed away.  The senior Falwell had many friends and lots of influence in conservative Republican circles, though I'd be curious to see how he would have handled Trump, since the latter had publicly mocked Falwell Sr. on more than one occasion.  Nor did it apply to trustee board members seen drinking and having a good time at lavish parties.  Some have had to step down during the current atmosphere.  

It was difficult to understand, in light of the strictness of the expectations of "The Liberty Way," how Falwell Jr. rationalized his support for Trump.  Trump's multiple adulterous affairs were things he bragged about and used to enhance is public image.  Just prior to Falwell Jr's embrace of his candidacy, he had emerged from an affair with a porn star, something else that "The Liberty Way" prohibits among its students.  How can you stand in front of a student body you are trying to teach disciplines of the Christian faith by practice and yet fail to set a good moral example by holding up a moral degenerate like Trump, who also has a potty mouth, lies through his teeth, cheats his way to financial gain, loves money, and would never qualify to be admitted to Liberty as a student?  

Falwell, Jr., as it turns out, and his wife, weren't exactly role models for the students, and they clearly did not take "The Liberty Way" seriously.  As stories about other public displays of crude behavior by Junior emerge, some documented by video and photography, it almost looks like he is mocking the University's code of behavior, and also the stern Baptist faith of his own father.  But he supports Trump. 

See more of the words of the Apostle Paul from the book of Titus that I posted at the beginning of this article.  These are words that Evangelical Christians claim to be inerrant, infallible, verbally inspired and the "sole authority for the faith and practice of the church."  

You cannot serve both Jesus and Trump.  

Is this Trumpian influence, or is it the reason Trumpism resonates with many--not all--Evangelicals?  

Churches, denominations, ministry organizations, missionary-sending agencies are all human institutions and they are not perfect.  There are always those within any group who have selfish motives and see a way to manipulate a system that is often based on trust for their own personal benefit.  Such scandals are not new. Some are spectacular, huge and get a lot of attention, like Jim Bakker or Jimmy Swaggart.  Most are only known to a small group of people within the entity where the scandal takes place.  

In my previous post, I leaned toward the idea that these scandals have resulted from Evangelical leaders venturing too close to the flame of Trumpism, and their support for his candidacy and presidency has led to their compromising their Christian values, abandoning the faith in some cases, in order to be able to hang on to his coat-tails.  Their support for him has created an "ownership" of everything that comes with him, almost all of which runs contrary to Christian morals, ethics and values. 

Getting caught between a rock and a hard place on the issue of sexual abuse, which is the most prominent theme running through these examples, is something they have in common with the guy who bragged about being able to "grab a woman's ......" because he was a celebrity and they let him do it.  In both of the examples used here, there has been a lot of support for sweeping incidents of sexual abuse under the table, ignoring it, claiming it is a ruse aimed at eliminating conservatives from leadership, while persecuting and blaming the victims.  Falwell Jr, several staff members and at least two Trustees are gone at Liberty as a result.  So are several executive committee members in the SBC, and its executive director, after just two years of leadership. 

Trump got rich and was able to gain political standing and power in spite of his abysmal values and complete lack of ethics and morals.  He had affairs, humiliated his wives, paid off prostitutes and porn stars and got elected to the Presidency with the help of conservative, Evangelical leadership.  He succeeded in spite of his moral behavior.  The support he gets from many of their followers may convince them that this stuff doesn't really matter and they can follow his example and get away with it too. The temptations have always been there.  The alliance with Trump simply serves to justify giving in to them.  

Democrats Are On a Roll: Now We Have to Control the Narrative

The signature legislation of the Biden administration is in position to be passed before the President finishes his first year in office.  It is popular, according to polling data, far above the mediocre approval levels reported for President Biden himself. I'm glad to see the President out, taking victory laps, making appearances and telling people what's really going on.  And I see that the Democratic party has planned a thousand such events across the country between now and the end of the year.  That's exactly what needs to happen.  Democrats need to "control the narrative" and get ahead on the benefits of these bills to the American people.  

Surely Democrats have people who can put out the kind of press responses necessary to change the doom and gloom attitude to a realistic perspective of what is a roaring economy.  Yeah, sure, there's inflation, expected in the wake of the COVID pandemic and the downturn that it caused.  As people start to get out again, businesses are trying to recoup their pandemic losses. This is still very much a capitalist, supply and demand economic system and recovery creates shortages and imbalances in places where production and service delivery slowed down when everyone was staying at home.  But the employment numbers are fantastic, unemployment claims are steadily dropping, job creation is at higher levels than it was under the former president and with the legislation that has already been passed, it's only going to get better.  

We are less than a year into what is already a much more positive and productive Presidency than we've seen since Barack Obama left office.  It's just ignorant to think someone without any political background or experience can succeed in the Presidency and we've just emerged from four years of failure that underlines that fact and provides evidence of its truthfulness.  Americans have been complaining about their government and "career politicians" since I789, when the constitution was ratified.  Well....you get the point.  But the fact of the matter is that career politicians have the kind of experience to make government work.  And Joe Biden is getting that done.  

Major Achievements Become Major Talking Points

I like lists.  They're short and to the point. 

• This administration had a distribution plan for the COVID vaccines that gave every American access to have one within six months. 
• We got out of Afghanistan, and while the collapse of the country, mainly due to the dubious diplomatic "deals" made by our previous President, required a quick exit, the logistics of which were massive, it was an absolutely remarkable feat, and the United States is finally out of what was one of the worst military and diplomatic situations it has ever been in.  
• The government is functioning according to its constitutional provisions, protecting citizens from the effects of a viral pandemic worse than anything we've seen in a hundred years.  
• The first big piece of Biden's signature legislation has been passed and signed into law.  We are anticipating the second piece after Thanksgiving.  After fussing, fighting and leaving the impression of "dissaray," it appears that pressure building on the reluctant has worked. 
• The economy, in spite of some inflation and high gas prices, is roaring.  Unemployment is diminishing far more rapidly than it did under the previous administration.  Applications for unemployment are dropping like a stone in a well.  
• The "Border Crisis" isn't.  Get away from right wing media and you will find that the United States is handling issues on its border with Mexico in exactly the manner that should be expected from a free country that has a history as a refuge from oppression.  There are large numbers of refugees from oppressive and impoverished areas of Latin America coming to the United States, but they are being processed as they should be as assylum seekers. That's how it should be done. 

Gas prices, by the way, are not under the control of the President.  It's a supply and demand issue in a capitalist economy and any conservative, right winger knows that to be true.  Gas prices were depressed during the last two years of the previous failed administration because COVID was keeping people at home and the demand for gasoline dropped by 40% during the last year.  It has come all the way back to within 5% of its previous peak, while production has not increased enough to keep pace with demand.  And so, the price goes up, as it always does in a supply and demand, free market economy. 

It's more than blatant hypocrisy for Republicans to be shrieking and flapping their lips about high gas prices when they are the direct result of the kind of economic system they think is fair and equitable. 

Everything's There For a Blue Wave Mid-Term

Eighty million Americans cast a ballot for Joe Biden in 2020.  It's only been a year since then.  I don't believe, not for a minute, that any of those eighty million people would waver in their decision and turn back to the orange menace, thinking that would now be a better way to go.  The threats posed by Trump and Trumpism are real and getting control of that narrative and making sure people know just how bad it would be for him to make another run for the Presidency is a key advantage for Democrats.  Millions voted for Biden to keep Trump from getting it and that's a fact that needs to continue to impress voters. 

But there's so much more.  The potential for the economic prosperity unseen in modern times is in the hands of the Democratic party and huge strides forward have been made.  The legislation that has already been passed, not what was originally proposed but still significant, is a major job creator.  So is the Build Back Better legislation.  They are gigantic investments in the future that are going to be paid for with money that wouldn't have been re-invested in the economy otherwise.  This is an agenda worth fighting for, and worth supporting those who are bringing it about.  

So let's get with it.  Democratic Party leadership, you need to get control of this narrative and start going head to head in combat with the extremist right wing propaganda that is out there.  We have free speech too, it's time to take advantage of it.  

The Social Agenda

Will someone please tell me why what's going on doesn't motivate you to step up and speak out?  Black lives do, indeed matter and in matters of policing and justice, African Americans are still enduring discrimination, prejudice and bias that no white American would put up with.  There's nothing socialist, communist or anti-Christian about being "woke."  Every American has free speech, freedom of conscience and has the right to believe in and practice the provisions of Critical Race Theory.  Every school district has the right to include its provisions in its social studies curriculum (even though it is not there now).  

People seeking assylum from political oppression or the oppression and deprivation of poverty should still be able to find it in the United States of America. They should be able to arrive at our border, ask for assylum, be allowed to cross and given the opportunity to support themselves while their request is processed.  They should not have to wait in Mexico, where the resources are not available to sustain their needs.  

Silenced by the Truth

Change requires understanding and the way things have developed in this country politically, pushed along by demagogues in the media like Rush Limbaugh and all his wannabees, Rupert Murdock, Christopher Ruddy, Marlon Maddoux, Steve Bannon and their ilk, who are propagandists, not journalists, is counterproductive to the will of the people.  In a constitutional democracy, where free speech is of high value, they must be discredited and bypassed, silenced by the truth, not by law.  

If you're reading this now, you are seeing a very small effort at changing the political narrative.  On any given day, this blog may get as many as I50 readers, or as few as 35 or 40, depending on how fresh the posts are and where they can be found.  I try to be factual, inspiring, gracious and understanding, and I consult multiple sources of information to make each post.  What affect that has on how people vote, I don't know.  But what if there were ten thousand other bloggers like this out there, as there very well may be?  Do we make a difference?  I hope so.  

Voting is the ultimate expression of the will of the people and Democrats, especially now, should not take that for granted.  Had the turnout in Virginia earlier this month been within a few percentage points of where it was in 2020, the legislature would still be in Democratic hands and so would the top three offices in the state, by a comfortable margin.  

And don't forget that there are Democrats in those red counties in rural areas that are big on the map but small in population.  I was looking at the Virginia results from last month, comparing them with 2020.  In one small county in Southwest Virginia, up in the mountains, Trump got I,775 votes in 2020, Biden got 766.  But in the governor's race, Youngkin brought in I,445 while McAuliffe got 335.  And that was the case in most of rural Virginia, where a lot of the Democrats just didn't turn out.  What was the difference?  Well, in 2020, the local and state Democratic party leadership ran ads on dozens of small town radio stations, including the one in that small county.  The ads were aimed at local Democrats to get turnout, not necessarily at changing minds. Combined with one short, door-to-door campaign, 85% of the Democratic voters turned out, compared to just 35% this year.  Radio ads on that particular station, still locally owned, run less than $I0 apiece when purchased in a package.  So for less than a thousand dollars, Democrats got turnout.  Multiply that across all of Virginia's rural counties and it would have netted more votes than McAuliffe would have needed to win.  

In 20I8, Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick took Arizona's congressional district 2 seat from Republican hands by running radio ads on small town stations in a largely rural county where less than 20% of the districts voters lived.  The ads, which ran as frequently as 20 times a day on three stations, cost her campaign less than $I0,000 but helped increase Democratic turnout in that area by 30%, more than enough to produce the margin of her victory.  In that same county, just a year before, a Democrat won the county attorney position by running ads on two of the same stations, including right through the Rush Limbaugh program that aired on one of them.  That's something to consider. 

There are a lot of people depending on the Democrats to win the 2022 mid-term elections and have a comfortable enough Senate majority to avoid narrowing power down to a couple of seats, like we've seen.  Now is the time to start buckling down on this and making it happen.  

Please call on us and let us know how we can help.  

Behind the Scenes, Among Trump Supporting Evangelicals, It's a Mess

More than two million church members have left the 45,000 or so congregations that make up the Southern Baptist Convention in less than a decade.  The slide started before Trump decided to run for President, in fact, attendance had started to plateau in the 1990's, in spite of the denominational leadership becoming more conservative, a movement going back to 1979.  But the decline has accelerated and steepened over the last five years, with membership losses of three quarters of a million since Trump took office after the 2016 election.  Attendance, which is a better measurement of actual participation, is down by more than million in a decade, half a million since the 2016 election benchmark. 

So what's going on?   Trumpie-style politics, lack of ethics and immorality, and a very un-Christlike political fight has been launched, courtesy of the Trumpie religious right political corruption. 

The Influence of Trumpism 

It started when Dr. Russell Moore, executive director of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (a small lobby organization advocating for whatever religious liberty issues Southern Baptists think are important) made it known that his own ethical standards would not permit him to support a morally corrupt, womanizing, adulterous philanderer for the highest government office in the land.  One other high profile SBC executive, Dr. Al Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, joined Moore in his dissent, mildly and with lots of explanation.  For Mohler, that lasted until he had used up most of his good will and wanted to run for convention President.  For Moore, it was consistent. 

That prompted a Georgia pastor who was chairman of the SBC's executive committee, Mike Stone,to push for an "investigation" into the ERLC and Moore, on a bogus claim that churches were withholding their denominational financial support because of Moore's stance and the ERLC board's continuing to support him.  Though the executive committee did not have the authority to investigate another entity, among the independent, autonomous boards of Southern Baptist missions, seminaries and commissions, Stone pushed ahead and put himself in a position to affect the outcome.  

In the middle of all of this, the Houston Chronicle published the results of an investigation it had been conducting, exposing hundreds of cases of clergy sexual abuse among Southern Baptist churches.  Several organizations had been pressing denominational leadership to look into this for years, and had been ignored and rebuffed.  Now, suddenly, the issue crashed into the convention like a cannonball, as serious and widespread as the Catholic church has had to face, and with similar multiple attempts to cover up specific instances by SBC leader.  

It was the responsibility of Moore and the ERLC, note "ethics commission" to take the initial steps and figure out how to help the convention navigate through the mess, which they did, admirably in fact.  But all of a sudden, because Moore is now leading the charge to bring about reform in the SBC on this chronic issue, a group of conservatives who were opposed to his leadership of the ERLC and who had started to organize in order to put like-minded political conservatives on trustee boards and leadership positions in the SBC, are also pushing back on any response from the SBC regarding sexual abuse.  Some are going so far as to say that the issue is a ruse being used to keep conservatives from getting control of anything in the SBC, even though they currently control everything.  Stone was the candidate they ran for President of the SBC in their June 2021 Nashville convention meeting.  He lost to Ed Litton of Alabama, a much less strident political figure who has been supportive of convention efforts, including those of the ERLC, to deal with clergy sexual abuse and listened to his best advisors when appointing the task force to deal with the situation. 

Keep reading, there's a whole lot more.  

After Litton defeated Stone on the second ballot election, conservatives (mostly church pastors active in the SBC somewhere) attacked him for plagiarism in sermon preparation.  No real evidence was produced, just recordings of a sermon he had apparently borrowed from his predecessor, J. D. Greear with permission.  Litton hadn't given a verbal attribution, but that opened the door for conservatives to continue to attack his character, claim most of his sermons are plagiarized or lifted from books, though no proof has turned up regarding any of the other multiple accusations. 

Prior to the 2021 Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting, Moore resigned from the ERLC, citing the pressure from the attacks on his character and leadership, taking a position with Christianity Today.  He left behind a couple of letters that someone from one side or the other "leaked," detailing much of what had been going on since the ERLC took up the sexual abuse issue, an embarrassment to those who were involved at the executive committee in forcing him out.  

This whole scenario just drips with Trumpie-style politics, backstabbing, double dealing, lying, character assassination and manipulation.  Fortunately, many of the SBC messengers at the convention could see what was going on, and were careful about casting their vote.  But this is far from over.  

Abandoning Christian Values for the Sake of Religious Politics

When conservatives used the denominational apparatus to gain control of the boards and committees in 1979, a predicted "split" of the denomination, as progressives and moderates left, really never materialized.  Most moderates, understanding the independent and autonomous nature of the local churches within the convention, made a few adjustments in their mission support and stayed in the SBC.  But I think the fracture this time is deeper, runs along political rather than doctrinal or theological fault lines, and the rhetoric has been far more vitriolic and hateful.  

There's a whole organization that has formed, known as the Conservative Baptist Network, attempting to get enough messengers from churches to elect the officers of the SBC who have sweeping appointive powers over who serves on the trustee boards and commissions.  It doesn't take long, looking at the information they put out, to realize the political motivation behind them.  There are a couple of "attack blogs" that are particularly vicious,(I won't post a link to that trash but if you google "SBC discernment blog, you don't have to go far to get to the really vicious stuff) and slanderous, since they provide no evidence for their claims.

This has all come about because one of the executive officers of the SBC was publicly and personally, by conviction, opposed to Trump. 

A Scandal in Lynchburg

Falwell Scandal

One of Trump's best friends among political Evangelicals is Jerry Falwell, Jr.  You can click the link and see that they share many of the same values.  

More of Trump's Evangelical Friends Sharing His Values

It wouldn't be fair to blame all of this on Trump.  Megachurches, which are not the Christian communities identified as the church that Jesus and the Apostles established, tend to be places where temptations to corruption are created by big money and lots of personal influence.  But it does explain their attraction to Trump.  These are the kind of people who think they can live on a different level than others, because of their influence and wealth.  Rules and laws are for others, not for them.  And they think God is going to hold their coat-tails and cheer them on while they enjoy themselves because they provide expensive religious entertainment every Sunday.  

From prison, two thousand years ago, the Apostle Paul wrote, 

"For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without any self-control. brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power.  Avoid such people"  II Timothy 3:2-5

The Christian Faith and Right Wing Evangelical Politics are Not Synonymous

Nathaniel Manderson: How Evangelicals Abandoned Christianity and Became Conservatives Instead Evangelicals Abandoned

I believe a Christian reformation in American Evangelical politics is desperately needed--not only to save my beloved faith, but to save the country.  Nathaniel Manderson, Salon, July 7,202I

If you've read this blog much, most of its readers and followers coming from posts on Democratic Underground then you know that one of the major themes of my writing is the departure of white, Evangelical Christians from what I call orthodox, Biblical doctrine and theology in favor of the worldly power of secular, right wing politics.  As wihte, conservative Evangelical Christians gained a place at the table, and then a position of dominance, in the Republican Party, they abandoned any pretense of depending on the power of God's Holy Spirit in achieving their mission and have turned to the secular power of government to get things done.  What they preach, politically, is not consistent with the Christian orthodoxy to which they lay claim.  

Dependence on secular politics achieves a conservative agenda when conservatives are in power, but it doesn't do a thing to help churches with Christ's "great commission" which defines the purpose of the local body of Christians known as the Church.  Nothing characterizes the shift more than selling out to Donald Trump, who, in exchange for the votes that a group of Evangelical leaders could deliver, promised to put their political agenda near the top of his priority list, along with making the rich richer by taking what little wealth the working class owns.  

Manderson does an absolutely excellent job of putting into words exactly what I have been thinking and feeling for quite some time, as well as helping to vent some of the frustration that is the main purpose of this blog, to vent and blow off steam by writing.  I also hope to find others who think the same way.  I'm a 'let's do something" kind of guy and I believe that I can make a contribution to the Democratic party beyond the money I give and the words I write.  I believe that those of us who have an intimate knowledge of Evangelicalism can, as Manderson suggests, find ways to break the political power of the right.  

This is Not a Comfortable Position

I learned, from my experiences at a university that was operated by the Evangelical denomination in which I grew up, and at one of the same denomination's seminaries, that what is widely accepted, taught and practiced in the churches bears little consistency with an interpretation of the Bible reached by studying it in the original languages and in its historical setting.  There are not many churches where you can apply what you learned to your career, if it is in Christian ministry, less so today because of the growing intensity of the politics.  

As an employee in an executive position for a Christian ministry organization I have been reprimanded for making comments on social media (Twitter and Facebook specifically) critical of Trump, specifically, critical of his immoral behavior and incessant lying.  I've been told, by others in ministry, including a pastor, that the were completely aware of Trump's depravity, one of them even laughed about how "fortunate" Trump was to be able to pull it off, but they voted for him anyway.  Because I value my position and the work that I do, I have to post anonymously.  I am not free to speak my conscience because even though my faith is based on Biblical truth, I'm a progressive Democrat politically, largely due to my Christian beliefs and faith.  Yet, it doesn't matter how well you do your job, or how orthodox you are, these days, if you don't agree with the political conservatives, they don't let you in their club. 

I've daydreamed about being able to work in a place where I could open up and not only express my political perspective, but use it to move progressive Democratic party values forward. Those of us who have this kind of educational and career background and experience as Evangelicals, can be experts in helping to break the power of religious right politics.  But my resume doesn't help me out.  It's taken a phone conversation and a morning meeting at a coffeehouse for my state representative, who is also the chair of the progressive caucus, to trust that I'm not some wild-eyed, right wing nut job.   

It's really only been during the last decade that the politics have created this hostile, intolerant atmosphere.  Oh, there are still a few people who won't speak to me because of what they heard me say or saw me post about Bush.  I got a lot of silence and sullen looks from fellow employees because I put a Kerry-Edwards bumper sticker on my car.  But it's different now.  I didn't let anyone I work with know that I went to Obama's second inauguration. 

I still have ways to express myself.  I contribute monthly to the DNC, I vote in every election and do my homework so that even when voting for school board, I won't support a Trumpie or a Republican, I visit with and encourage my Congressman, my Senators and my State representative, I post here and I carry myself with dignity.  In 2020, because Biden had a big lead in my state, I went to Wisconsin every weekend to knock on doors and help with phone banks.  And I keep hoping that I'll run into like-minded people in similar circumstances so that we can encourage each other and work to help people know the truth.

Know the Truth, Part 2

 America Cannot Give Evangelicals What They Want

In my previous post, I defined "Evangelical Christian" in doctrinal and theological terms, based on what has historically distinguished the Evangelical branch of Christianity from other Protestant denominations and groups.  There are those within many Evangelical churches and denominations who are fairly arrogant in their claims that what distinguishes them is holding to "conservative" theology and doctrine as opposed to more "liberal" theology.  Evangelicals claim two specific distinctives: 

• An emphasis on Jesus' "Great Commission", found in Matthew 28:I8-20 to "go, make disciples and baptize them", teaching them to observe all of Jesus' teaching.  It is this emphasis on active efforts to "evangelize" or convert "the lost" who are not believers in the triune God of the New Testament, that lends its name to the movement.  "Evangels" are those who preach good news.  
• The belief that the Bible is inerrant and infallible in all matters of faith and practice and is the sole authority over the church.  Most Evangelicals believe the Bible is inspired by God to the point where the very words used by the writers were "inspired," or "God breathed".  There is also a strong belief that the Bible can be interpreted literally by Christians because they are filled with, or indwelled with the Holy Spirit of God as a result of their conversion experience.  Without theological guidance, there can be a lot of lifting Biblical texts out of their context and literally applying them to current events, which leads to misinterpretation and error.  

There is an arrogance among many, though certainly not all, Evangelical Christians that their particular set of distinctive beliefs set them apart from "mainline Protestants" as the "true church" while all other branches of Christianity have been corrupted by tradition or pagan influence or by intellect and reason over spiritual discernment.  There is an anti-intellectual, anti-education movement within some groups of Evangelicals, particularly fundamentalist-leaning churches, that even rejects what is taught in institutions founded and operated by Evangelical churches and denominations. 

A Deal With the Devil

Rubin, in her Post column, says,  "In this context, White evangelical Christians' attraction to the thrice-married philanderer Trump is understandable, as is their support for the cruelest immigration policies (e.g. child separation) and the anti-Muslim travel ban.  It's all about race and religious identify, not policies found in Christian values and certainly not about finding a role model for civic virtues.  Trump was determined to protect White evangelicals against people of color and the decline in Christian identification; that was all they could hope for in a politician."

I call that a "deal with the devil."  Trump made a deal with prominent Evangelical leaders.  They deliver the votes of their followers, he appoints some of the judges they want, especially on the Supreme Court.  He could at least have made it look a little more like a religious experience and less like political dealing had he picked one of the more doctrinally conservative Evangelical pastors and joined his church, like First Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas, where one of Trump's most ardent admirers, Robert Jeffress, is pastor.  But he hasn't joined a church, and he calls Paula White, a "word of faith" heretic, who doesn't consider Trump's failings as sin, and who believes that money is the sole method of God's blessing, just for being faithful, his spiritual advisor.

Real Evangelical Values are Biblically Supported

Conservative Christians are fond of the term "Christian worldview" when it comes to the way their doctrinal and theological beliefs affect their behavior and lifestyle.  The problem is that when most of them use that term, they mean that there is no distinguishing difference between faith and conservative politics.  But the problem with that perspective is that it requires twisting Biblical texts so far out of their meaning and context as to make them unrecognizable and patently false.  Accepting political premises as truth is now the litmus test of Christian orthodoxy.  Not accepting conservative political premises as truth means a trip to hell, in the mind of many of those in the Christian political right. 

A true Christian worldview that is based on Biblical doctrine does not lead to a conservative political "worldview," which is not based on Biblical doctrine. In the same way that conservative critics pick apart progressive or liberal positions, claiming that they are not based on Biblical principle, neither are conservative positions based on Biblical principle.  They are political solutions to human problems, not spiritual solutions to human problems.  The local Christian church does not need the endorsement of, or the power of, the state to accomplish its mission and purpose.  In a true Christian worldview, depending on political influence and power to accomplish a purpose is a corruption of the church, placing faith in worldly power instead of in God's Holy Spirit, and is a subversion of the church's mission, which is to go, make disciples, baptize and teach.  

If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations--"Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch" (referring to things that all perish as they are used)--according to human precepts and teachings?  These indeed have an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.  Colossians 2:20-23, ESV

You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has lost its taste how can its saltiness be restored?  It is no longer good for anything, but is thrown out and trampled under foot. You are the light of the world.  A city built on a hill cannot be hidden.  No one, after lighting a lamp puts it under the bushel basket, but on the lampstand and it gives light to all the house.  In the same way let your light shine before others so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father in heaven.  Jesus' words from Matthew 5:I3-I6, NRSV 

Being "salt" and "light", as Jesus describes his church, is not being in control of the culture via the government, or being controlled by it.  So a true Christian worldview, believing that humanity's problems are spiritually resolved rather than by human effort, including government, would be opposed to virtually everything that is currently pushing Evangelicals into Trumpism, especially White Christian Nationalism, white supremacy, turning Critical Race Theory into a straw man to attack, ignoring Trump's complete lack of moral principle and his pathological lying, and either giving a pass to January 6th, or openly participating in it.  And in a Christian worldview, leaders are disqualified by their immoral, unethical behavior.  

"Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and free, but Christ is all and in all."  3:1I

Those are the words of the Apostle Paul, and the opening phrase is a remarkable statement to be made by a former Jewish rabbi and member of the Sanhedrin when speaking of the ethnic and racial composition of the local church. It becomes self-evident that white Christian nationalism is not supported by the Biblical text.  Period.

A multi-racial, multi-cultural democratic America is consistent with a Christian worldview.  A white, Christian-dominated America is not.

So What? 

What the Evangelical-Political right wants, according to Jennifer Rubin, is to become the state church of America, a pseudo-Israelite theocracy preserving God's chosen white European culture in an American "promised land."  That's a political perspective unsupported by a Christian worldview that is rooted in Biblical doctrine and theology, though it seems to have captured a majority of white Evangelicals in the United States, it isn't consistent with the way Jesus established his church to influence the world. 

The state endorsed and supported churches in European countries are dead.  They have become institutions rather than centers of spiritual life, subservient to the political systems that dominated them and changed their mission and purpose.  That's exactly what is happening to American Evangelicals who have bought into Trumpism.  They've already compromised their values to support Trump, a man who has built his public image on a foundation of immorality and greed that stands in direct contrast to Christian values.  They've separated themselves, by race, from spiritual influences among the Evangelical branch of the Christian church who hold to a Christian worldview based on Biblical principles. 

The Apostle Paul warned the church about being taken captive by worldly power: 

For the time is coming when people will not put up with sound doctrine, but having itching ears, they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own desires, and will turn away from listening to the truth, and will turn aside to myths.  2 Timothy 3:3, NRSV 

 

Know the Truth

Every now and then. I get a question from someone who asks how it is that I can be both an Evangelical Christian and also generally supportive of the Democratic party rather than the Republicans.  Sometimes the question is worded as a general assumption that being Evangelical is simply part of being Republican, or that being Republican automatically makes you Evangelical, as if there are political beliefs which must be accepted in order to also be Christian.  Others ask with the assumption that if I've accepted the reasoning behind certain Democratic party positions, or the science behind COVID-19, I should drop the Christian beliefs and convictions because they're not consistent.  

Drop the assumptions, be open-minded and I'll explain. 

There Are Plenty of Democrats in Evangelical Churches

My personal convictions are my own, not tied to trends or intended to fit in someone's box.  However, being Christian in an Evangelical tradition and also supporting Democratic candidates for public office is not as rare as the media makes it sound.  The polling data makes a big deal out of the fact that white Evangelicals have been overwhelmingly Republican, going as high as claiming that 84% of those who self-identify this way voted for Trump in 2020.  First of all, I question the accuracy of that figure.  Second, not all Evangelicals are white.  

In my own circle of friends made over a lifetime, most of them active and committed to their membership in an Evangelical church, I can identify, by their own words and actions, at least a third who regularly vote for Democrats, and half who didn't support Trump either time.  That's anecdotal, but its my experience.   

Classifying what constitutes "Evangelical" is different according to most media sources, some of which use the term exclusively applied to white or predominantly white churches while separating out Latino and Asian Evangelicals, and labelling African Americans as belonging to "historically African American" churches.  I use a set of core theological and doctrinal beliefs to identify Evangelicals, primarily those who believe in personal redemption characterized by a confession that "Jesus Christ has come in the flesh" (I John 4:2), belief that the text of the 66 books of the Old and New Testament canon are the measure of truth without error, and are authoritative for all Christian faith and practice and over all of the ministry of the church, and which place an emphasis on what is called Jesus' "great commission," which is to preach and teach the gospel leading to the conversion and instruction in the faith of those who are not Christians.  

The conversion experience itself is at the core of Evangelical theology.  It's not just a matter of acknowledging the authority of the teachings of Jesus, it's a matter of personal repentance and spiritual regeneration as a human being, created in God's image, is restored spiritually by a confession of belief in Jesus as the "Christ."  

Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.  I John 3:15

Little children, let us not love in word or talk, but in deed and in truth.  I John 3:18 [emphasis mine]

That's my theological definition of "Evangelical."  What that means is that more than half of American Evangelicals are not "white" by race or ethnicity, but are African American, Hispanic or of Asian descent.  The overwhelming majority of African Americans, 90%, regularly vote Democratic, as do 65-70% of Hispanics and 60% of Asian-Americans.  Added to the 16-20% of white Evangelicals who aren't Republican and I believe it is safe to say that at least half of American Evangelicals vote for Democrats running for office.  

The Trump Factor

It's hard for me to understand how Evangelical Christians could abandon their principles, especially since so many of them were outspoken against Bill Clinton's moral failures, to give such unqualified support to Donald Trump.  For people who claim to rest the foundation of their faith on Biblical truth, the support of Trump by Evangelicals is evidence of a collapse of orthodoxy.  The excuses that were used, "I'm not voting for a pastor-in-chief," or the old argument of voting for "the lesser of two evils" were appalling.  

Trump's record of immoral behavior, business and financial cheating and his disregard for the law in favor of making money is his character.  It's an image he chose, and carefully crafted at every opportunity.  He had an affair on his first wife with the woman who became his second wife, who got pregnant while he was still married to the first wife.  He had an affair on his second wife with wife #3 though apologists claim he was in the process of getting a divorce, which wife #2 disputes.  In between, Trump openly brags about multiple affairs, "hundreds," according to his own words.  

He's hung out with Evangelical leaders, but hasn't ever publicly declared anything that Evangelical Christians staunchly define as "repentance and confession" leading to a conversion or salvation experience.  In fact, he has, on multiple occasions, declared his belief that he doesn't need one.  The character traits he exhibited during his presidency, lying being the most pervasive and obvious, along with character assassination, are defined as "anti-Christ" by one of the Apostles in the early church.  And in spite of the support from some Evangelical leaders, he picked a "word of faith" heretic, Paula White, as his "spiritual advisor," someone who equates the pursuit of worldly wealth with spiritual blessing. 

January 6th

I wouldn't ever have voted for Trump under any circumstances.  But if there's one single event that seals the deal, especially with a big majority of voters, including some white Evangelicals, it was January 6th and his behavior leading up to that event.  He completely disqualified himself and exposed himself for who he really was with all of that.  There's no respect for the Constitution, or the government, it was all about him and his ego couldn't handle the defeat.  We will likely never know how much he was personally enriched by being President, illegally and unconstitutionally of course, but his attempt to overthrow the government and extend his Presidency beyond constitutional limits provides all of the necessary evidence to conclude that the man is a danger to the nation and should spend the rest of his life in prison. 

This event is not consistent with a literal interpretation of the Bible, specifically three passages, two authored by the Apostle Paul in Romans 13:1-7, and Titus 3:1 and one by the Apostle Peter, I Peter 2:13-17.  It is a demonstration of intolerance for the free expression of people who hold different political perspectives which make a democracy like the United States, with constitutionally protected rights, work like it's designed to do.  For a Christian claiming to be spiritually connected with God, participating in the January 6th insurrection would be an act of open rebellion, inconsistent with any Evangelical belief.

But What About the Social Agenda? 

Getting past all of the rhetoric which has gone to extremes as a result of the instant availability of social media, 24 hour, round-the-clock cable news networks and the conspiracy theorists and propagandists like Rush Limbaugh carving out their "niche," neither political party lines up well with Christian beliefs in general, much less with any specific sect or branch of Christianity.  

I could spend a lot of time on the history of Christian influence in the American government, including Jefferson's "wall of separation" phrase when he assured the Baptists that there would not be a "state church" supported by the government as there was in the European nations.  But let's cut to the chase. 

The fight over abortion rights is at the top of the list when it comes to issues gaining the support of voters on behalf of Republican candidates for office.   Were it not for this specific issue, there would be fewer Republicans in state houses and Congress, because many of them have been elected to office based on their public support for what they term as a general "pro-life" position.  But that support is almost universally interpreted as laws restricting or preventing access to an abortion, and opposition to any other means of providing medical and emotional support for women who are prone to choose abortion as an easy way out of a bad situation. 

And yet, since this became a rallying point for Republicans, back during the Reagan administration, the number of abortions performed in the US has only declined on two occasions, both during the administrations of Democrats in the White House and both times when financial assistance and social programs were put in place which provided health care and financial resources for women which gave them options other than abortion to resolve circumstances forcing a bad decision.  Whether they were in an abusive relationship, lacked education to make good choices or were simply living in poverty, the Clinton and Obama administrations succeeded in getting abortion numbers down significantly. 

You would think that among Evangelical churches and denominations there would be a plethora of agencies and organizations working to reduce the abortion totals by helping women in poverty get up on their feet and away from the circumstances in which they feel trapped.  You'd think that there would be adoption agencies which operate on contributions, buffering the cost of adopting children for families who can't afford the steep price tag.   You'd think that, but you would be wrong.  Such agencies and institutions do exist, but they are few, far between and not really capable of providing the kind of resources necessary to make a real difference. So how sincere, really, is the opposition to abortion rights and the desire to see abortion on demand end, if those who are hollering the loudest politically are dong the least that can be done, instead of the most.  

Control and Change the Narrative

The childhood taunt beginning with "sticks and stones" is defiant, but it's not really sound reasoning.  The fact of the matter is that taunts, name-calling and words do inflict pain and they can ruin reputations and be decisive in moral decisions.  The Republicans have used terms like "baby killer" to characterize elected officials who support abortion rights to their advantage.  And while that kind of name-calling, character assassination and exaggeration is not something Christians can support with any Bible doctrine, they indulge in it as well.  

That's where the narrative has to change.  If a Democrat who supports legislation that allows a woman to choose an abortion is a "baby killer" by definition, so is a Republican who refuses to use the government resources at their disposal to slow down the abortion rate, or an Evangelical who won't support an adoption agency or any kind of minimal care for women who consider abortion solely because they are left alone and in poverty.  At least that's the place to start. 

Sometimes the focus just gets twisted and put in the wrong place.  Would any Democratic party politician be unhappy if abortion clinics went out of business because women had resources to make a different choice? 

The American Democratic Republic

A republic is simply a representative form of democracy.  Nothing changes the fact that the United States is a democracy.  And even though it hasn't always been practiced the way that it is written, the constitution guarantees individual rights for all Americans, regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, religious beliefs or lack thereof, and it includes all of the choices they make which have not been determined to be prohibited by law because they interfere with someone else's individual rights.  There is no religious "test" for being American and there is no religious requirement.  

What that means is that the churches are free to exist, preach what they choose and how they choose, worship, distribute Bibles, get on the media, go to church when and where they like and believe whatever they choose to believe.  It also means that other citizens are free to not attend church, not be Christians, not follow the Bible's teaching, be atheists or agnostics and not share the same principles or practices at all.  They have the same constitutionally guaranteed rights as everyone else.  In spite of what some people might think, this is not a white Christian nation and it never has been, which is a clear indication that isn't what God ever intended.  

If rights are denied to some citizens, in spite of their equality, then they can be denied to any citizens in spite of their equality.  "Equal rights" is still a future goal, not a present reality.  There was still a lot of the influence of the old European aristocracy when the constitution was written and there have always been tendencies to go back in that direction, where only those who merit rights by their wealth are able to have them.  And shouldn't Christians be in the middle of the push for equality, instead of on the side of aristocratic arrogance? 

Taking Responsibility for Changing Perceptions

One of the main motivations behind this blog is to point out some of the distortions and inconsistencies between Trumpism and true Evangelical Christianity.  It takes knowing something about both to do so and instead of talking past people because of fixed points, there needs to be dialogue.  The reason many Evangelicals are attracted to Republicans, and through the GOP to Trump, is that far too many of them have no idea what they really believe when it comes to their faith, or they ignore their own pastors and theologians and turn Christian beliefs into superstitions or twist them to suit their own purposes.  Those who jump on the Trump political wagon tend to be those who are professing Christians because of what they think they can get out of it, not to be part of a true church that actually believes the teachings of Jesus and commits to the confession of I John 4:1-3.  

Undermining the false pretenses and assumptions of the Evangelical political right does not in any way undermine Christian confession or theology.  I would argue that following Trump and the political right not only undermines and cheapens Christianity, but using it for worldly political gain is anti-Christian.  I would also argue that the purpose of setting the record straight is not to make Evangelical Christianity a branch of the Democratic party either.  

"If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."  Christ Jesus, John 8:31b-32, ESV

Mandated Vaccinations Have Nothing to do With "Religious Freedom"

 Paul the Apostle equates being "prepared for every good work" with "submission to the authorities," when he writes to Titus, a bishop or overseer of several congregations working under Paul's apostolic authority. 

Remind them [the "elders" or leaders in the churches] to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle and to show perfect courtesy toward all people.  [Titus 3:1-2]

Two Kentucky Seminaries Sue to Block Vaccination Mandate

Vaccinations have been mandated by municipal, county and state governments in the United States for well over a hundred years, almost as long as medical science has produced them.  In all that time, there have been very few objections to getting them based on any kind of Christian doctrine.  There are a few groups who hold some very literal and specific views on accepting medical help that they see as being of human origin, but the bottom line is that American Christians, of virtually every theological and doctrinal background, have not used first amendment guarantees of religious freedom to refuse mandated vaccinations.  Until now. 

As I read the article cited above, I looked for, but did not find any Biblical or doctrinal reference from the leadership at either seminary supporting their opposition to the federal mandate.  More than likely, that's because the leaders at both of those schools are thoroughly familiar with the Bible and know that such a verse, interpreted in its correct context, does not exist.  It's clear, by the simple fact that tens of millions of Christians in the United States, and around the world, have submitted themselves or given permission for their children to be vaccinated against a wide variety of diseases, from diphtheria to the measles to smallpox and polio.  

Dr. Al Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, one of the two involved in the Kentucky lawsuit, himself offers no theological, Biblical reason for opposing the mandate, except the mandate itself.  In fact, Mohler has himself been vaccinated.  But he claims, "The larger issue here for Southern Seminary is religious liberty.  And on that we take our stand." 

On that, Dr. Mohler, you need to explain how something not religious in nature, and in fact having nothing to do with Christian faith or religion, something that you have personally declared has nothing to do with faith because you have participated in it, is a religious liberty issue.  

What both Southern and Asbury, the other Kentucky seminary in the lawsuit, are claiming is that because they are religious institutions, they should not be required to participate in a mandatory vaccination program ordered by the federal government.  The argument is that because the mission and purpose of the two schools is to train ministers, the mandate is a "distraction" from that mission and purpose and that it "changes" the relationship between the seminary and its students.  

There's still no religious liberty argument here.  Taking a vaccine is not distracting, deterring or preventing anyone associated with the seminary from any religious duty or practice required related to their seminary education or their future ministry.  Perhaps there is an interference argument if church services are limited capacity or closed by mandates, and I can see how that might bring up religious freedom issues.  But not this.  This is pure politics.  

Americans have as much religious freedom as they've ever had.  Being required to wear a mask or get a vaccination doesn't, in any way, interfere with the practice of a person's faith nor does it "coerce" anyone out of believing.  It is not persecution of the church, since the mandates apply equally to all employers, religious-based or secular.  

Romans 13:1-7 and I Peter 2:13-17

I would suggest that Dr. Mohler, as well as Asbury's leadership, examine their positions on and interpretation of these two passages of scripture, without adding in exceptions or possibilities that they didn't preach or teach until recently.  I read through a commentary on the Romans passage written by a professor at Southern and saw nothing noting an exception for Christians who are excused from following these teachings if they happen to not like the governing authorities or they are of a different political party than the interpreter.  

Christians in the early church who took these apostolic words seriously suffered tremendously under waves of persecution, many of them becoming martyrs for the faith, yet there was no complaining about the "unjust" nature of the Roman government or the fact that its emperors believed they were divine and set about persecuting and murdering those who didn't see that.  The obedience of Christians to the civil authorities was a testimony of their faith in Christ, as it should be in our culture today.  And this kind of resistance to promoting the common good by two theological seminaries teaching Christian theology does exactly what Paul and Peter were trying to prevent.

The precedent for mandated vaccinations in the United States goes back at least to the Supreme Court's Jacobson v. Massachusetts ruling in 1905.  It's not government over-reach or intrusion any more than drunk driving laws or auto insurance mandates.