So Exactly What Speech Does the First Amendment Protect?

No Indoctrination in Public Schools Unless It's Christian

A football coach in Bremerton, Washington is suing the school district he worked for because they suspended him for not following their directive, ordering him not to go to the middle of the football field after a game and kneel in prayer.  Initially, he did this after every game, alone, but as he continued the practice, players and others were encouraged to join him.  Eventually, it became an issue when parents complained that their kids who were players felt pressured to join him.  The former assistant coach Joe Kennedy, insists that joining him was voluntary, but the prayers took place on the school's football field and some of the players said they felt that if they didn't join in, they would lose playing time or be treated differently than those who did.  

The Constitution is pretty clear about religious freedom.  

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.  

So the question here is whether or not the coach going to the middle of the football field, kneeling in prayer constitutes a "government establishment of religion," or whether it is his free exercise of his religious beliefs.  The coach is a paid employee of a public school district, which is a government institution.  The field is school property, and the administration has the right to control how it is used.  

There is no law that says he can't pray, but since it has become a visible, public expression of a religious faith, specifically the Coach's Christian preference, has it crossed that boundary of "establishment"?  He has insisted that there is no coercion or requirement for anyone to join him.  He wasn't suspended from his position for praying, he was suspended for failing to follow the administration's directive telling him not to publicly kneel on the field after a game and pray, inviting others to join in.  They certainly have the prerogative to direct an employee's activity while he is on duty on their property, especially if they can prevent those employees from teaching about controversial subjects like critical race theory, sexual orientation or gender identity.  

It is most definitely religious influence, specifically Christian influence, prompting state laws against teachers discussing gender identity, sexual orientation or critical race theory in classes or at school.  Isn't it a violation of the establishment clause to pass laws which favor Christian perspective over other perspectives?  That's a rhetorical question, and it shouldn't require a court action or decision to determine.  Of course it is.  

And if a school district has the right to determine the content of its curriculum and instruction, and the government determines that it will not teach CRT, nor any content related to human sexuality, then to be fair, and in compliance with the law, it can not teach any Christian principle or perspective pertaining to any subject.  If teachers can be directed not to teach CRT or to "not say gay," then they should also be instructed not to pray or exhibit any religious belief or expression while they are at school.  If we believe in equal protection under law, then silencing teachers should include prayers in the center of a school-owned football field after a school event.  

Do We Have a Supreme Court That Will Uphold the Law? 

I don't have much confidence that this Supreme Court, with widely variant qualifications considered in the nomination and selection of justices, some of which do not have adequate education or experience to serve, will uphold the law.  Several of them are steeped in a fascist perspective, rather than a democratic one, and will be inclined to favor Christian beliefs over other religions or absence of religious beliefs.  With cases against the Florida "Don't Say Gay" law making their way through the courts even as we speak, along with this case in Washington state, they are going to have the opportunity to rule on this.  

There is a deeper question of whether the restriction of speech when it comes to CRT, gender identity and sexual orientation constitutes government "establishment of religion."  Being against principles related to all three of those areas is clearly and distinctly based on religious teaching.  Christianity, Judaism and Islam all have very distinct and clear principles related to all three of these issues.  I would go so far as to say that Christian opposition to Critical Race Theory is based on their belief that the Bible teaches white supremacy.  Not all Christians accept that, but the philosophical argument against it is a straw man, based on a very distorted and false representation of CRT that is connected to the white supremacist argument.  

The Football Coach's Actions Are Inconsistent with Christian Doctrine and Theology

Defiance of a directive from the school administration to stop going to the middle of their football field to pray after a game is an action that is disobedient to the Biblical narrative.  Two of the apostles of the early Christian church who wrote with the spiritual authority given to them by God write about the spiritual discipline of obedience to the governing authorities.  Paul makes these references in Romans 13:1-7, a clear statement that says governing authorities have been instituted by God and "Whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed."  

In Titus 3:1, Paul writes to one of his proteges who was a pastor of a church on Crete, "Remind them to be subject 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 every courtesy to everyone."  So from his perspective, it's about the Christian's testimony to their faith in Christ, not about their own desires.  There's no disobedience to or denial of belief in God represented by following the administration's instructions not to go to the center of the field to pray after a game.  By making a public spectacle out of his disobedience to the school authorities, he is disobeying these principles of scripture. 

Peter says the same thing in I Peter 2:13-17.  And remember, these apostles are not writing to the citizens of a democracy with religious and speech freedom.  They are writing to those who, for the most part, were not even citizens of the Roman Empire.  

Social Issues Have the Ability to Push the Political Pendulum Both Ways

There's little that has done as much to motivate Democratic and moderate independent voters in Florida, who represent half the electorate than Desantis' "Don't Say Gay" law.  That and the redistricting of Florida's representative districts, have sparked fundraising and get out the vote efforts that appear to be as active as those which pushed the state to turning blue back in 2008 and kept it there for eight years.  In order to carve up districts with a large African-American presence, some "safe" GOP districts had to go to a more marginal GOP majority which, in a mid-term election with hot button issues like this as a motivating factor, could easily backfire.  There's some polling data to indicate that this is already happening.  

The mistaken perspective that a majority of American voters will favor the kinds of Christian influences like open, public prayer will cost the GOP.  It's not just in the "blue states" where large numbers of voters have turned out to vote against this kind of constitutional violation.  States like Colorado and Nevada have become even deeper blue than they were over this kind of politics and it has substantially whittled down the Republican majorities in several other states, most notably Georgia, Virginia and North Carolina.  The racial overtones of CRT opposition will have a major impact in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Ohio, where a 3% increase in African American turnout in the midterms will be enough to flip lots of legislative seats and the federal positions.  

It is a myth, now perpetuated among many Christians, that their faith is being persecuted and threatened by the government because of "all of the restrictions placed on it."  What restrictions?  Name one.  Christians are as free as they ever were in this country to practice their faith as they choose and they are as free from persecution as they have ever been.  There are as many practicing Christians in Congress, the courts, the state legislatures, as there have ever been.  But that kind of freedom doesn't motivate votes.   

The Value of Integrity (Part 2)

Getting to the Bottom of Political Shenanigans in the Southern Baptist Convention *see note

I'm rarely left speechless when it comes to news about shenanigans associated with politics in my former denomination.  But these developments have left me as close to that as I've ever come.  

A conservative faction gained control of the denomination's officer positions, committee seats and trustee boards back in 1979 and have held control ever since.  They have enforced their own brand of theology and doctrine onto the denomination's mission boards and in particular, on its six theological seminaries where pastors, church leaders and missionaries are trained.  They've kept control up to this point, mainly because the more moderate churches more or less stopped engaging in denominational politics and found other ways to put their mission money to work.  

But the moderate leadership predicted that there would be conflict and division, even after they left, because, they said, that was the nature of the "conservative" approach that took control of the convention.  And sure enough, they've been right, though until these past three years, there hasn't been anything that has been as ugly, or that has threatened to split the denomination apart, as what's going on now.  

"These Conservatives" versus "Those Conservatives" 

The Southern Baptist Convention is the largest of about a dozen or so different Baptist denominations in the United States, along with many congregations that are independent of any denominational affiliation.  Baptist churches are independent, congregationally-governed churches.  There is no ecclesiastical connection between any church, no official "clergy recognition" or credentials, since each local church ordains its own pastors and elders.  Many Baptist churches choose to keep their independence and not affiliate with, or even cooperate with, other churches in any kind of structure.  

Denominational politics in the SBC is as old as the denomination itself, which dates back to 1845.  It was formed out of Baptist churches in the South who separated from what was then known as the Triennial Convention of Philadelphia because that body would not appoint slave-owners as missionaries.  While there are Southern Baptist churches in all 50 states now, the vast majority of churches and church members are found in the 11 states of the old Confederacy, plus Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, Delaware, Oklahoma and California.  Only 12% of the members live outside of those states.  

The argument that was made to support the need for conservatives to take over the convention in 1979 was that the leadership of the SBC was made up of too many "liberals" who did not believe that the Bible was the inerrant, infallible, written word of God.  "Higher criticism" was being taught to students in the seminaries, and liberal practices, like ordaining women to serve as pastors, were "creeping in" to the denomination.  To a certain extent, that was true, though the liberals in the SBC were nowhere near the theology of true liberals in the mainline denominations.  

There's been no change in the theological position of the SBC.  However, there's always been a doctrinal rift between the Baptists whose theology falls in the Calvinist tradition, and those whose theology is more Zwinglian or more Anabaptist.  In addition to this, the two "architects" of the original "Conservative Resurgence" in 1979 have fallen into disfavor as a result of the clergy sexual abuse scandal and their train of "admirers," mainly those who have lined up to kiss their rear ends in the hopes of getting a piece of the pie by being appointed to a committee or board, now find themselves and their personal kingdom building efforts, on the outside looking in.  So they've declared that liberalism now controls the SBC again, and have formed a political faction called the Conservative Baptist Network, to try and get some of their guys in the power positions to make appointments again.  And that's what this current fight is all about.  

Who in the World Did They Learn These Cut-throat Political Tactics From?  

That's a rhetorical question.  Actually, even back as far as I can remember SBC politics, which was around the late 70's when I was a student at an SBC-related college, the good-ole-boy, glad-handing, influence peddling, rear-end kissing game of prestige and prominence was a major factor in who got to become the "Baptist royalty" as the ministerial students in the theology program at the college called it.  But what's been happening now is straight out of the book called The Dirty, Low-Down, Unethical, Immoral Politics of Donald J. Trump.  

So, in simple terms, for those who aren't up on what's going on, there were two candidates who announced they were running for president of the SBC in June, when it meets in Anaheim, California (yes, across the street from Disneyland, which they once cancelled, er, boycotted).  One was a pastor from Florida, Willy Rice, who represented the current leadership and the traditional "conservatives" and the other, Tom Ascol, also from Florida, a Calvinist who represents the faction that formed the Conservative Baptist Network and says, without a shred of evidence, that the current leadership of the SBC is leading it back down the path of liberalism which includes "wokeness," and bowing to feminism, because it is finally giving attention to the victims of decades of sexual abuse by clergy in Southern Baptist churches.  

In a previous article on this subject, Signal Press: Cancel Culture on the Right, I wondered who the "informant" was, that person from outside Pastor Rice's church who called to let him know that it wouldn't be a good idea to try and run for president of the SBC after having ordained a former sexual abuser as a deacon.  The SBC passed a strongly worded resolution several years ago, right after this massive scandal broke, encouraging churches to prevent any former sex abusers from holding any church leadership positions.  Was there an ulterior motive behind the informant's actions?  Was this individual associated with the Conservative Baptist Network whose candidate, Tom Ascol, would stand a better chance if Rice stepped out?  

As it turns out, the "informant" was the sexual abuser's pastor when the incident occurred.  Not only did he know this deacon personally, he had developed a very close friendship with both he and his wife as he ministered to them and walked them through the aftermath of the sexual abuse.  They were close friends for years, and give the credit to this specific pastor for helping them get their lives back together, overcome the abuse, and receive God's grace, mercy and forgiveness, serving in church leadership at their pastor's recommendation.  Yes, that pastor is the one who contacted Willy Rice and started the ball rolling toward his decision to back out of the SBC presidential race. No one else had that information, no one else said anything.  That pastor has made his support for Tom Ascol, CBN, and his opposition to current SBC leadership, well known. Is that enough to fairly conclude that this act was politically motivated?  

This is one of those kinds of things that really shakes my confidence in church leadership.  Stepping into the  business of another church is contrary to both Baptist polity, since churches are independent and autonomous, and also to Biblical principle, at least, in the way it is interpreted by Baptists who believe the Bible to be inerrant and infallible.  This pastor has known about the sexual abuse for seventeen years, and he's known it all through the time that the deacon has been ordained at Rice's congregation, because they have been close friends ever since.  Why didn't he bring this up prior to the ordination, instead of now, when Rice has announced his candidacy and isn't the preferred choice of CBN?  And it should be noted that this pastor is the sole instigator of this issue.  

And what about the deacon and his wife?  I hope their Christian faith is strong enough to handle this monumental disappointment.  What they thought had been forgiven, and put behind them, as the scripture says God does with our sin, an event seventeen years in the past and, they thought, forgiven and forgotten by God, has become a newly opened, bleeding, painful wound.  Both they and the victim must now go through this pain and misery once again because their pastor, a man whom they trusted more than anyone else in this world, has made this an issue once again for the sake of denominational politics.  

There Are Lots of Far-Reaching Consequences

There are at least two Baptist pastors in this issue who have openly expressed a view that is contrary to the core doctrine of the Christian gospel.  By their actions, they have denied the sincerity of a Christian's testimony and the promise of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.  I'm not minimizing the seriousness of the sexual abuse that was committed.  But neither does the man who committed it.  He did everything that was required of him to demonstrate true repentance.  His former pastor provided him with that guidance, and his current pastor, Willy Rice, and his current church, who knew about the sexual abuse because he had admitted to it and accepted responsibility for it, determined that he had exhibited the qualifications to be ordained as a deacon.  So one pastor, who helped the deacon spiritually with repentance and restoration, undermined everything by interfering with another church's autonomy, and the other one led his church to undo the ordination and take back their recognition of his restoration to faith. 

There was enough confidence in this man's spiritual restoration, that he had been appointed to Florida Governor Desantis' Faith Advisory Council.  

For as the heavens are high above the earth, so great is his steadfast love towards those who fear him; as far as the east is from the west, so far he removes our transgressions from us.  Psalm 103:11-12, NRSV

Apparently there are some passages and verses of scripture missing from some people's Bibles. 

The Conservative Baptist Network is an angry group that first met in the home of former Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary President Paige Patterson's to film their informational video and launch their movement.  Patterson was one of the architects of the original "conservative resurgence" in the Southern Baptist Convention and used his influence to put himself into the most influential committee and trustee board seats, and eventually to obtain the presidential leadership of two of the SBC seminaries.  He was dismissed from Southwestern as evidence mounted of repeated mishandling of sexual abuse cases among students.  CBN has revived the old Conservative Resurgence cries of "liberalism" against those who ousted Patterson and who currently lead the SBC, citing "wokeness," "support and teaching of CRT", and what they claim is a "feminist push" for church leadership.  The only example they actually cite in support of that, from within the SBC's entities, is the recent efforts by the ERLC to recognize and minister to the female victims of the massive sexual abuse that has occurred for decades, perpetrated by SBC clergy.  

They have, to date, produced no evidence whatsoever for their charges, but they have engaged in some very anti-Christian tactics on social media, including some blistering false accusations against the current SBC President Ed Litton, who defeated their first candidate for president in Nashville last summer at the largest gathering of messengers in decades.  What's going on here, with Willy Rice, is just more of the same.  

This isn't what Jesus would do.  It is what Donald Trump would do. It lacks integrity, character and honesty in every way possible.  

And that's all I need to say.

*Baptist News Global is an independent, Baptist news agency, founded by the merger of the Religious Herald, the news journal owned by the Baptist General Association of Virginia and the Associated Baptist Press, the independent news agency partnered with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, one of the church groups which stopped participating in the Southern Baptist Convention when the conservative resurgence leadership took over.  Though it does maintain a partnership relationship to cover events and news related to CBF it is independently owned, autonomous and self-supporting.  

 

The Value of Integrity

 Houston Chronicle Investigation of Sex Abuse Scandal in the Southern Baptist Convention

Vox Article on Jerry Falwell Jr. Scandal at Liberty University

SBC Executive Director Resigns

Church Discipline Causes Wife of Child-Abusing Husband to be "Shamed" in Front of Congregation

Ravi Zacharias, Hillsong Sex Abuse Scandals

Hillsong Pastor Resigns After Sexual Scandal

Kimes' Resign from Hillsong

This is what a five minute search of the internet produced about all kinds of high profile sex abuse issues and scandal among conservative Christians, some of them very high profile Republican supporters and flag wavers.  These are real events, as opposed to what the conspiracy theorists and extremist news media personalities are claiming when they level charges as "grooming," So apparently, being "conservative" does not create some kind of protection, or immunity from sexual abuse.  These are crimes that actually were committed, not imagined possibilities of what might happen.  

Look, no one is perfect.  And these kinds of things seem pretty spectacular because they run so contrary to the moral values that are preached and taught by the Christian church, so they do tend to get a lot of media attention when they happen.  But I don't see anyone proposing legislation which would remove the rights and freedoms of all Evangelical Christians or Catholics out of fear of sexual abuse as a result, even though the kind of "grooming" that is being used as a political weapon by the right is happening in their own backyard with relative frequency.  Maybe that's where Republicans should focus their attention.  

I am a Christian, self-identified by what I believe and by conviction, and in accordance with the words Jesus Christ and at least two of his Apostles used to define the term.  I look at these news stories about real sexual abuse that has occurred among Evangelical Christians.  It's sickening and disgusting.  Most of these incidents occurred as abuses of power in the absence of true Christian faith, or at least, in some kind of facade posing as Christian faith.  These acts, every single one of them, were committed by someone who either set aside their convictions, or was faking it and never had any Christian faith or conviction in the first place.  

The scandal that has occurred within the Southern Baptist Convention, which is the nation's largest Evangelical denomination, is proportionately deeper and wider than the similar clergy abuse scandal in the Catholic church.  And if you look at all of these incidents, which are only a small handful of the more recent ones, or at least, recently reported ones, it would appear that the likelihood of experiencing some kind of sexual abuse in an Evangelical church is much higher than the imagined likelihood of being "groomed" by someone who is transgender, gay or lesbian.  These are real cases, not nebulous accusations based on conspiracy theories. They are all evidence which confirms the fact that sexual abuse is a real problem among conservative Christians. 

As a Christian, I was taught to value integrity, and to always tell the truth.  There were times in my life when I didn't do that and I regretted it, or, at the very least, spent an inordinate amount of time worrying that someone would find out.  The conspiracy theories, making accusations that certain groups of people, because of their political affiliation, are therefore child abusers, is ridiculous nonsense, but it goes deeper than that.  These are lies, for the most part, unsupported by factual information or data.  Are there gay, lesbian or transgendered persons "grooming" others and committing sexual assault? Yes, and those cases disproportionately make the news, but there are far fewer of them than the reported cases among those on the political-religious right. But that doesn't make all transgendered, gay or lesbian persons guilty, any more than the record indicated by the news articles cited at the beginning of this post makes all conservative Christians guilty of sexual harassment and assault, and of "grooming" their victims, either.  In fact, there is nothing comparable among them to the clergy sex abuse scandals mentioned above, which has been a chronic problem for decades, or to the Catholic church abuse and "grooming" scandal, but that's the logic being used by those who are making those accusations and citing false, phony conspiracy theories, rather than actual facts, as support for their politics.

They are, apparently, generating some push back. 

Mallory McMorrow's Takedown of the "Anti-Woke" GOP Conspiracy Theorists 

What Christianity Actually Teaches

In Christian doctrine and theology, sin is sin, and everyone is guilty of it.  "All have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God," says the Apostle Paul, writing to the Christians in Rome in the first century.  To the religious leaders who brought a woman to Jesus who had been caught in adultery, his response was "Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her."  His response to her was "Has anyone condemned you?  Then neither do I condemn you.  Go your way and from now on, do not sin again."  There's nothing in anything Jesus or the apostles instructed that singles out specific sins or sinners for specific punishment.  "For the wages of sin is death," says the Apostle Paul to the Christians in Rome, "but the free gift of God is eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord."  

Those words, "Go your way, and from now on, do not sin again," apply to every person, and no one, in this life, lives up to them.  No one.  

Love God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself.  Those are the two commandments Jesus said were the most important.  His Sermon on the Mount, along with the four gospel accounts of his three-year ministry, puts an emphasis on the belief that the way a Christian treats other people is a testimony to the veracity of their faith.  Jesus goes to some dramatic extremes to illustrate the point, using a parable about a Samaritan, a man who was despised by Jews because of his mixed racial and ethnic background, to illustrate it, along with some very pointed, and difficult to follow, instructions, like turning the other cheek, going the extra mile and praying for enemies.  

And on this particular subject, pointing fingers at the sins of others, Jesus was very clear.  

"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor's eye." 

Given the politics of the times, it is more than fair to link these scandals among the Evangelical branch of Christianity to the Republican party.  These highly visible scandals among Evangelicals are definitely the log in their eye, while they use people's fears, biases and bigotry to create an enemy in order to motivate someone's vote.  There's a boundary line here, between genuine Christian faith and practice, and the phony, counterfeit, politicized "Christianity" used to push partisan politics which demonizes specific sins while ignoring others.  Jesus actually had a lot more to say about adultery, fornication and unfaithfulness to a marriage, something many political pseudo-Christians should consider before throwing stones for political purposes. 

Nowhere does the Christian faith instruct or promote Christians becoming crusaders against other sinners.  Each Christian is called to testify to the grace they have been given by God, through Christ,  which is the only way their own sin has been overcome and forgiven.  And that's only demonstrated by a show of grace and mercy, gentleness and respect, which follows the example of Jesus, not personal attacks and condemnation.  

The political middle-to-left considers its diversity as its major strength.  Don't step away from that diversity and acceptance and trash the entire Christian faith because of the right wing political aberrations of it that are happening in American politics.  True Christian faith places a high value on integrity, and equality of humans created in the image of God.  It is in the business of redemption and restoration, not condemnation and destruction.  Distinguish between what is authentic and what is counterfeit, and accept those values as an asset.  

President Biden's Seven Biggest Achievements So Far

Newsweek: Joe Biden's Seven Biggest Achievements in His First Year as President 

Newsweek had some interesting observations back in January as President Biden wound up his first term in office as President.  I expected a lot would get accomplished, as we made the switch from an inept, ineffective, inexperienced failure in the White House to someone who knew how to make government work to get things done for the people.  His predecessor never figured that out, partly because he was unable to comprehend that running the government is not like running a business, which is set up for self benefit, and partly because he was so focused on self-benefit that he was incapable of determining the needs of his constutients.  And that needs to be said, to contrast the difference between the two men. 

There have been far more than just seven achievements, even if you categorize them by "biggest," which makes the matter of deciding how to rank them a matter of opinion.  Getting the infrastructure bill passed and handling COVID relief, along with vaccine distrubution, were definitely major achievements.  The whole economic recovery, which involved some major policy changes, along with the record job growth, should also be at the top of the list.  

"Giving Credit Where Credit is Due" is a News Media Failure

The Biden Administration isn't really getting the kind of credit it deserves for COVID relief or for the economic recovery and job growth.  Those are major achievements, not things that just happen by letting them happen.  Ignoring the extreme right wing media sources, the reporting on both of these achievements in the mainstream media has been underwhelming and medocre at best.  In newspaper jargon, these are front page headlines, and there should have been a parade of cabinet members--from the most diverse executive branch in terms of minorities and women in history--on the Sunday morning news programs and through cable news.  But with the exception of the three prime-time hours on MSNBC and their weekend programs, and two of CNN's regulars, the coverage was nothing close to what the achievements warranted. 

Kudos to Newsweek for mentioning a couple of achievements that are, in my opinion, major, but which have received little attention, and for putting them in this top seven list.  One is the suspension of the federal death penalty.  Finally we have a President and administration who understand the language of the constitution when it addresses "cruel and unusual punishment."  Along with that is the highest number of federal judges appointed since the Kennedy administration, with more diversity as far as the number of women and minorities appointed, than ever before.  The Biden-Harris administration has kept its promises in this regard, especially to African American women.  

Newsweek also gave credit for the restoration of the United States to its prior commitment to combat climate change, rejoining the Paris Climate Accord.  While I see this as an achievement, I am in favor of putting this in the same place with treaties, which would require a two thirds vote of the Senate to roll back once it's done.  Oh, I know, there's no way to get a two-thirds vote to approve it in the current Senate, so we have to work on making that happen.  But the world can't afford for us to keep moving back and forth on this.  

What Newsweek Didn't Recognize, But Signal Press Does

There are two major achievements of the Biden administration that I believe will go down in history as major achievements. Even if it hasn't been handled as it should have been in the current narrative, the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan was a major achievement in that it reversed one of the worst foreign policy decisions ever made in all of American history, and it was the proverbial can that got kicked down the street, trash left behind by a previous administration for the current one to clean up.  

The former President 45 should have been preparing a transition of office between November and January, providing the incoming Biden administration with intelligence information on Afghanistan which would have included the reality of the situation and the possible rapid collapse of the army and government instead of engaging in criminal activity to try and subvert the constitution's peaceful transfer of power.  Valuable time was wasted, and the blame for that should fall squarely on the incompetence of the Trump administration.  

What President Biden achieved was an airlift that evacuated over 100,000 people--Americans and those in Afghanistan whose lives would be endangered if they remained because of their connection with the U.S. and the previous government.  There were 13 additional American casualties involved, regrettable, but a relatively small number when considering the circumstances.  

The failed attempt at "nation building" by the U.S. in Afghanistan will go down in history as one of the worst foreign policy decisions ever made by an American President, and it is Bush's failure, along with the horrible, ruinous decision to invade and attack Iraq on false pretenses.  Trump's decision to legitimize the Taliban and undermine the legitimately elected democratic government of Afghanistan led to their ability to take the country back to a fundamentalist Islamic dictatorship, exactly the opposite outcome of the proclaimed aims of Bush.  

The other achievement is a current development.  Gathering intelligence on Russian activity aimed at invading Ukraine was probably a routine military assignment, but making the decision to announce it to the world, exposing Putin's intentions, and earning major credibility when it turned out to be correct, was a genius moment.  Correcting another major foreign policy mistake by the former President 45 and leading the NATO alliance into a solid front against Russian aggression has been a tremendous achievement, and the manner in which this President has handled the whole think, including knowing exactly how much pressure to put on Russia, where and how to level sanctions and how to approach giving weapons and financial help to the Ukrainian government, has been nothing short of historically remarkable.  

These two achievements alone, in other, less politically polarized times, would be fueling news media speculation about the President's excellent chances of re-election three years hence, and predictions of his party's ability to secure its majority in the mid-term elections.  And I haven't even mentioned the January 6th investigation, which could turn out to be the Democrats' greatest political achievement in two decades.  A summer full of televised hearings, along with all kinds of reminders about what this President has acheived in just over a year should be a strong foundation for members of Congress running for re-election.  

Winning the 2022 Mid-Term Elections Means Turning Out 2020 Voters

Last fall, in November, I determined that I wasn't going to listen to the "conventional wisdom," or accept excuses for doing nothing because "the party in power always loses the mid-term elections."  What that usually means is that after making an effort to win a Presidential election, voters decide to handicap the President they elected by putting the other side in control of the legislative agenda.  Both of the last two Democrats who have been in the White House were highly successful Presidents, but think about how much more they could have done if they'd have had a favorable Congress through at least three fourths of their two terms.  

Democrats need to keep their House and Senate majorities, and expand them if possible, and it is possible.  We need to break the filibuster and get things done during the next two years of President Biden's first term.  The constitution will not be recognizeable if we don't succeed.  

It's up to us, the "rank and file."  We need to take the initiative, not wait around for someone else to do something or wring our hands because "the party in power always loses the midterms."  We have the power and the ability to win this, and we need to step up and do everything we can to make it happen, especially committing to show up and vote.  

I am just one person, but there is plenty that I can do.  Prior to the 2020 election, I volunteered with a group to spend two weekends going door to door to get out the vote in suburban neighborhoods in Racine and Kenosha Counties in Wisconsin, just a half hour from my home.  Did it make a difference?  The Democratic turnout in both counties was up 2% in 2020, and that translates into about 6,000 votes.  Biden won Wisconsin by just over 20,000 votes.  I don't know exactly how many people we motivted and encouraged to go to the polls but I know we convinced some who were sitting on the fence or who weren't planning to cast a ballot.  

I'm involved, already, with "get out the vote" efforts through the DNC website, and two that I found someone posted in a reply on Democratic Underground.  I give every month, as much as I can afford, to the Congressional election fund of the DNC.  Every now and then, I'll send an additional $20 or so to someone in a key battleground state like Rafael Warnock, or to the Pennsylvania Democratic party for their senate candidate, or to North Carolina Democrats.  

I'm on twitter and facebook, where I have more than 500 combined contacts, many of them Republicans and I keep linking all of the factual information I can find.  I blog here, for something like 1,400 readers a month, many of those linked to social media contacts as well and I have decided that the themes about which I write and the information I cite will run along the themes of the evidence against Putin-loving Republicans and the effects of Russia's war on Ukraine, on January 6th over and over, on how Trump politics are completely incompatible with Christian beliefs and convincing Evangelicals "on the margins" to get on this side.  

I've lost friends and followers on social media because of it, but I don't care.  I've made a lot of new ones and I've learned that there are a lot of people who regret supporting Trump in 2020.  While they are reluctant about supporting Democrats, the door is open to clear out all the conspiracy theories and false information and provide the truth.  When I posted an article from a professor in Oregon who clearly explained that the GOP has everything about CRT, and about education regarding sexual orientation and gender identity completely wrong, I actually got a few responses from people who had their eyes opened.  

But I think the biggest job ahead is simply getting voters to the polls.  Eighty million people cast ballots for President Biden in 2020 and, given the kind of turnout a midterm election generates, getting about 60% of those people back, voting the same way, will yield a Democratic-controlled Congress for the next two years.  I don't know why we can't get 100% of those voters back, since it is pretty clear the Trump administration was a disaster and after January 6th, we know what a GOP majority will do.  We can't let that happen.  

Anytime you see something here worth sending elsewhere, even if it just annoys your Republican contacts on social media, feel free to link.  There's no subscription charge or fee, it's free.  I am an amateur but I have training in journalism and in history and political science, so sometimes there might be something worth reading and sharing and it might reach someone who is thinking about staying home on election day, alarm them and get them to the polls.  

And join me in the effort.  Just go do it, you don't need permission.  WE CAN DO THIS!

Graham Duplicity an Example of How the GOP has Become a Political Cult

 Valerie Biden Owens: "Graham is an Unrecognizable 'Sycophant in Chief"

Here's Lindsey Graham in 2015 quoted in the Huffington Post: 

"The bottom line is if you don't admire Joe Biden as a person, you have a problem.  You need to do some self-evaluation.  He is as good a man as God ever created."  

And in the same year, in an interview with CNN:  

"He [Donald Trump] doesn't represent my party, he doesn't represent the values that the men and women who wear the uniform are fighting for."  

But of course, Graham is capable of remarkable duplicity when he thinks he needs to score political points. Valerie Biden Owens points to these Graham quotes in her new book Growing Up Biden" and says, "This is inconcievable to me."  

It is to me, too.  

I'm particularly disappointed in Graham because we share a common background of having been raised and involved in the membership of a Southern Baptist church.  As the Republican party evolved, adopting first the values of Rush Limbaugh, which completely undermined the kind of negotiation and dialogue required for government to work, then those of former President 45, who had no use for democracy and desired to simply ignore any disagreement and do as he pleased, using congress for token support.  Apparently, Graham's relationships are now conditioned upon agreement with the political position he is backing, and even that isn't based on his own beliefs and conviction, but on his loyalty to the former President, not to his constituents or his country.  

How do you go from "He's as good a man as God ever created" about President Biden, and "He doesn't represent my party," and more pointedly, "He doesn't represent the values that the men and women who wear the uniform are fighting for," to what he says and does now, without explanation and almost overnight?  How do your values change that quickly?  Either it's an act, because he thinks that's what he has to do and say to stay in office, or someone has something on him that he doesn't want known, or money is involved.  And it could be a combination of all three.  

Republicans are Suffering From "Limbaughism" and "Trumpism"

There are plenty of Democrats who are influenced the same way.  Personal benefit, campaign contributions that help keep them in office, lack of a patriotic vision or simply caring more about the office than the people it is supposed to represent are all temptations that everyone in government is subject to and being a Democrat isn't a guarantee of integrity or honesty or remaining true to conviction.  I was disappointed in President Clinton, for putting personal interests ahead of the responsibility he had as President.  But he wasn't working to undermine the constitution and subvert democratic rule.  

The Republicans have embraced ideology that undermines the constitution.  There's very little "working across the aisle," and the Republicans who still, on occasion, determine to vote their conscience rather than voting total loyalty to a person, are turned into pariahs and punished by their party's congressional leadership.   They are offering no solutions to resolving the issues they claim are problems, but stand in the way of those who are actually trying to do something, then blame them because nothing happens.  

Graham sometimes has moments where he's his old self, and will say or do something that resembles independent thinking, but it doesn't last long.  He's no Mitt Romney, Lisa Murkowski, Adam Kinzinger or Liz Cheney, by any stretch of the imagination, nor even a Susan Collins.  These individuals only stand out because the rest of their party is so lacking in integrity, but with the exception of Kinzinger and Cheney, bi-partisan cooperation and party integrity is not nearly as visible in the others as it once was.  

"Growing Up Biden" Is A Narrative in Genuine Family Values

Valerie Biden Owen's book came out at a good time.  We're so polarized now that there are people who won't pick up the book because of who wrote it, but there will be a lot of others whose favorable opinion of President Biden will be restored by what she writes.  Joe Biden is a genuine person, the real deal, he doesn't hide behind a facade or try to create some public image of himself that doesn't exist in reality.  You get what you see. I imagine he's been hurt by the loss of what he considered real friendships from his time in the Senate.  He hasn't changed, he's the same Joe Biden, but they've changed and it's become painfully obvious that their values do not match his values.  

And that includes Lindsey Graham.  

Does the Conservative Baptist Network Represent a "Capitulation to Culture" and "The Functional Embrace of Worldly Ideologies and Practices"?

Conservative Baptist Fellowship's List of Complaints Against the SBC 

In a word, yes, it does. 

For those who aren't familiar with the denominational politics within the nation's largest Evangelical denomination, and how it has been corrupted by the influence of secular, Trump-style politics, the Conservative Baptist Network (CBN) is made up of a group of pastors and churches within the Southern Baptist Convention who claim that the denomination is, once again, going "progressive" and that it needs to have conservative values restored, and they are the ones ordained by God to do this.  They have, as you can see from their list of complaints, some neblulous, vague examples of how that's happening, none of which have anything to do with the leadership in the denomination but then, in Trumpworld, nothing connects to reality or facts, either.  These are the apparent issues:

• The SBC appears to be heading toward a measure of "wokeness" because it didn't adopt an almost word-for-word resolution on Critical Race Theory from an ultra right political source filled with inaccurate, misleading falsehoods and instead, adopted one that reflects a more accurate perspective of what CRT really is.  The convention resolution that was adopted still, by the way, did not acknowledge CRT as legitimate. 
• They cite the presence of programs and instruction in their seminaries, most notably Dr. Walter Strickland, who heads the "Kingdom Diversity Initiative" as a vice-president at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, as evidence of "wokeness" and CRT being taught at the seminaries.  Yes, Dr. Strickland is an African-American, and was on the resolutions committee that adoped the resolution which did not acknowledge CRT's legitimacy. 
• They claim that the denomination has become more accepting of women in pastoral and preaching roles.  They cite the ordination of two women on the staff of Saddleback Valley Community Church in California, which is, by membership, the largest church in the Southern Baptist Convention, and the ministry of Beth Moore, a popular author and teacher of women's ministries.  
• They cite the ongoing investigation into the clergy sex abuse scandal recently exposed by The Houston Chronicle, as evidence of the "confusion" and misdirection of the SBC's leadership.  But they fail to acknowledge that one of the founding steering council members was serving as President of the Executive Committee when it launched two unauthorized investigations into the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, attempting to shut down their response and undermine their attempt to minister to the victims by creating awareness in the convention of what had occurred.  

Tilting at Windmills

So far, in spite of a social media barrage of accusations, CBN supporters have turned up no evidence to prove that anything they're complaining about is actually happening in the SBC, or that it is connected in any way to the current denominational leadership.  Many of their steering committee members have been involved in multiple SBC trusteeships, committee memberships and officer positions for several decades, so if they are accusing the SBC leadership of causing "all of this confusion", which includes "declining numbers of baptisms and church membership" and the sexual abuse scandal, it seems more than a little counterproductive to have some of these same people they claim are responsible as founding directors of their own organization. 

Since they can't really come up with a factual list of examples, they've couched their complaints in nebulous, vague terms aimed at convincing Baptists who don't keep up with their denomination's politics that the "liberals" are in charge.  One of the better phrases, not because it actually describes what it going on but because it is both duplicitous and hypocritical at the same time, is to accuse "current SBC leadership" (which includes at least half of the CBN's current sterring committee) of "The functional embrace of worldly ideals and practices."  

Who's Embracing What? 

The two real issues at the bottom of CBN's organization and effort are both based on personal loyalty to an individual rather than on any real problems that are occurring in the SBC.  The first individual is Paige Patterson, the former President of Southeastern and Southwestern Seminaries, and perpetual SBC officer and committee member who was one of the "architects" of the original "conservative resurgence" movement in the SBC.  The other is former President Donald Trump.  

It wasn't an accident that the CBN was organized in Patterson's personal library in his home.  He was "retired" from service as President of Southwestern Seminary after mis-handling several cases of reported sexual assault, both at Southwestern and prior to that, during his term as president of Southeastern.  He had long ago worn through the good will that came with being one of the two men who started and helped sustain the ten-year effort to put like minded conservatives on the committees and boards of the SBC's entities and seminaries and "save the denomination from liberalism."  

CBN is made up of Patterson loyalists who, after all of the shenanigans that were revealed came out, realized that their chances of advancing themselves on the coat-tails of his influence were jeopardized by his absence from convention politics.  Almost every member of CBN's steering committee who are either currently or have been recent members of an SBC trustee board, committee or the executive board owe their presence there to Patterson's influence.  And that's about half the steering committee, some of whom have served on those boards and committees literally for decades.  

It's difficult to reconcile the inconsistency of a group of self-proclaimed "conservatives" whining about a few issues in the denomination that have nothing to do with conservative theology while supporting someone who essentially drove one of their flagship theological seminaries into a financial and enrollment crisis, and hid evidence of his misdeeds from a trustee board that he had used his influence to stack in his favor and who continued to act in an unethical manner after leaving.  

Southwestern, Baylor Settle with Riley Foundation after Fund Diversion Attempt

But, open support for the former president by SBC leadership is still an issue for CBN, not mentioned specifically, and it, too, characterizes their own "functional embrace of worldly ideologies and practice."  

One of the big issues that made the rounds of social media with many CBN supporters had to do with Dr Russell Moore, the executive director of the SBC's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, which is the lobbying voice of the SBC in Washington and as such, its most politically connected entity.  It's former executive, Dr. Richard Land, was unapologetically partisan far right, with connections to the Bush administration.  

Dr Moore, whose background includes a hefty dose of Southern Baptist theological education, could not bring himself to ignore the former President's corruption, lack of any ethical influence or moral compass and who built his personal and business reputation on what the Bible calls "debauchery."  And so, he became the target of those on the SBC executive board who wanted to remove him from his position at the ERLC, including the board's president, who was CBN's candidate for the SBC presidency last year.  That's why I see the connection here.  

Don Junior recently told a group of Republicans at a political gathering in Arizona that the reason Christians were losing their influence in political, social and business institutions in America was because they bought into all of that "turn the other cheek" stuff.  He claimed to "sort of" understand where that was coming from, but encouraged his audience to abandon that approach if they intended to, as he put it, "get anywhere in the world."  So it stands to reason that a Christian denomination, one that claims to believe the Bible is inerrant and infallible and "the only authority for faith and practice," and claims to preserve the conservative values of Christianity, would openly reject a political candidate who bragged about adultery and his ability to sexually assault women, operates vice-oriented businesses like casinos and strip clubs, demonizes anyone who doesn't demonstrate personal loyalty and who has rejected repentance and forgiveness, claiming he has done nothing to require it. 

I would have to conclude that support for a political party which condones violent insurrection and ignores the debauchery of political figures simply because they promise to do things for them, and which demonizes certain groups of people which is against the commands of Christ himself, would be functionally embracing worldly ideologies and practices.  So would imitating those practices.

When CBN's candidate for President of the SBC failed to get elected last June, it did not take long for critics to attack the candidate who was elected, Alabama pastor Ed Litton, for plagiarism.  Litton had borrowed and preached, with permission, a sermon series authored by previous SBC president and pastor J.D. Greear, but did not give any specific acknowledgement to Greear in his sermons.  So, the accusations began to fly.  Litton followed the Biblical instruction for his actions, apologizing, acknowledging his error, and asking for forgiveness.  But from CBN's corner, the response was to dig into his church's sermon archive and look for any little hint of another incident.  Some attack blogs, whom CBN says aren't connected to them, invented evidence and made further accusations.  There was nothing resembling the "seventy times seven" instruction in scripture, given by Jesus himself, from any CBN quarter. 

Last month, a Florida pastor, Willy Rice, announced his candidacy for SBC president.  Rice is not aligned with CBN, but is a staunch, conservative and solid Southern Baptist.  Someone, not yet known or named, approached Rice, complaining about a deacon his church had ordained who had been involved in a sexual relationship with an 18 year old student when the deacon had been a 27 year old high school teacher.  The deacon was repentant, the incident occurred long before he joined Rice's church and he had been open about his past.  But the incident forced Rice to reconsider his candidacy and has caused a disturbance and disruption not only in his church, but for the deacon and his family.  

In all fairness, the individual who brought this up hasn't been identified as being connected to CBN. Maybe it was a tactic, maybe not.  But it is something that didn't happen in the SBC prior to the influence of the politics and tactics of FP45 on Evangelical Christians.  It is certainly a new experience in the denominational politics of the SBC.  And it represents a clear embrace of worldly practice.  

The SBC is as Conservative as it has Ever Been

Nothing has changed in the SBC since Paige Patterson and Paul Pressler introduced the "conservative resurgence" by electing presidents with appointive powers.  The denomination's agencies, its mission boards and seminaries, are as conservative as they have ever been.  There's been no widespread teaching or embrace of CRT, far from it.  There are few churches, mostly on the fringe and not really among the actively participating congregations, that have female pastoral leadership not under the authority of a male pastor, or in a position of authority over men.  

But it isn't problem free.  Two million members of its churches have left in less than a decade, the number of new converts to Christianity that its congregations baptize each year is down by more than 70% of what it was at its peak.   The number of career missionaries has dropped 20% from its peak and a reorganization and restructuring of its North American Mission Board was a major downsize.  Its publishing house, Lifeway, downsized and relocated, and after just a few years, is now once again planning to sell its property, downsize further and is staying afloat on the value of its real estate and investments.  

The last thing it needs is a fight brought into the middle of its problems over a secular politician who couldn't care less about what they do, and is only interested in the votes he can get from them.  And it doesn't need a faction, identifying as "conservative," that is really capitulating to the Trump and conspiracy theory culture and functionally embracing worldly ideologies and practices.  

Republican Objections to Critical Race Theory, Gender Equality Issues, Are Deliberately Misleading

"I Teach the Things Republicans Are Trying to Outlaw: Here's What We Actually Teach"  (link to article)

There are times when I find myself scratching my head over something that Marjorie Taylor Green or Lauren Boebert, or even Ted Cruz, says about Critical Race Theory, what it is and what is being taught about it in the schools.  The big deal for them is that white students, specifically white male students, should not be made to feel discomfort because CRT tells them they are inherently racist.  They play on the fears of the loss of social power by whites, particularly by white men.  They claim that any education on sexual orientation or gender identity is "grooming" the students, putting ideas into their head.  

What's interesting about the Republican claims is that they confirm the accuracy of CRT's claims of inherent racism because that is exactly what they are using to motivate their own support.  If there were no "inherent racism" among whites, then CRT would not be a threat to any political perspective, would it?  As far as "grooming" goes, there's no evidence at all to support the claim that it is happening in sex education courses, or that there is anything in the information that is presented which encourages students to consider homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle or recruits them into any sexual orientation other than their own. 

But there is plenty of evidence to show that the absence of sex education programs in schools directly correlates to high rates of pre-marital sexual activity and even higher rates of sexually transmitted diseases as opposed to an environment where students get accurate information to make good choices.  

Being educated and informed is a deterrent to bad choices.  

The Huge Difference Between Informing and Indoctrinating

Here's what Dr Shaw, who is the author of the article that is linked at the top, said about the way she conducts her classes.  Dr. Shaw is Professor of Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies (WGSS) at Oregon State University, an ordained Baptist minister and has master's and doctoral degrees from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.  

"No teaching is value free or morally neutral.  In [our] studies, we acknowledge and own the political nature of our discipline, and we work intentionally to shape our classroom to reflect our political goals of inclusion, equality and justice.  

I try to create a classroom that is itself inclusive, equitable and just.  I welcome, and care about, every student in my class, including straight white men and I also recognize the ways that experiences of mistreatment, discrimination and oppression affect student's lives and the selves they bring into the classroom.  I pay attention to dynamics of differences and power in my classroom and I help students learn to analyze the strutures of discrimination in their lives and in society. "

There isn't anything in Critical Race Theory, or in any sexism studies, which indicates there is anything imposed or indoctrinated, or makes the white people uncomfortable, feel guilty, implies that they are "inherently racist," or blames anyone or lays the responsibility for racism or sexism on anyone because of their race.  That is a blatant and, in my opinion, intentionally political interpretation of CRT, as well as are the claims that it is not "consistent" with Biblical doctrine and theology or a specific denominational confession of faith.  

Republican Opposition isn't Based on Principle, it's Based on Fear of Losing Power

About Republican opposition to CRT, and gender equality, Dr. Shaw says, "They use scare tactics to enlist voters against the very kinds of education that would most benefit many of the poor and working class whites who are part of the Republican base."  

"What they love is power.  This was clear during the attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election.  No principles of truth, democracy, law and order, morality or any other lofty ideal underlay the blatant attempted power grab.  The love of power was more compelling than love of country, love of democracy, or love of truth.  And that continues to be so," she stated.  

Republican tactics, including voter suppresson, gerrymandering, politicizing the judicial system, the push of false, phony conspiracy theories, outright lying and blatant fear mongering is a clear indication that they know they can't win at the ballot box on a level playing field.  They are playing to ignorance and prejudice.  The idea they promote, that "the white male is an endangered species" in America is absolutely false and unprovable, and in fact, white males remain as dominant and as over-represented in regard to their actual proportion of the population, in business, government and social instutitions as they ever have been.  

Dr. Shaw's piece here also points to another stark difference between Democrats and Republicans, between the "liberal left" and the extremist conservative right, and that is the approach to providing education and information.  Republicans want to ban books, censor information and control the narrative so that people are misinformed and uneducated and not capable of making good choices as a result.  Democrats, politically and philisophically, want to present the whole issue, focusing on each point, and treat all sides of the issue as legitimate and equitable.  So, not in every single case, perhaps, but it would be very easy for Dr. Shaw, and others who teach in this field, to lay this out in a way that takes sides and indoctrinates students.  That, however, would be contradictory to the very principles that undergird their teaching. 

There's some valuable information here.  Take it, use it with your friends who don't get this and who are falling victim to the propaganda.  Take note of Dr Shaw's Christian faith background and the source of her education.  She completely undermines conservative claims on these social issues, and nullifies Evangelical arguments that CRT is not consistent with Biblical doctrine.  

Democrats Picked Up Midterm Election Support This Week

The conduct of the Republicans surrounding the confirmation of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson may have been something that plays well to the relatively uninformed segment of their base, but it cost them a lot of potential support and it also brought a lot of fence-sitters closer to a commitment to vote Democratic in November. Well, if you believe some of that pesky polling data, anyway.  

If the nomination and confirmation of Justice Jackson is a motivating factor for voters in November, the despiicable, deplorable behavior of the Republicans on the Senate judiciary committee and in the senate chamber itself following the confirmation vote will motivate even more voters to cast ballots for their opposition.  And if you buy all of their claims about how badly Democrats treated Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh, you weren't paying attention. Kavanaugh's behavior warranted the lines of questioning and the investigation into his past behavior.  Barrett fielded some tough questions, but nothing was anywhere near as disrespectful as the manner in which Republicans handled themselves this time around. 

Their responses and their behavior was dripping with rascist condescension.  It was hypocritical, disrespectful not only to the rest of the Senate, but to the American people, because that's our house, that's our government, not theirs, and we require better conduct than that.  We do have the power to enforce our standards and I suggest those Republican senators who behaved so badly should keep that in mind and remind themselves to whom they are accountable.  

Sixty Three Republicans Voted Against Helping Ukraine

What a wonderful way to make a legislative record at a time when atrocities are being uncovered and a destructive war against a fellow democratic republic is being waged by a dictatorial autocrat.  That's a great way to identify where your real sympathies lie, and who you really support.  The fact that these Republicans, who have by their actions turned support for Ukraine into yet another political test of loyalty instead of treating it with the seriousness that it deserves is a question of whether these people even have any human feelings or concerns in them.  

It doesn't appear that circumstances in Ukraine, which are revealing Vladimir Putin's dictatorship for the cruel, inhumane, hateful regime that it is, are going to let up the pressure on Republicans in Congress who are on the record as Putin-lovers and can be legitimately labelled as "enemies of American Democracy and Patriotism" because of it.  

Well, at least we know who is the enemy within, and who the Putin supporters are, if we didn't already know as a result of January 6th.  Thank you for identifying yourselves and giving your opponents a club with which  to beat you in your next election. 

 Thank You Senator Schatz

Senator Shatz Calls Out Hawley Hypocrisy on Defense Department Appointments

Calling out Republican flip flopping and hypocrisy is a full time job.  But it needs to be done.  The GOP is doing a bang up job of undermining its chances to take control of Congress away from Democrats and Missouri Senator Hawley is at the top of the "foot in mouth" brigade.  This deserves all of the attention that it can get and I am glad to see the mainstream media giving it at least some of the attention it deserves.  

Hawley better be careful.  Aside from the real possibility that he could be implicated for his role in the January 6th insurrection, he didn't win his Senate seat in relatively conservative Missouri by a comfortable margin.  Turnout among African American voters who make up a significant minority of the Missouri electorate was down 10% in 2018, when he won over Claire McCaskill by 5 percentage points.  Attacks on an African American Secretary of Defense and the first African American woman Supreme Court Justice look racist. There's a strong and well organized branch of Stacy Abram's get out the vote group operating in Missouri and remember how they got a Democrat elected to the Senate from Alabama?  And I'll leave it at that. 

Thank You Madison Cawthorn

No, I'm no supporter of this extremist North Carolina congressman.  So I was quite surprised when he opened his mouth and confessed that his fellow Republicans are coked-up sex addicts. Too bad we didn't get any names.  Was he bragging?  Did he actually go to any of the parties to which he was invited?  No confession was forthcoming, but boy, did he make some of the gray heads in Congress hopping mad.  

Republicans for the most part gave up on family values and conventional, Protestant morality when they supported the debauched, worldly FP 45, who was probably the guest of honor at most of those parties, if not the host of them.  But this is just another reminder, as that November 2022 election approaches, that the GOP has absolutely nothing to offer except conspiracy theories, lies, complaints and contradictions like Cawthorn. 

The Clarence and Ginni Thomas Scandal

I am probably not the first blogger to label what's happening with Justice Thomas as a scandal.  But that's what I'm going to call this from now on.  The fact that the spouse of someone who sits on the highest court in the nation would be part of a conspiracy to overturn an election, subverting the constitition and plotting a coup against the United States government is just unfathomable.  Had this happened during the Watergate scandal, instead of in these politically polarized times, the pressure on him to step off the court would have been so intense, he'd bave been out of his office and had his keys turned in the next day.  

If he had an ounce of integrity, he would step down now.  But we know from his confirmation hearings that he has none. 

Don Junior's Role in the January 6th Insurrection Confirms the Fact That It Was a Coup Attempt

That's hardly news, but his involvement was revealed this week.  They were planning this long before the election, knowing that there was a good chance they were going to lose.  They intended to use their influence and whatever actual power they had to keep Trump in office, regardless of the outcome of the election and that is a serious crime.  This must go to court and be decided by a jury of patriotic Americans and the perpetrators, including as many Trumps as were involved, imprisoned.   

Let's Help the Media

The Signal Press will continue to put this kind of information out each week, touting the multiple accomplishments of the Biden administration and calling out Republican lies, duplicity and parrotting of false narratives.  You are welcome to share on social media, links, whatever you want, and comments are also welcome.  The more we get out this word, the better things will go in November.  

Time to Celebrate

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson was confirmed today as the first African American woman to serve as a Supreme Court Justice.  It is a historic moment.  For some reason, the scene from the movie Harriet comes to mind, where Harriet Tubman became the first woman to lead a military engagement in American history, conducting a raid with the all-black Massachussetts 54th Regiment on the Combahee River ferry in South Carolina, defeating the Confederates and freeing over 700 slaves.  It took 160 years to get from that moment to this one, where an African American woman is confirmed to the Supreme Court.  

I say that to make this point,  President Joe Biden has been in office just a little over a year, and we have a female, African-American Vice-President, and now a female, African American Supreme Court Justice.  May the effects of her presence on the court grow and may she serve for many decades.  Noting that these are promises kept, here is yet one more reason why the Democratic party majority that stepped up to elect President Biden in 2020 needs to show up in similar numbers at the polls in November, to make sure this trend keeps moving forward.  

This moment deserves its own time to celebrate.  Service in our representative democracy has expanded yet again to include another excluded segment of the population.  Here's to President Joe Biden and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.  May this President have multiple opportunities to appoint justices to the Supreme Court.  

"Cancel Culture on the Right": Florida Pastor Forced to Abandon Candidacy for Southern Baptist Presidency

RNS: Pastor Willy Rice Ends Candidacy for SBC Presidency

Julie Roys: Leading SBC Presidential Candidate Under Fire for Ordaining Sex Abuser in His Church

Pastors Urge Willy Rice to Drop Out of SBC Presidential Race

Both of the above references carried the story by Bob Smeitana of RNS that Pastor Willy Rice, of Calvary Church in Clearwater, Florida, who was the first announced candidate for President of the Southern Baptist Convention has had to drop his candidacy. The intensity of politics within the denomination caused a measure of close scrutiny during which it was discovered that one of the church's current deacons had what Pastor Rice called "a sexual relationship that could also be described as abusive."  

The deacon involved was a former teacher and, according to the reports, had a sexual relationship with an 18 year old student when he was 27 years old and teaching in a high school in the Tampa area.  Pastor Rice noted that the relationship occurred long before the individual became a member of Calvary Church, that the individual was very open about his past, not hiding the relationship and was repentant regarding what he had done.  However, because the SBC is involved in an ongoing investigation into allegations of hundreds of instances of sexual abuse by Southern Baptist clergy, the convention passed a resolution last summer saying that anyone who had committed abuse should not be considered for church leadership positions.  

Pastor Rice said that he was recently "confronted by someone outside of Calvary" who knew about this specific incident from the deacon's past and who questioned why he was in leadership.  This approach is similar to the scrutiny that current SBC President Ed Litton was subjected to over borrowing a series of sermons, with permission, from a friend, fellow pastor and immediate past SBC President J. D. Greear.  Litton's church website was scoured for other examples of "plagiarism" as a means of attacking him and attempting to force him to resign as SBC president in favor of the first vice President, who represented the faction known as Conservative Baptist Network, from which most of the criticism of Litton originated.  It was not stated or confirmed that the individual who spoke with Rice about the deacon in his church was connected to CBN.

The deacon involved in the incident is also a member of Florida Governor Ron Desantis' Faith Advisory Council. 

Are Secular Right Wing Political Tactics Disrupting Church Doctrine and Practice? 

It appears that we have some "cancel culture" going on here.  I was taught in a Baptist church, from an early age, that repentance from sin brought about a spiritual transformation that included things like "sanctification" and "justification," terms that mean that a repentant individual who believes in the divinity of Christ and his sacrifice by crucifixion and turns to God by faith receives God's grace in forgiveness.  Sanctification means the soul is cleansed from sin, and justification means the individual is restored to God's presence.  

Apparently, Calvary Church of Clearwater believed that to be the case, and so did Pastor Rice, up until "someone" pointed out that, against the backdrop of current denominational politics, this doesn't look good.  They ordained the individual as a deacon, the qualifications for which can be found in the New Testament, in I Timothy chapter 3.  But now that their pastor is running for the convention presidency, a position that carries with it the power to appoint powerful committee members, there's been some second guessing and a change of mind.  Had the pastor not announced his candidacy, would this even be an issue?

There's a faction within the denomination, known as the "Conservative Baptist Network," that is aiming at controlling the convention, and the appointive power of the president is the pathway toward that control.  There's some indication in the article from Christian Headlines that the attention of the church, which was drawn to this issue by "someone outside of Calvary," may have come from someone inside CBN.  That's a similar tactic they've used to attack current SBC President Ed Litton, whom they accused of "plagiarism" for borrowing--with permission--a series of sermons from his friend and former SBC President J. D. Greear.  

The Southern Baptist Convention is also dealing with a clergy sex abuse scandal, exposed a few years ago by The Houston Chronicle, that is of similar scope and consequence to that of the Catholic Church's clergy abuse scandal.  That's what prompted the SBC resolution cited by Pastor Rice, encouraging churches to avoid putting former sex abusers in leadership positions.  That has put some conservatives on edge, because several of their leaders have been involved in some cover-ups and in badgering and psychologically berating victims who reported abuse to them when they were in positions of authority in the denomination's educational institutions and mission boards.  

Right Wing Political Implications

As previously mentioned, the deacon involved is a member of Florida Governor Ron Desantis' "Faith Advisory Council."  We'll see how that gets handled by the governor, and whether the media finds out about it.  The Conservative Baptist Network is quite comfortable with conservative politicians like Desantis, and if this doesn't look good for a church, it's not going to look good for him, either, especially if the guy doesn't get invited to leave the advisory council. 

Southern Baptists are considered the largest denomination within what is known as the Evangelical branch of the American Christian community.  Many prominent Southern Baptists have openly endorsed and embraced the former President, excusing or outright dismissing his open debauchery, including his bragging about being able to sexually abuse women, his multiple affairs on his three wives and his operation of sexually oriented businesses, at least two of which he still owns and are active.  

Evangelicals have embraced him as one of their own, in spite of his never having claimed any kind of "repentance" or confessed any kind of Christian faith.  So the words of the Apostle Paul in I Corinthians 5:11 apply to them, "Do not even eat with such a one," much less endorse and support someone like that to be President of the United States.  

A Clear Shift in the Church's Doctrine and Faith Practice That is Politically Motivated

The deacon in Calvary church was doing what he was taught to do as a Christian, and a member of the church.  He expressed remorse, regret and repentance from this incident of sexual immorality from his past.  I haven't seen anything regarding what he did for the victim in this case, but he was not charged with a crime, and he apparently paid a steep price for his very poor choice.  He was open about his past with the church leadership and they accepted his sincerity, believed in his spiritual life and ordained him to serve as a deacon in the church.  

Now, because of the pressure placed on his pastor, who was the one seeking the high profile office, and the fact that digging up dirt to smear candidates for the Southern Baptist presidency that don't identify with the CBN is now the M.O. of denominational politics, he is subject to the church's "change of mind" as they retract their unconditional forgiveness and their doctrinal convictions to do damage control.  How can you trust a church, and a pastor, that changes their mind because of circumstances, rather than consistently applying what they claim to be an inerrant, written "word of God."  

If I Restrict Your Freedom, What's Stopping You From Restricting Mine?

"The truth is, no one of us can be free until everybody is free."--Maya Angelou

In spite of the fact that we have a constitutional republic and a representative democracy, as a culture this country has struggled with the idea of equal rights for all.  It hasn't been easy to determine the definition of "all."  Some of that is the hangover left behind from our roots in the European aristocracy, some of it determined by the struggle to survive while settling and developing a vast land full of wild wilderness, some from the inequities of political power and influence created by racial and ethnic rivalries and jealousies because people came here from everywhere and also came into conflict with those already here, some from the manipulation and misinterpretation of religious practice and the presence of religious prejudice as the country was dominated by white Protestants whose churches and denominations developed a unique culture in this country. 

Origins of the Social Agenda Quagmire

We now find ourselves in what I call a social agenda quagmire.  Many Americans seem to think that the way to make this country better is to restrict the rights of those they don't like or with whom they disagree.  And while I will admit I haven't done any real research into the origins of this line of thinking, I blame Rush Limbaugh and the whole genre of right wing media (it's not news and I won't call it that) that has sprung up in his wake for using hatred and people's biases and prejudices to reap a fortune.  

Limbaugh wasn't motivated by trying to improve American government and culture.  His personal life was more an example of self-serving hedonism than it was of any of the conservative "values" he pushed.  He simply observed that there were few media outlets for those who felt bypassed and left out by the "establishment" and launched a network of mostly AM, small town radio stations whose revenue and listenership had been sagging and build enough of a niche to make himself rich.  Over time, wannabees scooped up some of the overflow.  

Limbaugh advocated for a no-compromise, no-negotiation stand on social issues, motivating people by their fears, their bigotry, their hatred and their lack of education.  He dehumanized those he attacked, declaring them unequal and not worthy of the same rights as those who saw things the way he did.  There's enough evidence from his past to believe that he was at least partially motivated by his own racist views, as much as he was by figuring out how to build a money-making media niche.  If Trump saw him as worthy of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, that says a lot about just how much of a fascist bigot he really was.  

As I said, I'm not a sociologist with research on this subject.  But I believe you can trace most of the muddled, confusing tangle of the extreme right's social agenda to this person and this point.  They are about as un-American and un-patriotic as you can get without actually becoming a Russian citizen, and a lot of them wish Putin was their President.  

It's in the Constitution

To have freedom of conscience, characterized by the right to free speech, means that we have to tolerate a lot of disagreeable ideology.  After moving to a mid-sized county seat town in Texas, not ever having lived in the South before, I was shocked to see, right on the courthouse square, just steps away from two churches, a neatly kept office building with a sign over the entrance, identifying the building as the headquarters of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.  Their emblems were on both sides of the sign.  

I was even more shocked to see, as I was driving through the square one evening, about two dozen individuals in white robes and hoods, carrying banners and torches, standing on the courthouse steps.  They were rallying about something, and the police were there separating them from a small crowd of counter-protesters across the street.  

It would not be difficult to make a logical, reasonable argument as to why such displays are unAmerican and un-patriotic.  These are people who are so proud of who they are and what they do that they wear hoods and robes so that they cannot be identified.  They achieve their purpose by intimidation and terror, in many cases denying or infringing upon the rights of those they attack.  They do not believe in human equality or the sanctity of life, or peace, or justice, they have no integrity as evidenced by the robes and hoods.  If the only way you can win your point is by intimidation, then you're a loser.  

As bad as all of that is, and it is one of the reasons why Critical Race Theory exists, if they are not permitted to exist and operate in the marketplace of ideas, sooner or later, someone will think about restricting the free speech of other groups a local minority thinks should not be in existence. 

We're Already There

The political pendulum swings back and forth.  I'm curious to see how many court challenges there will be to the restrictions that are being placed on Critical Race Theory.  When it was restricted in Virginia, a friend of mine who teaches there, in Arlington, told me that it will not be difficult to avoid teaching something that was not already in the curriculum.  How can you restrict something that doesn't exist?  But in the muddled mind of conspiracy theorists, it is the greatest danger to American society since Roe v. Wade.  I'd be willing to bet there are already teachers who are introducing it to their classes at this point, to see if anyone picks up on it, or if the unconstitutional restrictions on teaching it get challenged in court. 

What I really want to know, though, is how the constitutional rights of others who may have a different religious belief, political opinion or lifestyle than I do interfere with my freedom?  I am, because of the effect my Christian faith has had on my personal convictions, opposed to the practice of abortion.  I think our society, and even more specifically the Christian churches within it, are capable of providing what is necessary to prevent most of those who consider it from having one.  And I believe there is a much better pathway to resolution of the problems that come with an unwanted or unwelcome pregnancy than simply medically terminating it.  

But those are moral convictions informed by my faith.  I fully acknowledge that there are those who do not have religious convictions who are informed by either science or their own opinion who believe in a different starting point for what we call "life."  And they have the right to believe that.  And I realize that the government, via the courts, has to consider all perspectives when making a determination that does not constitute an "establishment of religion."  The belief that life begins at conception is an exclusively religious perspective.  Even though the law takes a position of "religious neutrality," that does not prevent Christians from finding ways to lower the abortion numbers.  

I can't think of any right that has been extended to any American that interferes with my free exercise of my faith or my conscience.  The courts are charged with the responsibility of determining where the boundaries are located.  I am concerned that if these state challenges to CRT, to fair and free elections, and to other free speech and conscience issues are allowed to stand, eventually everyone's rights are going to be open to some kind of challenge or restriction.  Once that line is crossed, and the political pendulum swings, no individual rights will be safe.

This is What Brainwashing Looks Like

GOP Congressional Candidate: "If Christians Repent (from taking the COVID vaccine), God Will Remove Poison From Their Body 

Christianity, or should I correct that and say real Christianity that is correctly interpreted and applied, does not reject the use of vaccinations, medical care, blood transfusions and other medical procedures that save lives and improve health.  Prayers for healing are not nullified by seeking medical attention or getting vaccinated or having surgery.  There is no source of authority for Christian doctrine that teaches that.

The ignorance, and the level of brainwashing that this statement represents should disqualify this particular candidate from being able to run for office.  We already have this kind of dysfunctional thinking in Congress.  That kind of ignorance is dangerous.  A million people in this country have died as a result of COVID, many of them unnecessarily so because they refused to get vaccinated as a result of this kind of brainwashing and ignorance circulating around on social media.  

The fact that the death rate from COVID is substantially higher among far right wing conspiracy theorists who won't get vaccinated than it is among those liberals who get vaccinated and boosted has to be a sign of God's favor on the liberals, at least, it would be according to Janet Porter's logic, huh?  And isn't she sort of shooting her own self in the foot here?  If she's appealing to other nut case conspiracy theorists to vote for her, shouldn't she be giving them advice that will help them survive until they cast their ballot, rather than getting COVID and kicking the bucket before the election?  She's undermining her own chances at winning. 

Those Are "Tongue-in-Cheek" Remarks--This Whole Anti-Vaxxer Conspiracy is Tragic

For Christians who believe in the existence of God, the whole scope of healing through the vast knowledge that has been acquired through medical science is common grace.  It is available to all who seek it out for their health and well-being.  Seeking a solution of medical science does not disqualify or nullify prayers for healing.  In fact, the availability of knowledge provided by medical science is almost always the manner in which God chooses to answer prayers for healing.  Nothing in the Bible teaches us to pray only for a supernatural means of overcoming disease or injury.  

It only takes a few minutes to get the facts, and a few more to get the vaccine.  It is completely worth it.  I've seen, up close, the misery and pain that a family goes through when they lose a loved one to COVID, especially when that loved one didn't get vaccinated.  I've not seen anyone die from getting vaccinated.  I have seen someone too young to die lose their life because of COVID and leave family members behind wondering if things would be different, and if they would have their father and husband back if they could just go back in time. 

A Warning Sign to Voters

Candidates like Janet Folger Porter must be defeated.  We don't need conspiracy theorists in government.  We need people who speak the truth and understand facts.  Rush Limbaugh and those of his ilk have turned the give and take of politics into winner-take-all, no compromise gridlock, which works for a few privileged people, but not for the rest of us.  Promoting conspiracy theories is, in old fashioned language, lying, and that makes Janet Folger Porter a liar.  So if you live in that Ohio congressional district, there's the reason to go vote, and to vote against her by electing her Democratic opponent.