Religion as FIFTH COLUMN: Thou Shalt Have No God Before Bush-Cheney

[McCamy Taylor]

Yesterday, right wing idiot with a typewriter Cal Thomas called American Muslims in the Holy Lands charitable organization Fifth Columnists.

http://www.star-telegram.com/245/story/281100.html

For those unfamiliar with the term "fifth column," it usually refers to a group of people who are assumed to have loyalties to countries other than their own, or who support some other nation in war efforts against the country they live in.

OK, this is Cal Thomas. He has lowered the bar for stupidity. No one else would call members of one of the world's oldest, largest most respected religions the same thing we used to call communists. Or would they?

I did a quick Google, and to my horror I discovered that there is a whole right wing subculture out there which is writing about "The Islamic Fifth Column in America". Here is just one example of many.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=275267277682917

What did Holy Lands try to do? Raise money to send to some of the poorest, most wretched people on earth, the Palestinians, who suffer from unemployment, malnutrition, infant mortality, police and military brutality while their neighbors live in affluence and the world--including their Saudi Muslim brothers--do nothing for them. For this, we are supposed to shiver in our boots?

A bunch of Americans must be drinking the Bush Kool Aid, because when some Muslim preachers decided to pray in an airport, that is exactly what they did. Then, they called the cops.

http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061125/NEWS/611250359/1326

In a statement to police, a US Airways gate agent wrote that three of the men prayed in Arabic at the gate. "I was suspicious by the way they were praying very loud," the gate agent said.

Good thing she wasn't there when I was a kid traveling with a class of 13 year olds and a nun. We said our "Hail Marys" really loud. And no one even looked at us.

I recently wrote in my journal that the right wing in America is trying to discourage true spirituality---the kind of religion that encourages people to have compassion for others and to take a stand for others in the face of government oppression. The current administration is afraid of the kind of courage we witnessed in Burma from the Buddhist monks. It does not want to see fat, lazy contented Americans suddenly develop a conscience. However, Americans are a very religious lot. Much more religious than people in other industrialized countries, such as Japan, according to some accounts I have read. And we have no state religion, such as those they have in Europe, which can tell the people "Do what your government tells you to do!". Religion in the U.S. is more likely to tell you "Follow your conscience." Which is a bad thing if you are Bush or Cheney and you are trying to start up a fascist state. So, the right wing has hit upon a plan. By aligning itself with some religious hucksters and forming a state sponsored Church which will serve to validate the government, it hopes to quash the conscience of the American people.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/McCamy%20Taylor/66

While the religious right is fond of claiming that the Founders were religious men and women, they forget that they were opposed to the union of church and state, because they believed that the state corrupted religion. Here is how Thomas Paine described religion in its independent form (from The Rights of Man )

All religions are in their nature kind and benign, and united with principles of morality. They could not have made proselytes at first by professing anything that was vicious, cruel, persecuting, or immoral. Like everything else, they had their beginning; and they proceeded by persuasion, exhortation, and example. How then is it that they lose their native mildness, and become morose and intolerant?

Since the American Revolution occurred during the Age of Reason, the same could have been said for any atheistic or agnostic system of moral thought. Paine does not assume that religion is good because it derives from God. It is compassionate and civilizing, because this is what humans strive for. This is what they demand in their moral belief systems.

What happens when the state takes over religion and makes it the one and only sanctioned Church?

By engendering the church with the state, a sort of mule-animal, capable only of destroying, and not of breeding up, is produced, called the Church established by Law. It is a stranger, even from its birth, to any parent mother, on whom it is begotten, and whom in time it kicks out and destroys.

The Church which serves as an arm of the state is not a humane church. It is a Church of the Crusades, a Church of the Inquisition. It is a Church which tolerates slavery and which is a tool of colonialists exploiting Africa. Cal Thomas is correct when he writes that Saudi Arabia has a lack of religious freedom. Islam as practiced in Saudi Arabia and several other Muslim countries where it is the state religion is a very oppressive institution. However, that is not the fault of Islam. It is the doing of the Saudi Royals, who have corrupted the religion in order to keep the people in poverty and misery while they live decadently. There are forms of Islam, such as Sufism, practiced by the besieged peoples of Darfur, which are more tolerant. Tibetan Buddhism has probably become a more humane religion, because its leader has lived his life in political exile, not allied with any state. The Liberation Theologists in Central and South America are more responsive to the needs of the poor, because they no longer bow quote so submissively to the authority of Rome.

In the United States, we are used to religious freedom. We have a gazillion different flavors of faith and each one does what it damn well pleases. This is in keeping with our rugged individualism and our faith in our ability to make moral decisions for our selves. As William Blake wrote "Jesus was all virtue and acted from impulse, rather than from rules." Take out the word "Jesus" and it would make a good motto for many Americans, even those who are not Christians. This is why it is extremely hard for anyone to try to start up a fascist state here in the good old US of A. (Note, Blake, though an Englishman, thought the American Revolution was a fine thing and wrote a long poem about it.)

Now, the Republicans and the right wing are attempting to ape the Saudi Royals by setting up an official United States religion that can be used to give divine justification to the administration's excesses, including their wars of choice against countries like Iraq, Iran and Venezuela which have nationalized their oil, and the war we will soon wage against Cuba, which is sitting on a lot of Caribbean oil that will be nationalized. Since religion is the force which is most likely to make Americans get up off their comfy couch and say "That ain't right!" the right wing attacks faiths which question the government. In 2004, while the Catholic Church was putting out its usual voters guide, the right wing made a special voter's guide, so that Catholics would not be distracted by issues like torture (Abu Ghraib) or the war of choice in Iraq, both anathema under traditional Catholic dogma.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/27/us/27beliefs.html?ref=us

“Faithful Citizenship,” the bishops’ official booklet-length reflections, met competition from punchier conservative voter guides insisting that the church’s position on five “nonnegotiable” issues — abortion, euthanasia, embryonic-stem-cell research, human cloning and same-sex marriage — should determine how Catholics vote.

Recognize the Republican Party platform? The Catholic Church was turned into a mouthpiece for the Bush administration for the 2004 election. Voters were told to just say no to Kerry, because the Democratic platform called for abortion choice. It was not a matter of voting based on conscience. It was Thou shalt not . This year, the Bishops have vowed to put out a stronger document that will encourage Catholics-“'we bishops do not intend to tell Catholics for whom or against whom to vote'”-- to consider all issues, including torture and the war and their duty to provide for the poor. However, that puts them at odds with the Bush Administration. That makes them "Fifth Columnists", with greater loyalty to the Vatican City and the Pope than to the residents of the White House. In the past, we have seen Catholic politicians' patriotism questioned, just as we are seeing Muslims' patriotism questioned now. Will Catholics get the All Saint's Episcopal treatment next year?

All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena, California was made an example by the Bush administration's corrupt Justice Department and IRS, because a sermon was delivered two days before the 2004 elections discussing the morality of the war of choice in Iraq. Even though no candidate's names were mentioned and no recommendations were given on how to vote, the Bush administration harassed the Church for two years, causing them to amass hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal bills, before telling them that they could keep their tax exempt status, but that they had done wrong (!!!!!). The Bush administration's intention was obvious. Just as the persecution of Dan Rather was meant to scare journalists into avoiding negative stories about W. (if they could do it to Rather, just think what they can do to you, the average journalist), the persecution of that Church was meant to frighten preachers into keeping their mouths shut.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-allsaints24sep24,0,6570946.story?coll=la-home-center

Bacon predicted that the vague, mixed message from the IRS after its nearly two-year investigation of the All Saints case would have a continued "chilling effect" on the freedom of clerics from all faiths to preach about moral values and significant social issues such as war and poverty.

Talk about war, lose your tax exempt status. Talk about health insurance, lose your tax exempt status. Talk about torture, lose your tax exempt status. Maybe Churches would be better off without their tax exempt status. Then, the government would have nothing to hold over their heads, and they could speak without fear.

Speaking of money, how do you make a compliant state sponsored Church? You buy one. The administration has been handing out Faith Based money since 2001. This year the Supremely Stupid Court said that this does not violate the Constitutional separation of Church and State---as long as the executive branch does it and not the legislative branch. I guess this it because the executive branch does not have to follow the Constitution which W. used up for scratch paper.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/25/AR2007062500531.html

Anyway, there are plenty of preachers holding out their hands, willing to say that Bush's War is God's War and Global Warming is God's Way of Turning Up the Thermostat if they can get their hands on enough cash---which is how tyrants throughout history bought the services of Church leaders. Just think of it as a tithe being funneled through the White House.

The moral here is that if your religion gets in way of the Republican Party or the right wing or the Bush Administration, do not be surprised if you find your charities hauled into court and your religious leaders hauled off planes and the Cal Thomas's of the world branding you a "Fifth Columnist" or "unpatriotic".

PS. Just for fun, I thought I would find out if anyone else in the world was as crazy as the right wing here in the US. Oh, yes. Crazy knows no borders. In India, there is someone who call Christians "Fifth Columnists" with a secret agenda to convert and overthrow the government.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/41916/CHRISTIANS-A-FIFTH-COLUMN-COMMUNITY-IN-INDI12

[McCamy Taylor]

1. Malcolm X "Why I Embraced Islam" (since it is too late too edit)

Just in case anyone thinks that Islam is all about Jihad,

During the past eleven days here in the Muslim world, I have eaten from the same plate, drunk from the same glass, and slept in the same bed (or on the same rug) -- while praying to the same God -- with fellow Muslims, whose eyes were the bluest of blue, whose hair was the blondest of blond, and whose skin was the whitest of white. And in the words and in the actions and in the deeds of the "white" Muslims, I felt the same sincerity that I felt among the black African Muslims of Nigeria, Sudan, and Ghana.

We were truly all the same (brothers) -- because their belief in one God had removed the "white" from their minds, the 'white' from their behavior, and the 'white' from their attitude.

I could see from this, that perhaps if white Americans could accept the Oneness of God, then perhaps, too, they could accept in reality the Oneness of Man -- and cease to measure, and hinder, and harm others in terms of their "differences" in color.

I don't think the Prophet is anymore to blame for the way the Saudi and some terrorists use his religion than Jesus is for the way the Borgias and abortion clinic bombers use his.

[msongs]

2. yes that will comfort the world's infidels nt

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

3. Thank you for such an insightful post

This point is interesting,

"The administration has been handing out Faith Based money since 2001."



Bush brings faith to foreign aid - The Boston Globe

LAKARTINYA, Kenya -- The herders of this remote mountain village know little about America, but have learned from those who run a US-funded aid program about the American God.

A Christian God.

The US government has given $10.9 million to Food for the Hungry, a faith-based development organization, to reach deep into the arid mountains of northern Kenya to provide training in hygiene, childhood illnesses, and clean water. The group has brought all that, and something else that increasingly accompanies US-funded aid programs: regular church service and prayer.

President Bush has almost doubled the percentage of US foreign-aid dollars going to faith-based groups such as Food for the Hungry, according to a Globe survey of government data. And in seeking to help such groups obtain more contracts, Bush has systematically eliminated or weakened rules designed to enforce the separation of church and state

In Lakartinya, a simple hut built with funds from the US government is the first in the area to have a tin roof. It serves as a station for weighing babies, distributing food, teaching health classes -- and, until recently, initiating local people into the rites of Christianity, according to Food for the Hungry staff. Classes begin and end with prayers, and in some cases are followed by Christian services.

For decades, US policy has sought to avoid intermingling government programs and religious proselytizing. The aim is both to abide by the Constitution's prohibition against a state religion and to ensure that aid recipients don't forgo assistance because they don't share the religion of the provider.

Since medical programs are aimed at the most serious illnesses -- AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis -- the decision whether to seek treatment can determine life or death.

But many of those restrictions were removed by Bush in a little-noticed series of executive orders -- a policy change that cleared the way for religious groups to obtain hundreds of millions of dollars in additional government funding. It also helped change the message American aid workers bring to many corners of the world, from emphasizing religious neutrality to touting the healing powers of the Christian God.

-MUCH MORE AT LINK- Registration Required
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/10/08/bush_brings_faith_to_foreign_aid/




President Speaks with Faith-Based and Community Leaders
Remarks by the President to Faith-Based and Community Leaders
Union Bethel Ame Church
New Orleans, Louisiana



I'm at this church to talk about the importance of what we call a faith-based initiative. Really what I'm here to say is that in the land of plenty, we must recognize there are still people who hurt. In the land of plenty, there are people who search for the light, who simply want a chance to succeed and realize their God-given talents. And those of us who have been blessed with the opportunity to help must play to the strength of our country in order to help save lives. The strength of America is found in the hearts and souls of our fellow citizens. This country must not fear the influence of faith in the future of this country. We must welcome faith in order to make America a better place.

Right here in this church, there are faith-based programs. Any program emanating out of a church or a synagogue or a mosque is a faith-based program. So here -- people talk about faith-based programs; those are programs that start as a result of a group of folks of faith deciding to do something about a problem. And the fundamental question in our society is, how does the federal government relate to programs of faith. "The mighty check writer" -- how does it relate when it writes checks to meet social needs with people who are solving our problems, in spite of government? My attitude is, the government should not fear faith-based programs. We ought to welcome faith-based programs, and we ought to fund faith-based programs.

I have asked Congress to not fear faith. See, the debate in Washington oftentimes is, well, the church will become the state, or the state will become the church. To me, that's never going to happen, and we won't let it happen. As a matter of fact, the separation of church and state is a vital part of our country. The freedom of religion is a vital part of our country.

But on the other hand, when people are able to deliver results, people should not say -- people shouldn't say, well, the results are coming from the wrong source of programming. We ought to say, we want results, we welcome results, and we're willing to fund programs that are capable of delivering results. We want to fund programs that save Americans, one soul at a time.

In order to get beyond the debate of process, we must say -- we must ask the question in Washington, does the program work? Does the program to help the addicted work? Is the homeless program working? That's the question that must be asked.

So I called on Congress to join me in passing laws that would allow the -- open up the federal treasury to faith-based programs, and they balked. They got caught up in the process. So I signed an executive order, an executive order that instructed all federal agencies not to discriminate against religious groups. Cabinet Secretary -- soon to be Cabinet Secretary Jackson now knows the call. One reason he's the Cabinet Secretary is because he already heard it, however, and that is that we're not going to discriminate against faith-based groups when it comes to housing initiatives.
-MORE AT LINK-
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040115-7.html

Reading the White House press release one gets the impression the faith-based initiative is about American communities.

With the millions of faith-based dollars going into the business of religious proselytizing, it is no wonder Congress balked.
So I signed an executive order.

[mlevans]

4. This is a very well-reasoned and thoughtful piece...

and I appreciate having had the opportunity to read it. I was just having a similar discussion over the weekend with my brother, who has developed so many right-wing perspectives concerning religion and politics over the past several years that I have difficulty now remembering that we grew up in the same household. He is firmly convinced that we are indeed involved in holy war; that Muslims will be coming to the U.S. to force our women to cover their hair and faces and to inflict their religious rule on all of us. Apparently he is completely sincere in this belief, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. I'm afraid I hurt his feelings when I said that I didn't mean to be offensive, but I considered the concept of holy war a lot like two kids arguing over who has the best invisible friend. We were finally forced to fall back on "I love you, but we're never going to agree on this" in order to avoid coming to blows. So these folk you're writing of definitely are out there, and it's kind of painful to discover that they are in one's own family.