Numbers Racket
Americans United for the Separation of Church and State reports on the Reclaiming America For Christ Conference. There’s a lot of interesting (in all senses) stuff in there, but I’m more curious about this passage from the FRC’s Tony Perkins:
How is it that in our nation where Muslims account for about 6 million of the 300 million living in this country, and Christians comprise 100 million, that Muslims can control the public policy and we cannot? I suggest to you that it is because Christians have become apathetic to our role in shaping the policy in our nation, and it could have deadly consequences, not only for the unborn, but for the living as well.
Are those numbers reallly right? Do Christians really only comprise a third of the American population? I’m assuming that Perkins is using a definition of “Christian” that excludes people who may identify as Christian but are less religious (or less conservative). But I’m curious what groups and people get tallied into the 100 million figure, where it comes from, and who specifically is excluded.
The particular point Perkins was making, it goes without saying, was inane.
Oh, and quickly, Ann Coulter also repeated her “fag” slur regarding John Edwards at the conference. To the attendees’ credit, it did not go over well, and she scurried off the stage shortly thereafter.
18 Responses to “Numbers Racket”
Numbers I have seen is that Religions make up about 86 percent of America while Secular/non religious make up about 13 percent. While I would argue his numbers the fact is that the evangelicals only amount to about 20 percent of the Christians.
For example Catholics make up about 25 percent of our country and they are far from Evangelicals. 13 percent are secular. The rest are methodist, presbyterians, Jehova Witnesses, Latter day saints. These groups are hardly Evangelicals.
The lie that the RR is going to take over the world is another myth perpetuated by the left in the scream fest of lies that has become politics.
Or insane, perhaps? I must admit, when I saw the quote and then saw you go off on the possible numbers I was rather surprised, since I found the actual point of the quote much more ridiculous.
According to the wikipedia, around 77% of Americans self identify as Christians. Gee…77% of 300 million is….231 million people. Oh…maybe Christians who find using their religion for divisive means don’t actually count as Christians, in his book. It actually would be interesting to see how Christianity is measured by them.
If Imus can lose his gig, will Coulter repeated remark be allowed to go without any consequence. Atleast Imus did some work for charities. Coulter is only looking out for herself and her view of the conservative movement.
Oh poor persecuted Christians. When will the good ole USofA ever give you guys a fair shake? And I don’t see why anyone is expecting arithmetic skills from people that think the world is 6000 years old. Coulter will lose her job the day the MSM turns its fickle microscope on her, just like Imus.
I think the Perkins comment echoes one that was discussed here recently by Dobson or one of his cohorts; they basically said that they define Christian as “Evangelical social conservatives”. The term apparently has nothing to do with Christ, but everything to do with politics according to this crowd.
How is it that in our nation where Muslims account for about 6 million of the 300 million living in this country, and Christians comprise 100 million, that Muslims can control the public policy and we cannot?
Well, let’s see, that would depend on whether Muslims actually do “control the public policy”. Seems to me more accurate to say that a corps of about 400,000 lobbyists (employed by who, exactly — those 6 million Muslims?) control the public policy, but hey, I must be one of them lefties.
A more notable point is Perkins’ peculiar idea that 100 million Christians in a democratic republic of 300 million voting citizens should feel entitled to the ability to control public policy. Last I heard, you need 50% of the vote, not 33%, to get a local leash law passed, never mind establish sweeping legislative agendas.
> Ann Coulter also repeated her
> “fag� slur regarding John
> Edwards at the conference
She’s a liability to everyone but the Left these days.
Don’t panic, people. It’s not like the people at these conferences are like Rushdoony, not limiting themselves merely to federal “blue laws,” but wanting more, the kind of thing the Left would like to scare people about. These people are simply tired of religious bigotry combined with a lack of (desired) influence in the Republican Party and especially in Washington. The “Separation of Church and State” people have for ages been bigoted as well as seeking what is not in the Constitution. (Government should neither promote nor prohibit religion and these libs want all kinds of government suppression of religion and religious-related normal-community-standard behavior. What’s next, making the Golden Rule and references to it illegal to place in government literature and statements?)
For those who don’t know who Rushdoony was, it’s not a cutesy variant on a talk show host’s name, but this guy, who sought a true nightmare of the Left–true theocracy, or “Dominion Theology” or “Theocratic Dominionism.”
Don’t panic. You’ll recognize it if they seek it, and have plenty of time and ability to react.
http://www.chalcedon.edu/
The conference people are much more tame, plainly and simply a bunch of typical Religious Right members, who are more conservative than stereotypical residents of Cambridge, Massachusetts, say.
http://www.reclaimamerica.org/
Rudi asked:
> If Imus can lose his gig, will Coulter['s]
> repeated remark be allowed to go without
> any consequence.
It’s already had consequences, negative for her and something Edwards could craftily exploit (positive for him).
Oh poor persecuted Christians. When will the good ole USofA ever give you guys a fair shake?
Sam your totally out in left field. America is Christian and treats Christians quite nicely thank you very much.
Those that despise Christians are the far left nut jobs led by Michael Moore and his conspiracy army. They are the ones blaming Christians and especially the Charismatic Christians for everything from Atomic bombs to Zebra Malaise.
As for being a Christian. America Loves me and I love America. We hold hands a lot. Sorry.
Actually I was being sarcastic. Christians make up 90% of the population, 99% of the elected officials, and 100% of our presidents. Yet every month or so I hear from some Christian leader about how their way of life in this country is in dire peril from the liberal media and activists judges because heathens aren’t forced to pray with them in school and gay people they don’t know or will ever meet get to be married. It just gets old.
> how their way of life in this country
> is in dire peril from the liberal media
> and activists judges
and liberal special interest groups and organizations like the “separation church and state” crowd. Not to mention the constant bigotry aimed at religious people by the Left — or at least, against Christians (who aren’t largely liberal and who don’t largely vote Democratic) as opposed to Jewish Americans and Muslims (who are, and do).
I could add that it’s made worse by the worst racism you typically will observe, namely that directed by the Left against Southern whites (black churches and left-activist black preachers are highly PC), and so I just did.
In fact, the GOP exploits the Religious Right, pandering to them before elections (as we see how) so they’ll turn out and vote largely Republican, and then often neglects them (which is why they complain about lack of support in Washington), even if they’re given a sop now and then (as we have seen with the Bush administration).
The GOP will never let the Religious Right achieve anything radical to the rest of the USA (at least to those who are sane and aren’t hatefully bigoted toward religion). The Left over-hypes the Religious Right all the time, making it a huge straw man.
It’s the worst of the Left that deserves what never will happen. Ha, ha, ha. Here’s how we can achieve better terms with and more toleration by Iran and the Saudis, at least at first — with a trip of our own back to the year 1500:
“[T]wo associates of the Rev. Jerry Falwell wrote an article which criticized Christian Reconstructionism, the influential movement led by theologian Rousas John (R.J.) Rushdoony, for advocating positions that even they as committed fundamentalists found ‘scary.’”
“In a world run by Rushdoony followers, sots would escape capital punishment–which would make them happy exceptions indeed. Those who would face execution include not only gays but a very long list of others: blasphemers, heretics, apostate Christians, people who cursed or struck their parents, females guilty of ‘unchastity before marriage,’ ‘incorrigible’ juvenile delinquents, adulterers, and (probably) telephone psychics. And that’s to say nothing of murderers and those guilty of raping married women or ‘betrothed virgins.’ Adulterers, among others, might meet their doom by being publicly stoned–a rather abrupt way for the Clinton presidency to end.”
“Almost any anti-abortion stance seems nuanced when compared with Gary North’s advocacy of public execution not just for women who undergo abortions but for those who advised them to do so. And with the Rushdoony faction proposing the actual judicial murder of gays, fewer blink at the position of a Gary Bauer or a Janet Folger, who support laws exposing them to mere imprisonment.”
“Reconstructionists provide the most enthusiastic constituency for stoning since the Taliban seized Kabul. ‘Why stoning?’ asks North. ‘There are many reasons. First, the implements of execution are available to everyone at virtually no cost.’ Thrift and ubiquity aside, ‘executions are community projects–not with spectators who watch a professional executioner do `his’ duty, but rather with actual participants.’ You might even say that like square dances or quilting bees, they represent the kind of hands-on neighborliness so often missed in this impersonal era. ‘That modern Christians never consider the possibility of the reintroduction of stoning for capital crimes,’ North continues, ‘indicates how thoroughly humanistic concepts of punishment have influenced the thinking of Christians.’ And he may be right about that last point, you know.”
http://www.reason.com/news/show/30789.html
“The Old Testament—with its 600 or so Mosaic laws—is the inflexible guide for the society DeMar and other Reconstructionists envision. Government posts would be reserved for the righteous, as long as they are male. There would be thousands of executions a year, with stoning a preferred method because it would turn the deaths into ‘community projects,’ as movement theologian North has noted. Sinners in line for the death penalty would include women who commit adultery or lie about their virginity, blasphemers, witches, children who strike their parents, and gay men (lesbians, however, would be spared because no specific reference to them can be found in the Books of Moses). DeMar told me that among Reconstructionists he is considered something of a liberal, because he’d execute gays only if they were caught indulging in sodomy. ‘I’m happy to just drive them back into the closet,’ he said.”
“Rushdoony denied the Holocaust and defended segregation and slavery”
“Traditionally, groups like Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority were ‘premillennial’: They believed that humanity was inevitably headed for Armageddon, which would most likely arrive with a nuclear blast, whereupon Christ would appear in the Second Coming and set things right. … Reconstruction’s alternative was ‘postmillennialism’: Christ would not return until the church had claimed dominion over government, and most of the world’s population had accepted the Reconstruction brand of Christianity. … For premillennialists, Reconstruction’s revolutionary philosophy offered an opportunity to turbocharge the religious right.”
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2005/12/a_nation_under_god.html
“The laws that Reconstructionists want to enforce are those of Ancient Israel. They believe that the Mosaic law is God’s blueprint for all societies. Transported to the context of twenty-first century America, they see themselves as ‘Christian Libertarians.’ Stripped to its barest essentials, here is their blueprint for America. Their ultimate goal is to make the U.S. Constitution conform to a strict, literal interpretation of Biblical law. To do that involves a series of legal and social reforms that will move society toward their goal.
1) Make the ten commandments the law of the land,
2) Reduce the role of government to the defense of property rights,
3) Require ‘tithes’ to ecclesiastical agencies to provide welfare services,
4) Close prisons – reinstitute slavery as a form of punishment and require capital punishment for all of ancient Israel’s capital offenses – including apostacy, blasphemy, incorrigibility in children, murder, rape, Sabbath breaking, sodomy, and witchcraft,
5) Close public schools – make parents totally responsible for the education of their children, and
6) Strengthen patriarchically ordered families.”
http://www.mainstreambaptists.org/mob4/dominionism.htm
Rudi said:
> If Imus can lose his gig, will Coulter
> repeated remark be allowed to go
> without any consequence.
As I wrote earlier, her conduct already has had consequences.
As a side note, I wanted to add that the true extremists about whom I posted material earlier would be Coulter’s undoing. You realize that the extremists are, among other things, sexist, so if Coulter and her deliberate controversy (and scummy behavior) were intended to advance any hard-core Religious Right membership, Coulter is simply being one of their female Useful Idiots, because in a “dominionist” nation (which we obviously will never experience), Coulter would be kept out of public, ideally barefoot and pregnant (would arranged marriages be used to deal with single women like her?).
.
>Oh poor persecuted Christians.
>When will the good ole USofA ever
>give you guys a fair shake?
You’re missing what’s really going on. Christians dominate public life, but they want to be persecuted. It makes them feel more Christ-like (“Blessed are they who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven”). Therefore they project their own dominance of public life onto their “enemies,” the secular-libero-dhimmi-aborto-islamo-fascists.
It’s not that they want to control the country, it’s that they’re ashamed they do.
> but they want to be persecuted
Prove it. Show us the words of theirs that say this.
The Baylor Religion Survey (2006), a survey of a random sample of Americans, found that 81.8% of the US population claims to be Christian. These numbers are similar to those found in other surveys of the US population (e.g., the General Social Survey & others). About a third, 33.6% are evangelical Christians; remember that even this group is fairly diverse, including the Mennonnites who are pacifists, as well as Southern Baptist who are definitely not (as a group) pacifists.
A hopefully helpful contribution from a religion researcher.
For more info, see: http://www.baylor.edu/content/services/document.php/33304.pdf
Prove it. Show us the words of theirs that say this.
Well, for starters they run the show in this country but keep crying about being put upon whenever they are not allowed to shove the bible in a heathens face. As if they are being persecuted. The “War on Christmas” was a great example of paranoia run amok. Standard belief from the far right runs as follows:
1) Christians are allowed to preach anywhere, anytime. Even in public settings such as schools where its almost guranteed you’ll be preaching to non Christians who probably don’t want to partake in the prayers.
2) Anything short of #1 is the work of anti-religon zealots trying to remove God from the USA. Despite the fact that worship in private, churches, or basically anywhere reasonable people practice their faiths exist for such purposes. You’d think there were bands of liberals shutting down churches by the score from some of the crap you hear on FOX.
3) Creationists pushing into public schools. Again, like they don’t have any other outlet for their teachings, they have to come into actual learning institutions and be allowed to spew there.
> they run the show in this country
They do not.
> Christians are allowed to
> preach anywhere, anytime.
No, they aren’t. They can’t even say invocations at graduation ceremonies or sporting events sometimes!
> Anything short of #1 is
> the work of anti-religon
>zealots trying to remove
> God from the USA.
Well, that’s often the case, as well as the truly silly and disgusting things like getting Santa Claus off the state fairgrounds, Pledge of Allegiance BS, “separation of church and state” misconstruction, etc.
> You’d think there were bands
> of liberals shutting down churches
> by the score from some of the
> crap you hear on FOX.
“It’s a conspiracyyyyyyy to destroyyyyyyy A m e r i c a.”
I suppose if that’s what you wish to hear, but…
attacks on religion to a pathological degree (as opposed to attacks on churches) are commonplace.
> Creationists pushing into public schools.
A small piece of truth, and easy enough to face, given that most non-activists do not want this any more than the lefties.
> The Baylor Religion Survey (2006),
> a survey of a random sample of
> Americans, found that 81.8% of
> the US population claims to be Christian.
This isn’t the least bit surprising. Most people brought up exposed in any to religion are exposed to Christianity and it’s part of the nation’s heritage, so (other than to radicals) it’s no sin (pun intended) and a commonly desired thing to identify one’s self in that way — even if one is not explicitly or actively religious.
The same is true for European heritage as well as our English libertarian heritage.