An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Resurrection of Intolerance (Guest Voice)

Resurrection of Intolerance

by Walter Brasch

The fanatic right-wing, after taking a few days off to catch their breath, is back again with vengeance.

Name anything that President Obama is doing, and this broken wing will try to slap it down, unmindful that more than two-thirds of Americans support the President, with his popularity rising each week, according to several independent polls.

During the campaign, they attacked Obama for being a Muslim. After all, they figured anyone with a name that wasn’t WASP-sounding must not be a Christian. Of course, they overlooked the Constitution, which says anyone—Christian, Muslim, Jew, or even atheist—has a right to be president.

When the Muslim connection didn’t wash with the people, the right-wing said that Obama went to the wrong Christian church. The United Church of Christ, many claimed, wasn’t even Christian because it allowed people of all views into its congregations. For the shrill-voiced pretend-Christians, their religion is more a religion of exclusion than of inclusion.

Then, during Easter Week, the holiest of Christian holidays, the lunatic fringe showed just how far from Christianity it is. On talk shows and in vitriolic columns, the hard-core conservative base blasted the President for not going to church every Sunday. But then, the President and his family attended Easter Day services at St. John’s Episcopal Church. The family’s plans had been kept secret, both for security reasons and because the President had stated many times both before and after his inauguration that he needed time to find an appropriate congregation and because he was mindful that his presence would, even unintentionally, disrupt services.

Undoubtedly, the harpies of the extreme right-wing will now suggest that the President attended services only because they had raised the issue, and that his attendance was solely for political reasons.

What these self-righteous harpies don’t point out, is that while the President and his family are looking for an appropriate church, he’s hosted prayer meetings and a Passover Seder, and acted in a way that is far more what Christian charity asks than many who put out litmus tests made up of requirements that might make God weep.

So, here’s a few facts for this group—just in case they were foaming at the mouth during their own religious education, and didn’t hear their lessons.

One: More presidents didn’t attend church weekly than did. Among those who had very irregular church attendance was Thomas Jefferson, a deist not a Christian, who had insisted that freedom of religion be a part of the Constitution.

Two: People can go to church twice a week, and participate in every ritual and still not understand the words and teachings of God and his prophets.

Three: Persons who don’t go to church every week aren’t worse than those who do.

Four: A church is a building. If God is omnipresent, he is present in every part of this universe, not just in buildings. Persons can understand and have their own faith without going into a building, for the spirit of God is within their hearts.

Five: No one has absolute truth, and any attempt to impose one’s faith upon others is a selfish and egocentric approach to religion, something Moses, Jesus, Buddha, Confucius, and Mohammad would find appalling.

Finally: If the fanatics continue their shrill screeches that President Obama and his family attend church every Sunday to show the nation they are “true Christians,” they should consider that one of the most influential conservative presidents never attended Sunday services while president, believing his presence would disrupt Sunday services.

That man was Ronald Reagan.

[Walter M. Brasch is a university professor of journalism, social issues columnist, and the author of 17 books. His current book is Sinking the Ship of State: The Presidency of George W. Bush, available from amazon.com, bn.com, and other stores. You may contact him through his website, www.walterbrasch.com]

  • CStanley
    Anna: You'd think wrong, and unfortunately for you the evidence is on my side.

    Exhibit A

    Exhibit B

    Exhibit C

    If you haven't noticed the pattern yet, none of those have anything to do with a defensive assertion of Christianity against false allegations of being Muslim- they're all stating the obvious (and successful) coaptation of Christianity to attract the more liberal evangelical voters to the Democratic party.

    To me, that's just par for the course in politics, but I don't see an intellectually honest way to justify the criticism of the right for doing it without making Obama open to the same scrutiny.

    And as for your closeup view from Chicago, you don't have to be up close to read the many accounts of how and why he ended up at Trinity Church. He didn't have to "make religion" part of his campaign, it was already an integral part once he became a member of a church that's so integrated with Chicago politics.
  • Anna
    CStanley,

    I would think even you'd admit that Obama didn't make his Christianity any part of his campaign until he was being accused of being a Muslim (or closet Muslim Manchurian candidate) by elements on the right. I can assure you that being from Chicago, Obama never made religion part of any of his local campaigns.
  • CStanley
    I agree with most of the points somewhat (I actually have a different personal opinion about the value and importance of formalized worship but I consider it none of my business to tell other people that my opinion is the correct one for them.)

    But I'm curious when the rule "He made it relevant for voters to criticize on this basis when he made his Christiantiy part of his campaign" became null and void?

    I never agreed with that rule, but I saw many people justifying the most outrageous judgmental comments toward Christian conservatives for the past eight years (or more.) What's changed other than a Democrat, liberal Christian being the subject of discussion?
  • mlhradio
    Joeaudio - You'll quickly learn that there is no point in arguing with trolls like Deadbrain. They refuse to listen to reason. So best to ignore them and stick to the original post to begin with.

    (I am beginning to think that use of either the phrase 'fascist' or 'Obama's birth certificate' should become the new Godwin's Law.)
  • joeaudio
    Please pardon me for commenting on other commentators without acknowledging Walter's post.
    I've forwarded this post to others, including my wife, who is "Director of Liturgy" at a local (Catholic) Church.
    The points (particularly 2-5) are excellent and should be considered by all folks of any faith at all.
  • joeaudio
    braindead,
    you are making a lot of incorrect assumptions. you don't know anything about me.
    look in the mirror yourself.

    birth certificate:
    you wrote:
    "where is his birth certificate. All I saw was a laser printed duplicate on the internet. Didnt know they had laser printers in 1960"
    the internet didn't exist in 1960 either.
    proof of conspiracy?
    ya.
    don't need to call you names, you know who you are.
  • Braindead
    Comeone Joeaudio

    Where is it? Why does he guard it with a team of lawyers. Where is his real birth certificate? One published on Daily KOS doesnt exactly instill confidence now does it.

    But you essentially call me names for my points and then you start your left wing rally rant. Bushco. Disastrous. I suggest that you look in the mirror and remind yourself that you were one of those I was talking about who tried everything he could to destroy the Bush presidency.

    The right learned well from you. For the rest of you. Remember. What goes around comes around in Politics.
  • joeaudio
    Can't argue with someone who knows he's braindead.
    I have a right wingnut relative who goes off on rants and I have to explain to him that's it's impossible to argue with ignorance and stupidity. or braindead.
    For the rest of you, please consider that Bush was elected without a majority of the popular vote and achieved a high rating as the country rallied after Bush/Cheney failed to prevent the 9/11 attacks. Rally round the flag boys!
    The Bushco fall from popularity occured after he failed to get Bin Laden and started a disastrous, pointless war in Iraq.
    If Obama starts a stupid war, he deserves equal infamy.

    But the birth certificate thing? Please, get a clue. Any clue. One would be a start.
  • robroy
    Jimmy Carter had a 69% popularitiy rating. Obama is now down to 63% rating. And your point?

    Obama's choice of the Episcopal church seems a natural. The Episcopalians recently chose for the deanship of one of their seminaries a lesbian priestess who, in a speech, led the crowd in a chant, "Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done." Jibes well with Mr. Obama's work as a state senator to oppose any restrictions on late term abortions.
  • Braindead
    Remember Bush was once popular. Had a 70 percent approval rating and then the left wing went on their BDS rant. They did the exact same thing to Bush that the right is doing to Obama.

    The right is tearing him down one peg at a time. They learned well from the Left. They watched and learned and they are returning the favor. They are whittling away at the publics belief in his ability to lead. One point at a time.

    One point a month. In 45 months his rating will be around 25 percent. Just about right for election time. Obama needs to hire Chris Mathews to write him a speech telling all us Americans that we need to cheer up.......More money is being printed.

    Incidently where is his birth certificate. All I saw was a laser printed duplicate on the internet. Didnt know they had laser printers in 1960 or when ever he claims he was born.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC