I Didn't Want to Write This
It wasn't my intention to write a political blog. I didn't want to make fighting the rise of the right-wing quasi-Christians my reason for being.
I wanted to write about the beauty in the world. The poetry in great art, the music in architecture, the drama in sculpture. I wanted to talk about the way a song or a great novel can lift a human heart above the basic struggles of living and give us wings. I wanted to write about ideas and the value in play.
It didn't work out that way. I've never cared that much about politics. Despite my own faith and beliefs, I never really worried much about the religious beliefs of others. I was brought up to believe that there was room for everyone in this country, that as long as you didn't step on someone else's toes, you could go your own way. I always thought that was really the idea of our nation. But I've learned in the last decade or so that there's a movement that doesn't believe in freedom for anyone but their own; that believes their way is the only way, and they're ready and willing to enforce this belief no matter who gets hurt. This movement is extremely disciplined, they're all on the same page, they march in step. They use the most private insecurities of a vulnerable population to expand their power, increase their wealth by manipulating their very need for meaning in life - their need to believe. They work in concert with a nascent political philosophy inaccurately known as "neoconservativism" that seeks a society where the weak disappear and power is God. They've convinced the fearful, the less educated, the middle class and poor whites that there are enemies all around, and to vote against their own best interest using a fantasy of security, of "values" but not morals. They are not tolerant of dissent.
This movement, which I believe is set on the very destruction of the best of our society is called by many names, but none of these names is really accurate. "Religious Right" misses the mark and "Christian Conservatives" is way off, since they are neither Christian or conservative. "Evangelicals" is closer, but I'm not willing to cede the concept of evangelism to this vicious crowd. I guess "fanatics" is probably closest to the mark but it just doesn't get across the way this movement is willing to dress itself in the clothes of reasonable people, with titles like "Reverend" and "Senator" and "Chairman of a conservative think tank". Scratch the surface on these folks and you get the mirror image of the wild-eyed terrorist, willing to meet his maker in cleansing blast of righteousness.
A movement so bent on destruction needs an enemy, and that's me, and if you're reading this, probably you, too. We were brought up to believe that religious beliefs were a personal matter. A very personal matter. Decent people didn't go around putting pressure on friends, co-workers, neighbors or children put into our care, such as students or Cub Scouts or the kids next door. If you were the type who went around asking people if they were "saved" it meant that you were a little bit looney, and you probably weren't going to get invited to the next barbecue. But today, if you're NOT saved, for a lot of people and institutions, including some of our government institutions, you don't exist. Think about this: If a presidential candidate were to admit that even though he believes in God, he's not much on going to church on Sunday, could he become President? He couldn't even get a nomination. In fact, if a candidate doesn't claim to be born again chances are good that he won't get a chance to run. So we've already got a RELIGIOUS LITMUS TEST for presidential candidates. Joe Lieberman only got by because he's a devout orthodox Jew. If he'd been a secular Jew, no way.
The ironic part of all this is that it's only the generous tolerance of the vast majority of open-minded Americans that made this theocracy happen. We always knew a few nuts who believed that evolution never happened (it's only a theory after all, they say, showing a misunderstanding of both the science of evolution and the word "theory") or neighborhood cranks who used to warn that we were all going to burn in Hell and sometimes shouted it from streetcorners. But we used to simply walk around them and shrug: "It's a free country, after all." But it took the politics of terror to put so much fear into us that we actually voted those wackos into power. Now we have to pay the price for a few more years, but have we learned the lesson? Do we now understand that the folks who believe God is whispering in their ears are always going to be more dedicated, more fervent, more willing to go to their neighbors with petitions, more willing to strap on bombs? To the Evangelicals, the Jihadists, this is an end-game. They're willing to accept nuclear options, mutual assured destruction, final solutions. It doesn't bother them to throw the baby out with the bath water (as long as it's not unborn), because their shallow interpretations of scripture tell them Armageddon is coming, there will be no tomorrow. The scary part is that they are now in a position to make Armageddon happen.
If we're going to insure a future for our children and grandchildren, one that's free of abortion-bombers and burkahs, we're going to have to shore up the separation between church and state that our founders so presciently made. We're going to have to make sure that people seeking to govern our country are able to put love of their country and their countrymen before the mandates of their own faiths. The evangelicals tell us that they cannot do this. There's our answer.
I wanted to write about the beauty in the world. The poetry in great art, the music in architecture, the drama in sculpture. I wanted to talk about the way a song or a great novel can lift a human heart above the basic struggles of living and give us wings. I wanted to write about ideas and the value in play.
It didn't work out that way. I've never cared that much about politics. Despite my own faith and beliefs, I never really worried much about the religious beliefs of others. I was brought up to believe that there was room for everyone in this country, that as long as you didn't step on someone else's toes, you could go your own way. I always thought that was really the idea of our nation. But I've learned in the last decade or so that there's a movement that doesn't believe in freedom for anyone but their own; that believes their way is the only way, and they're ready and willing to enforce this belief no matter who gets hurt. This movement is extremely disciplined, they're all on the same page, they march in step. They use the most private insecurities of a vulnerable population to expand their power, increase their wealth by manipulating their very need for meaning in life - their need to believe. They work in concert with a nascent political philosophy inaccurately known as "neoconservativism" that seeks a society where the weak disappear and power is God. They've convinced the fearful, the less educated, the middle class and poor whites that there are enemies all around, and to vote against their own best interest using a fantasy of security, of "values" but not morals. They are not tolerant of dissent.
This movement, which I believe is set on the very destruction of the best of our society is called by many names, but none of these names is really accurate. "Religious Right" misses the mark and "Christian Conservatives" is way off, since they are neither Christian or conservative. "Evangelicals" is closer, but I'm not willing to cede the concept of evangelism to this vicious crowd. I guess "fanatics" is probably closest to the mark but it just doesn't get across the way this movement is willing to dress itself in the clothes of reasonable people, with titles like "Reverend" and "Senator" and "Chairman of a conservative think tank". Scratch the surface on these folks and you get the mirror image of the wild-eyed terrorist, willing to meet his maker in cleansing blast of righteousness.
A movement so bent on destruction needs an enemy, and that's me, and if you're reading this, probably you, too. We were brought up to believe that religious beliefs were a personal matter. A very personal matter. Decent people didn't go around putting pressure on friends, co-workers, neighbors or children put into our care, such as students or Cub Scouts or the kids next door. If you were the type who went around asking people if they were "saved" it meant that you were a little bit looney, and you probably weren't going to get invited to the next barbecue. But today, if you're NOT saved, for a lot of people and institutions, including some of our government institutions, you don't exist. Think about this: If a presidential candidate were to admit that even though he believes in God, he's not much on going to church on Sunday, could he become President? He couldn't even get a nomination. In fact, if a candidate doesn't claim to be born again chances are good that he won't get a chance to run. So we've already got a RELIGIOUS LITMUS TEST for presidential candidates. Joe Lieberman only got by because he's a devout orthodox Jew. If he'd been a secular Jew, no way.
The ironic part of all this is that it's only the generous tolerance of the vast majority of open-minded Americans that made this theocracy happen. We always knew a few nuts who believed that evolution never happened (it's only a theory after all, they say, showing a misunderstanding of both the science of evolution and the word "theory") or neighborhood cranks who used to warn that we were all going to burn in Hell and sometimes shouted it from streetcorners. But we used to simply walk around them and shrug: "It's a free country, after all." But it took the politics of terror to put so much fear into us that we actually voted those wackos into power. Now we have to pay the price for a few more years, but have we learned the lesson? Do we now understand that the folks who believe God is whispering in their ears are always going to be more dedicated, more fervent, more willing to go to their neighbors with petitions, more willing to strap on bombs? To the Evangelicals, the Jihadists, this is an end-game. They're willing to accept nuclear options, mutual assured destruction, final solutions. It doesn't bother them to throw the baby out with the bath water (as long as it's not unborn), because their shallow interpretations of scripture tell them Armageddon is coming, there will be no tomorrow. The scary part is that they are now in a position to make Armageddon happen.
If we're going to insure a future for our children and grandchildren, one that's free of abortion-bombers and burkahs, we're going to have to shore up the separation between church and state that our founders so presciently made. We're going to have to make sure that people seeking to govern our country are able to put love of their country and their countrymen before the mandates of their own faiths. The evangelicals tell us that they cannot do this. There's our answer.
posted by Nittacci at 11:17 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home