“Deeply hath sunk the lesson
thou hast given and shall not soon depart.”
— William C. Bryant
Introduction
In the late 1980s, Neopagan newsletters and
journals were publishing articles about a religious freedom organization
(now defunct), that had been founded by Christian Fundamentalists
and which had invited Neopagans to join. The response from Neopagans
at the time was, I believed, naive. That led to the first publishing
of this essay in 1990 under the title, “Can We Trust ‘Friendly’
Fundamentalists?” During the 1990s, organizations such as
the Moral Majority and the Christian Coalition almost completely
took over the Republican Party on a local and state level, and
bragged about their abilities to control the results of elections.
By the mid-90s, they were riding high and convinced that they
had essential control over the Congress, if not the rest of the
national government.
However, Republican Representatives and Senators
failed to drive Bill Clinton out of office amid a bewildering
(to them) amount of high public support for the President. That
support was rooted, I believe, not just in a good economy, but
also in three other factors: (1) the common cultural expectation
that a nation’s ruler is supposed to be a “stud”
(thus fulfilling the Indo-European
“Third Function” of fertility); (2) the quiet agreement
of the average (straight) American male that if he were
the nation’s primary power object, he too would probably
take advantage of the many women approaching him as such; and
(3) the simple fact that most Americans simply don’t care
about a politician’s sex life, as long as it doesn’t
interfere with doing his or her job.
During the 1990s, the Religious Right began
to realize and admit that it had already lost the “culture
wars” with the rest of modern society. This bitter pill
combined with millennial fever to put some Fundamentalist Christian
leaders into a frenzy. Many of them actually hoped that
the dreaded Y2K Bug would lead to a collapse of the national
and state governments, so that they could have used their already
existing political networks and militia groups to take over in
the subsequent power vacuum. When 2001 c.e. arrived and neither
the longed-for Armageddon nor their Second Coming occurred, their
cultural (if not their political) power was severely shaken.
History, however, shows that opponents are
often most dangerous when they have accepted defeat and no longer
care about their own survival — just the destruction of
as many enemies as they can take down with them. Surely, many
in the Religious Right were thrilled with their candidate’s
successful thefts of the Presidency in 2000 and 2004 and his
cheerful willingness to appoint or nominate any rightwing lunatic
or corporate pirate they care to offer. In these dangerous times,
American Neopagans, and all others who cherish our constitutional
freedoms, should improve our understanding of what Fundamentalism
is, of the long-range plans of Christian Reconstructionism/Dominionism,
and of what a Fundamentalist considers “religious freedom.”
For that matter, the ongoing slaughter in the Middle East, not
to mention the horrific attacks against the United States in
September of 2001, show that religious Fundamentalism of any
sort is a threat to the lives and well-being of every man, woman
and child in the world.
If, by the way, you feel that this essay and
others on this site such as the one on the Real
Origins of Halloween are filled with “hatred of Christianity,”
you might wish to read “Anti-Christianity”
and Who Hates Who?
Defining “Fundamentalism”
Throughout this essay I’m going to be
referring to “Fundamentalists,” so perhaps I should
clarify the term. Let me start, as I so often do, with a historical
review of the term — on this occasion quoting from a standard
mainstream Christian reference book, the 1964 edition of A
Handbook of Theological Terms, by Van A. Harvey:
“Fundamentalism
is a name that was attached to the viewpoint of those who, shortly
after the turn of the [19th-20th] century, resisted all liberal
attempts to modify orthodox Protestant belief or to question
the infallibility of the Bible in any respect. The name is derived
from a series of tracts published between 1912-14, entitled The
Fundamentals that aimed at defining and defending the essentials
of Protestant doctrine. The most important of the fundamental
doctrines were (1) the inspiration and infallibility of the Bible,
(2) the doctrine of the Trinity, (3) the virgin birth and deity
of Christ, (4) the substitutionary theory of the atonement, (5)
the bodily resurrection, ascension and second coming of Christ
(parousia).
Since most of these beliefs have been a part of Christian orthodoxy
[for fifteen centuries], historians have seen the uniqueness
of Fundamentalism to consist in its violent opposition to all
beliefs that seem opposed to some teaching of the Bible. In the
twenties and thirties, this opposition was focused particularly
on any theory of man’s [sic] origins, especially evolution,
that seemed incompatible with the account in Genesis. Consequently,
Fundamentalism tended to be identified with blind opposition
to all critical inquiry.
Because of this identification, certain conservative
theologians who share the above-described beliefs but who think
they can be defended in a rational manner have tended to shirk
the name “fundamentalist” and call themselves “evangelical
conservatives.” They generally oppose the spirit of ecumenism
and any theology, including neo-Reformed theology, which does
not regard the Bible as the absolute and infallible rule of faith
and practice.”
Notice that over 40 years ago this Christian
scholar was mentioning the “…violent opposition
to all beliefs that seem opposed to some teaching…”
The term “Fundamentalist” has since been extended by
the mass media to refer to “Fundamentalist” Jews, Moslems,
and even Hindus! In each case, the inference is that some people
refuse to budge from the most conservative version of their faith
that is available to them and resist, even to the point of violence,
all competing worldviews, including scientific knowledge about
the origins of life, the age of the Earth, and the fact that
Earth is not really the center of the universe. Non-Protestant
Christian examples would be ultra-conservatives within both Roman
and Eastern Orthodox Catholicism, as well as some Mormons
(though non-Mormons often consider all members of the Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints “non-Christian”).
Non-Christian examples include some Orthodox and Hassidic
Jews, and many if not most Muslims. Atheistic and agnostic
examples would include many Marxists and Secular Humanists.
| Vocabulary Note: I’ve spent years trying to come up with appropriate
cross-religious terminology to use to refer to particular religious
phenomena. “Fundamentalist” is the best term I’ve
been able to find to use as shorthand for “ultra-conservative,
rigidly dualist, deliberately ignorant, force approving, religious
fanatic/extremist.” It at least has the advantage that most
English speakers already know it and many of them use it this
way, much to the annoyance of some who call themselves Fundamentalist.
Mainstream theologians and religious studies professors have
not been forthcoming with alternate terminology, perhaps because
of their own academic or theological agendas/fashions/limits.
I am very much open to suggestions for other terms that will
cover this complex but distinctive spiritual/religious dysfunction.
As Karen Armstrong says, in her brilliant (if genteely dualist)
The
Battle for God, “...the term is not perfect, but
it is a useful label for movements that, despite their differences,
bear a strong family resemblance.” |
It should be obvious that the following words
are my religious, philosophical, historical, political, and cultural
opinions. But so are the statements made by those who disagree
with me, even if they claim that their opinions are their “God’s.”
The Unholy Trinity
It seems to me that the primary emotions driving
Fundamentalists are an Unholy Trinity of anger, hatred and fear:
anger that there are other belief systems in the world (implying
the possibility that their own faith might not be the One True
Right and Only Way after all); hatred of these other competing
faiths and their followers for daring to exist and declining
to convert; a fear that if these other faiths are allowed to
continue, that they will seduce the Fundamentalists’ membership
away, and (for the theists) an even deeper fear that if their
beliefs are actually incorrect, then they will have essentially
wasted their lives avoiding happiness in the here-and-now while
chasing their “pie in the sky when they die.”
While a psychological analysis of their religious
beliefs infuriates The
True Believer, it can nonetheless be quite revealing
to outside observers. It seems obvious to me that this Unholy
Trinity is a religious expression of the severely dysfunctional
childhoods so common to Fundamentalists. The emotional repression
involved in being raised as a Fundamentalist tends to breed anger,
hatred and fear towards yourself and the world around you.
Fundamentalism, with its pervasive sense of
guilt about most normal physical and emotional feelings, and
its patriarchal structure wherein the father’s word is law,
creates family atmospheres in which emotional, physical and/or
sexual abuse of children is the rule, not the exception.
Such abuse, now being publicized thanks to organizations such
as Fundamentalists Anonymous, Walk Away, and various incest
survivors’ groups, can’t help but create personalities
in which legitimate anger, hatred, and fear towards their abusers
is redirected inwards, creating the guilt and shame so useful
for their religious authorities. Later in life, these painful
emotions can be redirected again, this time towards approved
targets — people with different religious and moral convictions
than those one’s family claims.
Again, I’m using the term “Fundamentalists”
very broadly. I’ve heard similar life histories from people
raised as Orthodox Jews, Mormons, and Jehovah’s Witnesses
— and I can clearly remember the patterns from my own Roman
Catholic childhood.
The Unholy Trinity is exhibited in other ways
that have affected all of Western history: anger towards ambiguity
(why can’t Mom/Dad/Siblings be predictable?); hatred towards
women (why didn’t Mom protect me?); and a generalized fear
of the entire world (what awful thing will happen to me next?).
The resulting emotional turmoil from these factors can’t
help but warp the overall worldview, and thus the religious beliefs
and actions, of the victims.
Arguing with Fundamentalists
Many people of good will are naive enough
to think that they can logically persuade Fundamentalists to
be more tolerant. Unfortunately, trying to discuss religion with
a Fundamentalist (and many Evangelicals) is like trying to discuss
color theory with people who can only see black and white. When
you try to point out, however diplomatically, that their vision
is limited by their inability to see red, green, blue or yellow,
they will insist that it is your view that is the limited
one, because you can’t see that a black and white world
view is more accurate in some ultimate way. If you suggest that
the universe is more complex than their dogmatic divisions of
100% Truth vs. 100% Falsehood, they will accuse you of
being dogmatic, because you refuse to concede that their dogmas
might be 100% True. Their next step is usually to denounce you
as demonic, or the dupe of demons, for thinking that there might
be any Truth outside their particular denomination’s version
of their scriptures.
More sophisticated (or pretentious) Fundamentalists
will suggest that critics of Fundamentalism should try to raise
objections which show that it fails on “its own terms,”
rather than on “your terms.” This, of course, is impossible,
not because Fundamentalism has no gaping holes in its theology
(it has many, as any moderate or liberal Jewish, Christian or
Islamic theologian will be happy to explain), but because it
is a closed logic system that defines itself as always True and
all differing views as always False — hence logical “failure”
can never be demonstrated because it literally cannot
be perceived by the Fundamentalists. In other words, they cheat.
The immunity to change that characterizes
the Fundamentalist logic system is turned into a virtue by sneering
references to “the theological fallacy of testing God’s
authoritative word by extra-scriptural standards” —
as if a book that’s been around for two thousand years hasn’t
provided plenty of time for scribes to insert ex post facto
evidence of its prophetic “fulfillment.” As for what
they assume “your terms” are, this is usually a simplistic
cartoon that distorts and blurs together every competing view
on the planet into a dualistic mirror of their own, which they
then can triumphantly defeat. This is the famous “straw
man” gambit (making up an easily-defeated caricature of
your opponent’s supposed arguments) that first year philosophy
students learn about.
When Fundamentalism’s prime philosophical
opposition came from Scientistic
atheists and agnostics, who were dualists themselves, it was
relatively easy for Fundamentalists to get away with playing
this game. They are much more confused — and threatened
— by pluralism, relativity, and ambiguity, hence their urgent
need to reduce all complexity to the psychologically soothing
(if philosophically and spiritually bankrupt) simplicity of dualism. More
dangerously, for those of us who care about human rights, this
desperate need for a simple universe leads Christian and Islamic
Fundamentalists to desire secular power to enforce their theological,
economic, and social opinions (which they call “God’s
Law”) upon every man, woman, and child on the planet, and
to violently eliminate all competing worldviews. (Jewish
Fundamentalists, however, only want to have total domination
over the territory that their predecessors ruled 2,500 years
ago, as well as over every Jewish family elsewhere in the world.)
When Fundamentalists get into secular power, they use that power
to shove their dogmas down everyone else’s throats using
whatever violence is necessary to silence dissent, as any glance
at Ireland, Israel/Palestine and most Islamic nations will reveal.
And then their insatiable lust for power will lead them to try
to export their Fundamentalism elsewhere, until the entire world
is under their control.
Religious Genocide and Toleration
While Jews have often been falsely blamed
for many things, it does seem true that the ancient Hebrews invented
religious genocide, which is the killing of other peoples
for having a different religion than the killers’ own. They
did this by murdering the priestesses and priests of the competing
deities worshiped within their own population, then the competing
clergy of all the local tribes. For good measure, they also killed
the conquered tribe’s adults and boys, keeping only the
little girls whom they could then rape and brainwash into the
new religion of Yahwehism and their new roles as slaves to men
(don’t take my word for it, the “Old Testament”
is filled with examples). Jeramiah and his revisionist followers
did their worst to remove the evidence of Yahweh’s wife
Tiamat, and demoted the other deities to “angels.”
The history of what then became known as Judaism is, if we are
to believe the Biblical tales (as we are ordered to do), in large
part one of sanctimonious religious terrorism — practiced
right up to the time when their weapons were physically taken
away from them.
Whenever they were a conquered people, the
Jews believed fervently and sincerely in religious freedom, but
whenever they had land and political freedom again, that freedom
vanished for all but themselves. Fifteen centuries of officially
approved Christian oppression and persecution, culminating in
the Nazi Holocaust (which had little to do with a few Nazi’s
garbled Germanic Meso-Paganism,
and very much to do with a pandemic Catholic and Lutheran anti-Semitism),
made religious freedom again a cherished ideal. Yet as soon as
there was a chance for another Jewish state, Fundamentalist Jews
were quick to oppress the non-Fundamentalist Jews and all the
non-Jews then or later in residence. The results have been the
current mess you can observe on your TV news every night.
Let’s not overlook the equally charming
history of Islam — another desert monotheism that started
by committing religious genocide against local Paleopagans, blaspheming
their deities, erasing the memories of their deity’s Divine
Consort, enslaving their women, and oppressing unbelievers whenever
possible. Moslem leaders and clergy, too, have promoted the ideals
of religious freedom and toleration whenever economic or political
fortunes have been against them, only to toss those ideals out
the window when Islam was in power. You may examine modern Iran,
Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, or any other nation in which
Fundamentalist Moslems are in power, for current examples. Most
of the hatred for the United States and the Western World that
motivated the Islamic terrorists who committed mass murder in
the U.S. was rooted firmly in Islamic Fundamentalism. (The rest
came from long-standing economic and political grievances, some
of them the direct result of our Power
Elite’s decisions over the last fifty years, that
the American people have ignored to our sorrow.)
That brings us back to Christian Fundamentalism
and a bloody history with which most Neopagans (and other western
non-Christians) are only too familiar. More men, women, and children
have been enslaved, tortured, raped, mutilated, and murdered
in the name of Jesus Christ than in the name of any other deity
in recorded history. Conservative Christians have oppressed Jews,
Moslems, Buddhists, Pagans, and other Christians throughout their
centuries of power; preaching religious intolerance as the word
of Jehovah whenever they had the military, political, or economic
power to make it stick — and then piously preaching brotherhood,
peace, and toleration when they didn’t. One cannot honestly
argue that these people “weren’t real Christians,”
when the people ordering and leading the Crusades, Inquisitions,
pogroms and lynch mobs were usually the highest religious authorities
in their denominations, making decisions based on what was then
mainstream Christian doctrines laid down after the movement took
over the Roman Empire.
The various sayings to be found in their scriptures
give monotheists a choice of which Trinity to worship. One is
the previously mentioned Unholy Trinity of anger, hatred and
fear: anger towards the unbelievers, hatred of “sin”
(i.e. different moral beliefs and those who live by them) and
fear “of the Lord” (meaning, fear of deviation from
the One True Way and fear of weapon-bearing enforcers of orthodoxy).
The other option is a somewhat holier Trinity of peace (from
the spiritual serenity their beliefs are supposed to give them),
love for all humanity (as supposedly being fellow children of
the same God), and hope for a new world (here or in their Heaven).
Because of the dualism
inherent in conservative monotheism, however, individuals and
sects tend to flip-flop between the corresponding extremes. The
liberals and the oppressed among them stress the positive side
of their scriptural message, while the conservatives and those
in power stress the negative side. Of course, the conservatives
often use the positive vocabulary when proselytizing, and both
the liberals and the conservatives routinely describe each other
as not being real members of The Faith. This gives both camps
what is now called “plausible deniability” for ancient
and modern crimes committed in the name of Moses, Jesus or Mohammed.
Do we blame modern ultra-conservative Jews,
Christians or Moslems for the crimes of their predecessors? Of
course not. No one deserves to be blamed for real or alleged
crimes committed by their ancestors or predecessors (though that
kind of liberal thinking destroys the whole Original Sin doctrine).
We can and should, however, blame specific Fundamentalists
and their beliefs for crimes they advocate and commit today.
Jewish Fundamentalists murdering Palestinians, Islamic Fundamentalists
bombing shopping malls and and flying jets into office buildings,
and right wing Christians killing doctors and clinic workers
(not to mention right wing Catholics and Protestants murdering
each other’s families in Ireland) are all acting out some
of their belief systems’ most basic (fundamental) doctrines,
beneath the additional layers of political and economic conflict.
For those who insist that they must keep all of their faith’s
doctrines, not just the ones they like, this should inspire
a reassessment of those doctrines. But of course, it seldom does,
because absolute truth claims are inseperable from atrocities
committed to support those claims.
Why Neopagans Frighten Fundamentalists
Do Fundamentalist monotheists hate Neopagans
more than they do the members of all the other competing religions
around these days? Well, not all of them do. Most of the Fundamentalist
Moslems in the world, for example, have never heard of Neopaganism.
They are too busy killing Christians in Lebanon, Jews in Israel/Palestine,
Hindus in India, Buddhists in Indonesia, authors in England,
moderate Moslems at home, and “Satanic Americans” in
office towers, to pay any attention to what appears to be a Western
religious movement with no appreciable presence in the Islamic
world. I’m sure though, if any Neopagans show up over there
and are stupid enough to mention their beliefs, Islamic Fundamentalists
will be quick to add them to their target list.
Most of the Fundamentalist Jews aren’t
paying any attention to Neopaganism either. We’re just one
more non-Jewish religion that their kids are straying off to,
and we’re viewed as a form of “craziness” rather
than evil (I suppose that’s an improvement). Of course,
some rabbis have noticed that many Neopagans are “offering
our cakes to the Queen of Heaven,” just like the Caanites
whom their predecessors slaughtered so many years ago, so we
are causing some fear and loathing in those Orthodox and Hassidic
Jews who know of us.
It’s the Christian Fundamentalists, however,
in whom we inspire the greatest anger, hatred, and fear. They
routinely denounce Buddhism, Taoism, the New Age, and all other
competing belief systems, just as they have always done, but
seem to save their greatest vituperation for occultists in general
and Neopagans (especially Witches) in particular. As most Neopagans
know, Christian Fundamentalists are constantly publishing and
broadcasting blasphemies against our deities, slanders against
our members, and half-truths and outright lies about our beliefs
and practices. Over and over, they strive to convince the general
public, the media, and the civil governments that we are devil
worshiping murderers, rapists, child abusers, and even cannibals.
Their kids beat up our kids in school, their adults vandalize
our stores and temples, shoot bullets through our windows, and
manipulate the courts to remove our children from us. Why? What
is it about Neopaganism that makes some Christian Fundamentalists
so desperate that they will repeatedly violate most of their
own Ten Commandments to try and stop us?
There are a number of theological reasons
why Fundamentalists of any monotheistic persuasion would find
Neopaganism disturbing; after all, we disagree with them about
almost everything they consider important. But so do the Buddhists,
the Taoists, the Hindus, and most of the other “new”
religions on the American religious scene. The real reasons for
the severity of Fundamentalist attacks on the Neopagan community
are, as usual, not theological at all.
We believe in magic
— that anyone can learn to do miracles. That makes their
Christ (assuming he ever actually lived, which is still an open
question among non-Fundamentalist historians) merely another
famous magician among many. This destroys the main body of “evidence”
(most of which was written down centuries after he supposedly
died) for special claims of his divinity and thus for the Fundamentalists’
special position as holders of The Only Truth. Modern magic yanks
the rug out from underneath Christian assertions of uniqueness,
to which they can only respond with the Manichean heresy that
their Devil is as powerful as their God and can do “counterfeit
miracles” for non-Christians.
Neopagans believe in pluralism and multiplicity — making us very hard to pin down and define,
and bringing up that dreaded feminine ambiguity. Worse, we
worship goddesses, our women have places of honor and leadership,
and gay and lesbian people are seldom discriminated against.
These attitudes threaten both the male egos that control Fundamentalism
and the inherent sexism of their way of life, and present the
terrifying danger that Fundamentalist women and girls (not to
mention any gay men and boys unlucky enough to be born into Fundamentalist
homes) might find our religions far more attractive than their
own — which, of course, many of them do!
Neopaganism is one of the fastest growing
religions in the world, with our numbers
doubling every five or six years. That’s a pretty healthy
wave of competition for minds, hearts, and pocketbooks. We have
members in every walk of life and every subset of the general
population, including government and the military, which can
only slow down Fundamentalists’ theocratic ambitions.
Perhaps worst of all, many of us who call
ourselves Pagans, Druids and Witches have deliberately chosen
to identify ourselves with the victims of Fundamentalism
— with the millions upon millions who have suffered at the
hands of conservative Jewish, Christian, and Islamic leaders
and followers down through the centuries. While reincarnation
has not been officially accepted belief in monotheism for the
last thousand years or so, a certain wave of fear must still
pass over some modern Fundamentalists when they realize, however
subconsciously, that we just might be their victims come back
from the grave to haunt them for their crimes, and that this
time when they try to silence us, they will fail.
But silencing us is something that they must
at least attempt, and not only because we are a healthy, growing
competitor in the marketplace of religious ideas. As a pluralistic,
decentralized, feminist, ecological, and democratic collection
of religions, Neopaganism represents the future of faith
in a world of ever-increasing change and diversity. Fundamentalists
know that the world is changing and that they cannot control
the changes. Neopaganism combines a revival of old deities that
the Fundamentalists have been taught from childhood were demonic,
with patterns of belief and practice that fit perfectly with
the new global culture now emerging. The Fundamentalists have
no psychological options left. They either have to cure themselves
of the dysfunctional personalities that have made them Fundamentalists,
or (being dualists) try to destroy us. Guess which tactic they
usually choose?
The Religious Reich and Christian Reconstructionism/Dominionism
In recent years, the United States and other
western countries have seen the rise of what I call the “Religious
Reich,” led by Fundamentalist Christian men with literally
theocratic agendas. For those of you unfamiliar with the term,
“theocracy” means literally “rule by a God,”
but in practice it means rule by men claiming to speak for
their God. How has this manifested in the U.S.A.?
It has done so through the Republican Party,
which has become an unholy-owned subsidiary of Fundamentalist
lunatics; as has become obvious to nearly everyone in politics
— including the Internal Revenue Service, which on June
10th, 1999 c.e. finally revoked the Christian Coalition’s
tax-exempt status. What many Americans don’t know, however
(until it’s too late), is that the Religious Reich focuses
as much attention on taking over local school boards, town halls,
and county governments, as it does on grabbing for power on the
statewide and national levels. This is part of their long-range
theocratic plan for America, which they call “Christian
Reconstructionism” or “Dominionist theology.”
They want to take over enough state governments to call for a
constitutional convention (according to some arguments,
they are only a few states away from that goal). At such an event
they could legally scrap our current Constitution and the entire
Bill of Rights, replacing them with their own twisted vision
of “Biblical Law,” which, like “Islamic Law,”
means whatever the men in charge say it does.
If they succeed in taking over America because
the rest of us were too lazy to fight them, too cynical to bother
voting, or too tired to fight for verifiable elections —
or if their cherished cultural collapse should occur — they
fully intend to institute the death penalty for being homosexual,
for having or performing (or assisting someone to have or perform)
an abortion, for living in “sin” (including all unconventional
partnerships, lovestyles, and family structures), for practicing
“witchcraft” (any minority religious, metaphysical,
astrological or New Age belief system), and for having or distributing
pornography (anything that turns them on sexually).
I know it sounds unlikely that anyone could
think this way in modern times, but remember, their predecessors
have been terrorizing unbelievers for centuries, slowing down
only when they lost political power. Today they’re close
to regaining the secular power they lust after, thanks to gaybashers,
anti-feminists, dozens of right-wing millionaires (think Amway,
Domino’s, Coors), and thousands of Fundamentalist and Evangelical
Christian preachers, Catholic priests and Orthodox and Hassidic
rabbis who see their livelihoods and power threatened by sweeping
global change. They depend on the votes of millions of neophobes
and xenophobes who are terrified of the future and willing to
vote for whoever their preacher/priest/rabbi tells them to. They
now control the Executive and Legislative branches of the American
govenment and are trying hard to take over the Judicial.
One excellent book that will give you the
lowdown on the Christian Coalition’s founder Pat Robertson
and his plans is The
Most Dangerous Man in America? by Robert Boston. It’s
a pretty scary book, at least for anyone who cherishes their
freedom of conscience.
The dangers of the Religious Reich don’t
stop at America’s borders. The Christian Reconstructionists
see their conquest of America as only the first step to ruling
the entire world. As Robertson puts it:
“There will never be world peace until
God’s house and God’s people are given their rightful
place of leadership at the top of the world.”
Every man, woman and child on our planet is
to be ruled by Christian Fundamentalist men — in their God’s
name, of course. They are to exercise “dominion” over
the entire world, hence the term “Dominionists.”
Don’t believe me or other liberals on
this topic? If you want to know the sordid details, straight
from the Religious Reich’s own messiah, just read The Institutes of Biblical Law, by Rousas John Rushdoony, the ayatollah of Christian
Reconstructionism, or as his publisher describes him, “the
president and founder of Chalcedon Foundation, an educational
organization dedicated to Christian reconstruction of every area
of life and thought.” That’s your life and your
thought they want to reconstruct and have dominion over.
Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and all their right-wing fundraisers
praise, quote and follow Rushdoony, who lays out his plans and
goals as clearly as Adolph Hitler did his own in Mein Kampf.
Read it and you’ll see why I use the term Religious
“Reich” instead of Right. Rushdoony and his followers
clearly agree that, “…general moral instruction without
a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character
training must be derived from faith…” Unfortunately,
the person who said that line the first time was Adolph Hitler.
Whether you are a moderate or liberal Christian
or Jew, a Hindu, Taoist, Unitarian, Pagan, Agnostic or Atheist;
whether you are gay, straight or bi; male, female, or undecided;
if your lifestyle, beliefs, or political views are even the slightest
bit different from those of the Religious Reich, you are a
target. Let’s not make the same mistakes that German
democrats and liberals did in the 1930s. Let’s make sure
that Margaret Atwood’s The
Handmaid’s Tale and Robert Heinlein’s Revolt
in 2100 both remain fiction, by getting off our comfortable
rear ends, stepping away from our keyboards, and exercising our
citizenship rights while we still have them.
Future generations (assuming we have any),
will define the 21st century of the Common Era in terms of three
major wars: the conflict between the American Empire and the
Chinese Empire, the battle between Christian and Islamic Fundamentalists
(each of whom identify the other with “godless liberalism”),
and the competition between the memes
of dualism and pluralism. Thanks to the political influence of
the Christian Reconstructionists and Dominionists in the Bush
II administration, all three wars are now connected, at least
as far as the rulers of America are concerned.
How Fundamentalists Define “Religious Freedom”
In their quest for absolute power, spokespersons
for the Religious Reich often use the language of the civil liberties
movements, in fighting what they perceive as government interference
in their practice of religion. Some Neopagans say that we should
work with such “friendly Fundamentalists” in a common
quest for religious freedom. I urge caution and further investigation
of individuals, groups, and their motives, before doing so.
We should not be fooled by Fundamentalist
references to religious freedom. Their complaints about “unconstitutional
government interference with religious practices” are actually
about the Fundamentalists’ loss of their traditional —
and very unconstitutional — privileges. For three
hundred years, North American religious zealots have been shoving
their theology down our throats, usually with the connivance
of the civil government. Where do you think most of our laws
about sex, drugs and gambling originated? From “blue laws”
that close stores on Sundays, to mandatory (monotheistic) prayers
at graduations, conservative Christians have dominated the public
American culture since shortly after the Revolution. But, over
the course of the last few decades, courts and legislatures have
gradually taken away one after another of the Fundamentalists’
special privileges. Organized prayer is no longer allowed in
schools, evolution is taught in biology classes, kids (at least
the ones in big cities) can now learn about safe sex and birth
control methods, etc. — all of which upsets the Religious
Reich terribly.
The Religious Reich complains that the existence
of rights for secular people (including the right not to be subjected
to Fundamentalist opinions) violates their rights as spreaders
of the Gospel. They argue that the separation of church and state
is itself a violation of the first amendment freedom of religion
clause, i.e., that they have the “right” to use the
government to promote Christianity as long as they aren’t
pushing any particular denomination of it. Often they attack
the American Civil Liberties Union
for its pro-separation stand, despite the fact that the ACLU
has done more to fight for genuine freedom of religion than any
other organization in American History.
The Christian Reconstructionists and Dominionists
of the Religious Reich would prefer that the United States of
America was a Fundamentalist theocracy in which they would have
every one of their old privileges back, and a number of new ones
as well (with only Fundamentalist Christians eligible to vote,
run for office, or teach in the schools, for example). No matter
how friendly, reasonable and ecumenical they may occasionally
act towards non-Christian groups, on the day they decide
they don’t need us anymore they will cheerfully rip our
throats out.
Does that sound paranoid? Perhaps. But we
know their track record. Fundamentalists have never supported
religious freedom for anyone but themselves except as a temporary
tactic. They are going to have to be a lot more convincing if
they expect us to be able to trust them. I suppose they could
start by publishing apologies for, and retractions of, all the
lies that they have published and broadcast about us over the
years, signed by all the national leaders of the Religious Reich
(most of whom have built their careers on such lies). I’m
not going to hold my breath waiting, however. Even Pope John
Paul II’s mealy-mouthed apology for the crimes of his Church
didn’t include the slaughtering of hundreds of thousands
of alleged Devil-worshiping “witches,” let alone the
millions of Paleopagans killed by the Church’s missionaries,
the Teutonic Knights, the Conquistadors, and other blessed representatives.
How are Critics of Fundamentalism Different from
Those They Criticize?
I am often asked by those who have read or
heard my strong opinions about Fundamentalists, how it is that
I am “different” from them. I am told that my opinions
about them are just as harsh as their opinions are about my religious
community and how dare I express mine! I am told that
I am spreading hate against Fundamentalists by mentioning how
hate-filled they are. So how, then, are those who consider Fundamentalism
a threat to civilization and freedom, different from the Fundamentalists
who say nasty things about us? Are we really “just the same”
as the people we oppose?
I think most people who are critical of Fundamentalism
would agree that:
- We don’t want
to shut down their places of worship and outlaw their religions.
- We don’t want
to discriminate against them in hiring, in housing, in the military,
or in the receipt of social services.
- We don’t want
to take over the government and force every citizen to live according
to our theological opinions, whether we think a deity gave us
those opinions or not.
- We don’t want
to organize paramilitary groups to overthrow secular governments,
or to plant bombs, or to fly jumbo jets into office buildings,
all for the greater “glory” of our deities.
- We don’t want
to kill people for being gay or lesbian, or for having sex with
someone they aren’t married to, or for sassing their parents,
or for practicing divination, or for belonging to a “false
religion.”
- We don’t want
to drive people from their homes and places of worship, and kill
them if they resist, because we think some deity gave our predecessors
a deed of property once upon a time.
Yet all these things are what most Jewish,
Christian and Islamic Fundamentalists do want to do. And have
done when they were able to. And will do again, if ordinary people
who aren’t religious fanatics don’t take action to
stop them.
In short, we don’t want to be sanctimonious,
bloodthirsty, power-mad, bigoted lunatics like they are.
That’s what makes us different. If saying
so sounds harsh, or rude, or biased, or politically incorrect,
so be it. If some people reading this consider themselves to
be Fundamentalists, but don’t agree with this Fundamentalist
agenda, then perhaps they should change their religious label
to something else. Better yet, they should actually take control
of their current denominations from the lunatics and fanatics.
Real Religious Freedom Organizations
I highly recommend that Neopagan and other
liberal religious people be prepared to take magical action to
defeat the magical malpractice of Fundamentalist “prayer
warriors” and to prevent unconstitutional and dishonest
plots by the Religious Reich by casting Spells
for Democracy. But magic/prayer is always most effective
if it is backed up with action in the physical, cultural, social,
and political worlds.
Fortunately, those of us in the Neopagan community
who are looking for genuine religious freedom groups to join
do have some trustworthy choices. There’s always People for the American Way
(2000 M St. NW, #400, Washington DC 20036). This group has pluralistic,
feminist, and democratic biases fully in keeping with Neopagan
polytheology. They have been keeping tabs on the Religious Reich
for twenty years, and their Right
Wing Watch Online webpages contains a wealth of information
the Fundamentalists would rather you didn’t read. I’m
a member and I recommend them.
A group affiliated with PFAW is the Progressive
Religious Partnership, composed of liberal and moderate clergy
and congregations from mainstream denominations. According to
their website, “People of faith across America are joining
together to answer the prophetic call to action, standing up
to the hypocrisy of the Religious Right and reclaiming the vocabulary
of our faiths. In response to those who manipulate the deep divisions
in our culture, we will challenge racism and sexism as we struggle
for opportunity and economic justice for all, and promote a healing
sexuality. Together, the Progressive Religious Partnership will
help each and all of us to be more effective advocates for social
and economic justice.” Well, that will get them denounced
by the Reich as closet Satanists!
A major force fighting the Religious Reich
is Americans United for Separation
of Church and State (1816 Jefferson Place NW, Washington,
DC 20036), a nonprofit, nonpartisan educational organization
of moderate and liberal Christians, Jews, Unitarians, Atheists,
Agnostics, and yes, a few of Neopagans! You can visit their website
or send email to their net liaison at hays@au.org.
Their phone number is 202-466-3234. Their newsletter, Church
& State is an excellent source of news and advice on
the fight against theocracy. I’m a member and I recommend
them.
Also worthwhile is The Freedom Writer,
a newsletter published by the Institute
for First Amendment Studies. IFAS was founded by ex-Fundamentalist
minister Skipp Porteous (author of Jesus
Doesn’t Live Here Anymore and other fine works)
and attorney Barbara Simon. Their publication, now available
online, focuses on the activities of the Religious Reich, exposing
fraudulent ministers, anti-Semitism, censorship campaigns, etc.
There are also frequent news clipping about civil liberties victories.
You can send IFAS email at “ifas@berkshire.net”
or snailmail at Box 589, Great Barrington, MA 01230. Their phone
number is 1-800-370-3329.
For keeping tabs on trends throughout the
American religious scene, I can recommend Religion Watch
(Box 652, N. Bellmore, NY 11710, $19.95 year USA). The editor,
Richard P. Cimino, does
an excellent job of reporting trends in both mainstream and minority
religious movements, albeit with a Christian moderate’s
bias. Every issue has statistical and analytical material of
interest to those of us paying attention to religious freedom
issues.
Of course, for civil liberties activism in
general, there is no beating the American
Civil Liberties Union. I’m a card carrying member
and proud of it (even if that does mean I can never be elected
President). Controversial as the ACLU is, and disgusting as some
of their clients have been over the years, they remain the largest
and most effective defense against all those forces (including
the Religious Reich) who would trash our Bill of Rights.
Because the Religious Reich has so identified
itself with the Republican Party in the USA, some of the ways
to fight it are through supporting the Democratic Party, the
Green Party, and the Libertarian Party, and their efforts to
ensure that future elections are fair and honest.
If Neopagans are going to support civil liberties
and anti-discrimination groups, which I think we should, then
we should be selective in our choice of allies. It’s usually
the extreme Fundamentalists themselves who oppress our civil
liberties. We’ll be much better off setting up our own groups,
or supporting organizations that are genuinely neutral in matters
of religious belief.
Not just Neopagans, but all those who believe
in simple human decency and freedom of religion for all people,
everywhere in the world, must stop being so damned passive and
start taking effective action to contain, subvert, and dethrone
Fundamentalism wherever and whenever it oppresses its own
and other peoples. Fundamentalists can only thrive in atmospheres
in which their fanaticism is considered “just their religious
belief,” and something to be tolerated by everyone else,
rather than the world-wide threat to peace, justice, democracy,
and civilization that it is. (For my Call
to Arms against worldwide Fundamentalism, visit that link.)
Deeply hath sunk the lesson they have given
and shall not soon depart.
|