Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

xchrom

(108,903 posts)
Tue Jul 1, 2014, 07:17 AM Jul 2014

The Christian right’s twisted notion of religious freedom

http://www.salon.com/2014/07/01/the_christian_rights_twisted_notion_of_religious_freedom_partner/


Robert Jeffress (Credit: AP/Luke Edmonson)

Religious freedom is one of the most fundamental American values, written directly into the First Amendment of the Constitution. Of course, true religious freedom requires a secular society, where government stays out of the religion game and leaves it strictly to individual conscience, a standard that runs directly against the modern conservative insistence that America is and should be a “Christian nation”. So what are people who claim to be patriots standing up for American values to do? Increasingly, the solution on the right is to redefine “religious freedom” so that it means, well, its exact opposite. “Religious freedom” has turned into conservative code for imposing the Christian faith on the non-believers.

While it seems like a leap even for the most delusional conservatives to believe that their religious freedom can only be protected by giving Christians broad power to force their faith on others, a new report from the People For the American Way shows how the narrative is constructed. The report shows that Christian conservative circles have become awash in legends of being persecuted for their faith, stories that invariably turn out to be nonsense but that “serve to bolster a larger story, that of a majority religious group in American society becoming a persecuted minority, driven underground in its own country.” This sense of persecution, in turn, gives them justification to push their actual agenda of religious repression under the guise that they’re just protecting themselves.

The most obvious and persistent example of this is the issue of creationism in the classroom. Clearly, teaching creationism in a biology classroom is a straightforward violation of the First Amendment, a direct attempt to use taxpayer money to foist a very specific religious teaching on captive students. So what the right does is reframe the issue, arguing that teaching evolutionary theory is a form of religious oppression, a direct attack on the beliefs of fundamentalists in the classroom. This is pure hooey, of course, since evolutionary theory is not a religion but a scientific reality, and teaching science as science is no more a violation of religious freedom than teaching kids to that “cat” rhymes with “hat” is an imposition of religion. But once they’ve convinced themselves that learning science in the science classroom is religious persecution, it becomes easier to convince yourself that it’s okay to “fight back” by forcing your actual religion on everyone else.

You can see this play out in the legends that PFAW details out. Do Christian conservatives want to force their religious hostility to gays onto the military? Tell a lie about how a sergeant was persecuted for simply holding that religious belief to paint yourself as the “real” victim. Want to justify forcing non-believing kids to pray to your god in school? Tell lies about how kids are being punished for having private prayers all to themselves. Want to force people in the VA hospital to sing your religious songs and worship your god? Spread a false tale claiming that people aren’t allowed private ownership of religious cards. Tell enough of these stories and people on the right can convince themselves the only way they can protect their own right to worship is to force their religious practice on everyone else.
14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

liberal N proud

(60,334 posts)
1. Religious freedom...
Tue Jul 1, 2014, 07:23 AM
Jul 2014

To join a group of like minded people and as a group obey the church leader and the rules of the organization set forth by the leader and a small group of "elders.

Does obeying a single person sound like freedom?

Sounds like self inflicted subservience.

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)
4. Doesn't the fact that it's self-inflicted imply freedom?
Tue Jul 1, 2014, 08:24 AM
Jul 2014

Also there are a wide variety of church organizations, depending on the faith and it's set up.

Bryant

liberal N proud

(60,334 posts)
5. But once you have submitted, can you ever leave?
Tue Jul 1, 2014, 08:58 AM
Jul 2014

Some organizations make it very difficult to leave.

That is where the freedom ends I think.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
8. I see many people here profess a faith then claim they don't believe any of it
Tue Jul 1, 2014, 09:44 AM
Jul 2014

'Oh, we just ignore that stuff about birth control and we don't hate gays either, but we stay in the church because....' and then they type up rationalizations for their contradictory actions. Must not be easy to leave if they are willing to hang with sexist bigots they do not agree with. Or maybe they do agree, and they just lie to those outside the faith. I have heard of some faiths that teach this is acceptable.

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)
9. They don't believe any of it, or they don't believe the parts about birth control and homophobia
Tue Jul 1, 2014, 09:45 AM
Jul 2014

Or, more to the point, do you think there is literally nothing at all to some faiths but birth control and homophobia?

Bryant

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
11. Can they show me a part of their faith's teachings that allow them to pick which bits they like?
Tue Jul 1, 2014, 10:18 AM
Jul 2014

Because many faiths use highly inclusive language about dogmas that are presented to be taken entirely. It's universal, eternal, complete, change not a jot nor title, those who do not accept the faith burn in hellfire, so the standards of belief should be very clear, and they are. It's all or nothing.
Am I not correct? Can you cite me a single faith that says 'take the parts you like and leave the rest'?

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)
14. This gets us into specifically religious territory
Tue Jul 1, 2014, 10:34 AM
Jul 2014

and would probably be best left to the religion forum (which I don't participate in for personal reasons), but I'll try and provide a brief answer.

There are faiths of course that allow for a wide variety of practicies within them - Unitarians, insofar as I understand them, allow for a wide range of individual beliefs. But even within more regimented faiths like, say, Catholicism, there are interpretations of how best to interpret the scriptures and Gods will. That's why Catholics disagree - consider the recent hobby lobby case. While some Catholics are obviously very happy with how the ruling went and were trumpeting it to the stars, other Catholic organizations signed an amicus brief opposing Hobby Lobby in this case (among them Catholics for Choice (CFC), DignityUSA, and The National Coalition of American Nuns
(NCAN)).

There are those who believe that all such interpretations are invalid and that only the most hardline and extreme reading of the scriptures is what applies. To such, Christians who do not believe the most hardcore interpretation are dishonest hypocrites. I don't accept that - I think that it is down to every person to interpret the gospel as they think best and act according to what they believe. It goes back to what the point of religion is - but that really gets us beyond the realm of what should be discussed in general discussion.

Bryant

intaglio

(8,170 posts)
3. I just posted something relevant to this in Atheists and Agnostics group
Tue Jul 1, 2014, 08:22 AM
Jul 2014
Humans of New York is a Photoblog by Brandon Stanton. In it he photographs ordinary people and, where he can talks to them. The following quote is from his conversation with an un-named ex-pastor.
"I’ve been a deep believer my whole life. 18 years as a Southern Baptist. More than 40 years as a mainline Protestant. I’m an ordained pastor. But it’s just stopped making sense to me. You see people doing terrible things in the name of religion, and you think: ‘Those people believe just as strongly as I do. They’re just as convinced as I am.’ ...
Emphasis mine


Link to original thread

nxylas

(6,440 posts)
7. Actually...
Tue Jul 1, 2014, 09:04 AM
Jul 2014

...I'd say the most obvious example of the Christian persecution narrative was that appalling God's Not Dead movie.

raouldukelives

(5,178 posts)
10. If they truly wished to impose the Christian faith upon us.
Tue Jul 1, 2014, 10:12 AM
Jul 2014

Then they would be doing what Jesus told them to do. Place the least first, never appear better than than the poorest in clothing or lifestyle, turn the other cheek, pray in private, be a good shepherd to your brothers and sisters, don't love money and of course, heal the sick, feed the hungry, house the homeless, comfort those in prison and be a peacemaker.

When I look at that list and compare it to the works of Christians in this country. Of the corporate & connected Christians. I ain't seeing it.
In fact, if I am seeing anything, I am seeing the direct opposite of all those ideals.
The Bible has a word for those types of people. It doesn't end well for them.

It does make me wonder why they so vehemently wish people to be the opposite of what the savior wants them to be. I mean, if it is all true, they are leading millions to certain damnation.

But of course, if there was a Satan. He wouldn't be operating out of mud huts in the desert or shantytowns in South America. He'd be running Goldman Sachs and trying to convince everyone that they are the most pious.

So I guess it all does make sense to them, for the ends they are striving for, for the Master they obey.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Christian right’s twi...