We won't spam, rent, sell, or share
your information in any way.
In case you missed the memo, Christian fundamentalists are on the march. We’ve been taking over little by little and we are now poised to smash the last bit of resistance into submission. At least that’s what the news has been saying. If you believe the liberal media, Christian fundamentalists are well-funded (!), well-organized (?), and well-placed (!?) and awaiting the final order from headquarters to administer the death blow. If you read Gary’s article yesterday, Rosie O’Donnell is just one of the many to give Christians far more credibility and influence than we could ever hope to have.
The recent spate of “theocracy” books by authors like Kevin Phillips, Michelle Goldberg, and Randall Balmer have only served to misinform and confirm the worst nightmares of the paranoid crowd. We can also add Rabbi James Rudin to that list. He calls Christian fundamentalists “Christocrats” (isn’t that clever?) and “believes that a small group of extremists is trying to make Christianity the official religion of the United States.” News flash to Rabbi Rudin…We are a Christian nation. When anywhere between 75-80% of the population of any country claims anything, it is “official.” If 75-80% of the U.S. population was overweight, illiterate and strung out on crack, then we could “officially” say that the United States is a nation of fat, non-reading crackheads. It doesn’t take an official pronouncement from the government to make it so. Besides, Rabbi Rudin should go outside of the U.S. sometime and ask the rest of the world what they think. We are internationally looked upon as a “Christian” nation. Just as Saudi Arabia is a “Muslim” nation, so are we “Christian.”
But the insanity of the “fundamentalist” name-calling is nothing more than a ruse. Everyone is a fundamentalist in some regard. Rabbi Rudin is every bit as fundamentalist in his beliefs as I am in mine. Rosie O’Donnell doesn’t speak for all gays and lesbians when she publicly proclaims her homosexuality. She’s a fundamentalist in her out-spoken views on public homosexuality, other homosexuals are more moderate in their views and think that closeting their perversion is a better way to live. So why don’t Rosie and Rabbi muzzle their own fundamentalist beliefs in the same way that they wish Christian fundamentalists would muzzle theirs? Why is it that Christians are “fundamentalists trying to push their view on everybody else” when they oppose abortion, but when a wacko like Peter Singer suggests that he would kill a handicapped baby, that is somehow alright. Read it for yourself. When asked if he “would kill a disabled baby,” Singer responded:
Yes, if that was in the best interests of the baby and of the family as a whole. Many people find this shocking, yet they support a woman's right to have an abortion. One point on which I agree with opponents of abortion is that, from the point of view of ethics rather than the law, there is no sharp distinction between the foetus and the newborn baby.
Peter Singer is a fundamentalist too. He’s pushing his “extreme” views on others in the public arena. Another questioner asked him what was the most immoral thing that he had ever done and Singer replied, “Spending too much money on myself when others need it a lot more.” Singer’s own brand of fundamentalism allows him to rationalize that spending too much money is a greater evil than killing a newborn baby. One wonders where Singer was when David Allen Austin had his day in court. Austin was on trial for beating Ashley, his 7-week old daughter, to death because she wouldn’t stop crying. According to Singer, Ashley was nothing more than a late-term foetus, no sharp distinction here. What if Ashley’s mother just waited too long to have the abortion and Austin had finally got around to taking care of it. He’s a busy guy, you know. Am I being crude and callous on purpose? Of course I am. Are you getting the point yet? Maybe one more example will help.
Three men tried to enlist in the Army in Madison, Wisconsin. All three were denied. How can this be? Aren’t recruitment numbers way down and the military is practically begging for volunteers? Yep, that’s true. But these three men were fundamentalists. They were more interested in pushing an agenda than they were actually getting into the Army. They violated the long-standing policy of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” They told. Even though they were never asked, they told anyway. And now, they’re martyrs for the homosexual activist groups and they have the New York Times eating out of their hands with their incredible story of bravery against the tyranny of the homophobic U.S. Army. But you see, this is acceptable fundamentalism. This is the kind of fundamentalism that we can all learn a lesson from…a lesson of inclusiveness, not divisiveness. Hogwash. These three knew that the Army would not—could not—take them as soon as they “told.” President Clinton made it a law in 1993. Like it or not, it is a law. But I guarantee you that there is more to this than just a coincidental admission of three overzealous homosexuals wanting to tell the world—starting with their Army recruiter—of the joy that they have found in their “alternative lifestyle.” This is the beginning of a test case for the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. So here we have homosexual radicals—fundamentalists whose religion is their “sexual orientation”—attempting to overturn an existing law. So, who’s really the religious fundamentalist now? Rosie and the Wisconsin three (not to mention Rabbi and Singer) are every bit as religious—and fanatical—as the Muslim or the Christian. Following Rabbi Rudin’s penchant for naming fanatics, I suppose we could call them “homocrats.”
 Kevin Eigelbach, “Rabbi responds to 'Christocrats’,” Cincinnati Post, September 14, 2006. Online here.
 “Peter Singer: You Ask the Questions,” The Independent (UK), September 11, 2006. http://www.acikradyo.com.tr/default.aspx?_mv=a&aid=15475&cas=931
 Gary McElroy, “Jury validates guilty plea in capital murder case,” Alabama Press-Register, September 12, 2006. Online here.
 Lizette Alvarez, “Gay Groups Renew Drive Against ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’,” NYTimes, September 14, 2006. Online here.