There are a few things that seem to be endless about the American Lie Machine and its quest to rephrase our founding principles, rewrite our documents and refashion us into the government by divine right the colonists left behind. The endless assault on the First Amendment is one of them.
Congressman J. Randy Forbes (R-VA), the founder and chairman of the Congressional Prayer Caucus, sponsored a bill to make "In God We Trust" the official motto on the United States of America, giving unlawful support to an unspecified, but intentionally Christian God and allowing and encouraging the carving of religious credos into the stone of our institutions and establishing state Theism contrary to the letter and intent of the US Constitution. He was troubled by a pattern of omitting God from the nation's heritage, said he. Could a talking snake be any more devious? Of course omitting God is not the same thing as preventing state recognition of Forbes' god and that's the forbidden and worm eaten fruit we're being offered and that some of us are deluded and befuddled enough to bite into.
"There is a small minority who believes America does not have the right to trust in God, who believes the United States should not affirm trust in God, and who actively seek to remove any recognition of that trust,"But the writers of the constitution weren't a small minority and had no intention whatever of forbidding the free exercise of religion by citizens -- only of forbidding the government officially to recognize any religion, sect, denomination or cult as preferred. But as I said, it's devious. There is nothing in our laws and no credible movement to prevent any American from trusting in any God or gods or principles or making statements to that effect -- or from ignoring them. There is the First Amendment to prevent the government from doing so.
Although Republicans are notorious for portraying the government as an alien force, separate from the people and their interests, it's interesting to see how in this instance, they're quite willing to see the people and the government as congruent or identical because equivocation is the armature about which is built this grotesque idol. But of course not paying for you to engrave your God on the wall I paid for isn't a rejection of anything but the government's right to do so, which is the precise intent of our constitution. There is no official God or official gods in the United States, no official belief -- and this legislation furthers only the intent to create one.
Forbes claims that the resolution is meant to affirm the importance of God in the heritage of the United States, but refuses to address the question of who the "we" are. If he's talking about the people as people, perhaps he's right, at least in the sense of a majority of them, but to a good number of Americans for whom the right to be irreligious, atheistic or pagan is protected, this resolution is an exclusion act. There is no me in that we.
Small minority? I'm not so sure, what with the penalties attendant to disbelief and doubt and unsanctioned belief, but so what? A small minority of Americans are of African descent or Jewish decent or indigenous descent or Chinese descent and the triumph of our democracy is to protect their rights, their numbers notwithstanding. I might say that a large minority of Republicans are asserting that intellectual minorities don't have the same rights when it comes to private thought and this mumbling against "small minorities" is nothing but an attempt to marginalize intellectual non-conformism.
In God We Trust isn't all that historical anyway. Although some, but not all US coins have had it stamped on them since about 1864 as part of the attempt to give a boost to the unpopular war, the motto only became "official" in 1956, shortly after the Knights of Columbus and other religious lobbyists convinced Dwight Eisenhower it would help give Americans another reason to hate and fear Communism.
The first appearance of "In God is our trust" was in Francis Key's poem, later set to an old drinking song and made into an anthem which didn't become official until the 1930's, by which time there wasn't much left of Jefferson's bones to be furiously gyrating in his coffin. That he would do so is of course contested by the plethora of Church funded revisionist historians like All About History who make statements saying President Thomas Jefferson wrote,
"The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time" and "Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are of God?"which words, of course, Jefferson never spoke or wrote. Perhaps you can see why the GOP stands against public education, science and history -- and for the Christian Bible and Christian government. Perhaps somewhere, the shade of Galileo is wryly smiling and George III, Rex Dei Gratia is giggling because the long upward climb to freedom is sliding back into the reeking sump from which it emerged.
Capt. Fogg,
ReplyDeleteYes, whenever somebody starts talking about "heritage" in that way, one wants to run or duck. The ignorance of people who try to enforce religion by means of law is just bottomless. When you show their view for what it is, they just serve up a rehash of it the very next day, or month, or year. As a dinosaur-American, I would be incensed at the adoption of Forbes' proposal: I mean, if you want "heritage," what about the Gondwanaland tradition of bowing the snout and straightening the tail before the Blessed Altar of Great Mother and Father T-Rex? How about a little recognition for that, too?
I don't know if Forbes and like-minded folks are even thinking about the 1st amendment. They are so obsessed with publicly declaring that Jesus is their BFF as part of their ongoing effort to prove to themselves that in spite of their lack of concern for the well being of anyone except self that they are good Christian folk. To paraphrase an Elvis tune, these folks need to engage in a little less conversation and a lot more action. If they actually devoted some of their energies to feeding the hungry or caring for the sick, or any number of affirmative acts on the behalf of others in need then they wouldn't have time to focus on trying to force everyone to embrace their pseudo Christianity. I'm so tired of these people.
ReplyDeleteI sense in Forbes' initiative grandstanding, tossing red meat to his political base and thus scoring points with them.
ReplyDeleteOr, he might just be bat-crap crazy. There seems to be lots of that going around Virginia these days.
Forbes and people of like mind about this ought to be shipped off to some country roiled by religious strife the way Ireland was for so long and the way the former Yugoslavia was. Spending even a few weeks witnessing atrocities, seeing a country destroy itself and fearing for one's own life can be educational. Forbes might learn what the founding fathers, many of them Deists, knew so well.
BTW, I'm no theologian and don't claim to know all about the Christian Bible, but I seem to recall that somewhere in the Good Book the faithful are told it's better to go into their room and quietly, unostentatiously, pray. The idea being, I think, that sincere expression of faith means more than outward trappings — things like attaching chrome crucifixes to government buildings and replacing the office summer picnic with a revival tent meeting.
So many folk's have told me that "GOP" stand's for "Grand Old Party" ... I have told them, they been misinformed, it stand's for "God's Own Party" :)
ReplyDeleteCapt., there is a wonderful passage in "The Essential Jung" in which Jung explains the importance of religion. (I know, I know. But hang on.)
ReplyDeleteHe views religion as something above the worldly, something that frees the individual from the mass—and the State. Jung believes religion to be something different from what he calls "creed", which to him is a sociological phenomena controlled by worldly agendas and political motives.
Jung was warning us, as always, about the psychological dangers of the shadow, and of merging shadows. Tying the State to religion is a recipe for the distortion of both, as the founding fathers and even the New Testament Jesus himself e.g. "render unto Caesar..." well understood.
So why do so few of the nation's spiritual leaders speak out against this politically-motivated public deception? It isn't religion or God that's the problem, as you point out. It's the political distortion. And the stupidity of a big chunk of the American public.
Edge:
ReplyDelete"So why do so few of the nation's spiritual leaders speak out against this politically-motivated public deception? "
It's about the power.
And let's not let any pesky historical references like Jefferson's papers or Franklin's autobiography or Paine's writings that spell out the Founders' views on religion rain on the Krazy Kristian parade!
ReplyDeleteI have been in an email conversation with an old friend who is decidedly right leaning and of course when facts can't be found, he trots out the GOD defense. And under God's big umbrella of social edicts falls abortion, illegal aliens, anything to do with government and healthcare reform. And the talking heads tell us that God/GOP says no!
And that God wants this to be a Christian nation.
And that God hates liberals, fags, people of color, Muslims, maybe Jews, the Chinese grocer and unions.
And pretty much anything else they want to pin on God in support of their ignorant, hateful, superstitious beliefs.
I'm in agreement with Sheria - when these people are asking WWJD? Where is the love? Where is the service? Didn't Jesus tell them that the least among them would be the greatest and that they should serve in all humbleness? Why is it that those of us that don't ascribe to such fanatical religiousity know more about the teachings they purport to follow than they do?
Why is it that those of us that don't ascribe to such fanatical religiousity know more about the teachings they purport to follow than they do?
ReplyDeleteWhat an excellent question, Rocky. Every time I hear someone preface a statement with "The Bible says" I can generally count on it being followed by some bigoted, gay bashing, racist, sexist or just generally mean spirited statement. I don't know where they get all these "talking" Bibles but there's a lot being lost in the translation.
Rocky:
ReplyDelete"Why is it that those of us that don't ascribe to such fanatical religiousity know more about the teachings they purport to follow than they do? "
Perhaps because actually reading the Bible shows it's full of the same political stuff masquerading as God's will that people are spouting today - and worse: genocide, slavery and all that.
Sheria:
I think most religions try to talk about humility, but it ends up with people bragging about how much more humble they are.