Blogging Against Senator Sam Brownback Since March 2005
Senator Sam Brownback’s NPR appearance is now available online. Click on the “Listen” button located near the top of the story page.
Nothing too spectacular in there. Brownback compared abortion to slavery and denied being interested in a Christian Theocracy in the United States. He predicted when Roe v. Wade is overturned (he sounded pretty confident) abortion will become a state issue and will be outlawed in many places.
There was no questioning of his stance on Stem Cells and no mention of the theocracy minded group that he is a part of (The Fellowship).
In all, much more sympathetic than the Rolling Stone article. For many people this was probably their introduction to Sam Brownback the presidential candidate.
[powered by WordPress.]
Blogging Against Senator Sam Brownback Since March 2005
I am a student of political science at the University of Kansas. Contact me with any questions, comments or tips.
21 queries. 0.328 seconds
February 13th, 2006 at 12:16 pm
Considering the fact that Brownback always compares abortion to slavery and one of his former aides told me personally that Sammy has a particular fondness for John Brown, does that mean he condones terroristic against women’s clinics similar to Brown’s attack on Pottawatomie? Has he ever spoken out against this kind of behavior?
February 13th, 2006 at 12:31 pm
He has spoken about his admiration of John Brown in public, although I can’t find a reference at the moment.
March 14th, 2006 at 3:03 pm
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” Voltaire
The vital wall that our nation maintains between religion, politics and governance has been breached and that opening has become an imminent threat to our democracy, our faith communities and the constitutional separation established by our founding fathers. I believe that the genius of their vision is in greater jeopardy than ever in our history. It may already be lost.
Those now in power in Washington, the Bush administration and Republican Party, have co-opted religion as a strategic political weapon. George W. Bush could never have been elected without members of the so-called Christian Right voting as a block and, though some may wonder at such broad Christian support of a leader whose conduct seems so diametrically opposed to the fundamental teachings of the Jesus they, and he, claim to worship, I believe the explanation is simple. Carl Rove and his president have simply taken maximum advantage of a vast right-wing simplemindedness. Oppose abortion, hate gays, praise Jesus and win!
Many (not all) “fundamentalist” Christians seem more concerned with their place in the hereafter than they are with actually living by the fundamental teachings of the Rabbi Jesus. That ideal path is apparently too difficult for those who believe that they simply have to declare him as their personal savior and accept “holy” scripture as the infallible word of God. Done, we are saved. Now let’s go kill some Iraqis and, by the way, the rest of you are going to hell. Though a minority, the Christian Right carries weight far exceeding its numbers because certain power seekers are willing to undermine our constitution and churches for their short-term political gain.
Too many church leaders enable this progressing disaster by preaching the modern, western and profoundly flawed doctrine of inerrant scripture. That unfortunate premise is at the very root of the problem because virtually any political or religious supposition can be justified with a biblical reference.
Although the Bible is a precious source of historic spiritual insight, its value is limited, unless it is read as it was written, through the living lens of direct experience of the divine. The men who actually wrote the words or interpreted and rewrote them understood this, at least into the nineteenth century and, for what it is worth, the apostle Paul seems to have said so in his second letter to the Corinthians, 3:6. Yet, despite countless examples of diametrically opposed biblical passages and countless translations through multiple languages and cultures, the ludicrous assertion of inerrancy persists, conveying power to a few and inflicting spiritual blindness on millions.
Humans prefer absolutes. It relieves them of actual critical thinking and provides some measure of relief from uncertainty and fear, even at the expense of intellectual liberty. Thus, we have Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and other preachers claiming their authority from scripture as if it were God, while herding their innocent sheep toward blasphemous support of war, capital punishment, accumulation of wealth and nationalistic idolatry, despite the reasonable certainty that Jesus taught exactly the opposite. Righteous opposition to abortion hardly offsets this deception and despite the innumerable good works conservative Christians do in the world, the sacrifice of “the spirit” in favor of “the letter” degrades experiential faith and opens the door to the destructive collision of democratic governance with “absolute divine law.” That idolatrous concept of literal interpretation of infallible scripture leads directly to lawmakers like Republican Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas, who openly advocates a Christian theocracy. He is now a credible candidate for president. Osama smiles.
Religion and worldly politics mix very well and the attempt to protect both by separation stands as the bold exception. The American experiment is profoundly threatened by those who would reunite church and state even as they distort the fundamental teachings of the Jesus they claim to follow. The paradox is breathtaking, the hypocrisy chilling. George W. Bush is the current manifestation but he will seem a mild aberration compared to what may follow if Americans do not raise their voices and cast from office all those who would undermine our constitution with misdirected religion. Vigorous protest needs to come from the pulpit and congregation as well as from concerned citizens of all faiths (or no faith) and from politicians of both major parties.
Blind party loyalty should never trump loyalty to our American Constitution just as blind religiosity based in the absurd notion of infallible scripture should never supersede faith in the Divine Love that transcends all government. Jesus taught that you cannot serve two masters and declined the opportunity to rule this world. To strengthen our nation and churches, Christians should simply follow his example and let their lives speak. National powers and principalities are necessary but they are of this world, and imperfect. Only separation of state from church, coupled with the guarantee to practice one’s faith without governmental influence gives true security to both. A merger perverts both. Our founders were men of great faith and spiritual insight, and they knew exactly where to draw the line.
Don Badgley
Don Badgley is a member of the Religious Society of Friends (Quaker) and political independent from New Paltz, NY.