![]() |
|
|
December 15, 2006 at 11:19:25
by Gary Vance Page 1 of 2 page(s) |
|
|
During the course of the King interview Dobson said, "But it's interesting to me that those, again, on the more liberal end of the spectrum are often those who have no value system or at least they say there is no moral and immoral, there is no right or wrong. It's moral relativism."
The initial 11/29/06 IPC rebuttal of this charge included a litany of noble liberal accomplishments by some American presidents and Christian leaders and concluded with "... it is preposterous for Dr. Dobson to suggest that liberalism is bereft of any notion of right and wrong."
Dobson also revealed in his dialog with King that he does not believe the constitution supports the idea of separation of church and state.
Dobson: "The separation of church and state is not in the Constitution. No, it's not. That is not in the Constitution. That was..."
King: "It's in the Bill of Rights."
Dobson: "It's not in the Bill of Rights. It's not anywhere in a foundational document."
The IPC responded: "As progressive Christians, IPC is steadfastly committed to the separation of church and state as stated in the Constitution of the United States. We base our belief not as an expression of hostility towards religion, but as a guarantee of its free practice whereby the position of one faith is not elevated over any other. In that manner, America will protect, as FDR proclaimed, "The freedom of every person to worship God in his own way."
Cybercast News Service published an article 11/30/06 by Susan Jones entitled Liberal Christians Going Head-to-Head with Conservative Christians. Jones notes the novelty of Dobson being chastised by a Christian group when she states, "In a lengthy news release on Wednesday, the Institute for Progressive Christianity rebutted Dobson's comments one by one, but it's not so much what the liberal Christians are saying, it's that they're saying it at all."
Rush Limbaugh, king pin of the far right talk show hosts, picked up on her story and blasted IPC on his 12/01/06 broadcast. Limbaugh opened his diatribe against IPC by dramatically proclaiming this to be a "sinister" story. He then offered his ditto of Dobson's remarks about "liberal moral relativism" and further affirmed Dobson's claim regarding no constitutional separation of church and state.
Limbaugh went on to say, "Here's something else, and this is the larger point. We just had the election. The Democrats just won the election less than a month ago. This is a brand-new group, the Institute for Progressive Christianity. They make up, they create, this brand-new group whose express purpose is to bash Christians. They do so by claiming that they are Christians too, but that the Falwells and the Robertsons and the evangelicals are nuts and wacko and pose a threat to real Christians, the progressive Christians. This is nothing more than a natural offshoot of their method in the election."
Limbaugh added, "So you have here a new group of Christians -- the "progressive" Christians -- who are running around with a script that says existing evangelicals and Christian leaders are corrupt, just as Republican incumbents were corrupt. This is supposed to depress the Republican turnout at the polls: It's the same technique that they ran during the campaign: put a bunch of frauds up as conservatives. Now, the same technique: they're ramping up to trash any Christian who dare say anything with a group of "progressive" Christians who say that everything you Christians are being told by your leaders is wrong and a bunch of fraud. So you watch. This group is going to be acclaimed. This is the one Christian group, the Institute for Progressive Christianity, which will not be laughed at, which will not be made fun of, which will not be impugned...they are going to be applauded, and the whole point of this is to further fracture the 24 million evangelicals and conservative Christians in this country."
The IPC issued another press release 12/07/06 responding to the Limbaugh broadcast. IPC director Frank L. Cocozzelli fired back, "Limbaugh's intent, with his many false assertions, is not designed to enhance the debate, but to shift the focus away from Dobson's own unsustainable claims. Along with my fellow IPC Directors I believe that the true moral relativists and nihilists are more likely to be found within the ranks of the Religious Right's neoconservative supporters. And they mislabel liberals as "moral relativists" and as "nihilists" to draw attention away from their own failures to address the pursuit of unrestrained economic self-interest."
IPC director Mark Farr added, "As Christians and as Americans, we affirm the traditional American ideal of separation of church and state as stated in the Constitution: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. But we are a pluralistic society and as such IPC seeks to ensure an open forum where people of all faiths and no faith can speak and express their views."
The IPC acknowledged that the phrase "separation of church and state" is not found in the constitution or the first Amendment, but asserts the phrase was in wide use among leading thinkers of the day. They support this claim with quotes from various founding fathers like this one from James Madison, "Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects?"
Rush Limbaugh is not the only right wing pundit attempting to denigrate the validity of the fledgling IPC. A Townhall writer says in a 12/01/06 column, "The group's website says the only way to refute Christian fundamentalism is to do so from within the Christian community. Otherwise, it suggests, the critics will be "perceived and painted as a persecutor of the faith." Bingo folks...this is it in a nutshell. The group is a subversive group made up of some Christians but does not have a real Christian agenda. Its goal is to undermine Christians and Christianity."
1 | 2
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 9 comments |
|
Jefferson and our secular government
Dobson is obviously not aware of the Wall of Separation Letter, written by Thomas Jefferson about our secular government and its defining document. When Thomas Jefferson wrote the Danbury Baptists in 1802, penning the famous "Wall of Separation Letter", Jefferson's intent was to clarify that the Constitution as a whole, was a separation of church and state. Jefferson, then President, saw no need to curry favors towards any faith and carefully refrained from any statements that could be misconstrued as an establishment of a state-endorsed, government-recognized religion. by Frank J. Ranelli (66 articles, 143 quicklinks, 29 diaries, 383 comments) on Friday, Dec 15, 2006 at 11:44:16 AM
|
|
Reply: Jefferson + Paine
"Soon after I had published the pamphlet "Common Sense" [on Feb. 14, 1776] in America, I saw the exceeding probability that a revolution in the system of government would be followed by a revolution in the system of religion... The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion."-Tom Paine Thomas Jefferson weeded out the miracle stories from the gospels and clarified the teachings of Christ in The Jefferson Bible: The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth 1. Be just: justice comes from virtue which comes from the heart. 2. Treat people the way we want to be treated. 3. Always work for PEACEFUL resolutions, even to the point of returning violence with COMPASSION. 4. Consider valuable the things that have no material value. 5. Do not judge others. 6. Do not bear grudges. 7. Be modest and unpretentious. 8. Give out of true generosity, not because we expect to be repaid. 9. Being true to ones self is more important than being loyal to ones family...those who think they know the most are the most ignorant...... e http://www.wearewideawake.org by Eileen Fleming (172 articles, 101 quicklinks, 274 diaries, 650 comments [16 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Dec 15, 2006 at 4:07:20 PM
|
|
THANK YOU Gary + Oped!!!
As a blogger for Crossleft I am greatly encouraged and blessed that you have written + Oped has posted this!!! xox + All Good 2U, e http://www.wearewideawake.org by Eileen Fleming (172 articles, 101 quicklinks, 274 diaries, 650 comments [16 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Dec 15, 2006 at 4:04:08 PM
|
|
Reply: Thanks for the encouragement
I truly appreciate the encouragement. We are fighting an uphill battle on this one. Keep pressing on! by Gary Vance (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 17 comments) on Tuesday, Dec 19, 2006 at 9:43:19 AM
|
|
Thank You, Thank You, Thank You!
For posting this enlightening article. I had not heard about this particular group, but you can bet I will be contacting them. I have been depressed out of my mind these past few years. I have felt as though I have lost my country and my religion, which is Liberal/Progressive Christianity. I have had to listen to Ann Coulter declare that my church, Episcopal, isn't even a church. I have had to listen to Jerry "Foulwell" and that nutjob, Pat Robertson, blame Liberals for 9/11. I have had to read junk science about every conceivable issue, from homosexuality to climate change. I had gotten to a place where I did not even want to refer to myself as Christian, anymore, as the above mentioned people are so nasty and hateful, I could not imagine anyone wanting to be associated with them. I sure as hell didn't. I say that it is about time that progressive/liberal/moderate Christians spoke out. All we heard from the rightwing media after 9/11 was, "where are the moderate Muslims? Why are we not hearing them condemn the terrorists?" Meanwhile I was wondering where the moderate/ liberal/progressive Christians were and why they weren't condemning all of the hate speech coming from the Christian-Right (Which, in my mind is neither). I called the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church in America and asked when he was going to issue some kind of statement. As it happened, he already had, but the news media completely ignored it. If all one watches is CNN, one would think that the very over-weight Jerry Falwell is the Pope of America. Wonder if he ever heard that glutonny is one of the seven deadly sins? Guess not. by wintefire6 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 89 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Dec 16, 2006 at 9:23:32 AM
|
|
Values and Moral Sense
I grew up a Catholic and am now not just a liberal but an atheist. I do not believe there is a God. But I know, deep, deep down inside, my value system and my moral sense (as well as the way I choose to live my life) make Robertson, Falwell, Limbaugh, etal, seem as though they wallow around in the cess-pool end of human thought. They are welcome to it. They are the last persons on earth I would want to be like. I should be their role model! by Diane Cadonau (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Saturday, Dec 16, 2006 at 3:47:41 PM
|
|
YES! Christians Rebuke Dr. Dobson
Jefferson's Bible is a joke, and this comes from me, a Progressive Christian. What a wonderful article and what great news. I am glad someone is hitting Dobson and Rush Limbought by the Corporations. I am glad they are hitting back, hitting back hard and hitting back quickly at those trying to destroy the wall between Religion and State. Dobson and Falwell likes will not be satisfied until we have another Hundred Years War between Prostestants and Catholic while both sides are gleefully burning heretics (those who disagree with them), Jews and Muslims alive. What a terrible perversion of Christianity. It is the elections. They have given boldness and vision to Christians. I hope this is the beginning of the end of corporate talk radio. Phil by pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 972 comments) on Sunday, Dec 17, 2006 at 12:08:57 AM
|
|
TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE
I suppose that I should be pleased to see that the thinking contingent of Christianity has begun to organize and speak out against the fascistic tendencies of politicized conservative Christianity, but really, all that I can think about is, "Where have you been for so long?" The American version of Christianity has been a major PR setback for Christianity's claim that it is a force for good in the world where it touches it. What have we seen here but that Christians were easily duped in large numbers (the overwhelming majority, in fact) into supporting a party that is antithetical in its philosophy to both that of Christianity's founder and namesake, and to that of the founding fathers? This has been a clear demonstration of how Christianity and religion could be used to facilitate evil. I am still waiting for the benefit. And apparently the best that American religion can do on the other side of the ledger after decades of being subjected to the moral majority's manipulative, antichristian and antidemocratic message without opposition is to finally publish a position paper that is essentially off of the radar. Far from making me feel better about coexisting with the pernicious effects of Christianity on my church-going neighbors every Sunday, this is evidence that the church just talks about moral conviction while it embodies moral complacency and condones moral turpitude. I realize that it is politically incorrect not to give lip service to the beneficence of Christianity and the power of Christ, but I'll reserve that reaction for when I see evidence for it. It's time somebody pointed out that the emperor is naked. That dog don't hunt. The test of the value of Christianity to society is in the answer to the question, "How do non-Christians feel about coexisting with Christianity?" If Christianity is a net neutral, they won't care. If it is a benefit, they will approve of it. If it is a drain on society, they will want it to leave. For example, I'm also not a member of the Lion's Club, but I'm glad they are there. They don't cost me money or impinge on my life at all, and they help blind children. They are welcome neighbors. The church? Costs me a bundle in unpaid taxes that I have to help make up (and please don't try to tell me that religion is not a business with a franchise on every corner), subjects millions of Americans to the training of weekly sermons praising faith (certainty in the irrational without evidence) and faithfulness (uncritical obedience). The facts also belie the church's claim to having inside information (divine guidance) from supernatural sources. It has recently given the keys to our kingdom to the fascist neocons on the advice of charlatans like Dodson and the pastors of America. Not very impressive, and surely not welcome at all. So, yeah, I'd say we'd all be a far sight better off if Christianity, unlike the Lions, or, say, Little League baseball, would just get up and go away. I know. Politically incorrect. Christianity really is a wonderful thing. It only looks like it has been a potent force for evil as well as a quadriplegic force for good in this country for a long time. I hope that it will arise, organize, and clean up its mess. Then it can be a neutral influence on all of our lives again, maybe even some of the benefit that it has always claimed for itself. Christians who disagree need only to produce the evidence of the church's benefit that more than offsets its burden on society in terms of strife, war and other well documented results of religious differences. You cannot expect that non-Christians will just accept what you have been told in church and have accepted on faith alone because you trust its source, the church. Christians need to remember that the rest of us have not chosen to live life committed to a guess. Not since childhood have we been willing to accept something as fact on somebody's say so when the evidence argues otherwise. If you want to make the secular world see any hidden value to society from the church, you're going to have to demonstrate it convincingly, not simply insist otherwise as I am accustomed. We don't admire faith like you do. Apply it to unseen worlds like heaven and hell and you can't go too far wrong. Apply it to reality and you get the Christian voting bloc on Bush, or George Bush on Iraq: stubborn insistence in the face of contradictory evidence supported only by will and self-deception and leading to tragic errors of judgment with real, material consequences. by Yaybob (12 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 174 comments) on Sunday, Dec 17, 2006 at 7:41:01 AM
|
|
Danbury Baptist
Gary, I am glad you mentioned the Danbury Baptist. Many of the commenters need to do a study about why the Danbury Baptist group was so important that Jefferson would write a letter just to them. They were a disenfranchised group until the Rev. War. They had control of two Colonies for the vote on the Constitution. They allowed it be plainly known if there was no guarantee there would be a separation of religion and state they would never agree to sign a ratification of the Constitution. As far as Christianity doing any good, just a little reading about almost every institution dealing with health, education, freedom and welfare have been initiated by some Christian group from modern hospitials, the Red Cross, public education, institutions of higher learning, the Civil War to free the slaves; in fact most of those screaming to end the apratheid in the US in the Civil rights were Christians and Amercian Jews including me. If you think that was easy living in the South, well I do no know what to say but go back and learn to read and write. I realze how innocent and trusting people can be manipulated and how we are all a product of our society which plays a large roll as to why there is a great divide betweeen Christians attitudes and policies in the US. Reverend Martin Luther King was a Baptist Christian. President Jimmy Carter is a Christian Sunday School teacher and a Baptist, too. I will let the Methodist worry about President Bush while I try to deal with JERKS such as Reverend Jerry Falwell and Richard Land. I do not know who is worse, W or Falwell. Phil by pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 972 comments) on Sunday, Dec 17, 2006 at 8:29:28 AM
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article?
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |