FAIR USE NOTICE

Bear Market Economics (Issues and News)

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.

Read more at: http://www.etupdates.com/fair-use-notice/#.UpzWQRL3l5M | ET. Updates
FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.

Read more at: http://www.etupdates.com/fair-use-notice/#.UpzWQRL3l5M | ET. Updates

All Blogs licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0

Saturday, May 31, 2014

GOP’s “religious liberty” scam just died: Why Brewer’s veto was so momentous


SALON






GOP’s “religious liberty” scam just died: Why Brewer’s veto is so momentous

Once upon a time, the right thought it could push its agenda behind claim of religious freedom. Those days are over





GOP's "religious liberty" scam just died: Why Brewer's veto is so momentousMike Huckabee, Michele Bachmann (Credit: AP/Susan Walsh/Reuters/Larry Downing/photo collage by Salon)
Back in 2012, a full two years before conservatives insisted that religious freedom entailed the right to discriminate against gay people or gay spouses in both private and public workplaces, Republicans in Washington trotted out the same religious liberty line for the arguably narrower purpose of defending religious employers who wanted to be exempt from the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate.
That effort ultimately ran aground, because the issue became the domain of the courts, but also because it ended up inviting a bunch of retrograde public pronouncements from conservatives about birth control and reproductive rights that ultimately dwarfed whatever political advantage Republicans hoped to gain by positioning themselves as tribunes for the religiously devout.
But for that ancillary damage, conservatives of all stripes really did seem to think that they’d gotten the framing right, and could apply it generously to future culture war battles.
The events of the past week have been especially fascinating in light of that history. The effort to apply the same religious freedom argument to anti-gay measures in states across the country has encountered tremendous resistance, not just from liberals but from business leaders, statewide Republican elected officials, and GOP celebrities who, for different reasons, seem to get that stomping away from a growing majority of the population with a middle finger hoisted overhead isn’t a smart thing to do.
On Wednesday night Arizona’s conservative governor Jan Brewer decided which camp she was with and vetoed her state’s version of the right-to-discriminate bill.
She joins a significant faction of powerful conservatives who seem to understand that religious liberty isn’t an all-purpose exemption from every law and norm conservatives don’t like, and can’t succeed politically as such. The threat to religious liberty can’t be tenuous or imagined. Brewer underscored that fact when she effectively admitted that the Arizona bill — SB 1062 — was a spasm of right-wing cultural panic.

“Senate Bill 1062 does not address a specific and present concern related to religious liberty in Arizona,” she said. “To the supporters of the legislation, I want you to know that I understand that long-held norms about marriage and family are being challenged as never before. Our society is undergoing many dramatic changes. However, I sincerely believe that Senate Bill 1062 has the potential to create more problems than it purports to solve. It could divide Arizona in ways we cannot even imagine and no one would ever want. Religious liberty is a core American and Arizona value, so is non-discrimination.”

In other words, I feel your pain, change is terrifying, but your remedy is bulls***.
Her veto carries momentous significance. It will resolve lingering ambivalence about similar efforts in other states and draw reluctant but influential players off the sidelines. I expect it’ll prove to be the pivotal moment when this particular uprising began to die.
But to my eye there are two revealing things about how this all unfolded. One pertains to a faction of conservatives who continue to articulate an absurdly expansive view of religious liberty; another pertains to a subset of liberals who are drawing over-broad lessons from this and a whole series of recent culture war victories.
Plenty of people on the right have effectively acknowledged that “religious liberty,” as applied here, was just a rhetorical frame that ultimately failed. But others have exposed themselves as adherents to a lopsided and deficient understanding of liberty. To support SB 1062 you must conceive of religious liberty as a social trump card. Whatever you do, in whatever social realm, must be publicly sanctioned so long as it’s an expression of some putative religious belief. Or to put it another way, any actions undertaken as exercises of religion must be treated as if they had been undertaken in private. This view writes democratic norms and competing liberties entirely out of the equation: We expect to benefit from all manner of public provisions and tax preferences, but if in return the public insists we treat everyone equally, our rights have been violated. If we can’t pick which insurance regulations we want to adhere to and keep the tax benefit the government provides to employers who provide their workers with health coverage, then it’s not religious freedom.
That view reflects an old, reactionary conception of liberty, and to the extent that it’s widely held, it implies a lot of frustrated and disoriented people, not given to relenting in any culture war battle.
But the flip side of this observation is that not every culture war battle will be as clearly delineated as this one. For instance, conservative columnist Matt Lewis propounded the following, provocative scenario in the Daily Caller on Tuesday.
“If you were a congregant in a church, wouldn’t you expect the pastor to marry you? Why should you be treated different? Any pastor — if he or she wants to maintain the church’s tax status, that is — had better grapple with this now.”
I suspect Lewis and I see the debate over the religious liberty defense from different perspectives. If you’re going to reduce the argument for gay rights down to a catchphrase, and you choose “leave us alone” instead of “we’re here, we’re queer, get used to it,” you probably aren’t terribly happy about the reaction to SB 1062. And Lewis seems unwilling to grapple with the sweeping nature of some of these measures.
But I think he’s probably right about where the gay rights fight is ultimately headed.
It would be an infringement upon religious liberty to shutter a church that refused to marry interracial couples. But how many conservatives would go to bat for that church if the government rescinded its tax exemption? Would they argue that religious freedom entails the freedom to discriminate in otherwise unlawful ways and pay no taxes? I kind of doubt it. The same logic obviously extends to same-sex couples. And yet, if the past week proved anything it’s that many, many conservatives believe that not only is it morally acceptable for a church to refuse to marry same-sex couples, but that the only way to uphold that church’s religious freedom is to make sure it keeps its privileged tax status as well.
I think that’s absurd and inconsistent. But I don’t think the politics of that fight would stack up as neatly for LGBT rights supporters as the one in Arizona did.
Brian Beutler
Brian Beutler is Salon's political writer. Email him at bbeutler@salon.com and follow him on Twitter at @brianbeutler.

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

The Religious Right Is Using Hatred To Try To Fundamentally Transform America


PoliticusUSA



The Religious Right Is Using Hatred To Try To Fundamentally Transform America



Tuesday, May, 20th, 2014




religious_right threat


It is unreasonable to believe that people in every nation love the country they live in, or that they would not likely emigrate to another country for obvious reasons such as escaping tyrannical dictators, depressed living conditions, less-than-hospitable geographical locations, or religious persecution. Americans are fortunate they have the freedom of, and from, religion thanks to the Founding Fathers who knew too well that left unchecked, religious leaders would persecute non-believers and impose harsh biblical laws on the entire population and make America an inhospitable country that citizens hated. There is a relatively large contingent of disgruntled citizens who seriously hate this country with a passion, and yet instead of fleeing America for their concept of Utopia, are Hell-bent on transforming America into a land Europeans emigrating to America sought to escape.

The election of an African American man as President in 2008 was absolutely intolerable for the great majority of racist evangelical Christians who, within a few months of Barack Obama’s inauguration, met and concocted a declaration that they would not rest until all Americans submitted to theocrats and decried the Constitution as obsolete and embraced the Christian bible as the law of the land. The document, the Manhattan Declaration, was written by evangelical leader Charles Colson who served prison time for his part in the Watergate scandal, Princeton law professor Robert P. George, and Beeson Divinity School dean Timothy George. The declaration reveals the authors and signatories’ intent to bring their biblical morality to bear on the government and society through religious tyranny founded on their bastardized Christianity and biblical morality laws. The declaration is contrary to the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal rights, freedom from religious imposition, and the Declaration of Independence’s pursuit of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that evangelicals believe are abominations.

Whether one just peruses the Manhattan Declaration, or studies it carefully, it is crystal clear its devotees hate everything about America, its people, the Constitution, liberty, free will, and equality for all. The declaration informs the level of hate evangelicals and the conservative Christians have for all aspects of American society including single parents, promiscuity, divorce, education, entertainment, government, science, laws, gays, and of course, Americans unwilling to bend to Christian domination. In fact, buried in the document is the statement that, “Immunity from religious coercion is the cornerstone of an unconstrained conscience. No one should be compelled to embrace any religion against his will,” and yet that is precisely what the thesis of the declaration informs is its intent.

Where the declaration exposes is the true nature of the religious right’s lie they are persecuted and victims because they are forbidden from imposing religion on the nation is the line; “nor should persons of faith be forbidden to worship God or express freely and publicly their deeply held religious convictions.” No-one in America is forbidden from worshipping god and the religious right knows it, but their definition of worship and public expression of their religious convictions means forcing them on the entire population; when they cannot, they claim their religious and moral commitments are trampled on. This sentiment permeates the declaration that is really nothing more than a manifesto advocating a Christian form of Sharia Law on the nation.

A great portion of the manifesto is devoted to “religious liberty” and “free exercise of religion” that was the basis of Arizona’s failed legal right to discriminate legislation and more recently; Hobby Lobby’s case before the Supreme Court. The goal of both Arizona Republicans, Hobby Lobby, and religious right movement in general is abolishing the 14th Amendment and laws against discrimination the “righteous” regard as tyranny, trampling their religious freedom, and prohibiting  ”free exercise” to impose their religious will on the nation. According to the religious right declaration, “the use of anti-discrimination statutes force religious institutions, businesses, and service providers of various sorts to comply with activities they judge to be deeply immoral,” informing their true goal is imposing their Christian morality on as many Americans as possible by convoluting free exercise of religion with prohibiting Americans from engaging in  ”activities they judge to be deeply immoral.” According to the manifesto’s long list of activities evangelical fundamentalists find deeply immoral, there is no aspect of American law, politics, government, society, or culture that escapes their definition of deeply immoral. Particularly the nation’s laws; including the United States Constitution.

The manifesto claims that “In recent decades a growing body of case law has paralleled the decline in respect for religious values in the media, academy, and political leadership. We view this as an ominous development.” What they view as ominous is the U.S. Constitution and its prohibition of religion imposing on Americans whether it is through the media, academia, or government and that is precisely what the manifesto’s thesis engenders; religious values, Christian religious values, its morality, and biblical laws forced on all aspects of society and culture. In fact, the Manhattan Declaration is an expression of Christian Dominionist’s intent and goal of dominating all aspects of American society.

It is a travesty that so many Americans, especially those on the left, dismiss the religious rights’ threat to their freedoms that goes far beyond forcing women to become perpetual birth machines or tormenting gays, because there is no aspect of society Christian tyrants will not target for their wrath; and it will be wrathful. There is a reason the religious right began decrying loss of religious freedom and that the President was waging a war on Christianity within a year of his inauguration; it coincided with the release of the Manhattan Declaration conservative Christians used to take advantage of racial animus toward the President. It also coincided with a well-executed claim the President was a Muslim and “the abortion president” that Republicans promoted through their silence and the preponderance of legislation targeting women’s reproductive rights.

The Manhattan Declaration is the thirty year culmination of the religious right’s entrance into the political arena thanks to Republican demigod Ronald Reagan, and although religious extremists in the Dominionism movement have been methodical in working behind the scenes to impose a Christian theocracy, there has never been anything resembling the blatant attempt to rule by bible that few Americans recognize as a credible threat. There was little outrage, or outright terror, at the Supreme Court’s recent ruling destroying the Separation of Church and State and Establishment of Religion when the Court’s Christian conservatives asserted sectarian prayers at government meetings was not only constitutional, but represented the “traditional ties between religion and government that date back to the nation’s earliest days.”

There is precious little any American can do to halt the march toward theocracy after the Supreme Court’s recent ruling, or the impending decision in the Hobby Lobby case giving free rein to any evangelical to ignore any law or statute if they claim it violates their “free exercise of religion.” There is nothing as dangerous as religion left unchecked, and according to the Manhattan Declaration there is no aspect of American society or culture that evangelical Christians will not attack with the same religious fervor of Europe’s Inquisition, Salem witch trials, or Taliban’s religious tyranny. If any American thinks for a minute they will not be targeted by the Christian right, they only need peruse the Manhattan Declaration and shudder because it reveals they hate everything about American society and culture that is not steeped in Old Testament dogmata. Most Americans are aware of how non-compliance was dealt with in the bible and if they are not, look at how the Taliban dealt with violations of Islamic law and substitute Islamic with conservative Christian.

The Religious Right Is Using Hatred To Try To Fundamentally Transform America was written by Rmuse for PoliticusUSA.
© PoliticusUSA, Tue, May 20th, 2014 — All Rights Reserved

Monday, May 19, 2014

God Doesn't Like the Sick, the Hungry, the Poor, the Homeless



politics




God Doesn't Like the Sick, the Hungry, the Poor, the Homeless?



Andy Ostroy

Andy Ostroy

Posted: December 18, 2009 09:05 PM





2009-12-19-godisarepublicane.jpg
An interesting thing happened on the Sean Hannity radio show Friday. The right-wing talking-head, while discussing health care reform and U.S. aid overseas, accused liberals of playing the religion card to impose their belief that it's Americans' moral obligation, and the work of God, to help those less fortunate. He mocked the liberal ideal that it's wrong for one nation to be so wealthy while children the world over go hungry. Feigning righteous indignation, Hannity preached to his 'great-American,' God-fearing listeners how wrong it is to hide behind the cloak of religion for political purposes.
Funny how we never hear any self-righteous criticisms from Hannity when the Republican Party exploits God and religion ad nauseam in order to indoctrinate Americans on its anti-abortion, school prayer, life-support, Christmas celebration, and anti-gay propaganda. But those pesky poor folk? The hungry? The Sick? The homeless? Well, according to Hannity's logic, God doesn't care about these people... unless of course they're trying to get an abortion, marry their same-sex partner or committing some other blasphemous act. But use religion to feed, house and care for people less fortunate? Shame on liberals.

Friday, May 16, 2014

5 of the Most Dangerous Delusions of the Far Right

Home


 TEA PARTY AND THE RIGHT  


Conservatives are outdoing themselves with the crazy on issues like climate change and abortion



May 14, 2014 























That the conservative movement is built on a bunch of misinformation, strange fantasies and outright lies has been the subject of thorough documentation, particularly in the past few decades. 
Conservative leaders deny inconvenient facts, make up lurid tales to justify their beliefs, and outright lie, if it suits their agenda. But these lies and myths rarely just sit in amber. They tend to evolve and get stranger and more baroque over time. Just when you think conservative misinformation can’t get any weirder, it does. Here’s four topics where conservatives are taking the lies and denialism to the next level.
1) Climate change.The White House recently released a report on climate change outlining how climate change is no longer a “future” issue since it’s having an impact on the environment right now. Conservatives responded by abandoning all restraint. No longer content with the line that they are simply “skeptical” of the science, George Will and Charles Krauthammer (neither of whom are scientists) went on Fox News to “explain” how all this science stuff is hokum. Will basically accused scientists of making it all up for mercenary reasons, saying, “If you want money from the biggest source of direct research in this country, the federal government, don't question its orthodoxy.” Why the federal government would make up climate change and then bribe scientists to lie about it was left unexplained.
But Michael Bresciani of the Christian Post may have come up with an even more entertaining, if still chilling way for conservatives to simply wave off the overwhelming evidence about climate change. Bresciani seems to accept that climate change is happening, but claims it’s for biblical reasons. “All that the Bible reveals about climate changed is part of the pre-millennial prophetic message. It does say that earthquakes and violent storms, fires and other natural disasters will occur with greater intensity and frequency as the ‘last days’ approach, but it clearly says these are ‘birth pangs’ for a planet about to meet its creator.” Instead of blaming carbon emissions, he blames “everything perverted, liberal and dehumanizing.”
So those are the two choices facing a forward-thinking climate change denialist these days: Either claim science is a lie or say climate change is real, but it’s caused by all the sex you perverts are having.
2) Abortion.Abortion has always been a topic that causes conservatives to spin off into fantasyland, but lately it just seems to be getting worse. Unable to admit out loud that they want to ban abortion to punish women for having sex, conservatives have taken to spinning fantastical tales of how abortion is an “industry” that deliberately tricks women into having abortions in order to make money. (Never mind that many abortion clinics are non-profits.)
But even that lurid fantasy is apparently not satisfying enough. Carol Everett worked in abortion clinics three decades ago and now makes a living as an anti-choice activist, and there’s no tale too tall for her to tell. Recently, LifeSiteNews, without an ounce of skepticism, printed some ofEverett’s claims about how the “industry” supposedly tricks young women into having sex, by letting them know that it exists. “We had a goal of 3-5 abortions from every girl between the ages of 13 and 18,” she told the unbelievably gullible audience at an anti-choice function. She then explained that abortion clinic workers supposedly sneak into schools and trick kids into getting abortions by teaching them the name of their genitals. Knowing your genitals have a name apparently puts them straight on the road to having sex, something she seemingly believes teenagers would otherwise have no interest in.
“My goal was to get them sexually active on a low-dose birth control pill that we knew they would get pregnant on,” she triumphantly concluded. There you have it: Anti-choicers have taken to practically arguing that feminists invented sex so they can trick women into having abortions. It makes perfect sense if you’ve been knocked on the head in the past five minutes. (Research shows that contraception use is linked to lower, not higher, abortion rates.)
3) Gun culture.The great myth the right has pushed for decades is that people need guns for personal safety, to protect against home intruders who are bent on raping and murdering them. It’s hard to deny the right to self-defense, but the tactic is fundamentally dishonest because having a gun in the home significantly raises the likelihood you’re going to be murdered. But no longer content simply to lie to people about guns, right-wing media has upped the ante, now arguing that a little pre-emptive murder of teenagers who are not actually out to murder you is good for overall safety and security.
You see it with the attempts to turn George Zimmerman into a hero, even though it’s indisputable that he chased down and shot an unarmed Trayvon Martin. Sean Hannity recently experimentedwith pushing the envelope even further, by championing the cause of a man who entrapped his victims with the intent to kill them for stealing from him. Byron Smith knew that his victims—Haile Kifer, 18, and Nick Brady, 17—had no intention of harming anyone with their admittedly stupid teenage stunt of breaking into houses to steal stuff. That’s why he set up an elaborate ruse to trick them into thinking his house was empty (including driving away and sneaking back into his dark house on foot) for the sole purpose of shooting them dead. Smith was found guilty of murder.
But Hannity couldn’t resist trying to turn him into a hero, claiming it was somehow self-defense because the kids “broke into the guy’s house.” This goes well beyond the lie that guns make you safe. The argument here is that pre-emptive vigilantism and the summary execution of people guilty of nothing more than petty crime is somehow “self-defense.”
4) Terrorism. Your average conservative is deeply committed to the idea that the Republicans are better on security issues than the Democrats. Of course, now they have to contend with the fact that President Obama presided over the killing of Osama Bin Laden. How better to go about this than just go big when rewriting history?

During a recent discussion of terrorism, Fox News host Eric Bolling said, “America was certainly safe between 2000 and 2008. I don't remember any attacks on American soil during that period of time.” No one bothered to correct him, even though the biggest terrorist attack in American history happened during Bush’s presidency, on September 11, 2001. Perhaps you remember it.
5) Benghazi. Fox News and various conservative pundits are notorious for going on and on with this hazy conspiracy theory trying to blame Hillary Clinton for an attack on an embassy in Benghazi that led to the deaths of Americans. But now it’s gotten to the point where every news story imaginable is being somehow linked back to “Benghazi,” no matter how tenuous the connection.
Recently, this trend reached a new low: Trying to use the kidnapping of hundreds of school girls in Nigeria by an Islamist cult to push the Benghazi hoax. Benghazi is a city in Libya, and is nearly 3,000 miles away from Nigeria. This did not stop Laura Ingraham on Fox News from implying that the embassy incident in Benghazi somehow caused the kidnapping. “I think part of the problem here is that we have a dead American ambassador,” she said, going on to suggest that the ambassador’s death emboldened Boko Haram to kidnap the girls.
Allen West went in a different, though no less disgusting, direction. Calling the attention paid to the Nigeria story “fishy,” West argued that the story is just a distraction from “all the scandals facing the Obama administration, especially Benghazi and the Select Committee.” The possibility that people might actually care deeply about what happens to innocent young girls is clearly implausible to him.
None of this should be surprising. Once the right embraced dishonesty as a favorite tactic, there’s no reason not to give into the urge to make the lies more elaborate and fantastical, all of which gets them more attention and gins up more hatred for their opposition. The lies are just going to get nuttier, as there’s very little reason for conservative pundits not to keep pushing and seeing how far they can go.

Saturday, May 3, 2014

Right Wing Christians and the Death of Egalitarianism and the Rise of Oligarchy in America


PoliticusUSA




Right Wing Christians Tell The Poor To Kiss The Ground Beneath The Feet Of the 1%

more from Rmuse




Saturday, May, 3rd, 2014, 10:00 am




Jesus wept


Egalitarianism is a trend of thought that favors equality for all people. Egalitarian doctrines maintain that all humans are equal in fundamental worth or social status, and although there was always a wealthy elite class living in luxury and a disenfranchised class living in poverty, between the end of World War II and the early 1980s, America was on its way to becoming closer to an egalitarian society than at any time in its history. All that ended with the election of B-movie actor Ronald Reagan in 1980 that began America’s march away from egalitarianism and on a path toward oligarchy that, thirty-three years later, is reaching fruition due to Republicans’ success at convincing the masses to give up all their possessions to the rich to get on the path to prosperity.

Crucial to Reagan’s insane trickle down economic theory was the so-called “moral majority” Christian movement whose support continues to enable the Republican transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the richest Americans. It is doubtful that what Americans regard as Christians, either then or today, have any knowledge of Jesus Christ’s teachings regarding the rich having no chance of entering the kingdom of heaven, or that he instructed the rich to sell all their possessions and give the proceeds to the poor. If today’s so-called “followers of Christ” had paid attention in Sunday School or read a few verses in three of the Christian bible’s “Gospel Accounts,” so-called Christians would reject Republicans if for no other reason than their preferential treatment of the very people Christ said had about as much hope of getting into Heaven as a camel passing through the eye of a needle.

It is now standard conservative policy for Republicans to condemn Americans as greedy and envious for the mortal sin of expecting to keep what little they have, and over the past five years particularly expect Americans to worship and pay tribute to the rich by giving up basic necessities of life. Jesus never instructed his disciples, and there is nothing in the Gospels, remotely resembling Jesus Christ instructing anyone to revere the rich or kiss the ground they walk on, but Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association thinks that is what Jesus wanted and counselled Americans receiving government services to “kiss the ground beneath the feet of the one percent.”

Fischer, as director of Issues Analysis for the extremist Christian American Family Association (AFA), said on two weeks ago that people who used welfare and other government services needed to “kiss the ground beneath the richest 1 percent of Americans.” Fischer also said Americans who paid into Social Security retirement and Medicare throughout their working lives had no right to collect, or expect to collect, on their benefits when they retire. According to the “follower of Christ,” Americans are laboring under a “myth” that they had a right to collect on their so-called “entitlements” or “earned government benefits” he claimed were socialism.

Fischer, ever the good Christian, scolded the poor and middle class and explained that “rather than the poor, the low income and the middle class being resentful of these rich people, they should be kissing the ground on which they walk! They ought to be given ticker-tape parades once a week in all of our major cities to thank them for funding welfare for everybody.” However, Fischer’s blasphemy against Jesus Christ and apostasy against his teachings did not stop with demanding that the 99% fall down and prostate themselves before the rich. He also railed against the government and “the involuntary transfer of wealth through taxation” he asserted “makes us a socialist country. This is Marxism on display.” In 2012, another Christian extremist, mega-church preacher Rick Warren, said via Twitter that “HALF of America pays NO taxes. Zero, so they’re happy for tax rates to be raised on the other half that DOES pay taxes.” Jesus likely wept.

According to Fischer who adheres to Republican conservatism as if it is a religion, President Obama is guilty of using the Internal Revenue service to “go after the 1 percent;” a claim Republicans imply by defending income inequality and protecting the rich from any tax reform. Fischer and Warren can bemoan and label taxation whatever their bastardized Christianity informs them, but Jesus commanded his followers to “render unto Caesar what is Caesars,” and their Christian bible says “Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. Whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.” Even a half-wit bible-thumper from the bible belt can comprehend those simple directions and that Jesus commanded the rich to sell all their possession and give to the poor; instructions that are contrary to conservative Christian ideology demanding the rich be held up as idols.

The state of the conservative movement, and increasingly the Christian conservative movement, has become a religious testament to oligarchy and the philosophy that the masses exist to serve the rich; including giving them all their possessions. Republicans have become so blatantly pro-one-percent that despite their weeping and gnashing of teeth over “crushing deficits” for the past five years, that they had the temerity to blatantly and without apology pass an unfunded $310 billion tax cut for the rich and corporations to increase the deficit they claim is an affront to “our children and grandchildren’s economic future.”
Like the so-called Christian right, Republicans are not even couching their idolatry of the rich and hatred of the poor and middle class they claim are greedy and envious for objecting to conservatives taking from the poor to enrich the wealthy that is the new Christian conservatism. One wonders how long it will be until the Christian conservative movement joins with Republicans to support a law mandating “the poor, low-income, and middle class” fall to their knees, prostrate themselves to the ground, and “kiss the ground beneath the one percent.” At the rate America is rushing toward oligarchy as theocracy, refusing to worship the rich will be akin to apostasy.
 
Right Wing Christians Tell The Poor To Kiss The Ground Beneath The Feet Of the 1% was written by Rmuse for PoliticusUSA.
© PoliticusUSA, Sat, May 3rd, 2014 — All Rights Reserved