Category Archives: Religion

Teapublican Mandated Nonsense.

Posted on by

We all know that Teapublicans have their knickers in a knot over the insurance mandates in President Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Not only are individuals mandated to carry insurance. Organizations are mandated to offer insurance that covers many types of preventative care, including (OMG!) contraception!

Teapublicans claim that such mandates are unconstitutional and must be repealed immediately. They claim that mandates are evidence of the “socialist, out-of-control big government of the Obama administration.”

But what about the Teapublican-ordered mandates that have been forced upon us?

Teapublicans have been pushing mandates on the American citizenry for many years. Indeed, the idea for health insurance mandates began with the very conservative Heritage Foundation. The idea was promoted by Richard Nixon and Bob Dole, and it was first implemented by Teapublican presidential frontrunner, Mitt Romney.

In a number of states, Teapublicans have mandated ultrasound exams for pregnant women considering an aborton. In most states, Teapublicans have mandated that voters present a photo ID with a current address. Most states have mandated that businesses, bars, even churches post signs if they choose not to allow guns in their establishments. In Florida, Teapublicans have mandated that those down on their luck pay for drug tests before receiving public assistance. In Arizona, Teapublicans are pushing a mandate that the unemployed pay for drug tests before they can receive benefits from their unemployment insurance. And, in many states, Teapublicans have mandated that funds intended for public schools be used for private and parochial schools.

And that’s just scratching the surface. We could also include such Teapublican mandates that marriage be only between and man and a woman, that the sale of the Plan B contraceptive be banned because they consider it tatamount to abortion, etc. And, of course, we can’t forget all those Teapublican–sponsored mandates that either failed to become law or were tossed out by the courts, such as mandatory prayer in schools, religious symbols in government buildings and mandates that the US be officially recognized as a “Christian” nation.

It seems that, for Teapublicans, a policy is only a mandate if you disagree with it.

The Teapublican Time Machine.

Posted on by

For several years, Teapublicans, especially white pre-Baby Boomers, have fondly remembered the days of their childhood when life was simple. When they could gas up the ’57 Chevy for $3.00 and cruise Main St. all night. It was a white-dominated “Father Knows Best” society of tidy neighborhoods with white picket fences.

Now those same Teapublicans seem determined to take us back to that era.

They can’t seem to grasp that those post-war days are really gone. Those days simply can’t, and won’t, be duplicated. Moreover, Teapublicans can’t seem to grasp the cultural dynamics that created the era they so fondly remember. It was an era of union-based manufacturing jobs that paid well enough to allow Mom to stay home with the kids. It was an era of small retailers, instead of big box chains; of neighborhood diners, instead of fast food chains. It was an era when everyone understood the importance of government and of working together – an attitude necessary for the defeat of Hitler and Hirohito. And it was an era when most of the products we used were made in the USA.

What these nostalgia-loving Teapublicans too easily forget are the seamy underpinnings of that era. African-Americans were segregated and denied the vote. Women were left out of business and politics. Young women were disdained and abandoned if they were unlucky enough to get pregnant before marriage. They were not allowed to attend school. Many were sent away to religious schools to be “rehabilitated” and have their babies in seclusion before giving them up for adoption. Many were simply barred from leaving home so the neighbors wouldn’t find out that they had become “fallen” women. If they chose to keep their babies, they received no child care payments. And if they didn’t want to have their babies, their choices consisted of tumbling down stairs, coat hangars, lye or back-alley butchers.

Yet the Santorum and Gingrich led Teapublicans want to revisit those days. Indeed, the policies being pushed by these candidates may well turn the “way back clock” back past the 60s and 50s, past the horrors of World War II, past the Great Depression, and past the Roaring 20s…all the way back to the 1800s, the days of Robber Barons. A time prior to the formation of the middle class. A time when there were no safety nets for those who were down on their luck. A time when rich industrialists ran everything, and when everyone else slaved 7 days a week to scratch out an existence.

Lest you think I exaggerate, consider the following legislative initiatives and proposals: All of the Teapublican candidates are on record as saying they would cut taxes, especially for the rich and for large corporations. They would eliminate capital gains taxes for the wealthy. At the same time, they would raise taxes on the poor. They would repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act making it impossible for tens of millions Americans to afford health insurance. And they would cut or destroy Medicare and Social Security.

They would drastically cut government, eliminating the Departments of Education and Commerce at a time when our economy is just beginning to show signs of recovery. They would eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency allowing large corporations to pollute our water and air at will with no consequences. They would continue or increase oil subsidies under the GOP’s “drill, baby drill” mantra. At the same time, they would eliminate subsidies for sustainable sources of energy.

They would likely start yet another war by attacking Iran, unleashing a torrent of hatred from the entire Muslim world and destablizing the Middle East and most of Asia. They would deny women the right to control their own bodies, even making it more difficult to obtain contraception. And perhaps most alarming of all, they would weaken the Constitutional separation of church and state.

Interestingly, despite the Teapublican candidate’s promises to shrink the federal government and cut the national debt, their fiscal policy proposals would actually increase the national debt according to the non-partisan US Budget Watch, while President Obama’s proposals would begin to shrink the deficit!

Even if you’re not a progressive as I am, a trip backward in the Teapublican time machine has to be an alarming prospect for all but the most right wing religious zealots.

Tell Teapublicans To Shove It.

Posted on by

Now that the Teapublican legislators of Virginia have passed a bill requiring women seeking an abortion to submit to a vaginal ultrasound, I would suggest a companion bill.  The new bill would require the male legislators of Virginia and Congressman Dan Issa, along with his all-male panel which testified on female contraception, to have an ultrasound wand shoved up their rectums in search of a brain.

Further, I propose that the anti-woman, anti-middle class, anti-Obama, anti-everything Teapublican presidential candidates be subjected to the same procedure.  It’s unlikely that the doctors would find a single brain among them.

Separation Clause Doesn’t Apply To Contraceptive Mandate.

Posted on by

The current uproar over mandates that Catholic-owned businesses offer contraception to insured employees seems, at best, insincere.

Ignoring the fact that Catholic Charities receives $2.9 billion of taxpayer money, and that the Catholic Church and other religious organizations own billions of dollars worth of real estate and collect billions in donations without paying taxes, there’s a simple principle at stake. Regardless of its ownership and non-profit status, a hospital or retirement home is not legally a church. It’s a business and an employer. And in order to operate as a business, it must meet a variety of legal and government requirements. For example, it must pay half of FICA for its employees. It must meet OSHA requirements for a safe work environment. It must pay for unemployment insurance and workers compensation. It can’t discriminate. And if it offers health insurance, it can’t choose which procedures or pharmaceuticals it wants the insurance to provide.

Such requirements were put in place to protect employees and our society at large.

Interestingly, Catholic-owned enterprises have already complied with the contraception mandate in 20 states. The Church did not raise a fuss until the Obama administration issued the mandate. Only then did the Catholic Church claim that the mandate violates the separation of church and state. What next? Will the Church claim moral opposition to paying FICA? To paying for unemployment insurance? Will it decide that all pharmaceuticals and medical procedures interfere with God’s will?

If the Church is sincere about separation of church and state, will it stop its practice of campaigning for political candidates from the pulpit? Will it no longer allow its tax-free facilities to be used for political gatherings? Will it refuse to take a position on any political issues?

Some Catholic leaders and, of course, Fox Noise Channel claim the contraception mandate is further evidence of an attack on Christianity. Of course, what organization would recognize attacks more quickly than the church that inspired the Crusades? Or the church that attacked indiginous people in order to force them to accept Catholicism?  Or the church that slaughtered and tortured millions as part of the Inquisition?  Or the church that created an environment for sexual predators in its ranks to attack children?

A True Conservative.

Posted on by

During the Teapublican primaries, we’ve all heard candidates who claim to be true conservatives. But upon listening to their plans, I have come to the realization that the only things they really want to conserve are their own fortunes.

It was during a recent Teapublican debate that I discovered I’m definitely not a liberal – never have been. I’ve been a conservative all along.

I believe in conserving clean air and water. I believe in conserving our forests, our streams and our oceans. I believe in conserving wildlife. I believe in conserving fossil fuels by not using them wastefully. I believe in conserving our natural resources by not subsidizing large corporations to exploit them. I believe in conserving our Constitution. I believe in conserving the Bill of Rights which provides equality and the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. I believe in conserving the separation of church and state.

I believe in conserving lives by only going to war as an absolute last resort. I believe in conserving taxpayer money by eliminating corporate subsidies, off-shore tax havens and no-bid defense contracts. I believe in conserving American middle class jobs. I believe in conserving the American tradition of building things rather than destroying them through vulture capitalism. I believe in conserving the rights of workers to bargain for fair compensation. I believe in conserving our electoral system by banning contributions from corporations and lobbying groups.

I believe in conserving our citizens’ homes and savings with common-sense regulations for greedy financial institutions. I believe in conserving our citizens’ health by providing access to affordable health care. I believe in conserving safety nets such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. I believe in conserving the rights of all people to pursue the marital relationship of their choice. I believe in conserving the rights of women to control their own bodies even if I disagree with some of their decisions. I believe in conserving our future by providing all children with the opportunity to receive a good education.

Finally, I believe in conserving America’s standing as a role model for the world rather than as a bully. And I believe in conserving the idealism that has always driven Americans by focusing on what can be, rather than what once was.

Patriots? Or Idiots?

Posted on by

Over the past 40 years, Teapublicans have co-opted patriotism and Christianity. They have cloaked themselves in flags and decried liberals and Democrats as socialists, communists, even fascists. They have blindly supported our military while ignoring our veterans. They have implied that anyone who fails to subscribe to their beliefs is unpatriotic. And they have stated that those who support peace, civil rights, public education, science, and economic fairness are un-Christian.

Hmmm…maybe they should read the Constitution and the Bible in their entireity.

It seems these Bible-thumping, gun-toting Teapublican “patriots” have a few things to learn about their nation and their faith. For starters, let’s take a look at how these so-called “patriots” refer to their duly-elected Commander-in-Chief.

Conservative activist, writer and Catholic, L. Brent Bozell III called President Obama a “skinny, ghetto crackhead.” Teapublican cars and trucks are often covered with bumper stickers stating “What an O-Hole,” “B.O. Stinks,” “A village in Kenya is missing its idiot,” “100% Douchebag,” and “Don’t blame me. I voted for the American.” Moreover, Teapublicans threatened the president and Democratic congressional representatives by carrying guns to their public appearances.

These are not the words and actions of patriots. And they certainly do not reflect the teachings of Christ who asked that his followers help the poor and turn the other cheek to violence.

These are the words and actions of a decidedly un-American, anti-Christian mob of bullies and thugs who have convinced themselves of their infallible superiority. They ignore science, re-write history, promote violence, and deny the civil rights of others.

What kind of patriotism is that?

Newt = John Edwards To The Nth Degree.

Posted on by

When it was discovered that 2008 presidential candidate, John Edwards, had an affair as his wife was fighting cancer, he became a national pariah who was vilified by virtually everyone.

Most vocal among his critics were the “Christian” conservatives who decried Edward’s lack of “values.”

But those same “Christian” conservatives now support Newt Gingrich.  Yes, that Newt!  The Newt who sanctimoniously led the cheers for Bill Clinton’s impeachment as the result of Clinton’s indescretion with an intern. The Newt who later admitted to an affair while his first wife was battling cancer. The Newt who had yet another affair while his second wife (and former mistress) was critically ill with Mulitple Sclerosis.  And who, despite the advice of his wife’s physician who told him that stress would be damaging to his wife, asked her to agree to an open marriage so he could continue his affair!

These facts, along with the Newt’s admission of 84 ethics violations as Speaker of the House should make anyone question his “values.” Indeed, they should be automatic disqualifiers for higher office. Yet here he is, the new standard bearer for “Christian” conservatives in the Teapublican presidential race.

After all, according to these pretend Christians, the Newt’s transgressions are in the past.  They don’t really reflect the man the Newt has become today.

No, they don’t. Today’s version of Newt Gingrich is even more ethically challenged. He is angrier, more vitriolic, more vengeful and more sanctimonious. But it seems that is what’s so appealing to “Christian” conservatives about the Newtster. He voices their self-righteous anger about President Obama and liberals. And following ABC’s interview with the Newt’s ex-wife about his affairs, they’re even more angry. Not at the Newt, but at ABC and the rest of the “lamestream” media for dredging up such an unsavory story about their hero.

“Sure, Newt is no saint,” they say. “But he has repented.” Apparently, his repentance has been so complete that he even earned the blessing of the apparent keeper of the “Christian” conservative’s moral compass – Sister Sarah Palin. That should be good enough for anyone. Shouldn’t it?

And what of John Edwards?  The “Christian” conservatives still consider him a pariah, of course.

Masters Of The Double Standard.

Posted on by

The field of Teapublican “presidential” (and I use the term loosely) candidates have proven, once and for all, that Teapublicans are almost completely devoid of ethics. I’d call them hypocrites, but we’re talking about Teapublicans here, so, for their benefit, I’ll try to use small words.

Teapublicans famously fight for so-called family values, yet many support Newt Gingrich who is twice divorced and whose second wife stated that Newt demanded an “open” marriage. In other words, a marriage that would allow him to boink anyone he wanted. So much for the “sanctity” of marriage issue.

Gingrich also admitted to 84 ethics violations while Speaker of the House and resigned in disgrace. Most of these violations were the result of Newt gaming the system to enrich himself. So much for the anti-Washington, anti-corruption issue.

Turning to the front-runner, Teapublicans are furious with so-called “Obamacare.” But what did President Obama use as a model for his health care reform? Why “Romneycare,” of course. You simply can’t be against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and support Mitt Romney. So much for the government health care issue.

Romney is also a “Vulture Capitalist” (Newt’s words, not mine) who led a private equity firm that purchased undervalued corporations with other peoples’ money, saddled the corporations with large management fees then sold off their assests while laying off thousands of American workers. So much for the jobs issue.

In addition, Romney has admitted to “parking” large amounts of money in off-shore bank accounts to avoid paying taxes. And though he has not yet released his tax returns, he estimates that his tax rate is “somewhere in the area of 15 percent.” Given that Mitt is a multi-millionaire, that’s a nice area to be in, especially considering that much of the middle class is taxed at a rate of 30-35 perecent! And, if Romney is elected and allowed to institute his recommended tax policies, his tax rate will dramatically drop while the tax rate for the middle class will remain virtually unchanged. And the tax rate for the poor will actually go up! Moreover, Romney’s tax plan will add tens of billions of dollars to the deficit. So much for the deficit and debt issues.

Voter support for these two only shows that Teapublicans are not really for anything. They’re simply against Obama. And many of them don’t even know why.

The Continuing Destruction Of Our Two-Party System.

Posted on by

Destroy limits on corporate political donations – check. Marginalize President Obama – check. Block Democratic presidential appointments – check. Block all attempts to improve the economy – check. Destroy ACORN – check. De-fund Planned Parenthood – in progress. Destroy labor unions – in progress. Suppress minority voters in key swing states – in progress. Destroy confidence in mainstream media – check. De-fund Public Broadcasting – in progress. Destroy the Environmental Protection Agency – in progress. Destroy confidence in government – check.

I will probably be dismissed as a leftist conspiracy crackpot for writing this. But if you think these things are unrelated, you’re wrong. More than 40 years ago, right wing Republicans along with conservative Christians set out to change the political landscape. They pushed moderate politicians from their party, labeling them RINOS (Republicans In Name Only). They attacked the media for daring to publish any story counter to their beliefs then eliminated the Fairness Doctrine to allow right wing media to lie as much as they want.

They focused on judicial appointments to replace moderate “activist” judges with conservative “activist” judges. Evangelist “Christian” Pat Robertson prayed (or should it be spelled preyed) for the death of moderate Supreme Court justices so George W. Bush could appoint “true” conservatives. They even attacked science for daring to teach such “leftist” ideas as evolution and climate change.

As a result, politics in this country have undergone a dramatic shift to the extreme right. Many traditional Republicans have switched parties or left politics altogether. Many moderate Democrats are former Republicans. And traditional Democrats are relegated to the Progressive Caucus and dismissed as extreme lefties.

In many states, thanks to the 2010 census and lack of Democratic voter turnout in 2010, Teapublican legislatures are hard at work gerrymandering congressional and legislative districts to benefit their candidates. But the most disturbing development of the Conservative/Religious alliance is the current attempt to suppress minority votes.

In 38 states (particularly swing states), Teapublicans are busy pushing bills to eliminate “voter fraud” by demanding photo IDs for voters. Nevermind that confirmed instances of voter fraud are virtually non-existant. In some states, it’s estimated as many as 50 percent of minority and elderly voters do not have driver’s licenses. Many of those people will find it difficult to obtain photo IDs. So Teapublicans are hoping that they won’t make the effort. And who will it help to suppress minority votes? Certainly not President Obama.

Our two party system and, as a result, our middle class have never been more at risk. If you think that’s accidental or the product of circumstances, think again.

Ummm…Actually, It’s A Pagan Tree.

Posted on by

This week, Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee unintentionally angered Christians by announcing the lighting of a “holiday tree” in the Rhode Island State House. Fueled by Fox News Channel, a group of carolers interrupted the lighting ceremony by singing O Christmas Tree. They were quoted as saying that they felt Chafee was trying to put down Christianity.

Instead of singing, they should have picked up a history book or simply searched the subject on their computers.

Had they taken the time, they would have found that the display of an evergreen tree or an evergreen branch at this time of year actually originated as part of the Pagan celebration for the winter solstice. Indeed, many historians believe that early Christians even changed the celebration of Christ’s birth to coincide with the solstice to make it easier to attract converts to their fledgling religion.

The carolers also might have discovered that, in the Old Testament, there is a passage in which the prophet Jeremiah condemned the ancient Middle Eastern practice of bringing trees into the home as Pagan. Of course, that was centuries before Jesus was born.

In Early America, William Bradford, the Pilgrim’s second governor, tried to stamp out the practice of decorating trees at Christmas-time as “Pagan mockery”. It wasn’t until 1851, that a “Christmas tree” was placed in an American church by Cleveland Pastor Henry Schwan. Even then, he was condemned for resorting to a Pagan practice and threatened with harm.

My point is this: It’s all too easy for people to find offense at some perceived slight or disrespect. It’s much more difficult to seek tolerance and to search for true understanding. If the carolers had made the effort, they might have actually learned something about the history of their own faith. And they might have understood that Chafee was not attacking Christianity.  He was merely trying to include all of his constituents in the season’s festivities as his Republican predecessor had done.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.