#Christian Nationalism

[socialjusticeinamerica]

[clearancecreedwatersurvival]

If your opinions on U.S. politics are not grounded in the understanding that a conglomeration of evangelical religious fascist cults are currently trying to eliminate every advancement in human rights won through collective struggle since the 1910s (the origin of every anti trans and other targeted repressive bill in every legislature and every lawsuit scotus has used to repeal landmark case decisions is the same policy thinktank funded by evangelical money) then I simply do not take your dedication to antifascism and human rights particularly seriously.

[odinsblog]

Lmao, Abby feels “betrayed” by Right wing conservative men, who been showing everyone they hated women literally from day one

[stopproject2025comic]

Project 2025 is a blueprint for enforcing Christian Nationalist ideas at the federal level. They have a plan and they mean to enact it, and we have to use every tool we have to fight it. That includes activism, spreading the word, and voting.

For people who use screen readers, we have full alt-text and image descriptions at the site. https://stopproject2025comic.org/comic/christian-nationalism/

[batboyblog]

Amongst some of the proposals for a second Trump Admin:

- end surrogacy

- end no fault divorce

- invoke the insurrection act to stop protests

- end sex education in schools

- stop policies that “subsidize single motherhood”

[probablyasocialecologist]

“Under His wings,” one lobbyist wrote in an email. “The Devil never sleeps,” another person sent in an email chain about the distinction between gender and sex. “I pray for the 2nd coming more and more.”

These missives are part of a trove of leaked emails between South Dakota GOP Rep. Fred Deutsch, anti-trans lobbyists, and other state lawmakers about anti-trans policies that are filled with language so deeply religious that, at times, the communications read like scripts from The Handmaid’s Tale. It’s the language, one expert told VICE News, of Christian nationalists who believe they’re engaging in a holy war.

The emails, which are available online for journalists and others to read and were first reported on by Mother Jones, include revelations about some of the ways that anti-trans lobbyists—and elected Republicans like Deutsch and Idaho Rep. Julianne Young—collaborate and strategize to write and endorse policies that directly target trans people on a national scale.

The repeated notes about “blessings” and “prayers,” as well as sign-offs like “God bless you” and “Under His wings,” proliferate throughout the emails, which frequently reference explicit religious motivations for targeting trans people.

[...]

“It is the language of Christian nationalism,” Thomas Lecaque, an associate professor of history at Grand View University focusing on apocalyptic religion and political violence. “It is the language of people who very much believe they are doing God’s will, and it is the language of people who very much believe that they are engaged in a holy war.”

[charliejaneanders]

Elon Musk has turned 𝕏 into a right-wing hate network, with violent racism and transphobia... Unlike its competitors such as Gab and Truth Social, 𝕏 is successful in normalizing white supremacist ideologies because of the large userbase it inherited from Twitter. A userbase that, when you post on 𝕏, includes you.

Here's a site to help organizations and people move on from X-Twitter.

[whatbigotspost]

Oh hey here’s a resource that says what we all already know: Christian nationalism is a rising threat in the US. It also covers how the 10% of Americans who are Christian Nationalists are pretty damn comfortable with fascist leadership.

I give this to you not because YOU need this proof, dear follower. But because your centrist cousin Beth or coworker Greg take NPR more seriously as a source than tumblr discourse…

So it’s here to source as needed, as you help them PAY ATTENTION TO THIS SHIT. Because we all really need to PAY ATTENTION TO THIS SHIT.

You’re PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS SHIT, right?

[shinobicyrus]

This week, Supreme Court Justice Samuel "goes on expensive fishing trips with republican megadonors" Alito decided to use an official Supreme Court order to once again rail against same-sex marriage and the entire concept of safeguarding queer rights.

It was all in response to a case the Supreme Court declined to hear involving the dismissal of 3 potential jurors who claimed that they had been unfairly passed over (yes they're complaining about not being selected for jury duty) due to their religious beliefs. The case involved a woman who was suing her employer for sexual discrimination and retaliation after she started dating the ex-girlfriend of a male coworker. The 3 potential jurors that had not been selected had stated a belief to the court that homosexuality is a sin.

Rather than commenting on the obvious bias three potential jurors had against a party in the case, Alito instead spent five pages ranting about the sheer injustice that had been done to them. The case, he said, fully exemplified the "danger" that he'd predicted back in 2015, when the Supreme Court had legalized same sex marriage nationwide (in a slim 5-4 vote, I will remind):

"Namely, that Americans who do not hide their adherence to traditional religious beliefs about homo-sexual conduct will be labeled as bigots and treated as such by the government."

Again this was a case in which a court ultimately decided that maybe people who believed that homosexuals were sinful shouldn't sit on a case in which one of the parties was one such "sinner." That sounds pretty fair to me; they didn't call them bigots, or evil, or throw them in jail. The court just decided that maybe they weren't a good fit for that particular case. For that particular plaintiff.

But no, a Supreme Court Justice, someone who is supposed to be a scholar of law, turned it in his mind into a government assault against "people of good will."

Never forget how narrow that marriage equality decision had been. Never forget Alito and Thomas are still salty about it 9 years later and have stated in public multiple times they want to revisit this decision. Just like Roe, just like Miranda Rights, just like the Voting Rights Act - they will gut civil rights and established precedent on the altar of their Originalism and make us beholden to the tenets of their personal Gods.

And they're doing it in public too, so they can signal to everyone who thinks like them to keep trying, you have friends here. You have a sure chance of victory.

At the very least, the lesbian with mad game won her case.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Greg Owen at LGBTQ Nation:

The night before his debate with Vice President Kamala Harris, Donald Trump joined a nationwide “prayer call” sponsored by a Washington-based Christian group in support of the former president. As in his sputtering debate performance, on the call, Trump blamed America’s woes on a “flood” of “millions and millions of illegal aliens” entering the country. For the Christians praying for Trump, he said an effort by Harris to naturalize these “criminals,” “mental patients,” and “rapists” – his words – would come at Christians’ expense.

“Every day, she is flooding our country with millions and millions of illegal aliens. She wants to make them citizens, she wants to have them vote,” Trump said. “Which will destroy the voting powers of Christian conservatives forever.” “And once that starts happening, and once you get those numbers involved, you lose everything,” he said. [...] But Trump also doubled down on a more insidious past promise to provide legal cover for Christians to discriminate, a pledge he avoided repeating in public on the debate stage Tuesday night. “When I win, I will stop the weaponization of our government against Christians, will defend religious liberty at the highest level, and I’ll create a task force of anti-Christian bias,” Trump shared on the prayer call. “We will fight it like nobody has ever fought it before. I’ll protect Christians in our schools, our government, public square, and we’ll bring our country back together as ‘one nation under God.’ We will make America great again.”

Want more proof that Donald Trump is in bed with Christian Nationalist theocrats? His proposal to create a task force to protect their “religious liberty” at the expense of others.

[fuckyeahreligionpigeon]

[chelledoggo]

hot take: Christians should not hold the American flag (or any national flag for that matter) in the regard of being "sacred."

the Pledge of Allegiance is inherently a prayer to a dead idol - a scrap of cloth that represents a clump of unfeeling soil.

His kingdom is not of this world.

...but what do i know? i'm just a filthy purple-haired liberal heretic, right?

[odinsblog]

One of the most durable myths in recent history is that the religious right, the coalition of conservative evangelicals and fundamentalists, emerged as a political movement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion. The tale goes something like this: Evangelicals, who had been politically quiescent for decades, were so morally outraged by Roe that they resolved to organize in order to overturn it.

This myth of origins is oft repeated by the movement’s leaders. In his 2005 book, Jerry Falwell, the firebrand fundamentalist preacher, recounts his distress upon reading about the ruling in the Jan. 23, 1973, edition of the Lynchburg News: “I sat there staring at the Roe v. Wade story,” Falwell writes, “growing more and more fearful of the consequences of the Supreme Court’s act and wondering why so few voices had been raised against it.” Evangelicals, he decided, needed to organize.

Some of these anti- Roe crusaders even went so far as to call themselves “new abolitionists,” invoking their antebellum predecessors who had fought to eradicate slavery.

But the abortion myth quickly collapses under historical scrutiny. In fact, it wasn’t until 1979—a full six years after Roe—that evangelical leaders, at the behest of conservative activist Paul Weyrich, seized on abortion not for moral reasons, but as a rallying-cry to deny President Jimmy Carter a second term. Why? Because the anti-abortion crusade was more palatable than the religious right’s real motive: protecting segregated schools. So much for the new abolitionism.

Today, evangelicals make up the backbone of the pro-life movement, but it hasn’t always been so. Both before and for several years after Roe, evangelicals were overwhelmingly indifferent to the subject, which they considered a “Catholic issue.” In 1968, for instance, a symposium sponsored by the Christian Medical Society and Christianity Today, the flagship magazine of evangelicalism, refused to characterize abortion as sinful, citing “individual health, family welfare, and social responsibility” as justifications for ending a pregnancy. In 1971, delegates to the Southern Baptist Convention in St. Louis, Missouri, passed a resolution encouraging “Southern Baptists to work for legislation that will allow the possibility of abortion under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother.” The convention, hardly a redoubt of liberal values, reaffirmed that position in 1974, one year after Roe, and again in 1976.

When the Roe decision was handed down, W. A. Criswell, the Southern Baptist Convention’s former president and pastor of First Baptist Church in Dallas, Texas—also one of the most famous fundamentalists of the 20th century—was pleased: “I have always felt that it was only after a child was born and had a life separate from its mother that it became an individual person,” he said, “and it has always, therefore, seemed to me that what is best for the mother and for the future should be allowed.”

Although a few evangelical voices, including Christianity Today magazine, mildly criticized the ruling, the overwhelming response was silence, even approval. Baptists, in particular, applauded the decision as an appropriate articulation of the division between church and state, between personal morality and state regulation of individual behavior. “Religious liberty, human equality and justice are advanced by the Supreme Court abortion decision,” wrote W. Barry Garrett of Baptist Press.

So what then were the real origins of the religious right? It turns out that the movement can trace its political roots back to a court ruling, but not Roe v. Wade.

In May 1969, a group of African-American parents in Holmes County, Mississippi, sued the Treasury Department to prevent three new whites-only K-12 private academies from securing full tax-exempt status, arguing that their discriminatory policies prevented them from being considered “charitable” institutions. The schools had been founded in the mid-1960s in response to the desegregation of public schools set in motion by the Brown v. Board of Education decision of 1954. In 1969, the first year of desegregation, the number of white students enrolled in public schools in Holmes County dropped from 771 to 28; the following year, that number fell to zero.

In Green v. Kennedy (David Kennedy was secretary of the treasury at the time), decided in January 1970, the plaintiffs won a preliminary injunction, which denied the “segregation academies” tax-exempt status until further review. In the meantime, the government was solidifying its position on such schools. Later that year, President Richard Nixon ordered the Internal Revenue Service to enact a new policy denying tax exemptions to all segregated schools in the United States. Under the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which forbade racial segregation and discrimination, discriminatory schools were not—by definition—“charitable” educational organizations, and therefore they had no claims to tax-exempt status; similarly, donations to such organizations would no longer qualify as tax-deductible contributions.

On June 30, 1971, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued its ruling in the case, now Green v. Connally (John Connally had replaced David Kennedy as secretary of the Treasury). The decision upheld the new IRS policy: “Under the Internal Revenue Code, properly construed, racially discriminatory private schools are not entitled to the Federal tax exemption provided for charitable, educational institutions, and persons making gifts to such schools are not entitled to the deductions provided in case of gifts to charitable, educational institutions.”

Paul Weyrich, the late religious conservative political activist and co-founder of the Heritage Foundation, saw his opening.

In the decades following World War II, evangelicals, especially white evangelicals in the North, had drifted toward the Republican Party—inclined in that direction by general Cold War anxieties, vestigial suspicions of Catholicism and well-known evangelist Billy Graham’s very public friendship with Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon. Despite these predilections, though, evangelicals had largely stayed out of the political arena, at least in any organized way. If he could change that, Weyrich reasoned, their large numbers would constitute a formidable voting bloc—one that he could easily marshal behind conservative causes.

“The new political philosophy must be defined by us [conservatives] in moral terms, packaged in non-religious language, and propagated throughout the country by our new coalition,” Weyrich wrote in the mid-1970s. “When political power is achieved, the moral majority will have the opportunity to re-create this great nation.” Weyrich believed that the political possibilities of such a coalition were unlimited. “The leadership, moral philosophy, and workable vehicle are at hand just waiting to be blended and activated,” he wrote. “If the moral majority acts, results could well exceed our wildest dreams.”

But this hypothetical “moral majority” needed a catalyst—a standard around which to rally. For nearly two decades, Weyrich, by his own account, had been trying out different issues, hoping one might pique evangelical interest: pornography, prayer in schools, the proposed Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution, even abortion. “I was trying to get these people interested in those issues and I utterly failed,” Weyrich recalled at a conference in 1990.

The Green v. Connally ruling provided a necessary first step: It captured the attention of evangelical leaders , especially as the IRS began sending questionnaires to church-related “segregation academies,” including Falwell’s own Lynchburg Christian School, inquiring about their racial policies. Falwell was furious. “In some states,” he famously complained, “It’s easier to open a massage parlor than a Christian school.”

One such school, Bob Jones University—a fundamentalist college in Greenville, South Carolina—was especially obdurate. The IRS had sent its first letter to Bob Jones University in November 1970 to ascertain whether or not it discriminated on the basis of race. The school responded defiantly: It did not admit African Americans.

Although Bob Jones Jr., the school’s founder, argued that racial segregation was mandated by the Bible, Falwell and Weyrich quickly sought to shift the grounds of the debate, framing their opposition in terms of religious freedom rather than in defense of racial segregation. For decades, evangelical leaders had boasted that because their educational institutions accepted no federal money (except for, of course, not having to pay taxes) the government could not tell them how to run their shops—whom to hire or not, whom to admit or reject.

The Civil Rights Act, however, changed that calculus.

(continue reading)

[the-greatest-fool]

I basically only post and read posts in my bubble aside from occasionally scrolling through Real Tumblr, but people’s takes about US politics on this website are fucking unbelievable. They talk about our government as if it didn’t save us from a pandemic-induced financial collapse, pump trillions of dollars into public works, not to mention substantially invest and rein in pharmaceuticals, and is instead some sort of ultra-neoliberal-corporate kitty shooting machine.

Like let’s be for real. Do they…know what the government does? How it works? Do you know what a conservative is? Do you know what an authoritarian is?

Because a system of government whose citizens are all lucky it has had continuous peaceful transfer of power for centuries could very well have its greatest norm violated—that those who reject its legitimacy must be rejected—and we don’t blink an eye.

Because the first major investment against climate change, coupled with life saving investments into healthcare, cancer research, and drug costs could be shredded by indiscriminate fiscal conservatives who don’t care if we die in forest fires, cancer from pollution, lose insurance because we’re jobless, or, apparently, all die in a fricking plague.

Because a foreign policy establishment that had finally reversed two decades of foreign intervention in favor of a normalization strategy aimed at reducing American foot presence, drone strikes, and indiscriminate killings is about to be replaced by the whims of a man who dropped the “mother of all bombs” on the Middle East, gave American soldiers up to Russian bounty hunters, extorted a foreign leader for political favors and arguably indirectedly resulted in that country being BRUTALLY INVADED BY AN IMPERIAL NEIGHBOR, is in the pockets of CCP-funded billionaires, and WANTS TO “FINISH THE JOB” IN GAZA.

Because a President who is against family separations and promotes a path for DREAMERs and more legal immigration and rights for unodcumented people could be replaced by a man who wants to separate families, PUT UNDOCUMENTED PEOPLE IN CONCENTRATION CAMPS, RESTRICT EVEN LEGAL IMMIGRATION, ESPECIALLY THAT OF MUSLIMS, AND SHOOT MIGRANTS.

Because a President who stopped a repeat of the Great Recession and the painful decade that followed it with strong fiscal stimulus which CUT CHILD POVERTY IN HALF BEFORE CONSERVATIVES MADE IT EXPIRE, then managed to cut deficits and presided over a decline in inflation, resulting in record high real wages (aka taking into account inflation) for workers is going to be replaced by a President who wants to TARIFF ALL FOREIGN GOODS by 15%, CUT TAXES FOR THE FILTHY RICH AND THE TAX ENFORCEMENT TO STOP THEM, INCREASE CHILD POVERTY AND UNINSUREDNESS by cutting gov’t programs, and HURT UNIONS which by every measure will lead to lower wages, higher prices, and more poverty and starvation.

Because a President who has pledged to sign a bill codifying Roe v. Wade (which has yet to be possible in recent memory, whatever these kids say), who enshrined the right to marry someone of the same sex or different race, who supports the Equality Act which would enshrine LGBTQ protections into the law, could be replaced by THE MAN WHO REMOVED AMERICA’S RIGHT TO ABORTION, whose Christian nationalist supporters want to END SEXUAL FREEDOM as we know it including TARGETING IVF AND BIRTH CONTROL, who wants to reverse LGBTQ discrimination law in favor of Christian bigots who hate queer and trans people, and who demonizes that community to win political support.

Ask yourself if you really think there’s no difference between the two. Ask yourself if a reasonable person given these facts would choose the latter. Ask yourself why you see so much propagandizing against the reasonable choice. Ask yourself why so many people seem to have opinions on this when they “don’t even go here”.

Maybe I’m just preaching to the choir here. Maybe people who say this inane stuff wouldn’t vote anyways. Maybe somehow we’re screwed anyways. Maybe people will stupidly vote third party and we’re fucked. Maybe this will get me attacked.

I don’t care anymore. If I have to see one more fucking post acting like we live under the fucking Evil Empire while a SELF PROCLAIMED DICTATOR is about to end the best streak of decent governance I’ve ever seen in a while, I just can’t anymore.

[batboyblog]

The law is a product of a legislative season in which Republican lawmakers who had felt stifled for eight years under a Democratic governor, John Bel Edwards, sought to advance a flurry of conservative legislation to Mr. Landry, his Republican successor.

In a special session this year, lawmakers rolled back a previous overhaul of the criminal justice system and passed bills to lengthen sentences for some offenses, strictly limit access to parole, prosecute 17-year-olds charged with any crime as adults and allow methods of execution beyond lethal injection.

Lawmakers also advanced first-in-the-nation measures like designating abortion pills as dangerous controlled substances and allowing judges to order surgical castration of child sex offenders.

------------------

While past attempts to force displays of the Ten Commandments in public schools have failed supporters feel more optimistic about their chances in court thanks to the conservative Supreme Court.

and this kids is why you vote, every time, for the Democrat however boring, annoying, or conservative (for a Democrat) they are, because when Republicans take over this is the shit they do, this what they want do everywhere if they have a chance.