Spotlight: Methodism Under Attack
Bruce Wilson printable version print page     Bookmark and Share
Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 01:15:50 PM EST
[image left: partial map of IRD associations with media and religious organizations. click here  for full version from Media Transparency]  As material - mostly courtesy of Andrew Weaver's leadership in guiding research efforts - has acrued on John's Dorhauer's ongoing series I've created a new Talk To Action anthology dedicated to IRD associated attacks on the United Methodist Church
. Why would the IRD want to attack the mainline Protestant Denominations ? Andrew Weaver, in his review of Hardball on Holy Ground, by Stephen Swecker, explains:"Think about this: While the members of churches affiliated with the National Council of Churches account for about a quarter of the population, approximately half of the members of the U.S. Congress say they are members of these communions. NCC church members' influence is disproportionate to their numbers and include remarkably high numbers of leaders in politics, business, and culture.... Moreover, these churches are some of the largest land owners in the U.S., with hundreds of billions of dollars collectively in assets, including real estate and pension funds. A hostile takeover of these churches would represent a massive shift in American culture, power and wealth for a relatively small investment. "

Again, I'm really glad to see some light being shone on the efforts of dominionists to hijack mainstream denominations.

(Very interestingly, in that IRD diagram--there's quite a number of familiar faces in regards to dominionism, and a few that are linked specifically to previous attempts at hijacking and sheep-stealing.  Not surprisingly, both the Coalition for National Policy and the Coalition on Revival are counted (in fact, the COR in particular is linked with sheep-stealing and hijacking of mainstream denominations; at least one of the COR's founders has been linked with actually devising some of the very tactics the IRD is using nowadays to hijack and split mainstream Christian groups and in particular is linked with dominionist groups that have a longterm documented history of targeting non-dominionist Christian groups for infiltration and conversion).  Donald Wildmon (yes, as in the American Family Association) is also prominently listed.

Some of the other players are less well known but still incredibly influential in dominionism--the group "Christian Voice" (not to be confused with the UK-based Christian Voice which is a different dominionist group), for example (which is definitely linked to the Assemblies of God and particularly the Full Gospel Businessmens' Fellowship International), is mentioned.  Christian Voice is probably best known as one of the major conduits for organising dominionists in the Assemblies back in the 70's (originally over--in a longstanding tradition of sorts--trying to deny equal rights to LGBT individuals, a tradition that Assemblies-affiliated groups keep up today, including knowingly associating their youth groups with known hate groups), including specifically coordinating the hijacking of the Republican Party by dominionists; to this day, the magazine is a major media outlet for dominionists and even in the 1980's was recognised by major media as a pro-dominionist magazine.  To this day Christian Voice distributes a "report card" on legislators, detailing how they voted on dominionist causes; the group also has an online website and operates voter drives specifically aimed at registering dominionists to vote.  (Interestingly, some sources have also linked Christian Voice to the Moonies; apparently the present legislative director of the group has connections to Moon.)

Interestingly, the topic of the IRD and specifically the IRD targeting the United Methodist Church has come up rather frequently on Dark Christianity (the Livejournal forum which Lorie manages and I am a frequent commentator at)--this info will be extremely useful to people there, several of whom have expressed concern about their churches being potentially targeted.

by dogemperor on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 02:59:56 PM EST

I would assume in the current pernicious atmosphere here in America, where anything goes, that NO church congregation is safe from Dominionist raids, including the Catholic Church. As a matter of fact, I would think that the American Catholic Church has most likely been under attack since the early 1950's as indicated by its long term dwindling membership; which has been accelerated in recent days due to the wide spred negative publicity caused by the priest sex scandals. I am certain that many of new members filling the pews of these new evangelical  megachurches are former catholics. It is by no means a coincident that all of these new megachurches describe themselves as non-denominational. If one includes data on the fastest growing churches in Central and South American and the Caribbean, it become immediately clear that it is the Dominionist groups that are winning and it is the traditional Catholic Church that is losing. A quick look at the global picture rather puts the outrage of stealing the flock into the correct perspective, don't you think?

by exegete on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 03:22:01 PM EST
Not only has the Catholic church been pretty explicitly targeted (since the 60's in fact) by "sheep-stealing" dominionists, it's in fact the same groups of dominionists doing it--the Assemblies and the "independent neopentecostal" groups that are descended from the Assemblies (and, occasionally, are in fact Assemblies churches merely calling themselves "nondenominational").

The Full Gospel Businessmen's Fellowship International (a major force that the Assemblies of God has used to practice "sheep-stealing" and to "seed" dominionist groups in churches--a tactic the IRD is now borrowing) is pretty clearly linked with the whole "Catholic Charismatic" movement, even encouraging people at first to stay in their parishes so they can convert more members to being essentially Mass-attending pentes.  The people leaving Catholic churches to go to large Assemblies and neopente megachurches is no accident--quite often, they've either had "Catholic outreaches" or "charismatic Catholic" groups started in Catholic churches decades beforehand.

(In some cases, particularly in Central America, this has even spilled over into dominionism of the American kind--El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala all have rather serious problems with dominionist movements started in the US, and it is known that the FGBMFI and various pente groups actively funded the Contras in Nicaragua (and in fact Oliver North has gone stumping at Assemblies churches claiming what he did in the Iran-Contra scandal was "God's work").  In my history of dominion theology within the pentecostal movement I've documented some of the FGBMFI's misbehaviour in Central America--behaviour bad enough that even the Peace Corps documented it.)

by dogemperor on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 03:43:44 PM EST

Indigestible perhaps. But, I wpouldn't be surprised....

by Bruce Wilson on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 04:01:47 PM EST

"Moreover, these churches are some of the largest land owners in the U.S., with hundreds of billions of dollars collectively in assets, including real estate and pension funds. A hostile takeover of these churches would represent a massive shift in American culture, power and wealth for a relatively small investment. "

There you have it. It's all about the money, and the power that goes with it. These people don't care about the congregations, except to shake them down for their tithes. They care about the money, and the power that money buys them.

No wonder they're hijacking and plundering mainline churches.

by Lorie Johnson on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 05:17:20 PM EST

I posted my thoughts on this subject at the article: Understanding the "Christocrats", but I really want to hear specifically how a church can be taken over unless the members are not happy with the church's current direction? It seems like people are simply unwilling to face the reality that, unfortunately, these fundamentalist churches are growing because they're preaching what people want to hear. I admit it's a sick mixture of the gospels of prosperity and hate, but it sadly seems to be what Christians want. Consider the success of the Left Behind books. And if we can stop being politically correct for a minute, the main reason people are buying them is to revel in the punishment of the non-Christians; who they insanely imagine are persecuting them. The following quote from Joe Bageant, (the only liberal writer who seems to know what's going on in the country) is appropriate here. It doesn't specifically address religion, but rather the unwillingness of so many to acknowledge the way things really are. It is this unwillingness that creates these conspiracy theories.

"The hardest thing for garden variety American liberals to grasp is what a truly politicized and hateful place much of America has become---one long mean
ditch ruled by feral dogs where the standards of civility no longer apply. The second hardest thing for liberals is to admit that they are comfortably
insulated in the middle class and are not going to take any risks in the battle for America's soul ... not as long as they are still living on a good street,
sending their kids to Montessori and getting their slice of the American quiche. Call it the politics of the comfort zone. ... When I look around America's barrooms, church suppers, swap meets and strip clubs, I see that "the American
people" like the way things are going. Or at least half of them do. They like World Championship Wrestling and Confederate flags and flat screen television
and they like the idea of an American empire. "The people" don't give a rat's bunghole about social programs or the poor or other races or the planet or
animals or anything else. They LIKE cheap gas and making life tough for queers. They LIKE chasing Thanksgiving Day Xmas sales. And when fascism comes,
they will like that, too.

That is reality. It is all around us and only the liberals, in their noble but blind egalitarian efforts, deny this. "The people" however, do not deny reality---they
create it from the belly of their perverse ignorance, even as the left speaks in non sequitur and wonders why the hell they cannot get any political traction.
Meanwhile, it is football and NASCAR and guns and a republic free from married queers for the people. That's what they want. That's what they voted for---a
moral republic.

Moral values of course had jack to do with anything. What those people were voting for a couple of months ago was hatred of other human beings culturally
unlike themselves, particularly gays and lesbians, but also non-born-again Christians. That's why Republicans got constitutional amendments banning same-sex
marriage on the ballot in eleven states. They suspected the hate was there to be exploited. And it was, passing easily in nine of the eleven states. It
was always about hating those who are different. Hating "the other."

The entire article, The sleep of reason amid wild dogs and gin, is worth reading. As are most of his other articles, especially for liberals. So if I'm wrong, please tell me how a church can be taken over if the members like it the way it is? I don't deny at all the fact that slimy fundamentalists are going in to churches trying to convert, but how can they succeed unless the members are dissatisfied with their church? Admittedly, if these dominionists weren't actively trying to steal sheep, most people would stay in their current church. However, if people are content with their church, sheep stealing won't work. Christians may unite against non-Christians, but they hate each other almost as much as they hate the rest of us. Hence, they think people who go to other churches need saving just like people who don't go to church at all. It's not sheep stealing, it's saving people from heresy; or so they would have us believe.

by Dave on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 09:33:11 PM EST

I have seen you post this comment before: that churches are being taken over only because the fundies are preaching what most people want to hear. That is just not the case. I have witnessed in church after church bullies who quote the Bible from a very narrow perspective dominate conversation. And while many who stand up against them are willing to enter into dialogue with them, the bullies continue to attack and berate and say there is no middle ground. When this goes on month after month, folk who are occupying the middles ground - by far the vast majority of folk despite your claim to the contrary - get so sick of tired of the bickering that they eventually leave the church. This erodes the confidence of the church, the membership base, and alienates those who are left as finally a win lose battle is fought. These bullying tactics work, which is why so many are being trained to use them. There is no compromise, no middle ground. That the United Church of Christ - for whom I serve - is a liberal church is no secret: by Liberal we mean that every person is free to define their own theology, and draw their own conclusions on matters of faith. What cannot be explained is why fundamentalists think that they have the right to fight to remove these churches from their historical connections to their denomination when in any given community about which we are speaking there are many choices for more conservative, fundamentalist believers to make. It sometimes takes them years to finish their work, but they eventually wear people down. It is ludicrous to argue that these churches are lost to their denomination because most of the people they are speaking to like what they have to say. I will describe in the coming weeks a number of churches that fit the pattern I describe here.
Shalom, Rev. Dr. John C. Dorhauer "Time makes ancient good uncouth; we must onward still and upward who would keep abreast of truth." from Lowell, "The Present Crisis"
by John Dorhauer on Wed Feb 22, 2006 at 08:46:06 PM EST

"the only liberal writer who seems to know what's going on in the country" - That's a rather broad brush. You might well say this : "there is one good liberal - an anomalous token."

How is such a characterization not tantamount to hate speech ? Please explain.

by Bruce Wilson on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 10:18:25 PM EST

All I'm trying to say is that Bageant is one of the only liberals to recognize that this movement is not restricted to a small minority of right-wing radicals. It's a movement that has widespread support; about half the population. I don't know how to get moderates and liberals to accept this. We can't hope to win the fight if we don't even know what we're up against. It may have started out with a few neocons and dominionists, but they've sold it to the people. And they've sold it brilliantly. And I come back to my original question: how are these churches being taken over except that the dominionists have found dissatisfaction in them to be exploited. If these churches were healthy, the fundamentalists couldn't make a dent. A dominionist can't change my beliefs so why would he be more successful with others? I think the answer is, he's not changing anyone's beliefs. He's simply bringing out and taking advantage of the beliefs these folks already hold. And if that's true, then we have to acknowledge that these ideas are much more widely held then we thought.

by Dave on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 11:13:49 PM EST
If you are going to recommend an article and make such a big deal about it, please do us the courtesy of providing a link, or if one is not available, tell us at least what publication it appeared in and when.

There are a number of people writing on this site who have written extensively and knowledgeably about the religious right for many years.

While I have the greatest respect for Joe, you might try reading some of the fine writers right here and taking thier analyses more seriously.

by Frederick Clarkson on Wed Feb 22, 2006 at 12:03:33 AM EST

If you have a little patience, and read John Dorhauer's series, you may get your answers. That is what the series is for.

But then, it seems you have already made up your mind, in which case, there is no answer that will satisfy you.

But if anyone cares to answer your question, despite the skeptical and argumentative way it is posed, I am sure they will do so.  

As for Joe Bageant, I know him a bit. I like him. He is a fine man, and a great story teller and an astute observer of the American scene. He cares deeply about people. He is also the first to say that he is not an expert on the religious right, and does not wish to be thought of as one.

by Frederick Clarkson on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 11:14:16 PM EST

Well, speaking as someone who is a survivor of one of the major groups that orchestrates these hijacking attempts, I can tell you how it works longterm:

a) Group within a dominionist denomination (formerly pretty much the Assemblies of God and other neopentecostal groups, but now expanding to the Southern Baptists to an extent) decide that as part of their "missionary outreaches" they are going to target Christians for conversion to dominionism.

(As an aside, I should note that groups like the Assemblies of God et al generally don't consider non-dominionist Christian groups as truly "Christian".  They may play nice with the groups for purposes of recruitment, but in the churches themselves if you aren't waving around "swords of the Lord" and yammering in tongues they do not consider you Truly Saved.  Hence they--unlike practically every other Christian denomination--consider conversion of non-dominionists, including by methods of deception, to be completely ethical.)

b) Either groups seen as potentially friendly to the dominionist cause (in aspects of theology) are recruited, or they will actively "seed" a group.

In the case of the group I'm a walkaway from (the Assemblies), typically they will target either a group in the church that accepts "tongues" or that is seen as "conservative" theologically, and establish friendships with them through a group called the Full Gospel Businessmen's Fellowship International; if they're lucky enough to get a pastor who is sympathetic, they also try to get groups that are various "fronts" of the Assemblies (like Royal Rangers, or Chi Alpha, or the Bible Bowl) as "partners".

If no existing group like that exists, they don't see it as a problem; what they do in this case is convert one or a few members, then expressly encourage those members to remain in their original congregation and recruit more members.  The Assemblies of God has bled off a rather substantial number of Catholics in Central America using these tactics, and this is also largely where the whole "Charismatic Catholic" movement comes from; they also use this same tactic in things like promoting "Messianic Judaism" (basically Assemblies churches that set themselves up as "Synagogues" and follow Jewish kashrut law), and even as of late "Messianic Islam" movements as well.  (No, I'm not making this up.  I wish I was.)

c) These movements are bred--largely in stealth--in mainstream churches until there is a "critical mass" of followers which can either hijack or split the denomination.

One of the methods that is used in these groups is of "cell churches"--small parachurch groups that essentially play "big brother" on members and enforce toeing the line.  There is some amount of evidence--Sara Diamond's book "Spiritual Warfare" describes this best, but there is at least one good article which largely uses Diamond's book as reference that discusses how the "cell church" or "shepherding" method was even specifically designed to split churches and to make it easier to hijack them.

Of note here--"cell churches" as described in the article are generally seen as one of the single most coercive and spiritually abusive tactics practiced by these groups.  Most exit counselors now consider it a major "danger sign" if a church has a heavy focus on "prayer cells" and the like, because of serious abuses (most well known in the International Church of Christ, but also very well documented in the Assemblies, neopentecostal groups, and even parachurch groups like Promise Keepers).  At least one exit counseling group documents how this operates in at least one neopentecostal group, and there is an excellent book called The Discipling Dilemma which discusses "cell churches" and the abusive tactics promoted therein (not only within the International Church of Christ but within the Assemblies and other neopente groups into the "Third Wave" movement in particular); even Wikipedia's entry on spiritual abuse details how this movement is harmful.

One of the particularly interesting things that has been found in research of people who have been recruited into "cell churches" is that on psychological tests they tend to converge to the same personality profile in commonly used diagnostic tests and a followup study shows  that this sort of "merging into a hive mind" occurs with any coercive religious group (i.e. it's not just restricted to "cell churches" but also shows up in persons involved in the Moonies, in Scientology, etc.--in fact, one of the groups it showed up in was Maranatha, a dominionist group closely connected to the "charismatic" movement that was so coercive that it was literally banned from multiple state college campuses and to this day is recognised as one of the more highly coercive "Bible-based" groups (and which was heavily promoted in the Assemblies, of note)) and mainstream churches which were used as "controls" did not show these changes.

As spiritual abuse is prevalent in the dominionist movement and in fact is part of the core theology of some groups including the originators of dominion theology, the use of spiritually abusive tactics to recruit members can't be discounted.

One method, too, of actively "farming" dominionist movements is converting people to dominionism and then encouraging those persons to remain in their original congregations to convert others.  As noted, the "Catholic Charismatic" movement is largely the result of this (there is documentation showing that the FGBMFI explicitly encouraged Catholic converts to pentecostalism to remain in their dioceses and start "Catholic Charismatic" movements), and there is evidence that the Southern Baptist Convention hijacking may have been in part the product of this (both by the Assemblies courting dominionist Southern Baptists in early attempts to hijack the Republican party and start "Christian Nation" movements, and by at least one of the persons behind the invention of "cell churches" being a Southern Baptist who was recruited through a "Charismatic Baptist" group and who now is a regular on Assemblies "traveling preacher" circuits).

The timelines here are not short--we're talking in the realm of multiple decades (starting in the late 60's-early 70's in most cases, and all the way back to the 50's in some cases--very similar to the timeline for active promotion of dominionism within the US itself, and again, starting from the Assemblies and similar groups and spreading out to the mainstream).  In many of these cases, these movements have been literally festering for decades gaining momentum, and are now reaching critical mass.  This is actually in part a strategy that the groups that invented dominionism have had for decades in terms of "sheep-stealing"--the hope is that these denominations will split or be hijacked, go dominionist, and then eventually take on all the aspects of dominion theology as practiced by the Assemblies et al--or that their members will leave their parent churches and then join the dominionist movement (either joining dominionist denominations or becoming "independent" neopentecostal or "charismatic" groups).

by dogemperor on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 11:36:18 PM EST

I appreciate someone genuinely addressing my question in detail. I think we actually agree on how this is being carried out, although you have much more knowledge on the groups and methods involved. I guess my problem is, what kind of people fall for these tactics? I think they are one of two kinds. One group already believes in many of the same things as the dominionists, in which case, they should switch churches. This by the way, is why I brought up Joe Bageant. I know he's no expert on the religious right. But he understands that the conservative beliefs of the religious right are shared by a large percentage of the public. That's why sheep stealing is so easy to do. It's not because it's such a well-organized plot. It's more because there's loads of folks in mainstream churches receptive to the message. The other people to fall for this stuff have so little grounding in their own faith that they can be easily converted to almost anything by a good salesman. I think our focus is in the wrong place. We can't stop the fundamentalists. They're just trying to get as many converts as possible. And after all, that's what churches are about. And since they don't consider non-dominionists to be real Christians, they're fair game. Instead, we should focus on how mainstream churches have so failed their congregations that they are so easily lead away. And how our educational system has failed to teach people to think critically. People who are trained to think logically and have a firm foundation in their beliefs are impervious to these silly tactics. I play organ in Catholic and traditional Protestant churches. I see a lot of conservatism and acceptance of dominionist beliefs. For example, petitions to deny gays equal rights, and belief in the Rapture by Catholics apparently unaware that the Church considers the Rapture heresy. If these folks move to dominionist churches, is it because the traditional church was infiltrated, or were they just ripe for the pickin'. By the way, congratulations for getting out of what one pastor I know calls the "ass emblies of God". Also, I went to a couple meetings of the Full Gospel group with a family member. I never met so many con men in my life. I mean real cons; pyramid schemes, Ponzi schemes, you name it.

by Dave on Wed Feb 22, 2006 at 02:22:49 AM EST
The targeting of churches by outside organizations is only part of the reason for congregational division; but it is important to understand the dynamics of outside secular and religious organizations that have an interest in destroying mainline churches.  These right-wing organizations have had some success in targeting mainline churches by exploiting the vulnerabilities that congregations already have:

  1. Declining Membership: Churches that have been losing members will sometimes call a new pastor who is strong on "Evangelism" even though his (usually) theology is more conservative than that of the members, if they believe that he will help the church grow again.  There can be some ensuing conflict between the older and newer members when there are theological differences or the new members are more connected to the pastor's personality than to denominational identity.

  2. Cultural Influences:  Right-wing Christian media (radio, TV, rock music, bookstores) dominate the landscape to the extent that mainline Christians are influenced by them as well.  In fact, mainliners have to go out of their way to be able to find other resources.

  3.  Conflict avoidance: Many moderate Christians do not like when there is any conflict in their churches; they look to church as a refuge from the troubles of the outside world.  Even if conservatives are threatening to take over their church, they will resist liberals' "getting political".  They will abandon a conflicted church in search of a calmer one.  (More charitably, some church people are so spiritually or emotionally needy or fragile that they cannot or will not defend themselves or their church).

  4.  Group dynamics:  Each congregation has its own history and mix of personalities.  In fact, considering how easily things could go wrong or dysfunctional in congregations, it's amazing that so many of our churches are not just hanging in there, but growing and thriving.

by Rusty Pipes on Wed Feb 22, 2006 at 02:25:50 PM EST

My only criticism is that the specific IRD connection of each person listed is not clear.  Visuals are the missing pieces in United Methodism@R I S K.  When I pull out my reports articles and essays, the eyes novice listeners glaze over.  Thank you for posting this very important communication piece. We need more like it.  Now I have to get to a color printer.

by tikkun on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 11:36:17 PM EST
I have a piece coming out in the next issue of The Public Eye, which should be out within the month.

When it is posted online, I will write about it here.

by Frederick Clarkson on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 11:55:44 PM EST

The good news here is that more people in the area are talking about the problems of the Diocese of Albany.  I've sent my outline of United Methodism@R I S K and a barely readable copy of the chart out to several heretofore uninitiated folks who requested the information.  Of course the URL for talk2action goes along with.  

One thing more, I've passed my copy of UM@R to Marc Perry.  It would be helpful if journalists and writers here would give him a call to back up my case that it's imparative reading in order understand what is going on in the Diocese of Albany.  I found the IRD listed as an affiliate organization in the Anglican network that Herzog led not all that long ago.  He resigned under pressure but I'm not at all convinced that he isn't still a mover and shaker in the network.

When I find Marc's phone number and e-mail address, I'll post them here.

by tikkun on Wed Feb 22, 2006 at 11:01:47 AM EST

Possibly dozens of times conjunctions with IRD / Renewal group related searches I've done. His affiliations with such groups seem neither recent or casual.

by Bruce Wilson on Wed Feb 22, 2006 at 01:22:37 PM EST
I  found this just today.  It's pretty crude and looks like it was put together by ViaMedia when they were just getting started.  I haven't spotted a link to it from their webpage but there is a link on the site above that takes one to the current ViaMedia webpage.  It's interesting in that it provides an excellent history of events leading up to where the Episcopal Church finds itself today.  I'll do more with it when I write my next report.  

by tikkun on Wed Feb 22, 2006 at 10:25:24 PM EST
I'm going to put together an anthology for Talk To Action on attacks on the Episcopalian Church - to mirror the two I've now started on attacks on the UCC and UM.

by Bruce Wilson on Thu Feb 23, 2006 at 09:07:35 AM EST
of pieces that might be helpful.  One is specifically about the IRD, and the other outlines what's been going on in the Episcopal Church:

Who Should Resign?

A Closer Look at the Attempted Coup

by Jake on Sat Feb 25, 2006 at 01:18:36 AM EST

Just noticed that you have found your way here, as well.

I have posted the first of what I expect to be a series of diaries to bring the folks here at Talk2action up to speed on TEC, the AAC/NACDP, Global South, etc.

Please take a look and comment if you feel it appropriate.

Peace and Grace, Andrew

by ajg on Mon Feb 27, 2006 at 09:37:44 AM EST

I've created a site section and hope to collect all the current Talk To Action material ( and more ) there.

by Bruce Wilson on Fri Mar 03, 2006 at 12:12:43 AM EST

WWW Talk To Action

Cognitive Dissonance & Dominionism Denial
There is new research on why people are averse to hearing or learning about the views of ideological opponents. Based on evaluation of five......
By Frederick Clarkson (329 comments)
Will the Air Force Do Anything To Rein In Its Dynamic Duo of Gay-Bashing, Misogynistic Bloggers?
"I always get nervous when I see female pastors/chaplains. Here is why everyone should as well: "First, women are not called to be pastors,......
By Chris Rodda (173 comments)
The Legacy of Big Oil
The media is ablaze with the upcoming publication of David Grann's book, Killers of the Flower Moon. The shocking non fiction account of the......
By wilkyjr (97 comments)
Gimme That Old Time Dominionism Denial
Over the years, I have written a great deal here and in other venues about the explicitly theocratic movement called dominionism -- which has......
By Frederick Clarkson (93 comments)
History Advisor to Members of Congress Completely Twists Jefferson's Words to Support Muslim Ban
Pseudo-historian David Barton, best known for his misquoting of our country's founders to promote the notion that America was founded as a Christian nation,......
By Chris Rodda (105 comments)
"Christian Fighter Pilot" Calls First Lesbian Air Force Academy Commandant a Liar
In a new post on his "Christian Fighter Pilot" blog titled "BGen Kristin Goodwin and the USAFA Honor Code," Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Jonathan......
By Chris Rodda (127 comments)
Catholic Right Leader Unapologetic about Call for 'Death to Liberal Professors' -- UPDATED
Today, Donald Trump appointed C-FAM Executive Vice President Lisa Correnti to the US Delegation To UN Commission On Status Of Women. (C-FAM is a......
By Frederick Clarkson (114 comments)
Controlling Information
     Yesterday I listened to Russ Limbaugh.  Rush advised listeners it would be best that they not listen to CNN,MSNBC, ABC, CBS and......
By wilkyjr (77 comments)
Is Bannon Fifth-Columning the Pope?
In December 2016 I wrote about how White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, who likes to flash his Catholic credentials when it comes to......
By Frank Cocozzelli (226 comments)
Ross Douthat's Hackery on the Seemingly Incongruous Alliance of Bannon & Burke
Conservative Catholic writer Ross Douthat has dissembled again. This time, in a February 15, 2017 New York Times op-ed titled The Trump Era's Catholic......
By Frank Cocozzelli (55 comments)
`So-Called Patriots' Attack The Rule Of Law
Every so often, right-wing commentator Pat Buchanan lurches out of the far-right fever swamp where he has resided for the past 50 years to......
By Rob Boston (153 comments)
Bad Faith from Focus on the Family
Here is one from the archives, Feb 12, 2011, that serves as a reminder of how deeply disingenuous people can be. Appeals to seek......
By Frederick Clarkson (173 comments)
The Legacy of George Wallace
"One need not accept any of those views to agree that they had appealed to real concerns of real people, not to mindless, unreasoning......
By wilkyjr (51 comments)
Betsy DeVos's Mudsill View of Public Education
My Talk to Action colleague Rachel Tabachnick has been doing yeoman's work in explaining Betsy DeVos's long-term strategy for decimating universal public education. If......
By Frank Cocozzelli (52 comments)
Prince and DeVos Families at Intersection of Radical Free Market Privatizers and Religious Right
This post from 2011 surfaces important information about President-Elect Trump's nominee for Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos. -- FC Erik Prince, Brother of Betsy......
By Rachel Tabachnick (210 comments)

Respect for Others? or Political Correctness?
The term "political correctness" as used by Conservatives and Republicans has often puzzled me: what exactly do they mean by it? After reading Chip Berlin's piece here-- I thought about what he explained......
MTOLincoln (238 comments)
What I'm feeling now is fear.  I swear that it seems my nightmares are coming true with this new "president".  I'm also frustrated because so many people are not connecting all the dots! I've......
ArchaeoBob (87 comments)
"America - love it or LEAVE!"
I've been hearing that and similar sentiments fairly frequently in the last few days - far FAR more often than ever before.  Hearing about "consequences for burning the flag (actions) from Trump is chilling!......
ArchaeoBob (170 comments)
"Faked!" Meme
Keep your eyes and ears open for a possible move to try to discredit the people openly opposing Trump and the bigots, especially people who have experienced terrorism from the "Right"  (Christian Terrorism is......
ArchaeoBob (143 comments)
More aggressive proselytizing
My wife told me today of an experience she had this last week, where she was proselytized by a McDonald's employee while in the store. ......
ArchaeoBob (140 comments)
See if you recognize names on this list
This comes from the local newspaper, which was conservative before and took a hard right turn after it was sold. Hint: Sarah Palin's name is on it!  (It's also connected to Trump.) ......
ArchaeoBob (144 comments)
Unions: A Labor Day Discussion
This is a revision of an article which I posted on my personal board and also on Dailykos. I had an interesting discussion on a discussion board concerning Unions. I tried to piece it......
Xulon (143 comments)
Extremely obnoxious protesters at WitchsFest NYC: connected to NAR?
In July of this year, some extremely loud, obnoxious Christian-identified protesters showed up at WitchsFest, an annual Pagan street fair here in NYC.  Here's an account of the protest by Pagan writer Heather Greene......
Diane Vera (123 comments)
Capitalism and the Attack on the Imago Dei
I joined this site today, having been linked here by Crooksandliars' Blog Roundup. I thought I'd put up something I put up previously on my Wordpress blog and also at the DailyKos. As will......
Xulon (185 comments)
History of attitudes towards poverty and the churches.
Jesus is said to have stated that "The Poor will always be with you" and some Christians have used that to refuse to try to help the poor, because "they will always be with......
ArchaeoBob (142 comments)
Alternate economy medical treatment
Dogemperor wrote several times about the alternate economy structure that dominionists have built.  Well, it's actually made the news.  Pretty good article, although it doesn't get into how bad people could be (have been)......
ArchaeoBob (82 comments)
Evidence violence is more common than believed
Think I've been making things up about experiencing Christian Terrorism or exaggerating, or that it was an isolated incident?  I suggest you read this article (linked below in body), which is about our great......
ArchaeoBob (188 comments)
Central Florida Sheriff Preached Sermon in Uniform
If anyone has been following the craziness in Polk County Florida, they know that some really strange and troubling things have happened here.  We've had multiple separation of church and state lawsuits going at......
ArchaeoBob (77 comments)
Demon Mammon?
An anthropologist from outer space might be forgiven for concluding that the god of this world is Mammon. (Or, rather, The Market, as depicted by John McMurtry in his book The Cancer Stage of......
daerie (107 comments)
Anti-Sharia Fever in Texas: This is How It Starts
The mayor of a mid-size Texan city has emerged in recent months as the newest face of Islamophobia. Aligning herself with extremists hostile to Islam, Mayor Beth Van Duyne of Irving, Texas has helped......
JSanford (104 comments)

More Diaries...

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments, posts, stories, and all other content are owned by the authors. Everything else 2005 Talk to Action, LLC.