The Oogedy-Boogedy Gap, Defined
Frederick Clarkson printable version print page     Bookmark and Share
Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 03:06:05 PM EST
It was not so long ago that liberals and Democrats were wringing their hands about how more deeply religious voters were tending to vote Republican.  This was called the God Gap. The Party was also horrified to learn from national polls that it was widely viewed as "hostile" to people of faith. Much scurrying has ensued to try to correct this perception.

Meanwhile the tensions within the Republican Party and the Religious Right are spectacularly boiling out, (as such things often do when a political party searches for reasons for historic losses. )

It is in that sense that a recent piece by conservative columnist Kathleen Parker is an important moment.  It is significant not only because it gives voice to the longstanding discomfort of conventional conservatives with the excesses of the Religious Right -- but their discomfort with the  Religious Right itself. Most remarkably of all, it was stated in terms that stray deeply into territory that if it had been expresed by anyone any less conservative, the howls about "anti-Christian bigotry" would have been heard around the world and non-stop on Fox News.

What this situation has revealed is an  Oogedy Boogedy Gap, which we may define as the absence of outrage when a conservative enages in an act of religious bigotry that would have had them an uproar had something similar said by a liberal.

But in searching around, I was unable to find much outrage -- even from the Religious Right. Imagine what the reaction would have been if say, Michael Moore, or Katha Pollit or a Democratic candidate for office -- anywhere -- had written this:

"As Republicans sort out the reasons for their defeat, they likely will overlook or dismiss the gorilla in the pulpit.

Three little letters, great big problem: G-O-D...  the evangelical, right-wing, oogedy-boogedy branch of the GOP is what ails the erstwhile conservative party and will continue to afflict and marginalize its constituents if reckoning doesn't soon cometh.

Simply put:  Armband religion is killing the Republican Party.... the Grand Old Party since the 1980s or so ... has become increasingly beholden to an element that used to be relegated to wooden crates on street corners....  the GOP has surrendered its high ground to its lowest brows.

The silence is deafening -- with two notable exceptions: Steve Waldman, editor of BeliefNet and Jonah Goldberg editor of The National Review.  

Goldberg denounced

"...the quasi-bigotry that has you calling religious Christians low brows, gorillas and oogedy-boogedy types... [and he demanded that she]... drop the nonsense about how the G-O-D people or the Palin people are low brows and beasts. There are low brows and beasts everywhere, on every side of the ideological spectrum.

Waldman:  

The rest of the column engages in gross stereotyping of religious conservatives. The party is "increasingly beholden to an element that used to be relegated to wooden crates on street corners" and has surrendered "high ground to its lowest brows."

So, religious conservatives are crazy, dumb and scary, says Parker.

Meanwhile, Christine Todd Whitman referred to the "social fundamentalists" as "hostage takers."

Remember when David Kuo wrote that inside the White House the non-evangelical conservatives mocked Christians as useful stooges? Maybe he should have said Useful Ooogedy-Boogedies.

Before liberals get too smug, we should remind ourselves that it was not so long ago that calling conservative religious people with whom we disagreed (from non-violent nuns praying in front of clinics to Ralph Reed to the Aryan Nations) meaningless epithets  like "religious political extremists" was considered state of the art politics. Inside the Beltway consulting firms were paid big bucks to craft this and similar focus-grouped  epithets (read, "messages"). Later, liberals and Demorats were shocked, shocked to find out that the electorate viewed the party as "hostile" to people of faith.  

The fact is that religious bigotry, both subtle and overt, exists across the religious and political spectrum (including that obnoxious variant, anti-religionism). That this is surfacing so spectacularly in the Republican Party and in the conservative movement is an opportunity for progressives.

Let's remind ourselves that religious equality and toleration have, along with absolute respect for the right of indidvidual conscience and separation of church and state,  long been core values for both religious and non-religious progressives.  If we want to be able to gain and hold the moral, intellectual and political high ground in defending and advancing our values, it is essential to know (or at least to seek to know) the difference between fair criticism and religious bigotry. It is difficult to hold the moral high ground against the religious bigots of the Religious Right, if we think, act and speak like religious bigots ourselves.

The Oogedy-Boogedy Gap provides us with an extraordinary opportunity to define ourselves in ways consistent with the values of the rights of individual conscience and separation of church and state that made possible the coalitions that forged the Constitution of the United States from Article 6 that proscribed religious tests for public office, and later, the First Amendment.  




Display:
Draft Definition:  The absence of outrage that occurs when a conservative enages in an act of religious bigotry that would have had them an uproar had something similar said by a liberal.

by Frederick Clarkson on Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 03:27:07 PM EST
The "because we can" factor ; the right has methodically developed its own dedicated media that has no counterpart on the left, and so the message projection capability on the right is greater. The Internet may be leveling the playing field slightly, and Air America doesn't hurt. But the media environment nonetheless seems more conducive to factually dubious or hyperbolic claims put out from the right.

by Bruce Wilson on Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 05:33:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think this one is different.

Kathleen Parker is not a creature of the internet age. She is old school print, and her collumn's home base is The Washington Post, and her other hat is as a teacher of writing that is part of the extended Buckley family (as in William F. et al) Her vulgar outburst is important because it comes from such a considered perspective.

I think what is at issue for us is not so much overall media capacity of the right, which is certainly greater, but getting folks of the center/left to recognize what is happening with Parker is more than just moderate convervatives blaming the RR for their recent electoral losses. Parker's piece illuminates the ugly side of their values -- the ones that allowed them to join with the RR in gaining  political hegemony in the first place. Parker et al have benefited from and helped enable the rise of the religious right.

But times have changed and power has shifted. And Parker et al are scramblig not to get, umm, left behind. But in her haste, she reveals her true self.

by Frederick Clarkson on Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 06:55:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

One way of rapidly summing up your point, if you think this characterization has merit, might be to say that Parker has claimed that she has  manners and supports pluralism.

by Bruce Wilson on Tue Nov 25, 2008 at 02:04:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
One might also say that Kathleen Parker is an ureconstructed religious bigot of the Old School, whose sulphurous attitudes spew when frustrated and angry.

by Frederick Clarkson on Tue Nov 25, 2008 at 09:29:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]


I recall that Kathleen Parker received a lot of angry letters and emails from professed conservatives when she dared to suggest Sarah Palin was perhaps not the best choice the GOP could have made for the vice-presidential ticket. The angry Religious Right was all over Parker about that, and sent her much hate mail about it.

by khughes1963 on Tue Nov 25, 2008 at 07:08:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]



IOKIYAR = "It's O.K. if you are Republican"

I am mostly amused by the sight of Republican circular firing squads. I thought that was a Democratic monopoly....

by NancyP on Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 10:31:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]



....I can see a need to make the church/state and even church/society boundaries less fuzzy. The RR is so far over the line that there is little  disagreement that they are over the secular boundary, but there are many here who have also used Secular to mean atheist or non-religious (in the not thinking about religion sense rather than the not involving religion sense that is the real definition) and had reactions in me as those who have lumped all deeply religious folk with the RR would have in the religious left.

When one is drowning, one does not worry about damp feet, and the damp feet are a lot less annoying, but annoying none the less. I often side against the Atheists who see no use in any part of religion, but a country where nearly half think that the earth is 6,000 years old has a serious issue about their choice of encyclopedia, and that can have negative effect on the whole society.

With the old Marxists saying that Religion is the opiate of the people and we need to eliminate it, and the Neocons saying that Religion is the opiate of the people and we need to pump out as much opium as possible, it would seem to me that a much more nuanced conversation is called for.

While I find much to discuss and learn in all religions I draw the line at the point where the religion becomes an encyclopedia, easily when at odds with scientific observation, but also when asserting as fact what cannot yet (or ever) be observed. I know you would ban "That obnoxious variant" from the site, but I think that the brighter the line the easier it is to know when you have crossed it from either side.

by FreeDem on Tue Nov 25, 2008 at 09:55:47 AM EST


... meaningless epithets  like "religious political extremists" was considered state of the art politics. Inside the Beltway consulting firms were paid big bucks to craft this and similar focus-grouped  epithets (read, "messages").

Oh? Can you name a specific example of such a campaign, and who paid whom to coin which labels?

And since you claim this was a Democratic project, please specify whether it was done under the leadership of Carter, Clinton, or which other supposedly anti-religious fanatic?

That the Democrats should be perceived by what we now so delicately call "low information citizens" as sworn enemies of all that is holy can be ascribed to the work of that other party, one we might dub the "disinformation citizens". Whose interests does it serve for this blog to echo this slander?

My (perhaps fallacious) memories of the "religious political extremists" tag have it that this line was used by your (and my) former employers at Planned Parenthood - which was, and is, under endless attack by people for whom "RPE" is, if anything, a euphemism. Just how would you propose a group or movement in the crosshairs of the (very) religious (hardly ever) right describe their antagonists?

by Pierce R Butler on Tue Nov 25, 2008 at 08:52:49 PM EST

And as long as anyone thinks there is only a "they" (AKA "them") there is little room for increasing our knowledge, let alone the efficacy of what we do politically.

In any case, we have been over this ground before. But to refresh your memory it was  Celinda Lake who for years in the 90s trotted out new slogans for her clients, including Planned Parenthood, until the post 911 world made the labeling and denomiization of people with whom one happens to disagree as extremists became transparently wrong headed. Yes, there are people of extreme views and people whose modus operadi are extremist, and certainly PP has been vicitimized by them. But many people who are critics of PP do not merit the label.  

It may be as Lake claimed that "research" showed that in the narrow confines of her parameters, one term is better than another. What her research  did not cover, was how people who used terms of demonization as gross generalties would come across. (Answer, not nearly as well as they thought they were coming across; conveying messages about themselves that were unanticipated.)

Part of the point here (beyond the above mentioned points about labeling and demonization that have been much discused on this site, such as here http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/1/19/235149/867) there is a difference between fact and propodanda.  Some people come to believe that terms of propaganda reflect reality; others come to adopt propaganda terms, almost as a fashion statement -- using such terms as often as possible to show how "in the know" they are. Unfortunately, the routine invocation of such terms often limit thought, conversation and the capacity to aquire knowledge, and thus limits our ability to evaluate formidable opponents and thus undermimes political effectiveness.  But one of the main problem with labeling and demonization techiniques and terms is that there can be a lot of blowback. And I believe that is what happened in this instance.


by Frederick Clarkson on Fri Nov 28, 2008 at 10:53:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Imagine yourself in a women's clinic, with Randall Terry and friends howling outside one window, the American Life League chanting on the sidewalk, Missionaries to the Preborn playing paramilitary off to the other side, and anonymous heroes of the Army of God tossing suspicious packages at the back door. A reporter calls up and asks you for a comment on the situation, and you say,

"We're surrounded by ... ____"

Just how would you complete that sentence?

by Pierce R Butler on Fri Nov 28, 2008 at 08:53:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

PP staff did not need an expensive and out of touch PR firm to be able to desecribe mobs, criminals, terrorists, and sure, extremists (when those things were present.)

I maintain that PPFA and others made an error in thinking that one size fits all when it comes to basic vocabulary about the Religious Right, and believing that labels and smear tactics are an appropriate or adequate substitute for knowledge.

The tactic backfired, and even Celinda Lake now advises people against using it. It is important for those who are serious about these things to learn from the mistakes of the past, and at the very least, not insist on continuing to make them.


by Frederick Clarkson on Sat Nov 29, 2008 at 02:24:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

... PPFA and others made an error in thinking that one size fits all when it comes to basic vocabulary about the Religious Right...

Perhaps the major part of our contention here arises from different motivations. You seem to be seeking an analytical taxonomy; I respect that, but have greater need of a rhetorical handle.

For you, "religious political extremists" is too vague. I more regret its failure because I'd enjoy labeling militant fundies as "urpies" (RPEs) - or anything else pithy, disrespectful, & street-useful.

It's highly unlikely the same lexicon could meet both requirements, but neither function lacks validity.

by Pierce R Butler on Tue Dec 02, 2008 at 10:39:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I say that we need accurate terms of description and the knowledge to back them up so we can even have coherent conversations, let alone have effective political strategies.

I maintain that the religious political extremists phrase (and other similar ones) politically backfired; offended vast numbers of people unnecessarily, and too often made (and make) the peope who use them come off as bigoted and ill informed.

Additionaly, these terms of demonization also function as thought stoppers, which goes to my point above. Sometimes people who come off as bigoted and ill-informed, actually are.

by Frederick Clarkson on Wed Dec 03, 2008 at 01:01:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]







but if you read some of the nearly 400 comments following her opinion piece, you will see that rank-and-file Republicans are certainly in a tizzy! Anybody who dares to defame St. Sarah is lower than a snake's belly in Death Valley.

I am reasonably hopeful about the next four years, but after that? If St. Sarah makes a comeback, we may be needing that place in Canada after all...

by phatkhat on Tue Nov 25, 2008 at 09:17:23 PM EST
I've been hearing that sort of thing, and in many areas cannot say what I think- while they condemn Obama and say all sorts of lies about him while praising Palin and referring to her as if she were some sort of saint.

SIGH.  I've heard "Obama is the antichrist" and things like that recently by people who obviously believed it- and they openly and publicly express HATE about people feeling a sense of joy and relief in his election.  (We're being offensive and disrespectful towards their religion- even if it's quiet private talk among friends!  In the "blogosphere"- they don't want ANYTHING positive said about Obama and the election in some of the blogs I've seen- non-religious and non-political blogs!)  

The racist language and jokes are also getting more numerous and worse.  Their reality is starting to show.

by ArchaeoBob on Fri Nov 28, 2008 at 11:58:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I've been thinking about this subject a lot today.

I think a good part of it comes down to the source of people's knowledge.

We've been going on first-hand experience, recorded speech and activities, and written records.  We use logic and examine the evidence.  We read what others have written and weigh their words and evidence.  (And, yes, we admit that we're wrong or that we disagree with each other- and that doesn't necessarily end the relationship.)

In some sense, what I have observed is very similar to what is done in science.

From what I've observed, the dominionists listen to preachers and take what they say as the basis for their knowledge.  They don't question, they don't disagree, they don't use logic or think about what the source of their knowledge is.  There is little real internal discussion- and any disagreement gets one expelled or punished.

On one hand, there are people who have had the same experiences I have, and have recordings and other evidence which I find persuasive.  On the other hand, there are people who repeat one version or another of the same old stuff I'd been told in the dominionist churches I attended years ago- and have heard since then.  I've personally caught the second group lying time and time again.  Indeed, the things we all have problems with are based upon one lie or another.

We've all seen the distortions and fantastic claims.  They are based upon lies (or falsehoods)- and we are NOT just disagreeing with their ideas.

In a sense, this whole argument is like the one between Science and pseudoscience- do we dignify their nonsense with a reply, do we show them the respect due to people and watch them turn that shown respect into further support for nonsense (as has happened with pseudoscience promoters)- or do we call them quacks and fakes and refute them every chance we can?

Much of what I've seen- reported here, in the (as a friend of mine puts it) "meat world", in print and elsewhere- are VERY much like the claims made by pseudoscience (which I've been dealing with for a few years now).  Some of it is obviously based on "The Big Lie", and I've seen other techniques being used.  

The question is- how do we respond to people who are promoting falsehood (just like the pseudoscience people) for political or financial reasons without empowering them or their cause any more?  Our response must be done in such a way that they can't get any traction with it.  And as scientists are finding out- you HAVE to speak out against the nonsense.  Not doing so means risking that the lie will spread.

This is rather a summation of the thoughts I've been having about this topic.


by ArchaeoBob on Sat Nov 29, 2008 at 12:35:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]




From my perspective, I think religious voters tend to vote Republican. Most deeply religious people that I know are Republicans. I have no idea why? Probably, they all think God wants them to vote for. By the way, what does the oogedy-boogedy really mean?


Lemma from online bookmark

by Lemma on Thu Aug 27, 2009 at 01:51:10 AM EST
There's a lot to be said for a more ecumenical approach to faith, and even respecting the right of every individual to lead a good life in the absence of faith, but that's something many of the most fundamental Xtians apparently don't want to understand.

I'm all for religious tolerance. Unfortunately, the groups being discussed are generally NOT for any kind of religious tolerance, nor do they respect any intellectual expression or pursuits unless these conform to their religion's requirements. These requirements are derived either from divine inspiration or from whatever makes their leaders wealthier and more powerful.

Steven from online dating site

by steven on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 07:07:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]



WWW Talk To Action


Ah, True Remonstrance!
In previous posts I have called for mainstream Catholics to offer remonstrance - an earnest presentation of reasons for opposition or grievance against the......
By Frank Cocozzelli (4 comments)
Congressman Wants Citizens of ALL Religions to Reflect on the Ten Commandments
Well, spring is in the air, and that can mean only one thing. It's time for a member of Congress to introduce a resolution......
By Chris Rodda (0 comments)
Happy Birthday, Pat!: Virginia Legislature Lauds Extremist TV Preacher Robertson
TV evangelist Pat Robertson's 80th birthday is on Monday, and to mark that momentous occasion, the Virginia legislature decided to pass a resolution lauding......
By Rob Boston (1 comment)
Netanyahu and Hagee, Serial Obstructionists
Last week I wrote about Prime Minister Netanyahu's participation at John Hagee's CUFI rally held in Jerusalem on the evening of Joe Biden's arrival......
By Rachel Tabachnick (0 comments)
Bill Donohue: Defender of Glenn Beck.
Glenn Beck's recent admonition that people who attend a church that teaches social justice should leave -- was anti-Catholicism. This was obvious from a......
By Frank Cocozzelli (5 comments)
Blog Against Theocracy!
It's that time of year again.  It's time for the annual Blog Against Theocracy, April 2-4, 2010.   The prime mover of this blogtacular......
By Frederick Clarkson (1 comment)
Creeping Religious Rightism in the Democratic Party, Cont.
  Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State has an op-ed today at AOL News discussing how, campaign......
By Frederick Clarkson (6 comments)
Invoking Intolerance: Religious Right Throws Fit Over Islamic Prayer In Virginia
Today an imam delivered the opening prayer before the Virginia House of Delegates - and once again the Religious Right is having kittens. Three......
By Rob Boston (1 comment)
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and John Hagee Share Stage as Biden Arrives in Israel
Yesterday (Monday) Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to hundreds of Christian Zionists in Jerusalem at an event organized by John Hagee and Christians......
By Rachel Tabachnick (6 comments)
When the Truth Is Shown to Be Lies
It's been a year since President Obama lifted the Bush administration's restrictions on the federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.  Nevertheless, religious opponents......
By Frank Cocozzelli (7 comments)
Repent Amarillo's Spiritual Mapping and Vigilantism
Repent Amarillo, a Texas ministry which refers to itself as an "Army of God,"  is making news for its spiritual warfare and vigilante tactics.......
By Rachel Tabachnick (17 comments)
Whale Tale: AFA Staffer Says Bible Mandates Death For SeaWorld Orca
On Feb. 24, a tragedy occurred at SeaWorld in Orlando, Fla. A six-ton killer whale known as Tillikum pulled trainer Dawn Brancheau underwater to......
By Rob Boston (5 comments)
A Call to Censor the Religion Blogosphere
Some time ago, I filled out a survey from the Social Science Research Council (SSRC) in connection with an academic study they were doing......
By Frederick Clarkson (8 comments)
Prayer Warriors of the New Apostolic Reformation Getting Some Exposure
Yesterday Alternet published an article by Bill Berkowitz including an interview with me about the New Apostolic Reformation, or the "largest religious movement you......
By Rachel Tabachnick (8 comments)
Role Models of Remonstrance
I recently called for mainstream Catholics to offer remonstrance -- an earnest presentation of reasons for opposition or grievance against the reactionaries now fomenting......
By Frank Cocozzelli (8 comments)

Publicizing the existence of the NAR -- some suggestions
Some regular columnists here on Talk to Action have complained about difficulties in getting the mass media to notice the existence of a new but rapidly growing - and already highly influential - religious......
Diane Vera (2 comments)
School Board, State and school prayer
Now both the Polk County School Board and the state of Florida are trying to push prayers in the schools! ......
ArchaeoBob (0 comments)
City in trouble for sectarian prayers
The city of Lakeland, Florida has been challenged by Atheists of Florida and the local synagogue for having sectarian prayers before public meetings. ......
ArchaeoBob (0 comments)
The Blind Side's Blind Spot
The hit movie, The Blind Side, is all about the Christian values of being your "brother's keeper." Or is it? ......
John Sheirer (3 comments)
When Christianity is Un-American
Just thought readers might be interested in linking to this article at The Yurica Report: ......
TMurray (1 comment)
Violence increasing
I think people should read this article- and realize that the dominionists are becoming more and more violent.  If something isn't done to counter their hate, this country is in deep trouble! ......
ArchaeoBob (3 comments)
His "Freedom" Means Denying Yours - With Your Own Taxes
Referring to recent political skirmishes over the rights of gays and lesbians to marry, Cardinal Francis George called five rocks thrown at empty buildings and the theft of a few lawn signs "quasi-fascism."  He......
bettyclermont (0 comments)
Rome has spoken....Man the lifeboats!
When Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was elected Pope Benedict XVI in 2005, it was widely reported that he preferred a smaller, more obedient flock in his Church. Once again, he is proving those reports to......
bettyclermont (0 comments)
Your children will be forced to shower with gays! (says the AFA)
I've just received the following American Family Association email, which claims that the Obama administration has a nefarious plan to force gays and straights in the US military to shower together ! Donald Wildmon......
Bruce Wilson (3 comments)
Pope John Paul II's Penitential Practices: The Opus Dei Connection
We are pleased to once again welcome theologian William Lindsey as a guest front pager. This piece is crossposted from the new progressive Catholic group blog, The Open Tabernacle: Here Comes Everybody. -- FC......
William Lindsey (0 comments)
WallBuilders, Inc., Promoting a dominionist "Christian Nation"
Cherry Hill Seminary Supports Patrick McCollum in 9th Circuit Case Against California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation http://snipurl.com/u8kcj ......
Dragonzmajick (2 comments)
Roeder verdict sparks fears of more anti-abortion violence
cross-posted at dKos Scott Roeder is likely to spend the rest of his life in prison for the murder of George Tiller.  At the very least, he'll by 75 years old before he can......
Christian Dem in NC (0 comments)
The dark underside of the Latter Rain--a walkaway's view
cross-posted at dKos I read Bruce Wilson's posts on dKos and Talk To Action regarding the "Pray For Newark" initiative with particular alarm.  While Pray for Newark appears to espouse an admirable goal--community empowerment--it's......
Christian Dem in NC (2 comments)
Bishops as Provocateurs
In a thinly-veiled reference to the campaign of President Barack Obama, Archbishop Emeritus of St. Louis, Raymond Burke, charged that Americans are "embracing a totalitarianism which masks itself as the 'hope,' the 'future' of......
bettyclermont (0 comments)
The Vatican v. Children
Yesterday was not a good day for children seeking justice from the Roman Catholic Church. The internet brought the following news: ......
bettyclermont (0 comments)
Religious bigots control supermarket chain
Well, they've won again.  The religious bigots have forced Publix Supermarkets into bowing to their wishes. ......
ArchaeoBob (11 comments)
Manhattan Declaration is to Theology what Fox is to Journalism
The December 20, 2009, New York Times ran a lengthy article by David D. Kirkpatrick about Robert P. George, "The Conservative-Christian Big Thinker." The occasion was release of George's "Manhattan Declaration" signed by the......
bettyclermont (2 comments)
Merry Freakin' Christmas: I'm Taking Your Stuff, and you Can't Stop Me!
A humorous look at the larger implications of a seemingly harmless holiday tradition. ......
John Sheirer (1 comment)
Lou Engle, September 25, 2007, Los Angeles: "Holywood"
[This is a partial transcription of a sermon/speech Lou Engle, Founder of TheCall gave on September 25, 2007, in Los Angeles. The full sermon is slightly over 63 minutes. This partial transcript is of......
Bruce Wilson (0 comments)
Rick Warren Tweet complains my videos of his "Hitler/Lenin/Mao" speech are unfair
It's gratifying to know "America's most powerful pastor" seems to have taken notice of my videos, showcasing Rick Warren's 2005 speech at California's Anaheim Angels Stadium, during which Warren outlined a "stealth" program to......
Bruce Wilson (4 comments)
Blurring Reproductive Rights and the Religious Right
The principle of the Hyde Amendment, which restricted federal funds from paying for abortion back in 1976 -- is now seen as an acceptable, "abortion neutral" position for the prochoice Democratic Party. How did......
Frederick Clarkson (0 comments)
Rick Warren Calls on Followers To Be Dedicated as Followers of Lenin and Mao
[note: for more recent news on Rick Warren, see Rick Warren's Dissertation Advisor Leads Network Promoting Uganda Anti-Gay Bill] Video, below contains audio recording, photos, and transcript from Rick Warren's April 17, 2005 speech......
Bruce Wilson (6 comments)
Julius Oyet Touts The College of Prayer
A new Talk To Action story identifies Apostle and bishop Julius Oyet as a major player in the recent effort in the Ugandan parliament to pass a draconian anti-gay bill. In this video [transcript......
Bruce Wilson (1 comment)
Mark Silk on the Hagee / Rodriguez Entente
Mark Silk, at Spiritual Politics has picked up on my notice of the Hagee-Rodriguez embrace and zeroes in on what's certainly one of the most notable aspects: "The key thing to understand about the......
Bruce Wilson (1 comment)
Inscribing Christian Values in our Children Before Birth?
Following the evolution of evangelical discourse as it re-defines homosexuality as evidence of "fallen creation", Terri Murray looks at how the Christian right have shifted their rhetoric to adapt to empirical research showing that......
TMurray (1 comment)
US News & World Report Showcases Creationist Ray Comfort
US News and World Report's Dan Gilgoff has charitably provided evangelist Ray Comfort a media platform in the form of a US News & World "exclusive" through which Comfort defends his efforts to distribute,......
Bruce Wilson (0 comments)
Atheist billboard in Central Florida
The organization "Atheists of Florida" sponsored a billboard promoting atheism in Lakeland, Florida.  I, however, have some concerns. ......
ArchaeoBob (4 comments)
Transcript: Billy Graham and Richard Nixon, February 21, 1973
The following is my own transcript of a 20 minute phone conversation between Richard Nixon and Billy Graham, on February 23, 1973. As far as I am aware this is the only publicly available,......
Bruce Wilson (0 comments)
Rifqa Bary being sent back to Ohio now
Well, there's a change in this case.  After the judge gets immigration documents and so on from the parents, he will send her back. ......
ArchaeoBob (2 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. Powered by Scoop