Letters from the future (pt-1)
Hey Matt, have you read this new letter from Focus on the Family? It’s a fictionalized letter from a Christian in the year 2012. Normally when one thinks of 2012 they remember all the talk of the end of the world, with the way this letter is written one might think that the world did indeed end, or at least for one portion of the population of the US.
You see, right now there’s a race going on, a race in which many evangelicals are becoming disheartened with the political party that has held their sway for decades. This sway is certainly scaring those in charge of both the party, and those with whom the party has place “in charge” of the evangelicals. With little over a week left until the election, both the party and the evangelical leaders are fearful losing this election.
These evangelical “leaders” decided that the best way to win an election was to continue the fear mongering that the party they are aligned with has begun. This letter is a “fictionalized” account of what may come should the Muslim Obama win the election.
What do you think, Matt?
————
This letter is brilliant.
Brilliant.
You see, for years the foundation has been laid which enables this letter to work to the fullest effect. Evangelicals have spent years discussing the ways in which they are persecuted, maligned and targeted for extinction, all the while continuing the enjoy the fact that one of their own is in control of the White House, one of their publishing companies (Zondervan) has one of the largest market shares in publishing, and they represent the largest sect of the largest religion in this country. All this and still, they insist that they are persecuted. Thus we end up with the persecuted hegemony.*
I remember looking for persecution around every corner when I was growing up, after all, I was told that it existed. This idea of the persecutorial boogie monster has actually done more harm than any true persecution committed against either Christians or the church.
Now that the base has been exposed, lets take a look at the letter.
————
We open with the author lamenting over the current state of the union, saying that they can no longer sing the national anthem without crying. This idea amuses me, that (just under) two millennium after Christians died after refusing to sing the anthem of Rome, Christians think it OK to partake of this empirical nations anthem.
Anyways, the author quickly begins to discuss the Supreme court appointments made by Obama during his first few months in office. Unsurprisingly Obama appoints a set of left leaning judges (the author note that these judges have close ties with the devilish ACLU). We are then subject to a series of “worst case scenarios” in which two more conservative members of the S.C. step down are are replaced by more of the crazy liberals. Thus tipping the balance of power towards the liberals. This sets the stage for the court decisions that take up the next seven pages (nearly half the document).
We are first exposed to the virus known as homosexuality. This “virus” has been accepted constitutionally by this new liberal court, thus causing a series of maladies in which the state of the union is severely degraded. All because it’s OK for gays to marry…
Before we look at these I want to point of this statement:
After many of these decisions, especially those that restricted religious speech in public places, President Obama publicly expressed strong personal disapproval of the decision and said that the Supreme Court had gone far beyond what he ever expected. But he has also stated repeatedly that he had sworn to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States,” and, now that the Supreme Court had ruled, he had no choice but to uphold the law, for these decisions were the law of the land.
It’s interesting that they should mention that, it seems that they would expect Obama to act in a manner contrary to the constitution. Something that they are accusing these liberal judges of doing. But when your target audience knows very little about the Constitution** it’s not that hard to make statements like this hit with full effect.
1. The boy scouts. It’s stated that the boy scouts disband, due to the no required hiring of Homosexual scout masters, who then subject children to being in the same pup tents as them. This is, for lack of a better term strong enough term, complete bull-shit. The scout masters code is as follows:
When staying in tents, no youth will stay in the tent of an adult other than his or her parent or guardian.
I find it interesting that the boy scouts would change their policy to allow scout masters to sleep with scouts, only to then disband once they realize that this policy may infect their children with the gay virus.
Focus on the family also shows their deep-seeded mistrust of the different here. They assume that if someone is gay, they cannot control any impulses, and are more prone to sexual molestation. Sometimes it’s better to look to your own flock before accusing others of what’s not there. We’ll talk about this idea in depth at a later date.
2. Sex education. Apparently once homosexuality accepted as constitutional it will then be taught to first graders. This no doubt comes from the accusation that Obama wants to teach about the birds and bee’s to first graders, which has been shown as false. Another example of fear mongering and intentional dissinformation. Nothing else to see here, move along, move along.
3. Adoption. Here we get the first taste of the idea that Non-profits will be subject to governmental tampering. “Christian” adoption agencies will not be able to pick through parental candidates. I find this idea preposterous, I think you’ll find it rare to really encounter any person trained in law that feels the government can interfere in these sorts of ways. The separation of church and state, as most liberals see it, is desirous of keeping the two entities as far apart as possible. They’d prefer Christians just keep to themselves, and will do the same gladly.
4. Business is now forced to prove that they do not discriminate against same sex couples. I think that’s a no brainer… that should be required TODAY, but when you don’t think that same sex couples are as human as heterosexuals, it’s easy to think they don’t deserve the same work benefits as heterosexuals. (Keep this one in the back of your mind… it will come into play later)
5-9 are similar to 3, Governmental interference with churches. Again… not going to happen.
10. The military (part A). Obama will immediately begin actively recruiting gays into the military. The author derides that “sensitivity” training towards homosexuality that has become part of military boot camps. Funny… I wonder of the author is willing to deride the “sensitivity” training towards the killing of other humans in the same way.
11-13 deal with the silence of religious speech at educational facilities. I can’t say I’m against this, if it means the silence of all religious points of view. It would certainly remove quite a lot of the dissent and distress that religions are infamous for when confronting each other. This sort of distress doesn’t really have a place in our schools… But hey, I’m a liberal… Focus on the Family doesn’t care what I think.
14 talks about the pledge of allegiance. I’m against the pledge in it’s entirety, I pledge no allegiance to any country, as it’s very hard to give your allegiance to many entities. I would swear my allegiance to God, and go no farther. But when “Country First” is your motto, it’s very easy to see why allegiance to your country is so important. (Jesus held no allegiance to Rome nor the literal nation of Israel***)
15-17. Here we begin to discuss abortion. I find myself agreeing with the author more here, as I am against abortions. I guess I should write a separate post about abortions, as my views on it are somewhat different from mainline Christianity. So for now, we’ll move along.
18. Pornography. Apparently Obamas supreme court will nullify all FCC laws regarding obscenity, thus enabling the slippery slope which lets sexual perversion run rampant from the airwaves to the grocery stores. The author pretends that it’s not easy enough to access sex already, any child with an internet connection can see whatever he or she wants. I would say if you don’t like what the government approves then you have to personally take steps to “protect” your children. I know there are already Internet filters, christian satellite companies, and christian radio out there, all of which could provide “clean” “filtered” viewing pleasures for your family. More fear mongering is all this point turns out to be.
19. Guns. Focus on the family is vehemently pro-gun and pro-gun ownership, and feel that an Obama presidency would end gun-ownership rights nationwide. Obama himself has stated that this should be a decision for local municipalities and states, and I agree with him there. As far as the gun control issue goes, I find myself on the side of higher regulation, but not the abolishment of ownership rights. I do question the need for ownership of an assault rifle, as well as a Christian who is fine with drawing down another human.
20. Home schooling. This one is interesting, I support homeschooling, as I probably learned more during my time as a homeschooler than during either my private school years or my public school years. I would agree with the author here, that the requirement that a parent have a teachers license in order to school their child is inane.
21-25 Deals with the military. Obama being weak willed has apparently let the US fall away from it’s role as the military superpower of the world. First off, Obama is actually far more pro-military action than I’d like him to be, and he as stated before that he would be willing to use military force. Here we find that I agree with neither the Obama or the author. The military should not be the answer.
I would like the point out the author anti-approach to open conversation with entities that don’t agree with you. I find this idea that we can only talk with those who agree with us quite modern in approach, and not very successful in the end. We need to understand that discussing viewpoints with people those who disagree with you does not mean that you agree with them. Social cooperation would require us to work with those whom we disagree with. What is more a more beautiful thing, inter religion cooperation to solve a social justice issue, or a religious leader refusing to work with another because of ideological disagreeances.
26. Health care. Let me share this little gem with you.
The great benefit is that medical care is now free for everyone — if
you can get it. Now that health care is free, it seems everybody wants more of it.
It seems that the author does not like the idea that everyone is trying to get the health care they need. Social Darwinism seems to be at work in the authors mind, and a breath after saying that it’s good that health care is free, the author decries the usage of said health care by those who need it. Asinine hypocrisy at it’s best right here folks, but what I find more remarkable is that it’s coming from a Christian source. Health care for all should be our goal, not our fear.
27. Health care rationing. The author plays up fears that the elderly cannot get health care due to rationing. The sad truth is, as Sara Robinson of Our Future points out (here) is:
Don’t look now: but America does ration care. And it does it in the most capricious, draconian, and often dishonest way possible.
Mostly, the US system rations care by simply eliminating large numbers of people from the system due to an inability to pay. Last year, one-quarter of all Americans didn’t go to a doctor when they needed one because they couldn’t afford it. Nearly that many skipped getting a test, treatment, prescription, or follow-up appointment recommended by a doctor. In Canada, those same numbers are in the 4-5% range; in the UK, 2-3%. Also: nearly 20% of all Americans had a hard time paying a medical bill last year; and these stresses now trigger over half of all personal bankruptcies in the country.
28. Taxes. We’ve heard a lot lately, from conservative talking heads, about Obama’s tax policy, and how insane it is to give tax breaks to those which currently pay no income taxes. Again we have a nice manipulation using the lack of public knowledge on our (complex) tax system. Most Americans who receive checks from their employers will notice that a portion of their checks are taken out. This is known as the payroll tax, which includes Federal income taxes and FICA, as well as state income taxes if your state requires them. In this way working Americans actually do pay income taxes, however at the end of the year your taxes are calculated and credits are applied. Some of these credits are known as refundable tax credits, are returned to you several weeks after you file, however if you don’t pay enough throughout the year you are required to send the IRS a check for the remainder of your federal income tax liability.
This system of credits and refunds enables conservatives to say that 40-50% of those living in the US do not pay income taxes. It’s a flat out lie.
———–
I think we’ll stop here for today. We’re sitting at a hefty sized post as it is. We’ll resume sometime in the next few days, in the meantime lets hear your opinions on this propaganda letter.
————————————————
* I cannot take credit for this term, I must refer you to the Slacktivist, where I picked it up from.
** I am not stating that everyone knows very little about the Constitution, but I am certainly comfortable in stating that a vast majority of ALL Americans don’t know much about the Constitution.
*** I am drawing a distinction here between Israel as a literal nation with borders and boundaries and the idea of the Nation of Israel meaning followers of Judaism. I would say that Jesus would certainly not swear allegiance to any nation.
email2friend