The Christian Right vs. Everyone Else

“But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.” – Thomas Jefferson

I have forever had a complete lack of interest in organized religion beyond what I consider to be a purely academic curiosity. I trust that my beliefs are innate, that my values are based in logic, and that my morals are firmly grounded in my own consciousness.

The Christian right considers my views to be the source of the depravity plaguing our nation.  Not only am I destroying the moral fiber of this Christian nation, but I am also an arrogant and elitist communist in direct opposition to religious liberty.

The lack of Christian influence in my life has apparently also led me to be anti-American, anti-Christian, and anti-Religion.  According to these zealots, I am also a member of an unknown religion [despite the aforementioned claims of my hostility toward religion] with the sole purpose of destroying Christianity.

“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion.” – Treaty of Tripoli, signed on November 4, 1796

In the United States, the term “Christian right” is used to describe the informal ultra-conservative alliance of a number of politically active Evangelical extremist groups.  This overly pious coalition believes that because Protestants founded the United States, our laws and public policy must be specifically based on the Evangelical interpretation of the teachings of Christianity.

Contrary to what the Christian right believes, this nation was neither founded by Christian men nor based on the teachings of Christianity.  Freethinkers, deists, and anti-Clerics founded our nation and sought to form a government that would support the citizens’ rights in both religious and secular endeavors.

For instance, depending on which super sacred version of the Bible you read, the act of rebellion is stated to be comparable to the sin of predicting the future or performing witchcraft.  If the United States were truly based in the Christian faith, then the rebellion against the Crown would have been considered to be an act against the Creator himself.  

 “Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear.” – Thomas Jefferson

The creation of The Jefferson Bible is another example of the lack of reverence the Founding Fathers had for Christianity.  Thomas Jefferson believed that the ethical system presented in the Bible was sound, but that this system should be separated from its supernatural elements.  Jefferson revised the Bible by taking a razor to the Gospels and editing its text to exclude what he considered to be disingenuous.

“The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion.“ – Arthur C.Clarke

The Christian Coalitionof America, a prominent Christian right extremist group, states that its primary mission is to ensure that government “serves to strengthen and preserve, rather than threaten,” Evangelical families and their Christian values.

This mission may seem legitimate to some due to wording that insinuates that the government is somehow attempting to restrict the rights of Christians, however I cannot understand the logic behind the sentiment.  The Christian right as a whole supports this notion that government is somehow seeking to threaten their religious freedoms.

Their purpose is encompassed by the belief that the government has a responsibility to curb society’s morality to correspond with the morals set in place by the Bible.  The apparent belief is that government should value Christian beliefs over that of any other group and that the seizure of secular rights is justified when the protection of these rights offends Christian sensibility.

Protesting “anti-Christian bigotry” and defending “the rights of people of faith” is listed by the Christian Coalition of America as one of five political actions considered to be of the upmost importance.  The phrase “anti-Christian bigotry” refers to a sentiment amongst the Christian right that if you are not with them, you must be against them.  Defending “the rights of people of faith” refers to the support of banning actions that are considered to be sinful by the Bible.

 “Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law.” – Thomas Jefferson

The following are issues championed by the Christian right as issues threatening the religious freedoms of Christians as well as destroying the morality of Christian America:

Removal of “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance

The Christian right protests altering the Pledge of Allegiance, especially modifying it by removing the words “under God.”  They claim that the Pledge of Allegiance should not be altered to accommodate nonbelievers and maintain that the words “under God” are original to the Pledge of Allegiance.  The Christian right is mistaken about the history of the Pledge of Allegiance. 

Title 36 United States Code § 172 was amended on June 22, 1942 and the words “underGod” were incorporated into the Pledge of Allegiance on June 14, 1954.  What they are in fact protesting is the removal of words unoriginal to the Pledge of Allegiance.

The Pledge of Allegiance was intended to allow citizens to express loyalty to the flag and the nation it represents, but the Christian right has decided that it was also intended to express American loyalty to the Christian religion.

Reversal of “ObamaCare”

The Christian right has been quite vocal about its opposition to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.  The main issue seems to be in regard to the mandate requiring that employers provided health care coverage that provides employees with access to contraceptives.  Providing contraceptives, which are obviously only used by those engaging in premarital or extramarital relations, infringes on the employer’s religious freedoms. 

Businesses like Hobby Lobby have been filing lawsuits against the Obama administration, claiming that the contraceptive mandate considerably burdens the ability of employers to exercise their religion.  These protests against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act imply that the government is somehow limiting Christian employers by requiring that they make contraceptives available to their employees.

I believe that the act is extending access to contraceptives in order to ensure that all citizens are able to make their own decisions regarding reproductive health.  In contrast, Evangelicals apparently believe that only immoral fornicators would use any form of contraceptives and that the accommodation of such sinners would make every Christian an accessory to infantile genocide because pregnancy begins even before conception. 

Apparently, the Christian right believes that every woman becomes pregnant and miscarries twelve times a year.  According to this logic, every child is virgin-born, every menstrual cycle is a life cut short, and premenstrual syndrome is a subconscious reaction triggered by maternal instincts.

Opposition of the Respect for Marriage Act

House Resolution 1116 § 598 is a proposed bill in Congress that seeks to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.  If the proposal passes the United States will be required to recognize the validity of same-sex marriages.  While this would not require individual states to recognize the validity of these marriages.

The Christian right is strongly against the proposal because they believe that same-sex marriage degrades the sanctity of Christian marriage.  A commonly cited argument against redefining marriage is that civil unions are good enough for those sinners and that tainting the good name of marriage will only incur the wrath of God.

I have never understood the desire of the Christian right to monopolize marriage.  The earliest recorded instance of marriage is from Sumerians and predates Christianity.  This would indicate that the concept of marriage is not original to the Bible and therefore not a religious union and should not be defined in a way to exclude on the basis of religious belief.

Those against same-sex marriage often cite Leviticus 18:22, which states that one should “not lie with a man as one lies with a woman.”  I have not yet heard a single person cite Leviticus 20:13, which states that if “a man lies with a man…they must be put to death.”  In what seems to be an effort to lessen the executioner’s guilt, it adds as that “their blood will be on their own heads.”

I would also like to note that the Book of Leviticus lists a number of abominations in addition to that of the private relations that take place between two men.  Most are ignored by today's Christians because they are considered to be archaic and that God would no longer consider these acts to be sinful or punishable by death.  I appreciate how God gives free passes to heterosexuals, but just can’t get past that whole “gay thing.”

Abominations that are commonly ignored:

Eating water-dwelling creatures without fins and scales.

Eating any creature that can lay eggs or fly.

Eating any creature that slithers or crawls.

Eating any creature with four or more legs.

Eating leftovers that are three days old.

Eating pork.

Eating with Hebrews if you are an Egyptian.

Taking from the collection bowl.

Remarrying your first husband.

Fornicating with a married woman.

Eating anything after touching something dirty.

Wearing clothing of the opposite gender.

Being stubborn.

Being proud.

Lying.

Gossiping.

Marrying someone that isn’t Christian.

Charging interest on loans.

“To give opinions unsupported by reasons might appear dogmatical.” – George Washington

Do not mistake my opinions as anti-Christian sentiment.  An adamant belief in something is commendable, but protecting your freedoms by threatening the freedoms of others is anything but.  The short quiz found here will let you know whether your religious liberties are being threatened or if you are in fact the one threatening the freedoms of others.