Who Thinks the Culture Wars are Over? Take the Quiz.
Frederick Clarkson printable version print page     Bookmark and Share
Tue Jul 27, 2010 at 11:11:50 AM EST
The claims that the Religious Right is dead and that the Culture Wars are over are as ubiquitous as they are poorly supported.  We have debunked such claims many times here at Talk to Action. (Most recently, Frank Cocozzelli took on one such prominent claim.)

Over at Religion Dispatches, I have an essay about all this. You'll find a sample after the jump -- followed by a quiz featuring ten prominent examples of statements claiming End of the Culture Wars and/or the Religious Right is Near.
One of the strangest phenomena in American politics is the persistence of claims, based on scanty or dubious evidence, proclaiming the death of the Religious Right or that the end of the culture wars is at hand. Having written about the ever-evolving Religious Right for more than 25 years I have found myself often perplexed and sometimes gobsmacked by such claims.

These claims play a significant role in the discourse but they've received far less scrutiny than they merit.

it was unsuccessful Republican presidential contender Pat Buchanan's demagogic speech at the 1992 Republican Convention that really launched the term into our political lexicon. Although it is now generally referred to as "the culture war speech," Buchanan never actually used the term...

   

"There is a religious war going on in our country for the soul of America. It is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we will one day be--as was the Cold War itself."

He makes it clear that this religious war is being waged on cultural fronts--but that culture is not the war itself. This is not a distinction without a difference. The religious war of which he speaks is not merely a collection of "social issues" over which people disagree, like abortion, homosexuality, and separation of church and state. It is, rather, a clash of profoundly different worldviews which are then played out in battles over specific issues.

The fascinating problem with the method of those who declare that the culture war is over, or about to be, is that they rarely if ever actually take the metaphor a step further. They do not name any of the belligerents, only the "issues" over which unnamed groups are said to be at war.

Facts are stubborn things--especially when one finds oneself without any. Some of those who make the claims we are discussing here, when they bother to cite any evidence at all, tend to rely on interpretations of convenience of public opinion polls or election outcomes. Chip Berlet has done a good job of debunking misuses of polling data of this sort, so I will not repeat all of that here.

That said, both liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats, often display a lack of appreciation of the seriousness of purpose as well as the considerable resources, ideological rigidity, and ongoing political clout of the Religious Right. Sometimes spectacularly so.

For example, Religious Right leaders objected when Governor Mitch Daniels (R-IN) called for a "truce" on contentious social issues--apparently without consulting those whom he expected to join in the truce. They declared that such a truce is the equivalent of "surrender." Daniels, a possible 2012 GOP presidential contender, backed right off. Rob Boston, who has written about the Religious Right for two decades concluded that "Daniels' quick retreat" indicates "that the Religious Right has lost none of its political punch."

Here are ten notable examples from the last few years right up to the present -- with links. Test your knowledge of the pronouncements of those who have told us that The End is Near. Take the quiz!

The ten statements below were made by some of the following ten prominent people. (Hint: Not everyone listed below is quoted in the quiz.)

Bill Clinton, former President of the U.S.
E. J. Dionne, columnist, The Washington Post
Ted Haggard, former President, National Association of Evangelicals
Robert P. Jones, pollster, consultant to Faith and Public Life and Third Way
Rachel Laser, Director of the Culture Program, Third Way
Barack Obama, President of the U.S.
Bill Press, nationally syndicated columnist
Frank Rich, columnist, The New York Times
Cal Thomas, nationally syndicated columnist
Jim Wallis, President, Sojourners

2006:  "In this election, both the Religious Right and the secular Left were defeated, and the voice of the moral center was heard."

Bill Clinton
Robert P. Jones
Barack Obama
Jim Wallis

2007:  "E.J. Dionne wrote a strong column today about our paper, "A Treaty in the Culture Wars:  Requiem for the Religious Right?", where he calls this effort an "important sign that religious conservatives are facing the disintegration of their movement."

Bill Clinton
Robert P. Jones
Barack Obama
Jim Wallis

2007:  "The era of the Religious Right is now past, and it's up to all of us to create a new day."

Ted Haggard
Rachel Laser
Bill Press
Jim Wallis

2007:  "No matter who becomes the next president of the United States, the American people have already won a great victory - with the total disintegration of the once all-powerful religious right."

Bill Clinton
E.J. Dionne
Robert P. Jones
Bill Press

2008:  "I've got some good news... the dominance of the religious right over our politics is finally finished."

Rachel Laser
Barack Obama
Cal Thomas
Jim Wallis

2008: "RELIGIOUS RIGHT R.I.P.... Thirty years of trying to use government to stop abortion, preserve opposite-sex marriage, improve television and movie content and transform culture into the conservative Evangelical image has failed.

Bill Clinton
Ted Haggard
Frank Rich
Cal Thomas

2008:  "The era of the religious right is over. Even absent the rise of urgent new problems, Americans had already reached a point of exhaustion with a religious style of politics that was dogmatic, partisan and ideological."

E.J. Dionne
Ted Haggard
Rachel Laser
Barack Obama

2010:  "These dying gasps of our culture wars, like [George] Rekers's farcical pratfall, might be funnier if millions of gay Americans and their families were not still denied their full civil rights."

Bill Clinton
E.J. Dionne
Bill Press
Frank Rich

2010:  "I believe we are also nearing the end of the "Religious Right" representing Evangelicalism."  

Bill Clinton
Ted Haggard
Rachel Laser
Cal Thomas

2010:   "In 2010, the American ayatollahs' ranks have been depleted by death (Falwell), retirement (James Dobson) and rent boys (too many to name). What remains of that old guard is stigmatized by its identification with poisonous crusades, from the potentially lethal antihomosexuality laws in Uganda to the rehabilitation campaign for the "born again" serial killer David Berkowitz ("Son of Sam") in America. ... The death throes of Mel Gibson's career feel less like another Hollywood scandal than the last gasps of an American era.

Bill Clinton
E. J. Dionne
Bill Press
Frank Rich




To discuss this story, sign up for a free account

Display:
Who Thinks the Culture Wars are Over? Take the Quiz. | 19 comments (19 topical, 0 hidden)
RR Dead? (5.00 / 1)
I think not. They're kind of like Michael Meyers from the Halloween movies, or Freddy, or zombies. They keep coming back. Someday their influence will be over but I can't help but thinking they're going to make a bigger mess before it's all said and done.

by COinMS on Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 09:43:51 AM EST

Granny proverb (5.00 / 2)
There is an old saying in West Texas.  Can't bury grandma if she ain't dead.

by wilkyjr on Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 12:41:44 PM EST

So where are the answers? (none / 0)
I'd love to know who made these statements. Any chance for a list of the guilty?

by PastorJennifer on Tue Jul 27, 2010 at 04:51:44 PM EST
the answer is in the linked date on each quote (none / 0)


by Frederick Clarkson on Tue Jul 27, 2010 at 06:47:07 PM EST
Parent


Not Over, But Peaked (none / 0)
I have made this comment before---and I know that not everyone agrees with me---but I do believe that the influence of the Religious Right has peaked during the first decade of the 21st century in America, and that looking forward, they are unlikely to enjoy such halcyon days again.

Now, "peaked" is not the same as "over." It could be another ten, twenty years or more before the influence of the Religious Right on the political stage fades to insignificance, but I also don't think that they will be drive the agenda as openly and forcefully as they did in the past decade or more.

Why? Demographics. America is becoming a less religious place, with fewer Christians, and fewer conservative Christians.  The number of young non-believers back in the 50s was 5% or less, today it's well north of 20%, and is gradually following in the footsteps of the demographics of other Western nations who have seen the numbers of the religious faithful drop considerably over the last 25 years.

Most of my married American friends still attend church, but it is usually for the sake of the children--to expose them to a religious education--and not for themselves.  This is pretty much what it was like back in the UK with the parents of many of my school friends (in the 1970s).  They attended church in order to take their kids to Sunday School.  Today British parents very rarely feel the need to do this any more, and I suspect we will likely see the same trend in the next generation of American parents too.

Now, I realize that American is more conservative in general than most European nations, so the trend may not be as fast and strong, but the demographic trend toward less religious belief over the last 40 years is undeniable, and I suspect will be self-perpetuating.  Once people reach their 20s, their religious beliefs are pretty much set (as evidenced by the static nature of the percentage of non-believers as each generation ages) and so as religious faith declines from generation to generation, children will continue to have a greater chance of being non-believers.  It would not be surprising to find as many as 40% of today's newborns calling themselves non-believers (or non-religious) when they turn 25.

It is highly unlikely that the Religious Right community would be immune to such a marked trend, even if the attrition is only marginal in the early stages.  At 20% of the US population, they are still a powerful force for activism within their chosen party.  But as that 20% is whittled away, and as more Americans become more hostile to their dogmatic religious beliefs, they will find it increasingly tough to drive the agenda, particularly at the national level, where they cannot avoid the spotlight.

Looking at the Tea Party movement, it's obvious that the Religious Right sees now it as the vehicle of choice for gaining influence in Washington, given their confluence of paranoia and conservative wish list, but it's a campaign and a messages that is no longer overtly religious. The headlines are all about taxes, socialism, and freedom, keeping the social conservative issues in the background. (They are there, of course, but being quietly de-emphasised, which is not exactly an indication of confidence and strength.)

Now if the Tea Party is a roaring success in November (which is not a given just yet) then they will give the Religious Right a platform from which they can get up to all kinds of mischief, but it will almost certainly be temporary, since there isn't the slightest indication that right-wing conservatives of any kind can actually govern competently (their anti-government mantra makes that a self-fulfilling goal really).

So, yeah, we could be in for a few more bumpy years where the Religious Right exerts more power than its relevance and size deserves, and it could be even worse if they find a leader who is actually likable, sane and competent (i.e. not Gingrich, Palin, Angle, or Rand Paul), but unless the trend away from religious belief is reversed (which could happen, but I feel is unlikely) then it will only be a matter of time before the days of the Religious Right are well and truly over.

by tacitus on Tue Jul 27, 2010 at 05:02:51 PM EST

Demographics -- the other side of that story (none / 0)
I really hope you're right.  But, as long as you're bringing up demographics, there's an important countertrend, which is the tendency of conservative religious folks to have more babies than other people.

This trend is especially pronounced in Israel, where many of the ultra-Orthodox believe they are commanded by God to have as many babies as they can possibly squeeze out.  For that reason, the religious parties have increased in strength over the years.

Here in the U.S.A., there has not been, so far, a similarly strong trend among fundamentalists to have huge families.  But this might change as the predominant end-times belief continues to shift from pre-trib pre-millenialism to post-millenialism, especially if the "Quiverfull" movement (which forbids contraception and encourages large families) manages to grow in popularity.

Also, I suspect that the Catholic hierarchy is betting that those Catholics who accept the hierarchy's teachings on birth control will eventually outbreed those who don't.


by Diane Vera on Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 04:46:51 PM EST
Parent

Priorities (none / 0)
That's an interesting point, Diane. One of the people I knew from work was a Quiverfull adherent, at least in the sense they did not believe in contraception, and last I heard they were on their eighth or ninth child and his wife was only in her mid-thirties.

I'm not sure though that there will ever be enough Americans who would make such a sacrifice to reverse the overall trend. Studies have shown that immigrant families from countries with traditionally large families tend to adjust very quickly to the norms of the nation they move to---so quickly, in fact, that even the first generation immigrants would have fewer children if they moved before they started their family.

In other words, the standards of society -- 2.4 children or whatever it is today -- is tough to resist, and it would take a huge amount of dedication to go against that trend and sacrifice many of the comforts and consumer trappings of a modern middle-class life, not to mention the problem of paying for the college education of a half-dozen kids or more.

While members of the Religious Right are fanatical in many different ways, it's pretty clear that when push comes to shove, they're often not willing to back up their words with deeds. Imposing bans on gay marriage is one thing.  Giving up your truck in order to pay the medical bills for the birth of your fifth kid is quite another.

As you rightly say, Catholics -- and in particular Hispanic Catholics -- may be their best hope, but the Religious Right hasn't exactly been welcoming them with open arms in the last few years. While some of the leaders might bemoan the anti-immigrant feeling, I suspect that there are just too many in the Religious Right whose ideal Christian society isn't made up of millions of brown people for whom English is their second language.

Hence, in parts of Texas where the Latino population is growing (notably in and around Dallas) the voting population is trending strongly Democratic.

So I don't know. Demographic trends can always shift.  There was obviously a shift that got things rolling toward less religious believe 40 years ago, and things can change again. But, underneath the religious, conservative facade of American life (which is admittedly far stronger than that in Western Europe) there is an awful lot of secularism already, and I think it's enough to keep the same trend growing, even in Quiverfull families.  It's one thing to have lots of babies, it's quite another to keep them all in the fold as they grown up!

by tacitus on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 12:41:10 AM EST
Parent




Fewer Issues (none / 0)
I would also like to point out that the Culture War is really a series of battles---and they are battles that the Religious Right continue to lose (even if they win a few skirmishes first).

Just look at the battles they have lost in the past. School prayer, creationism, intelligent design, gay rights (excluding adoption and marriage), no-fault divorce, legal bans of sexual behavior, IVF, and so on.

While some of these issues still rumble on, the Religious Right has not make significant headway in reversing any of them, and it's unlikely they ever will.

Now, they are at great risk of losing a couple more battles.  Gay marriage (and adoption) and abstinence-only sex education.  It's true that they have won some important skirmishes in these areas, but both demographics and plain, simple facts are working against them. Young people are far more accepting of homosexuality than the previous generation (who never had friends who were openly gay) and now that gay marriage has a foothold in several states (and likely will be back in California within a couple of years) without the prophesied collapse of American society (or anything much at all, in fact) then it's very likely that this remaining opposition to gay civil rights will be rendered impotent in the vast majority of the country by the end of the decade.

As for abstinence-only education, well, we now know that it doesn't work, (Duh!) and even if parents are in love the idea that their child remains "pure" until they meet the partner of their dreams, they are also practical when it comes to protecting their children from harm when they make mistakes.  Only a pathological few wish to see their children living with the full consequences of their sins, even unto death.

Just the other day, here in Texas, another school board announced that they were abandoning abstinence-only sex education, and I suspect more will follow.

So that's two more battles the Religious Right will lose in the years ahead, shrinking the Culture War down even further, to the point where really the only main battlefront remaining is abortion.

Now that is where the Religious Right has been able to make inroads, and hold their ground, and if the Supreme Court nominations work out for them, we could see a major victory for them in the years ahead.  Given that the number of pro-choice and  anti-abortion people has remained almost static for 40 years, I'm not clear as to what will happen in the future, although given the defeat of hard line anti-abortion legislation in some places, the Religious Right is unlikely ever to win a complete victory.  Thus I suspect this particular battle will rage on for more decades to come, and is likely only to end when technology intervenes and some kind of foolproof implantable controllable contraceptive is made widely available.

(There will no doubt be a debate over that too, but it will be one that the Religious Right will most certainly lose.)

by tacitus on Tue Jul 27, 2010 at 05:29:57 PM EST

some RR wins for you (5.00 / 1)
- Getting the Hyde Amendment made permanent as a condition for passage of health care reform, and compelling Obama to sign an executive order barring use of federal funds for abortion -- just in case the legislation was not enough.

-- Defeating marriage equality at the polls in CA when Obama was winning the state in 2008.

-- Passing anti-gaymarriage amendments to state constitutions in more than 30 states, with no federal relief in sight, and no repeal efforts with any chance of success anywhere on the horizon.

-- Having the political power to compel John McCain to select Sarah Palin as his running mate.

-- The outright control of the Texas GOP by the RR, and BTW, of the state board of education. (Where is the anti-RR political strength when it comes to elections as crucial as these seats?)

And those are examples just off the top of my head.  As I have pointed out, polling taken alone is not an adequate measure of the state of either the RR of the Culture Wars.  It does not measure the relative strength of institutions, ideologies, cadres of trained activists and leaders; the capacity of media infrastructure to hold together and inform movements, and much, much, more.  

by Frederick Clarkson on Tue Jul 27, 2010 at 07:02:20 PM EST
Parent

Yes, but... (none / 0)
Hyde Amendment -- I did say that abortion is the one area where they have made significant progress.

CA gay marriage -- that victory will be overturned either by the courts or at the polls by the end of 2012.

Wider gay marriage -- yep, most of those legal prohibitions will be hard to overturn, but the days where the gay marriage issue can drive voters to the polls will soon be over for the reasons I gave earlier.

Palin -- that was a desperation move from a losing candidate, and we all saw how successful that was.  In fact, one can argue that it was a victory for the opponents of the Religious Right, given the pasting Palin has received since that day.

The Texas GOP -- yeah, well, in case you didn't know, the Texas State Republicans have a majority of precisely three (with one vacancy) and that's after the gerrymandering efforts of the GOP a couple of elections ago. Demographic gains by the Hispanic population could see the Democrats back in power within a few years.

Also Speaker Tom Craddick was recently replaced by a more moderate Republican at the instigation of the Democrats and 16 Republicans.

Finally, Rick Perry's flirtation with the religious right has done him little good in the polls so far.  He is in the fight of his political life with Bill White, the popular Democratic mayor from Houston.

So I agree, the Texas GOP is a good example of how a handful of extremists can drive an ideological agenda, but it's clear that their reach is nowhere near as great as is sometimes advertised, and there are signs that their influence is waning, even here in Texas.

by tacitus on Tue Jul 27, 2010 at 07:44:44 PM EST
Parent

yes but, you are saying that maybe (none / 0)
the outlook is sunny, but you may be wrong. Things change. What's more the RR were elected to their seats on the SBOE, worked hard to do it and they rolled over their opposition. Show me some election victories and then explain to me how they not only signal a Dem electoral trend but actually are determinative in the outcome of the culture wars and the relative strength of the RR.  Fact is, the RR has build power over time and others have not. Even if they lost all of their seats next time, would that mean the RR had lost them forever?    

In fact, the RR has had the political clout to accomplish all of the things I have mentioned. And predictions about different outcomes down the road are not to be confused with reality.  Fact is, the RR has had the political power to get where they are, and there is no serious indication of slippage.

But lets address the CA gay marriage polling issue since that is what you and others are attempting to hang your argument on.

First, gay marriage is inseparable from other important matters because it is integrated into comprehesive worldviews about the family. Second, even changing attitudes about this subject, to the welcome extend that it is happening, does not necessarily lead to different outcomes in therms of the issue, or electoral outcomes for sympathetic candidates. Just because people are more positive about gay marriage than they used to be does not mean that they are motivated to do anything about it. What's more, as Chip Berlet and I have pointed out, polling of large samples by Robert P. Jones and by Pew in the past few years have both shown that among the young white evangelicals whose views are softer than their parents regarding gay rights, those same young people are more profoundly antiabortion. Therefore - what does that say about future voting behavior?

Serial suppositions about social progress does not reality make.  

In CA, marriage equality lost at the ballot box while Obama was winning in 08 -- because the RR was better organized, had more resources, and better messages. If gay marriage in California is the test of the strength of the RR, then I say advantage RR.

But let's say that marriage equality prevails in CA  by way of a slam dunk court decision. That does not mean that the RR is dead. It only means they lost on that issue. Does a loss in court make the movement weaker or stronger?  Or does the movement merely change to limit the damage?  How do we know? Point is, we cannot make well informed predictions about that.

The old epistemological saw, the map is not the territory, applies strongly to single issue polling with regard to how one then measures the Religious Right and its relative strength in the culture wars. It is not only a map which needs to be tested against sheer reality, it is often the wrong map.

Pols like Rich Perry come and go. He has not "flirted" with the RR. It has been a central part of his base. If he loses this time, it will be for many reasons, including a rising and revived Democratic Party. But the RR lives on beyond the political lives of pols like Perry.

by Frederick Clarkson on Tue Jul 27, 2010 at 09:33:36 PM EST
Parent

Half Full / Half Empty (none / 0)
But let's say that marriage equality prevails in CA  by way of a slam dunk court decision. That does not mean that the RR is dead. It only means they lost on that issue. Does a loss in court make the movement weaker or stronger?  Or does the movement merely change to limit the damage?  How do we know? Point is, we cannot make well informed predictions about that.

Of course I don't think the RR is dead if they lose the court case (which is not certain anyway), but I believe it would be part of a pattern that will eventually lead to the waning in influence of the Religious Right.

Perhaps I should repeat that I don't believe that the Religious Right is dead, far from it.  I just believe is that their high tide has come and gone. All that means is that their overall reach and ability to influence the societal and political direction of the country is beginning to recede. In other words, the water is still lapping at our feet, even if it is no longer covering them. There is still a long way to go, and I don't believe for one moment that the important task of your website will soon be over.  

As I said, things will likely be hairy in different ways for at least a decade. But I strongly suspect that when we look back at this upcoming decade from 2020, we will see two things. A continuing decline in overall religious belief, and a decline in the influence of the Religious Right.  They may still be an important constituent of the Republican Party even then, but they will not be wielding kind of power that allow sweeping bans on gay marriage to be brought into effect in the last decade.

I could be wrong, of course, but and perhaps I am being too optimistic, but I have confidence that the American people are beginning to see more clearly what the Religious Right brings to the table, and they don't like it. I also see little reason why the USA, alone out of all comparable nations, can resist the secularization of society much longer.

It's been an interesting discussion, nonetheless, and thanks for posting the original story.

by tacitus on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 12:20:21 AM EST
Parent

you are ignoring so many other factors (none / 0)
such as, organization, leadership, trained activists, major institutions including law schools that did not exist a generation ago, enormous broadcast media capabilities, considerable electoral capacity, and more.  

You also seem to suggest that a decline in religious belief according to polls is a permanent trend and that this is necessarily progressive. In fact, there are already plenty of non-religious conservatives who find common cause with the religious right on many issues, for example on school privatization. It is one of the reasons why the RR is powerful.

Belief that demographic trends are constant and lead to certain preferred outcomes, is to my mind, buying a pig in a poke.

by Frederick Clarkson on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 12:40:43 AM EST
Parent

I would add (none / 0)
that corporations also have a lot to loose if the "Religious Right" were to go into decline.  You alluded to privatization- that is a big problem and from what it seems, they want everything privatized so they can get their hands on more tax money.  Then there is all of the connections between Big Money (Corporate or otherwise) that have been documented at T2A.

The fact is, the "Religious Right" serves the desires and goals of Big Business (and the rich)... through hegemony.  The Elites have gained new power through the Supreme Court decision giving corporations rights that should only belong to real people... and that is just one nail in the coffin.

I kind of laugh when I hear people say that the "Religious Right" (and from that they imply the dominionists) is either fading or doomed.  At the same time I feel a lot of frustration, because with the exception of the previously-mentioned poll, there is adequate evidence on ALL fronts that they are actually getting stronger and winning.

I just wonder if early in Hitler's career, people said of the Nazis that they were dying or fading?  It took millions of lives to end that evil regime- I wonder what it will take to break dominionism?  (I would argue that there are valid parallels between Nazism and Dominionism).

by ArchaeoBob on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 09:05:05 AM EST
Parent

Come Now (none / 0)
Well thanks for providing yet another example of Godwin's Law, Bob.  I think you're being more than a little hyperbolic comparing the Religious Right to Hitler, and you are certainly overblowing the risks of America becoming a Dominionist nation.

For all the strength of the Religious Right, the strain that is Dominionism is still a fringe concern.  Yes, there are plenty of cases where religious extremism has raised its ugly head, but that has always been the case in America.  Most of us (including me) are way too young to remember the kinds of things that mainstream conservative Christian leaders were saying about black people before the Civil Rights movement took off, but I have little doubt that they would make most people's hair curl today.  

And just remember how far we have come from the days when gays were being persecuted and locked up for simply expressing their sexuality in public.  Sure the Religious Right has squashed the prospect of full gay marriage in a number of states, but there is absolutely no doubt that they have been on the defensive on this, one of the two signature issues, for decades, and there is no sign of that changing. Even in the face of the constant barrage of anti-gay propaganda about the evil "gay agenda," the lives and status of gay people have transformed in the last 40 years, and when even the Religious Right is willing to concede civil unions in their battle against gay marriage, there is no doubt that they are still on the defensive.

So I think it's wise to step back and look at how far this nation has come since the 1950s.  There may not have been such an overt and organized political movement as the Religious Right in those days, but that's only because their policies were pretty much the default position in many cases.  No abortion, no gays, very little separation of church and state, and so on.  They have made the ensuing battles extremely tough, and they will continue to do so in the future, but I really don't see any prospect of them gaining any major victories (with the exception of abortion rights) that would even bring them back to the status quo as it was in the 1950s, let alone a Dominionist America.

by tacitus on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 11:58:22 AM EST
Parent

I wondered (none / 0)
if someone would spout "Godwin's Law".

It's only valid if the comparison is wrong or unwarranted.  In this case, it's right and valid.  

50 years ago, dominionists were largely unknown and fundamentalists were rarely heard of... in fact they were thought of as nutcases as a general rule.  The Southern Baptists were strong for the social gospel (even though there were some serious racism problems there), and didn't buy the dominionism line.  When I was a little kid, Pentecostals and Fundamentalists were considered hick kooks... and their theology was thought laughable and infantile.  They grew through the 70's and 80's- remember the IRD?  That started in the 80's as I remember.  The numbers of steeplejacked churches have skyrocketed- in the Diocese I live in, it used to be only one, maybe two- and now it's almost all of the churches (I've heard of ONE exception).  People in the churches actually cared about poverty back then, and realized that it was a systemic problem that required national attention (and not band-aids from the churches).   Look at the attitudes that are out there today- and they originated in the dominionist/fundamentalist churches with their insistence that suffering is caused by personal sin.  

It used to be that the idea of theocracy being a danger to this country would have caused laughter from a lot of people, but now a lot of academics and theologians and others have realized just how much danger we're in.  50 years ago, it wasn't even on the radar- now we have several people seriously researching it.

tacticus, I've seen dominionism flourish since I was an adult.  I've seen it become powerful (look at the last election- we had McCain and PALIN, of all people- that would have been a joke a couple of decades ago)!!!  It's gone from possibly hearing someone ranting against the separation of church and state in church- to hearing it regularly in public (along with the call for forced sectarian prayers and support of a narrow range of denominations).  It's gone from maybe getting accosted by someone once in a blue moon- to getting proselytized or pressured over religion on a regular and frequent basis.

50 years ago, I don't think that a law soliciting funds through a state agency for an organization such as Focus on the Family would have even made it to the bill stage... and not gotten as far as the one we stopped just a few years ago.

50 years ago, anyone calling Jesus Christ "the executioner" would be thought of as crazy and not knowing the Bible at all- now you hear of that, and it fits right in with some forms of dominionist theology.

Yeah, the country has changed, and many of the changes are for the better.  For instance, 60- 50- even 30 years ago, I would be living in danger of being put on a bus with a one-way ticket to Oklahoma (and my elders WERE threatened with that several times in the 70's) just because of who I am.  That is, if we weren't killed outright.  Now I'm free to live where I want in the Southeast- or at least I would be if I could afford to move.  60 years ago, discrimination was de jure against most minorities.  Now it's against the law and those who practice it have to do it on the sly (still hugely common, however).  50 years ago- an atheist was more likely to experience discrimination as well...  now it's less likely in some areas (but not in this county).

50 years ago, the question of GLBT rights wouldn't have even been raised, but now it's an issue.

So I do see the improvements, but I also have seen the increase in dominionism (and I would include Pentecostalism and Fundamentalism in that).  A HUGE increase.

The only good news about this whole mess is that some people are starting to see what is going on... but I'm worried that it may be too late.  

by ArchaeoBob on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 09:36:56 PM EST
Parent










One thing... (none / 0)
that these people who think the "Religious Right" are dead- or dying- or even weakened, have forgotten is that they never give up or back down.  It's one thing when it's just a handful of noisy preachers as it seemed in the past, but when you start hearing the same message every direction you turn- they're not getting weaker- they're winning.

When people rant at you when you stop at flea markets, or in the grocery store, or at yard sales (or even when you stop at stoplights when you take street preachers into account) - repeating the sort of BS we hear from their leaders- that's scary.  That also has been happening around here (and has so for the last few years, but it's getting worse).

You'll also encounter the sorts of things they spew on non-religious blogs.  Heaven help the poor soul who tries to speak up for separation of church and state, or for evolution, or for freedom of religion for non-Christians.

by ArchaeoBob on Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 02:29:00 PM EST


To what extent is this a class war, or geographic? (none / 0)
I wonder about the extent to which the "culture war" is in fact a *class* war, between educated or urban folks, and less-educated, possibly rural folks. Closely related to this, I wonder about the extent to which geography is linked to views--specifically (a) perhaps rural/urban, (b) perhaps northern/coastal states vs southern states. I think it would be extremely useful to this discussion to have data on either point.

by Diogenes6 on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 10:06:31 AM EST
Not a class war or a geographic war (none / 0)
First, a lot of dominionists are just as much urban as rural, and they DO seek out more intelligent people (but brainwash them and dumb them down).  I became a dominionist (for a few years) while IN college- and my story is a common story.  They recruit on campuses all the time (and have done so for years).  

So while it may be a class war (with the dominionists being cannon fodder for the elites), it's not educated vs not educated or city vs rural.  

I think it's like a cancer or a virus - the ideology behind dominionism spreads almost like an infection or metastasizing cancer (except that non-cancerous cells- regular people- are infected).  It's a battle of ideologies- the thinking that one must take over a country "for Christ" vs people who don't think that way.  I've seen it infect some pretty intelligent (and liberal) people, and take over some rather liberal churches.  So maybe in a sense, it's society (as a body) vs an invader.


by ArchaeoBob on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 10:03:11 PM EST
Parent



Who Thinks the Culture Wars are Over? Take the Quiz. | 19 comments (19 topical, 0 hidden)

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 (375 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 (203 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 (111 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 (101 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 (113 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 (144 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 (126 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 (118 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 (251 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 (65 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 (161 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 (177 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 (70 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 (80 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 (218 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-- http://www.talk2action.org/story/2016/7/21/04356/9417 I thought about what he explained......
MTOLincoln (253 comments)
Fear
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 (107 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 (214 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 (165 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 (163 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 (169 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 (180 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 (130 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 (331 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 (149 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 (90 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 (214 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.