Question for thought and discussion
ArchaeoBob printable version print page     Bookmark and Share
Mon Nov 01, 2010 at 09:51:02 AM EST
I would like to ask this question:  If you encounter someone who thinks that the Dominionists/NAR/"Religious Right" are just some backwoods hicks or a few individuals acting up- how would you respond?
Over the weekend racist graffiti was spray-painted on the road in front of our mailbox.  We were the only people in the area to experience that, and are also the only Native Americans who are open about it in the area.  When we reported it to the police, we tried to tell them that there is a long history of problems, every since I've gotten vocal and public in my opposition to dominionism (actually, every since I walked, but I didn't say that).  They insisted that it had to be kids and when I mentioned the local megachurches preaching against me by name- and harassing family members about the letters I write, they couldn't accept that a church could be involved.  They DID admit that there were "a few extremists" in this area who talked violence, but insisted that they were a few individuals who were just exercising their first amendment rights.  Both of the officers who responded had been to dominionist megachurches in the area, and called them "Crazy", but refused to believe that they could or would harass people.

I've been encountering things like the regularly-heard "But it's a CHURCH, it can't be THAT BAD!" for years now.  I probably hear that as a quote at least three or four times a year, maybe more.  I cite, I point people to the evidence, I direct people to this blog.  They reply that T2A and all of the places where the evidence exists are "Conspiracy sites" and flat refuse to consider that there is a dangerous movement in this country.  They say that our evidence is concocted or taken out of context, they refuse to believe our own personal stories of abuse and brainwashing.

I also even encounter people who insist that racism is dying out and that the Klan has not been a real presence for many years now- that bigotry is just a few individuals being stupid, and that minorities are being overly sensitive (or words to that effect).  These people seem to be just ordinary citizens, and have no clue to what is happening to people around them.

I encounter this almost every time the subject comes up - even if I'm not the one who brings up the extreme behavior or language.  I've had people bring up some public action of a dominionist that we know to be rather normal for them, but they think it is an individual who has mental illness and refuse to accept that it's what is being taught.

Our message isn't getting out.

If you encounter people like this, what would you say to try to show them that it's a movement and not just a few 'extremists" "acting up"???  How would you reply to "But it's a CHURCH, it can't be THAT BAD!"???



To discuss this story, sign up for a free account

Display:
Question for thought and discussion | 14 comments (14 topical, 0 hidden)
Well, Jim Jones once had a nice church... (none / 0)
...but his parishioners drank the Kool-Aid.

I'm sorry about the incident - If the local megachurches are preaching against you by name, you might want to consider a lawsuit. That might escalate things, sure but things sound pretty bad already. Would said preaching fall under libel/slander statutes, do you think?

As for the police, well they're under a lot of constraints, legally (or they should be, at least.) But if they themselves admit there are people locally who advocate violence you might want to get that on record.

I'm not sure what you can do easily to convince people you're up against something real. I'll be writing about the ties between Uganda & local organizing in the US very soon, for what it's worth.

by Bruce Wilson on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 06:38:08 AM EST

Awesome reply! (none / 0)
ROFLMAO!  That is an awesome reply.  I know a lot of people don't know the history of Jim Jones and his church and they would be flabbergasted to realize that he came from what is considered a more "mainstream" church in most areas, even though they are/were Pentecostal.  (I've even met 'kids' who only have a fuzzy idea of where "drink the Kool-Aid" comes from.)

This I think is one of the central issues- getting people to realize that (1) we have clear evidence backing us up, (2) we're not a bunch of conspiracy nuts, and (3) their local churches may be guilty of this stuff.  Having a reply to the "but it's a church..." and arguments like that is one clear step.

Possibly we need to come up with a set of clear speaking points.  Statements worded in such a way that it becomes clear that this is a real and pressing issue and ignoring it (or passing it off as 'conspiracy theory') is not a good idea.

The cops told me that going after the church would be a loosing proposition because it's a freedom of speech issue.  Funny how they are exercising freedom of speech when they promote violence and denigrate people, while we experience persecution if we speak out for freedom and separation of church and state.

by ArchaeoBob on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 10:16:11 AM EST
Parent



Don't know (none / 0)
I don't know how to convince people. Probably they're not going to be convinced. Make sure you document fully everything, and perhaps the ACLU might consider your case? If someone is preaching against you by name, can you get a tape of that? The local police probably won't be any help. You would have to get more of a high profile group to become involved.
Good luck!

by COinMS on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 07:54:09 AM EST

Of late I have talked about the real Cuckoo bird (none / 0)
And how different races of Cuckoo parasitize different species of birds, the ones that parasitize Wrens lay an egg that looks like a Wren only bigger and from the Wrens idea better than its own eggs, and the same for Thrushes and other songbirds each different , but the result is always Cuckoos, and the death of every young bird in the nest that is not a Cuckoo.  And in every case the parent bird is totally oblivious of the issue and will support, feed, and vigorously defend the Camouflaged Impostor even though if  they had a clue about the reality they would be horrified in the extreme.

This is how I differentiate Real Christians from the Real Cuckoos and points out how most large religions have their own cuckoos who look like them instead of like Christians, but on a policy basis have almost no difference, and as different from the religion they camouflage as as Domionists are from the teachings of Jesus. And like the Wrens there are many good Christians who are blind to the threat that they so vigorously defend.

Explained this way there are few but the actual Cuckoos who will not "get it", but the point needs to be made much more widely.

by FreeDem on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 10:42:02 AM EST


the site (none / 0)
'Bbut its a church it cant be bad' in the face of evidence to the contrary may involve less than optimal effectiveness of this website. ArchaeoBob noticed this response:

"They reply that T2A and all of the places where the evidence exists are "Conspiracy sites" and flat refuse to consider that there is a dangerous movement in this country."

I know you dont want to have this site flooded by dominionists or their defenders, but on the other hand you dont really have any cross examination of the things that are written here.

Some discussion with some polite give and take might improve the trust level, and decrease the opinion out there that this is just one of those "Conspiracy sites".

by TheOther on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 01:08:21 PM EST

polite give and take (none / 0)
does indeed happen here from time to time. We have rather tense debates from time to time as well. Disagreement, within the reasonable parameters of the terms of service and the site guidelines is always welcome. Generally, however, this has never been a high comment site, so if you have comments, please make them. But we can't really control for who shows up and who does not.

by Frederick Clarkson on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 02:27:04 PM EST
Parent

"Cross examination" not the problem (none / 0)
The problem is the cultural blind spot to just how evil "Christians" can be (something well known in non-Christian countries, and a heartbreaking fact).  Sadly, dominionists and their ilk have commanded the language, and a lot of people automatically assume (atheist/liberal/non-Christian/Muslim/Wiccan/you name it) equates to immoral and evil, while "Christian" is thought as always good.  The fact is, spouting "Jesus Jesus" does not mean that you're a good person, or that you're going to be moral or just.  As so many of us have seen - it very likely is going to be just the opposite.

As far as "Cross Examination", I've seen what happens when dominionists are allowed onto a blog.  They destroy it.  ALWAYS.  Either literally or by steeplejacking it.  

There is discussion and even arguments on this blog.  We don't agree on some things.  We all do agree that dominionism must be stopped from destroying this country, and the stated purpose of this blog is working together to expose and resist them.  There are some rules and they have served well to keep this blog from suffering the fate of others I've been on.  Those rules should not be lightened to provide some sort of "balance".

by ArchaeoBob on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 11:06:14 PM EST
Parent

Cross Examination (none / 0)
Even in the most Dominionist church they consider themselves to have their disagreements, but only within the most narrow confines. This means that they dont really allow discussion.  

Well, people are allowed to have their churches (and their websites) however they wish. Churches have something like a "terms of service' restriction and dont appreciate when people try to go beyond that.

Even the most open church will not allow all forms of disagreement to be expressed at all times. It would be impossible to function. I grant that.

The stated purpose of this website is to 'expose and resist', and ArchaeoBob expresses that it cannot function if close questioning is permitted.

The problem is still one of function. If you need a place to meet that is your own, with no need for iron to sharpen your iron, then this website functions well. However, if you want to convince others, the current set up might not be optimal for that function. A closed system might keep the believers happy, but it doesnt reach out very well. Because nothing convinces better than an open, polite, frank discussion.

I appreciate your problem of maintaining order and control, but i also appreciate why many people wouldnt trust your website and want to label it a 'Conspiracy website'.

I dont know how you can gain wider appeal without losing the safe meeting place that you currently have.

 

by TheOther on Thu Nov 04, 2010 at 09:29:16 AM EST
Parent

I disagree (none / 0)
For one thing:

"Even the most open church will not allow all forms of disagreement to be expressed at all times. It would be impossible to function. I grant that."

There are churches where said disagreement is allowed, but they're run democratically and tolerance and acceptance are the bywords.  You have the right to air your differences, and I've seen some pretty strong arguments in the church.  Yeah, there are times where disagreements would not be aired (because there are times and places for that), but it's completely different from other churches I've been in - where most of the time you have to follow the party line (or be thrown out).

What isn't permitted in those churches is trying to force one's views or ideology on another.  Nothing will get you out on your ear faster than that.  The churches work well, and they are havens for people who have had their souls/minds/personhood wrecked by the Pentecostals/Dominionists/Fundamentalists.  Their structure and few strong rules (forcing of religion on another isn't allowed for instance) protects us from the people who harmed us in the first place, and keeps the church as a safe haven.  I haven't seen this function in any other church, and that's partially because they aren't aware of the danger (or don't care).

I might add that even a Pentecostal or Fundamentalist would be welcome, as long as they didn't try to force their ideology on the rest of us.  Sadly, that usually is the case.  In a few instances, they leave their former ideologies and are now long-time members of the church.

This is a relatively open blog in many ways, but there are things that are not allowed.  Openly supporting and defending the dominionists and their actions is one of them.  Supporting and defending or arguing their hot-button issues is another.  We are progressive and that's not going to change.  We oppose dominionism and that's not going to change.

I might add that from what I've read, the dominionist websites are at least a thousand times more strict than this one, and highly intolerant of anyone who doesn't pass muster.  I've heard of non-dominionists going to websites and when the people there just suspected that they haven't drunk the Kool-Aid, they threw them out and banned them.  Either you're one of them or you're out - and as some of us can testify, that is what they seek (and have done) in "real life" (as in trying to drive people out of their homes and neighborhoods, and harassing anyone who doesn't support their causes and actions).

I don't know you from Adam, but the very fact that you're here arguing for 'opening up' this blog to dominionists and discussion of their hot-button manipulation topics is in itself testimony that we're not closed to disagreement or discussion, UNLIKE THE DOMINIONISTS.  And we have valid reasons for the strong rules- again, the dominionists would destroy this blog if they could, and weakening the rules (and the enforcement of those rules) is what keeps this blog from being destroyed.  (I repeat- I've seen it happen before.)

(BTW- it seems to me that every once in a while we have someone who comes in here and tries to get us to lower our standards, so they can argue the 'hot button' topics and so on.  They invariably leave in frustration because they don't get their way.  I suspect that all of them were dominionist trolls whose goal was to try to destroy this blog.)

by ArchaeoBob on Thu Nov 04, 2010 at 11:06:35 AM EST
Parent

And by the way... (none / 0)
The topic of this thread is how to answer people who say "But it's a CHURCH, it can't be THAT BAD!" or something along those lines.  The thread topic is NOT "lowering standards to allow arguing the topics that are accepted as fact on this blog".


by ArchaeoBob on Thu Nov 04, 2010 at 11:11:17 AM EST
Parent


Message from the Management (none / 0)
People will try to stick nasty labels on this site no matter what our terms of service and site guidelines may be.  We are unconcerned and undeterred. We have addressed attacks on the integrity of the site from time to time, but mostly we ignore such distractions.

And by the way, the terms of service and site guidelines are not up for debate, and you are venturing into concern trolling.

"Remember that the statement of purpose and guidelines, and the decisions of the site owners, administrators or moderators are not up for discussion and debate on the site..."

Please stick to the subject, which is generally the religious right and what to do about it. If you have anything to say about those things, please do.

by Frederick Clarkson on Fri Nov 05, 2010 at 02:08:24 PM EST
Parent





On reporting hate crimes (none / 0)
If people dismiss Talk To Action as a "conspiracy site," I would suggest that you put together your own collection of the most dramatic primary source material you can find (e.g. mass media accounts of harassment by dominionist groups, plus statements by megachurch pastors and other NAR leaders themselves bragging about driving "witches" out of town) and refer people to that instead.  Then, refer people to Talk to Action for more information and updates only AFTER you've convinced them there is a problem.

As for the cops, I suspect there may be more going on than just simple disbelief.

The cops may be reluctant to investigate a church because the church may be politically connected.

Also, you may be up against a genuine First Amendment issue here.  Legally, cops are not supposed to begin any criminal investigation of any person or group based merely that person's stated beliefs -- even if those beliefs are decidedly antisocial.

I once ran into this roadblock in an entirely different context.  Back in 2003 or 2004, some friends and I happened to run into what appeared to be a child sex ring online.  When I called the FBI to report them, I had a hard time convincing the people at the FBI that I had good evidence that these people were committing actual crimes, as distinct from merely ADVOCATING pedophilia.  I was told that they are not allowed to investigate people merely because of what they advocate.

Obviously, this limits the ability of police departments and the FBI to investigate hate groups.  For that reason, most investigations of hate groups are done NOT by law enforcement agencies, but by private watch dog groups such as the ADL and the Southern Poverty Law Center, who then report to the police and/or FBI any solid evidence they encounter regarding hate crimes.

For this reason, I would suggest that you contact various anti-hate-crime watchdog groups, NOT the ACLU.  The ACLU does excellent work, but their mission is to stop cops from overstepping their constitutional bounds, NOT to encourage cops to be more aggressive about fighting crime of any kind.  So the ACLU will NOT be on your side in this particular issue.


by Diane Vera on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 08:39:43 AM EST

I would love to have that sort of info (none / 0)
If I could find that information without having to spend hours reading and compiling, I would be absolutely delighted.  Right now, I've got too many pans on the stove and even just plain blogging/commenting is somewhat deleterious and a bit of a distraction.

It's a fantastic idea.  In fact, it would make for a really effective online tool if there were such a webpage, that has just the evidence (and properly cited) - but without commentary.

(That would eliminate the "conspiracy site" claims that T2A regularly gets when I refer to articles here.)

by ArchaeoBob on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 10:23:45 AM EST
Parent



A difficult question I have asked myself too (none / 0)
I really don't have much of an answer for you. Just continue your education of the subject. otherwise they seem to be well hidden predators using our freedoms against us. It is difficult indeed to fight against this. You sound like you are outnumbered in enemy territory with no real help. My first thought is for you to move. It is difficult and in this economy impossible. I would recommend circumspection and vigilance considering your location. Semper vigilis

by Nightgaunt on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 02:25:57 AM EST

Question for thought and discussion | 14 comments (14 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.