Politics Plus

Here’s the official version of the story.

But on the first day of the week at early dawn they went to the tomb, taking the spices they had prepared. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they went in, they didn’t find the body of the Lord Jesus. While they were puzzling over this, two men in dazzling robes suddenly stood beside them. Because the women were terrified and were bowing their faces to the ground, the men asked them, "Why are you looking among the dead for someone who is living? He is not here but has been raised. Remember what he told you while he was still in Galilee, ‘the Son of Man must be handed over to sinful men, be crucified, and rise on the third day.’" Then they remembered his words.

They returned from the tomb and reported all these things to the eleven and all the others. The women who told the apostles about it were Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and some others. But these words seemed nonsense to them, and they wouldn’t believe them. Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. He stooped down and saw only the linen cloths. Then he went home wondering about what had happened.

[Luke 24:1-12 ISV]

Is it true?  That depends on how you define truth.  If by truth, we mean historical truth, we have eye-witness testimony that it is.  But, as someone who works with prisoners, I know that eye-witness testimony is often colored by attitude and not always reliable.  Can I prove that Jesus rose from the dead? Absolutely not.  It is impossible for me to know for a logical certainty that it happened as described.  However, historical truth is not the only kind.  If it is not historical truth, it is mythical truth.  Whether or not Jesus physically survived the tomb, the religious right of his day failed to accomplish their goal for having him killed, because his revolutionary teaching did survive, and that teaching changed the world.  Millions around the world today claim Christian faith, including me.  However we do not all believe the same things.

For me, faith is a completely individual thing.  It empowers me to act out the compassion, generosity, concern for the less fortunate, and love of others that he taught.  It leads me to acceptance of the beliefs of those who disagree with me.  I am a better person for having it.  I believe that God honors all faith, provided that faith is authentic.  If you are a Buddhist, a Hindu, a Jew, a Muslim, a Native American, a Wiccan, or whatever, I believe that God honors your faith.  That also applies to Atheism, because that belief requires the most faith of all.

I thoroughly enjoy discussing faith, even with people who disagree.  I have no problem with people who share their faith, as long as they are not proselytizing.  I would not try to impose my faith on you, nor would I ridicule your faith.  I take offense when people try to impose their faith on me or ridicule mine.  When I rail against the American Taliban, it is not their faith I find objectionable.  It’s their behavior.

Individuals have faith.  Nations do not.  Theocratic nations are the most unhealthy for faith, because beliefs imposed from outside are not authentic.

That is the problem we face in the US.  Some in our nation wish to impose their dogma on all of us through force of law.  I oppose such theocracy.  Our founding fathers showed genuine wisdom by inserting the establishment clause in the First Amendment forbidding the government from interfering with the faith of individuals and from preferring one religion over another, thus establishing the principle of the separation of church and state.  Theocrats keep trying to dig under that wall of separation, but experience teaches us that whenever they do, the results are bad for America.

Here are three examples of what I mean.

…Terri Schiavo entered a vegetative state in 1990 after adopting an "iced tea diet" (related to her bulimia), resulting in a disastrous potassium deficiency that caused irreversible brain damage. In this persistent vegetative state she remained the last fifteen years of her life, neurological tests indicating that her cerebral cortex was principally liquid.

Both Schiavo’s doctors and her court-appointed doctors expressed the opinion that there existed no hope of rehabilitation. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, stated that it was his wife’s wish that she not be kept alive through unnatural, mechanical means. Michael Schiavo wanted life support (her feeding tube) removed, after which Terri would slowly die of malnutrition and dehydration. By this time Michael had taken a new lover, but refused to divorce Terri, as doing so would have forfeited his right to determine her care.

More than twenty times the Schiavo case was heard in Florida courts. Every time, the court ruled that the decision was her husband’s to make, upholding the sanctity of marriage long respected by legal precedent. Schiavo’s parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, refused to accept this verdict, feeling in their hearts that their daughter would somehow recover. Of this struggle, Schiavo’s attorney, George Felos told the Associated Press, "The real grievance is not they [the Schindlers] did not have a day in court, that they did not have due process. The real grievance is they disagree with the result."

The Schindler family videotaped Schiavo for extended periods of time, discarding nearly all of the footage, and prepared a short but disingenuous "highlight" video featuring only the occasional moments when her facial expression looked vaguely like a smile, or when family members were posing where Schiavo seemed to be staring, giving the illusion of "eye contact."

In 2003, a court-appointed guardian for Schiavo wrote that during the protracted legal struggle, her parents had "voiced the disturbing belief that they would keep Terri alive at any and all costs", even if that required amputation of her limbs. "As part of the hypothetical presented", the guardian’s report stated, "Schindler family members stated that even if Terri had told them of her intention to have artificial nutrition withdrawn, they would not do it."

Politicians inserted themselves into the fray. The case was the catalyst for Florida’s controversial "Terri’s Law", which gave Gov. Jeb Bush the authority to have Schiavo’s feeding tube re-inserted when a court ruled that her husband could have it removed. It was a tremendously sad family situation, undoubtedly painful for everyone involved (except, of course, the vegetable Terri Schiavo).

This circus continued for years, co-opted by the pro-life movement. Many who never met Terri Schiavo argued passionately about her fate, protested court decisions, published newsletters or websites. Among the loudest hysterics, many argued in a fundamentally dishonest way, using tactics such as referring to Schiavo as Terri Schindler (maiden name), or Terri Schiavo-Schindler (a form she never used).

Terri’s doctors opinion was that Schiavo’s coma had been caused by a potassium imbalance triggered by her bulimia. Nutball "save Terri" activists knew better, and claimed she suffered a violent beating at her husband’s hand. Her parents eventually agreed, and said that her husband often beat Schiavo when she was healthy — but Schiavo never called the police, apparently never mentioned it to anyone, and her parents never mentioned it either until years after Schiavo was hospitalized. There is no evidence to support such claims.

As the insanity moved to the federal level, Schiavo’s feeding tube was finally removed on March 18, 2005, and her heart stopped beating 13 days later. The Schindlers claimed that as the tube was withdrawn, Schiavo blurted, "I want to live!" But just this once, they had apparently forgotten to bring the video camera.

The U.S. Congress quickly passed legislation allowing federal courts to intervene, and President George W. Bush flew back to Washington to sign the bill into law. It should be noticed that this is the same George W. Bush who, as Governor of Texas, signed into state law the power of hospitals to remove a patient (in identical situations as Terri’s) from life support — a critical factor being the family’s ability to pay the hospital bills — even if such removal was against the family’s objections.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay lied for national newscasts that Schiavo "talks and she laughs, and she expresses happiness and discomfort… It won’t take a miracle to help Terri Schiavo; it will only take the medical care and therapy that all patients deserve." But in 1988, DeLay had concurred in his own family’s decision to withhold care for his comatose father.

In a final postscript to Schiavo’s short life, the autopsy conducted after her death established that her brain damage was even worse than experts had said while she was alive, and that virtually everything the "save Terri" activists had said was incorrect. Schiavo’s brain weighed about half what a healthy human brain weighs, damage that left her unable to think, feel, see, or interact in any way with her environment. There was no chance she could have recovered, and no evidence she had ever been abused…

Inserted from <nndb.com>

Those politicians who tried to impose their religion upon Terry’s husband extended the grief of the family and wasted congressional and judicial resources that should have been used elsewhere.  The hypocrisy that Bush interrupted his vacation and flew to Washington to come between a patient and doctor, when he refused to do so, while New Orleans drowned, still amazes me.

Today [April 1], Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed complaints with the Senate Ethics Committee and the House Office of Congressional Ethics against members of Congress who reside or have resided at the C Street House, alleging they paid below market rent in violation of congressional gift rules.

CREW’s complaints name Senators Sam Brownback (R-KS), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Jim DeMint (R-SC), and John Ensign (R-NV), as well as Representatives Mike Doyle (D-PA), Heath Shuler (D-NC), Bart Stupak (D-MI) and Zach Wamp (R-TN) as members of Congress who received improper gifts from C Street Center, Inc., the entity that runs the house and is affiliated with the Fellowship, a shadowy religious organization.

Recent press accounts indicate that members of Congress who live in the house pay $950 per month in return for lodging and housekeeping services. Meals may also be available at an unknown extra cost.

Earlier in the week, Clergy VOICE, a group of clergy from various religious traditions, filed a complaint with the IRS asking for an investigation into the tax implications of accepting lodging at the C Street House. The group surveyed the Capitol Hill rental market and discovered that nearby hotels charge a minimum of $2,400 per month, corporate housing costs a minimum of $4,000 per month and efficiency or one bedroom apartments typically go for at least $1,700 per month. None of these rates include any meals.

The House and Senate gift rules specifically include “lodging” as a prohibited gift. There are only two exceptions to the ban on accepting lodging: if it is provided by an individual based on personal friendship, or if it is hospitality in a personal residence owned by an individual. Here, because a corporate entity – C Street Center, Inc. – owns the property, neither exception applies. In addition, members may not accept gifts offered to members of Congress because of their official positions. As only members of Congress appear to live in the C Street House, it seems likely that it is because of their positions that they are permitted to live there and are offered below market rent.

CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan stated, “At a time when so many Americans are losing their housing it is surprising to discover that some members of Congress are lucky enough to have a landlord that charges below market rent for fairly luxurious accommodations – and offers housekeeping and meal service to boot.” Sloan continued, “Rarely does someone – particularly a member of Congress – receive something for nothing, so you can’t help but wonder exactly what these members may be doing in return for all of this largess. Of course, this is the reason the gift ban was enacted in the first place. This situation cries out for an immediate ethics inquiry.”…

Inserted from <CREW>

The Family made the passage of health care reform far more difficult and weakened the final bill through their attempts to impose their religious beliefs as legislation.  And this does not even touch on their religious assault on the LGBT community and attempts to put them to dealt in Africa.  If they has their way, the Spanish Inquisition would be reborn on US soil.

…President George Bush has claimed he was told by God to invade Iraq and attack Osama bin Laden’s stronghold of Afghanistan as part of a divine mission to bring peace to the Middle East, security for Israel, and a state for the Palestinians.

The President made the assertion during his first meeting with Palestinian leaders in June 2003, according to a BBC series which will be broadcast this month.

The revelation comes after Mr Bush launched an impassioned attack yesterday in Washington on Islamic militants, likening their ideology to that of Communism, and accusing them of seeking to "enslave whole nations" and set up a radical Islamic empire "that spans from Spain to Indonesia". In the programmeElusive [sic] Peace: Israel and the Arabs, which starts on Monday, the former Palestinian foreign minister Nabil Shaath says Mr Bush told him and Mahmoud Abbas, former prime minister and now Palestinian President: "I’m driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, ‘George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan.’ And I did, and then God would tell me, ‘George go and end the tyranny in Iraq,’ and I did."

And "now again", Mr Bush is quoted as telling the two, "I feel God’s words coming to me: ‘Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East.’ And by God, I’m gonna do it."

Mr Abbas remembers how the US President told him he had a "moral and religious obligation" to act. The White House has refused to comment on what it terms a private conversation. But the BBC account is anything but implausible, given how throughout his presidency Mr Bush, a born-again Christian, has never hidden the importance of his faith.

From the outset he has couched the "global war on terror" in quasi-religious terms, as a struggle between good and evil. Al-Qa’ida terrorists are routinely described as evil-doers. For Mr Bush, the invasion of Iraq has always been part of the struggle against terrorism, and he appears to see himself as the executor of the divine will…

Inserted from <The Independent>

This example is the most egregious of all, because thousands of US troops died, thousands more were wounded, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died, the country was trashed, and we spent $billions, all because theocrats gained control of our government and instituted a jihad.

Faith needs to be personal, as I said.  Jesus opposed theocracy as well.  Although the Roman Empire was a dictatorship, they administered Judea locally as a theocracy.  Here is what Jesus had to say about that.

"How terrible it will be for you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! For you give a tenth of your mint, dill, and cummin, but have neglected the more important matters of the law: justice, mercy, and faithfulness. These are the things you should have practiced, without neglecting the others. You blind guides! You filter out a gnat, yet swallow a camel! "How terrible it will be for you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and the plate, but on the inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. You blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup, so that its outside may also be clean. "How terrible it will be for you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs that look beautiful on the outside but inside are full of dead people’s bones and every kind of impurity. In the same way, on the outside you look righteous to people, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.

[Matthew 23:23-28, NIV]

He could have just as easily been speaking to today’s religious right theocrats.  They have embraced the role played by the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Scribes of his day.  Because Jesus opposed them, I consider it my Christian obligation to oppose them as well.

Whatever your faith, may your Easter be filled with good things, kind thoughts and happy memories.

I am submitting this article to the Blogswarm Against Theocracy.