Tuesday, September 26, 2023

Conservatives Are Not All Christians, So Please Stop Presuming It

This is an important article. American conservatives do need to recognize that there are irreligious conservatives too. I am one. And in that regard I am a fairly typical Australian conservative. Perhaps due to its convict origins, Australia is a dominantly irreligious place. Church attendance is around 20%, mostly Catholics and ethnics. So NEITHER side of politics is very likely to be religious.

And Australia manages to be a very civilized place nonetheless. One index of that may be that the homicide rate in Australia is less than one per 100,000 people. In the USA is over 6 per 100,000 people. Irreligious places can be pretty good. I am profoundly grateful for where I live

It happens so often that I am amazed when the contrary occurs. I am at a gathering of Republicans/Conservatives, and someone gives the benediction. This could happen at a luncheon, certainly at a dinner, and other types of gatherings. Usually, these prayers are only a couple of minutes in length. Then, after all has been said, the speaker adds a final sentence, “In Jesus’ name do we pray.”

Messaging Matters

I’m not the first to observe that Republicans and Conservatives have better programs and policies and a firm grasp of what actually helps the nation, but they have lousy messaging. The Democrats have harmful programs and policies but better messaging. They know how to twist and turn a phrase. Consider the difference between the terms “pro-abortion” and “pro-choice.”

When it comes to benedictions, conservatives can enhance their phrasing. Rebel is all you want, but citing the name of Jesus in the benediction is unnecessary. Once you say, “Heavenly Father,” or “God,” or “the Lord,” that is more than enough for a benediction in front of a group.

A benediction speaker once said, “In Jesus's name do I pray.” That, at the least, seems more appropriate than roping in the entire audience. Upon hearing such a closing statement, one might think, “Yes, I'm with you,” or “Fine, that is your prerogative.” Indeed, we are all for free speech. The last thing we want to do is squelch somebody else's speech. The Left shouts down conservative speakers, creates safe zones, and requires toeing the politically correct line. We're bigger than that.

Concurrently, it is vital to understand and acknowledge that many people at the political gatherings that you attend are NOT Christians. When you make the blanket and wrong assumption that all are Christians, your messaging is wrong and frankly unhelpful.

Who Might be a Republican?

For many years, I have been a greeter and foot traffic director for Wake County, NC, Republican primaries. With 100% assurance, I can tell you from personal experience that a significant sliver of those arriving are of Indian descent. Most Indians are Hindu, 79.8%, so the odds are Hindus attend GOP events. Muslims account for 14.2%, while Sikhs, Buddhists, Christians, and Jains largely account for the remaining six percent of Indians.

A notable number of Asians also attend in Wake County. The Chinese government recognizes five major religions: Buddhism, Catholicism, Daoism, Islam, and Protestantism. Other faiths are prohibited while often tolerated.

The majority of Jews are still staunchly Democrats for reasons that I’ll never understand. Right-leaning Jews are in attendance at conservation gatherings. The point is that the ties that unite us are our political views. We do not have to be of the same religion.

I am not a Christian, but I share many of the same values that they do. I'm not offended when a speaker, giving the benediction ends with “In Jesus’ name do we pray.” I am, however, dumbfounded that here, past mid-2023, the speaker and possibly the meeting host still do not understand their constituency. It’s as if they are merrily proceeding along with blinders. It makes me wonder: do they seek non-Christians, vote-wise as well as ideologically, or are they pushing some kind of doctrine? Politics based on religion, bordering on theocracy, is not pretty.

Unhelpful Presumptions

To presume that everyone in the room is a Christian or a devoted follower of Jesus is to make the same kind of error that the Left makes every waking moment. The Left paints a broad brush over their constituency, believing that every single one of them is pro-choice, hates Donald Trump, wants open borders around the clock, regards sexually grooming children as appropriate, and so on.

As conservatives, we should be smarter, more aware, and more ready to embrace those in our ranks who are not necessarily of the same religion but of the same politics.

I'm not spouting platitudes here, such as “diversity is our strength.” The issue is a call to fellow conservatives everywhere to recognize that our ranks contain people from different backgrounds and different walks of life. The sooner we embrace this notion, which is going to be impossible to ignore, the stronger we will be.


Can Trump get a fair trial?

You’d think by now that Trump would have assembled a crack legal team to fight off the avalanche of legal peril the Democrats are raining down on him. Yet you’d be wrong. Trump cannot get first-class lawyers, largely because of the seeming certainty of deep and serious legal, personal and career reprisals against lawyers who sign on to his team.

If you want a legal career, you can’t afford to work for Trump, that’s the message.

A Democrat-linked legal hit squad called ‘The 65 Project’ is largely to blame for what amounts to an attempt to deny Trump access to counsel, in the US this being a right that is even enshrined in the 6th Amendment. The 65 Project has personnel linked to the powerful Washington DC Democrat lawfare centre, Perkins Coie. Even Forbes, no Trump-supporting outlet, says the 65 Project is funded by ‘dark money’. And as you read this the 65 Project is seeking to disbar more than 100 lawyers in 26 states who worked on Trump post-election lawsuits. The two-year-old group, named after the number of Trump post-election lawsuits, has filed 79 ethics complaints, and while it claims to be bipartisan, it is reported no lawsuits have hit lawyers representing Democrats despite Democrats themselves questioning election results myriad times over the years including one Hillary Clinton. Managing director of the 65 Project Michael Teter explains this by saying in USA Today no one on the left manufactured facts in court to overturn an election. That’s his outlook in a nutshell. The crime, as the Babylon Bee puts it, is ‘Questioning Election Results while Not Being a Democrat’.

Notice that the 65 Project mission is couched in Orwellian nicespeak. They are ‘defending democracy’ and holding ‘Big Lie Lawyers accountable… so that lawyers, including public officials who subvert democracy, will be punished’. But the line between a frivolous lawsuit and a merely weak one is not always clear – in fact, lawsuits with little chance of success are a dime a dozen especially in the US where, uniquely, there is no costs rule so that losers pay two-thirds of the winners’ legal costs.

Put differently, and as the saying goes, the absence of evidence is not always evidence of absence. High-profile lawyer Alan Dershowitz, himself a Democrat, cuts to the chase over what he calls the ‘nefarious’ 65 Project: ‘It’s a tactic. People will not take on Trump-related cases. That’s the intention and that’s the result.’

Dershowitz himself was targeted after defending Trump against what he says was an ‘unconstitutional’ impeachment in 2020, and in 2023 Dershowitz wrote, in a paper entitled ‘Why Trump cannot get a top-tier lawyer’: ‘I was cancelled by my local library, community center and synagogue. Old friends refused to speak to me and threatened others who did. My wife, who disagreed with my decision to defend Trump, was also ostracised. There were physical threats to my safety.’ Most long-time Trump associates bear similar or worse scars, financial, emotional and career-affecting, of this vicious targeting; Roger Stone, John Eastman, Rudy Guiliani, Jenna Ellis, Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Steven Bannon, Peter Navarro and many more have all been dragged through the courts or are in the midst of financially ruinous lawfare. There is talk of personal harassment, nails in driveways, protesters outside lawyers and judges’ homes, as happened with the Supreme Court justices after the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

These sort of ad hominem attacks sure look to us like naked intimidation. And this in the same country in which, as a young lawyer, the future second president of the US, John Adams, served as a lawyer for the defence in the trial of eight British soldiers accused of murder during a riot in Boston on March 5, 1770. Adams and the other defence lawyers got all the soldiers acquitted but two who were given token sentences for manslaughter. Adams remained proud of upholding the presumption of innocence and right to counsel his whole life.

So as much as we are both the most pro-American non-Americans going, this politicisation of the lawyerly caste is way worse in the US than in the Westminster common law world. The US criminal justice system is bottom of the class, to be blunt.

Few lawyers can afford to challenge this formidable, if despicable, onslaught against a presidential candidate’s legal rights. The result is another stacked deck against Trump. Trump conservative, the influential Charlie Kirk of youth organisation Turning Point USA, said on a recent podcast: ‘If you talk to any sophisticated lawyer, Donald Trump’s team is made fun of constantly… in serious legal minds a better legal team could crush these indictments.’ That’s the point for these 65 Project Democrats, isn’t it? To get attorneys to walk away by threatening them with an ability to earn a living in the future and even to practise law.

It’s a dangerous game these partisan left-wing lawyers are playing. Public confidence in the legacy press has already cratered and, let’s be honest, it’s never been that high as regards lawyers. It took hundreds of years to build up the cab rank rule type thinking. It is crucial to a well-functioning legal system.


John Cusack says Democratic elite ‘sold out the working class for decades’: They’re ‘full of s—‘

John Cusack had some strong words for the Democratic Party elite, Monday, when he branded them as being “full of s—” and blasted them on social media for allegedly selling out the working class “for decades.”

“They have played a major part in creating the precise conditions for fascism to flourish – Obama corporatist democrats – are to the right of Richard Nixon on domestic policy – Don’t believe me – look it up – and Dems have sold out the working class for decades – and this kind of bought and paid-for betrayal of principals [sic], fairness – historical precedent -any sense of moral or intellectual honesty – The kind of brutal selfish horrific actions one only does – because they can get away with it,” he wrote in part on X, formerly Twitter, Monday.

The 57-year-old “Say Anything” and “High Fidelity” star’s lengthy post continued with a takedown of the party’s complacency with the wealthy, not-far-enough-left politics and neglecting certain principles.

He argued that the party elite’s trajectory has planted fertile ground for Republicans like Trump to win.

“All your Yale and Harvard buddies will tell you how great and smart you all are – and they are all in bed with all the same big , big money power players- And we run the world – right ? – this kind of staggering amoral bulls— is one of the main reason ( yes there are others ) Trump’s demagoguery works on people. The Democratic elite ARE full of s—,” he continued.

The lengthy statement came in response to an article from Jacobin Magazine which claimed some top Democrats seek to outlaw federal wealth taxes.

“Imagine what FDR would say about such a proposed law ?! Don’t worry fellas – the Democrats will save the .ooooooo1 % from paying tax – the hubris to do this – is staggering – it’s a sham and an insult to everyone’s basic intelligence – the contempt for people – To even attempt this … Unbelievable,” he continued.

He ended the spiel by accusing Obama’s famous “hope and change” slogan of becoming “another branded hustle.”

Cusack has been outspoken about his political stances in the past, slamming former President Donald Trump on multiple occasions, including by calling for an impeachment over his alleged mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Christian Bookstore Under Attack on Military Base

A small, family-owned Christian bookstore that operates inside the Fort Liberty Exchange mall is under attack from a hate group that claims the store's presence violates the U.S. Constitution, the Todd Starnes Show has learned.

Faith2Soar has operated in an Army and Air Force Exchange mall for the past eight months. Prior to that, the for-profit company ran kiosks on military bases.

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation, an activist group known for targeting Christian ministries operating on military bases, filed a complaint arguing that the store violated the so-called "separation of church and state."

“We have no trouble with any of these stores at all if they’re in some local mall. But it’s about the time, place and manner. This is on U.S. military property,” MRFF founder Mikey Weinstein told Military Times.

He claims he was alerted to the store’s existence when a soldier emailed about the bookstore “selling t-shirts reading ‘Salvation is Found in JESUS.'"

Imagine that. A Christian bookstore selling a t-shirt adorned with a Christian message.

Weinstein alleges that 211 Military Religious Freedom Foundation clients complained and out of those - 165 purported to be Christians. Smells like a lot of bull fertilizer to me.

He also claimed “the Constitution makes it clear that [the government] will not establish religion. This is the epitome of establishing religion, in a post exchange.” Again, not true.

First Liberty Institute, one of the nation's largest religious liberty law firms, is representing Faith2Soar.

“First Liberty is proud to stand with our client, Josh Creson, and his faith-based business," attorney Mike Berry told The Todd Starnes Radio Show. Berry is the law firm's senior counsel director of military affairs.

"The Army should simply ignore Mikey Weinstein and his hollow threats that have no basis in law or reality. This is exactly why Congress is considering a bill that would prohibit the military from wasting its time responding to Mikey Weinstein’s blatant religious hostility," he told me.

Weinstein, who has been incredibly successful at removing Nativity scenes and Bibles from POW/MIA tables, also took issue with products that he said promoted "Christian nationalism."

“It represents the heinously un-American, unconstitutional epitome of unlawful, ‘in-your-face’, fundamentalist Christian nationalism, triumphalism, exceptionalism, domination, bullying and supremacy,” Weinstein wrote in a letter to Lt. Gen. Christopher Donahue, the commanding general at Fort Liberty.

“The obvious COMMAND endorsement and favor of fundamentalist Christianity, to the exclusion of all other faith and non-faith traditions of your subordinate U.S. Army soldiers, by the Fort Liberty command structure is unmistakable, untenable, illegal, immoral, and unethical," he added.

Store owner Josh Creson told Military Times that mall officials officials met with him to look at the items in the store since Weinstein’s complaint. But no action has been taken.

“We’ve never been approached by anyone complaining about our presence here at all. We’ve received a tremendous amount of praise and appreciation from people saying they are so thankful we are here, but nothing ever negative,” Creson said.

Creson says he and his wife have been subjected to profane and threatening emails and telephone calls. In spite of that, he is calling on people to pray for "Mr. Weinstein and other angry people, some of which have sent some mean, expletive-laden messages and attacks, to come to know the goodness of God."

"We want nothing more than to serve, honor, and glorify God and to help our community in having access to Christian material," he wrote on the store's Facebook page.

Here's a thought. How about booting the godless heathens and keeping the bookstore?


My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs


1 comment:

ScienceABC123 said...

Funny thing, there is no "separation of church and state" in the US Constitution. There was, however, a separation of church and state clause in the former Soviet Union Constitution.