Bulldog Alert! More fun with ChristianExodus
Yes, it is true, I just don't know if I can let this organization go without sinking my teeth into them any deeper. (And again, I want to stress that I like this org, and want them to hang around for years more, so that I have plenty of material for the future.)
Last time I mentioned a timeline. If you took a look at it, you know it is too easy a target. Have fun with it as a mental exercise, but I will leave it alone in all its grandstanding glory. What I want to look at is their "legal" Position Statement. The sheer zaniness of this is immediately clear for any first year law student, or any human with at least a semi-functioning brain.
First off, their intention:
ChristianExodus.org is an association of Christians who no longer wish to live under the unjust usurpation of powers by the federal government, and therefore resolves to formally disassociate itself from this tyrannical authority, and return to the model of governance of a constitutional republic. We seek a republican government constrained by constitutionally delegated powers. If this cannot be achieved within the United States, then we believe a
peaceful withdrawal from the union to be the last available remedy.
Ouch! Who knew that Interstates free of potholes was an abomination to God? Or maybe CEs Christians all are personally willing to donate their time charitably to pour concrete and build bridges in lieu of paying taxes.
South Carolina constitutional reforms:
ChristianExodus.org seeks to include many of our positions in a new constitution in South Carolina. For example, some constitutional guarantees ought to include the protection of human life at conception, the Ten Commandments as the foundation of law, the prohibition of any redefinition of marriage, and a strong reserve clause (reservation of undelegated powers to local government).
Yes, stoning to death any Muslim for the crime of believing in "other gods" sounds reasonable for a new "constitutional republic" as mandated by the first commandment of the venerable Ten Commandments.
Regarding the U.S. Constitution:
A simple distinction [between rights and privledges] can be made by asking oneself the question, "Is what I seek guaranteed to me by my Creator?" Some examples of rights include: life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, defense of private property, self-defense (bear arms), religious belief, etc.
God (the creator) granted the rights of liberty and religious belief? The authors of CE's position statement must have been on LSD when they wrote this. What did they sleep through their study of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, (Numbers), and Deuteronomy? All God did then (not to mention the next books regarding Israel's Judges and Kings) was kill outright all non-believers and those who chose liberty over complete submission to God.
And self defense? Well it is good to know that the Canaanites were morally right and the Hebrews were morally wrong, according to the master theologians of CE.
Then there's "pursuit of happiness".. Is not a gay man who pursues happiness a partaker of this right? Apparently, pursuit of happiness is just a euphemism for being utterly miserable.
Then there's the issue of private property. How much of the then Israel actually belonged to the Hebrews? If you were to bother to read the bible, you would learn that the answer is zero. It was all stolen via warfare and conquest. How can that be interpreted to mean a respect for private property? Just Askin'.
Next, there's this piece of excrement that defies all reason, either Christian pretzel logic or actual rationality:
ChristianExodus.org believes government may regulate behavior so long as the regulation does not violate unalienable rights of citizens. Legislation outlawing certain behaviors must reflect the will and values of the majority of the governed. It is within the unalienable rights of every community to define a set of behaviors that may be considered detrimental, unhealthy, unsafe, criminal, and undesirable for the community. To deny a community the right to govern such behaviors and reflect the values of the majority of its citizens is to impose tyrannical oppression on the community and deny its fundamental rights.
Someone explain to me how "pursuit of happiness" is an unalienable right, yet it can be limited by the whims of some (any) majority. I would really like to know how, if given the CE gets their society, that a Muslim majority moves into one Christian town, and votes to make Islam its official religion they could possibly complain? They could not, but you all know damn well they they would simply deny it. Try this mental experiment: Transplant Las Vegas to South Carolina. Now using CE's logic, they would, by their very own definition, be perfectly happy with that. This perfectly illustrates just how silly and dishonest they really are.
Notice how they twist 180 degrees what tyrannical oppression means. They say that a "majority" has the right to do anything they commonly vote (agree on) upon the minority -- yet that is somehow not tyranny. To them, tyranny means the minority having the right to live their lives in "the pursuit of happiness" in spite of the majority's wishes. Funny, I never before knew that oppression was the act of expressing the "unalienable rights" given by their God.
I really have to wonder how the leaders of CE would feel if America held a national referendum and the majority allowed abortion to continue. Would they issue a news release saying that they no longer considered abortion an issue, since America had spoken out against their position and drop it entirely as an issue. I really doubt it.
Their final statement on the purpose of government is the wackiest of all:
Government does not exist to redistribute wealth, to create means of production, to usurp the authority of the family, or to regulate the church. Moreover, the state's authority is subservient to the Creator's authority, and when in conflict, government must adjust its position to conform to God's natural law. This authority structure is imperative because should the state be considered supreme, our rights are no longer secure.
Pardon me here, but didn't their very own supreme dictator, Jesus Christ, state on more than one occasion that redistributing wealth was the moral thing to do? But don't take my word for it, take the Supreme Dictator's word on it: Luke 12:33, "Sell what you have and give alms; provide yourselves money bags which do not grow old, a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches nor moth destroys." Matthew 19:21 "Jesus said to him, 'If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.'"
I believe I can safely state that our rights are only no longer secure if these Christians gain control of our government.
Under the Status of Government banner, we have this jewel of compassion:
Americans have lost the ability to distinguish rights from privileges. American government routinely taxes the private property of producers and redistributes the revenue to individuals who have not earned it.
You see, the poor deserve the God-Given Right to live out on the street, starve and die of disease because the government has no right to supply these services. Only if the poor submit and give over their own personal religious beliefs to the Christian charities do they have the right to shelter, food and medical care.
Our federal government does not allow protection of the unalienable right to life of Americans in their mothers' wombs.
Here again we have the prime anti-abortion call. That being that a speck of cells (i.e. life just after conception) constitutes a full-fledged human being. I am not going to get into an abortion debate here, other than to say this: Considering the fact that there are many spontaneous abortions (fertilized eggs failing to implant in the womb) does that make God the biggest abortion doctor ever? Read the Pentateuch. God commands the killing of babies, pregnant women, and young children. Not even abortion doctors advocates this. Abortion is not only justified in the Bible, but intanticide, genocide, and general murder are advocated. At least we anti-bible types have better morals than the Judeo-Christian God.
American courts routinely violate the unalienable rights of individuals and communities to express their religious beliefs.
This is flat out false. No American (or any individual on American soil) has ever been denied their rights to religious freedom.. With the exception of Mormons who were told that they could not be polygamous. At least, according to CE, Utah should be allowed to return to their practice of polygamy since it would be voted so by the majority of its citizens. The problem with this is that it would invalidate their argument regarding "traditional marriage."
And next next:
The state of Massachusetts flagrantly declares that its authority is supreme to the Creator's when it redefines the God-ordained institution of marriage.
See above. God's institution of marriage is clearly laid out in the Old Testament. So just how many wives and concubines did David have, or Solomon? Oops! Traditional marriage isn't so traditional after all. And what about the "traditional" ban on interracial marriages throughout the South? Just what is a traditional marriage according to CE? I guess its all in what the current (non-traditional) thinking is. And what about the opinion of the majority? CE says that matters, but here they say it doesn't, their most recent concept of "tradition" is all that matters. I guess contradiction is a "right" to be written into CE's idea of their new Constitution.
Under the heading, "Intentions for Government" we find this gem:
Local government offers people choices and variety by way of easy relocation to a nearby community more in tune with their beliefs. Decentralized power promotes competition between communities that desire to attract new residents. That government is best which governs least and resides closest to the people.
That first sentence really is saying this, if your neighbors don't like you because you believe differently, then your only option is to uproot your family and move out. The fact that you have a job, friends, roots, means nothing, GET OUT! So what if you can't find a job in the community that does agree with your beliefs, that is YOUR FAULT!
The last sentence is the most absurd of all. It says that the absolute best government is no governement at all -- anarchy.
At no time in American jurisprudence has religious persecution been acceptable. Nor does ChristianExodus.org believe any tenets of the Christian faith promote persecution of other faiths. Our organization stands decidedly in favor of religious freedom and liberty for all human beings so long as their religious behaviors do not violate the God-given rights of others. Again, ChristianExodus.org will not support any efforts on the part of government to violate the unalienable right to freedom of religious belief. People of all faiths must have the same rights and freedoms guaranteed to them under law.
The only thing that can be said here is that honesty and straighforwardness are not values held CE. For they are giving religious freedom to all here (in violation of their other statments I have pointed out above) and yet also claim that the majority has the right to dictate morals. So what happens when a religion says that same-sex marriage is not only acceptable, but are performed under the auspices of the religious leaders. Then, by their claim here, same-sex marriage (i.e. their non-"traditional" marriage) would by default be acceptable to government.
ChristianExodus.org recognizes that homosexuality is an unhealthy, unsafe, detrimental behavior that affects all citizens in a community, not just the participants. Additionally, sexual conduct outside the bonds of marriage is not a God-given right. Therefore, homosexual activity is a behavior that a state may regulate and legislate against.
Of course, using this logic, then all pre-marrital and extra-marrital sex would also be illegal and punishable by jail time. Good luck funding all the jails that will be necessary to house everone who breaks that law without taxing residents. And to make this extra-silly, consider this: in violation of the no-redistribution of wealth via taxes, building jail cells and paying for food for the convicts would no be possible since those convicts should be paying their own way. This would turn convicts into forced laborers (i.e. slaves).
Furthermore, since homosexuality is not considered a sin by all Christian religions, then the religious freedom of those homosexuality-allowing Christians would have to be limited, in violation of the God-given right to religious freedom.
Religious displays in public:
Finally, a fundie Christian organization who says outright that atheism is not a religion!
Communities have a right to express values consistent with the majority of their citizens. This includes the public display of religious symbols such as crosses and the Ten Commandments. This communal right rests upon freedom of religious exercise and freedom of speech. However, there is no right to freedom from exposure to religious expression. To suggest otherwise would automatically negate and violate the unalienable rights of religious freedom and free speech. In other words, a religious minority in a community does not have a right to deny religious expression to the majority. As with all other communal decisions, the values and expressions of a community will inevitably result from popular will at the ballot box. If a religious minority does not like the decisions made by the majority, they may either relocate to another community or attempt to change the minds of the electorate and become the majority.
But it would be fun to watch all the CE members squirm under the blowback from their rules they set up. Imagine a Community taken over by CE later being re-taken by Catholics who then vote to place Mary statues and actual crucifixes (not crosses) all over town. And making "Hail Mary" the official prayer before all official government functions.
If public education exists, local control of education is paramount. Funding of local schools should come exclusively from local revenue. The local community alone should generate the policies and values expressed in schools.
Science and Math are right out the door. The Bible is God's science and math books. God set the value of pi=3.0. Man is the guilty party who redefined pi=3.14159.... CE's civil engineers will used only the God-ordained value of pi in their design of buildings and bridges. Biology and Medicine will become forbidden topics as God explained how to cure the sick and how all animals came to be and propagate.
Oh, and let's not forget literature. Instead of listing banned books, public schools will list acceptable books. Those books acceptable will be: The Bible and that is all.
Interests of minority in South Carolina:
If secession is effected in South Carolina, there will be a minority of unionists in the state. The under girding principle in a representative form of government is that majority rules. It then becomes the responsibility of the minority to relocate or change the policies of the state through the ballot box. It would be a great injustice to suggest that the preference of the minority ought to prevail over that of the majority.
In other words all minority only have the rights given them at the whim of the majority. If the majority deems that all members of the minority be rounded up and marked via tatoo and special clothing, to be later rounded up and placed in specialized "camps" that will be perfectly legal and acceptable to CE -- but only if the majority votes for it at the ballot box.
Religious tests for citizenship:
ChristianExodus.org does not desire the establishment of a theocracy where religious tests are required for citizenship. Also see our position on religious freedom above.
Exactly! CE does not desire a theocracy because a theocracy requires that God be the king of the government and its citizens, and CE knows that while God is king, he is not king of government. Or something like that. I certainly cannot figure out how making religious views and religiously-based morals the only law of the land is not defined as theocracy. I guess they can claim this because they want to write a direct violation of the Ten Commandments into their new Constitution, that being religious freedom and worshipping other gods.
We hold that the various States should repeal the 16th Amendment, which grants Congress the power to directly tax the people. Direct taxation of the people is contrary to the original intent of the Union and deprives the States of a powerful check on federal excess.
I guess that by this logic, then CE fully endorses the repeal of the 13th Amendment and a return to slavery as originally provisioned in the Constitution. This is to say nothing about the amendments allowing blacks, women and 18 year olds to vote. Since none of that was in the Constitution originally either.
Wouldn't that make a great recruitment advertisement for CE?? "Come join us in South Carolina. We plan to strip all women, blacks and 18 year olds of the right to vote. Oh and we're going to reinstitute slavery too!"
I really have to wonder who at Christian Exodus actually wrote all this garbage. I can only picture an inbred, home-schooled adult who was repeatedly dropped on their head as an infant. That seems to be the only way to produce a person so ignorant and illogical capable of writing this tripe.