Last night, after right wingnut republicans in the Missouri Senate refused to confirm Governor Mike Parson’s (r) nominee as Director of the Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS) – during a pandemic:
Governor Mike Parson @GovParsonMO
Missourians know that I share these beliefs and would not have nominated someone who does not share the same Christian values. Yet, Senators chose to believe baseless rumors and outright lies on social media rather than the facts in front of them. 6:02 PM · Feb 1, 2022
“Missourians know that I share these beliefs and would not have nominated someone who does not share the same Christian values…”
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
….that no person shall, on account of his or her religious persuasion or belief, be rendered ineligible to any public office or trust or profit in this state, be disqualified from testifying or serving as a juror, or be molested in his or her person or estate; that to secure a citizen’s right to acknowledge Almighty God according to the dictates of his or her own conscience, neither the state nor any of its political subdivisions shall establish any official religion….
That no person can be compelled to erect, support or attend any place or system of worship, or to maintain or support any priest, minister, preacher or teacher of any sect, church, creed or denomination of religion; but if any person shall voluntarily make a contract for any such object, he shall be held to the performance of the same.
It’s possible Mike Parson (r) has read the words. It’s clear he doesn’t comprehend them.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
Today, From Vicky Hartzler (r):
Rep. Vicky Hartzler @RepHartzler
On #ReligiousFreedomDay, we are grateful for our God-given rights to worship freely as our Founding Fathers intended.
Recent events have shown how important it is to preserve and protect these cherished freedoms. Coming together starts with our faith in God — not the government.
[….] 10:33 AM · Jan 16, 2021
“…Coming together starts with our faith in God — not the government.”
Some of the responses:
“Separation of church and state” was also a tenet the founding fathers believed in.
This is entirely unprofessional and insulting for you to say.
We need political leaders.
Not lap dogs for another organization that doesn’t pay taxes.
You need to resign if you can’t see that.
This is emphatically against the very idea of the US government in which religion – yours, mine, theirs – stays outside the halls of power. For shame.
Maybe you should go to seminary school rather than service in secular government.
Separation of church and state ….Sound familiar?
In case you missed it, Christians are ruining Christianity.
God didn’t give us the right of freedom of religion; our Constitution did. And if you think your religion is more important than our government, maybe you shouldn’t be an elected official.
Reminder, freedom of religion is indeed freedom from religion. Also our founding fathers wanted a secular government genius.
Ignorance runs pretty high on their side.
Did the fairies at the end of your garden tell you this ?
I assume you believe in fairies as well as God ?
Who’s religion? Gov does not belong in religion nor religion in government. The constitution already protects religion. We have seen politicians fail to protect the constitution when it failed to suit their needs. Protect the constitution first. Religious freedom follows
Because theocracies are such beacons of peace and freedom….
Freedom OF religion DOES include freedom FROM religion.
Jefferson stated it well to the Bey of Tripoli: We are not a Christian Nation.
The whole point of Religious Freedom Day is to be able to choose how or if you practice religion, not to push Christianity above other religions. What the actual hell is wrong with your brain?? Separation of Church and State happened for a reason
Umm our founding fathers came here to avoid having everybody under one religion. Maybe ,just a thought, you should try reading the constitution of the United States of America.
There have been recent events where Christianity was prohibited?
Yeah. By Evangelical churches, primarily… They violated the First Commandment and worship 45**
Millions of Americans do not want your religious ideologies anywhere near legislative decisions that affect our lives.
I don’t believe in your God. I also have the freedom the believe that.
Trying to further radicalize your base in the name of God. Smdh. You have no business holding a position in our government if you never learned about separation of church and state.
Would those be the recent events that Vicky helped spur on by casting doubt on Biden’s election win? The events that ended with a cop getting killed? Are those the recent events that we’re talking about?
Because I distinctly remember God saying something about not lying.
You need to re-read the founding documents of our nation because you have missed entirely the critical distinction of the separation between church and state. Your words and deeds are another reason to put Christ back in Christian not just Christmas.
Evangelicals never impose Christianity on themselves. Amirite, Vicky!
Great but January 17 is hereby declared as freedom from religion day.
Your last phrase sounds as if you think we all have to believe in God in order to find goodness and connection with our fellow human beings.
I’m sure you didn’t mean it that way. We don’t live in, nor want, a theocracy.
So you’re praising the founding fathers…while railing against the secular governing system they founded. WTAF. Conflicted much?
Are all your constituents Christian??
Free to resign.
Nope! The constitution is what rules America. And it says a separation of church & state.
Full stop
When will we be enlightened enough to have freedom from religion.
Freedom of religion also means freedom FROM religion.
Keep your “god” to yourself.
What about the freedom to not worship a god(s)? Some of us don’t and still feel unity with our fellow Americans. Coming together is based on our commitment to the ideals of country and Constitution.
Recent events and violence stoked by church leaders within the Christian Nationalist evangelical movement.
To hell with that.
So what you’re saying is that you’re not actually willing to abide by your oath of office?
There’s that.
Resign
Who’s god?
This is extremely dangerous rhetoric.
Keep YOUR religion out of my gov’t. Ya know, like the Constitution says
Vicky Hartzler voted against:
Restoring the Voting Rights Act
Providing disaster relief to Puerto Rico
Combating brutality and racial discrimination by police
Expanding ACA
Raising minimum wage to $15
She needs to get out of government so she can spend more time with her faith.
Oh put a sock in it, lady.
You version of Christianity is nothing like mine. In fact, your cult should have no say in our government.
What part of “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” do you not understand?
I am tired of hearing about your faith. Jesus this, Jesus that…you invoke his name to justify actions that are craven, down right depraved. And for what? What do you get out of it?
It’s disgusting. If you could feel shame you would.
The English Oxford Living Dictionariesdefines a fanatic as one who exhibits “excessive and single-minded zeal, especially for an extreme religious or political cause.”
So what’s a theocrat? According to Mirriam-Webster, it’s “one who rules in or lives under a theocratic form of government,” which is defined as “government of a state by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided.” In other words, a theocrat is a religious fanatic who wants to make sure we all defer to his God and jump to order when he legislates what he believes to be his God’s preferences.
An example of a wannabe theocrat here in Missouri is our current Attorney General and Republican Senatorial candidate, Josh Hawley.
Many have noticed that Hawley is just a bit uninspired when it comes to his regular duties as AG – such as fulfilling promises that he would fight against Jefferson City’s culture of corruption. But Hawley doesn’t always run on empty; what gets the the boy’s blood primed is any perceived slight to the power of the state to insist that we we all defer to his brand of Christianity.
Hawley calls it defending religious liberty. Others have pointed out his religious liberty amounts to repression and a license for bigotry. But judge for yourself; here’s a few examples of our AG’s religious crusades:
Hawley’s current bête noire is the Johnson Amendment which he wants to eliminate. so that churches can make official political endorsements and still retain tax-free status. He seems to believe that it violates his and like-minded folks religious liberty and freedom of speech if I, a nonbeliever, don’t have to subsidize their political views via a tax exemption for their politicized churches – a point of view, by the way, with which most Americans and numerous religious bodies disagree. And, of course, GOP candidates like Hawley are salivating over all the dark money that will be funneled into campaigns via donations to churches once the Johnson Amendment is history and the total politicization of religious life – along lines they favor – has been achieved.
Hawley, while running for AG, advocated for state legislation to “ensure that churches and businesses will not be compelled to “participate” in same-sex marriages” – a bit bizarre since the Fist Amendment clearly protects churches from such coercion already, and, since Missouri does not provide anti-discrimination protection for LGBT people, there could be no possible legal grounds to try to force the issue. He may have finally figured this out since, so far as I know, we’ve not heard about it since he won the AG race.
Hawley also claims credit for his somewhat nominal participation in the famous Hobby-Lobby case which gave “closely-held” businesses permission to refuse to provide their female employees with insurance that paid for birth-control if doing so clashed with the owners religious or “moral” beliefs.
He attributes his support for this decision to his belief that “abortion is not a right,”[… .] It is a violent act against the defenseless. It violates every principle of morality and should be barred by American law.” Immoral? Yes. Because Hawley’s believes his God says so.To hell with my God.
What are the implications for regular people if their AG – or, God forbid, their senator – is a religious zealot? Consider the following:
A 34-year-old painter is suing Dahled Up Construction, a company based south of Portland, Ore., for allegedly firing him after he refused to join a Christian Bible group for employees. [… .]
Coleman told The Washington Post that when he explained to the company’s owner, Joel Dahl, that he had different beliefs, Dahl said: “If you want to keep your job, everybody needs to attend. If not, I’m going to be forced to replace you.”
Where do you think AG Hawley would come down? Do you trust him to understand what we’re supposed to be in America? Theocrats want the power of a specific religion to be pervasive and all-encompassing – and bear in mind that the desire of persecuted religions – those not endorsed by the ruling theocrats – to escape theocratic rule is one of the reasons that our country exists.
Today, from Representative Vicky Hartzler (r), via Twitter:
Rep. Vicky Hartzler @RepHartzler
It was an honor to speak on behalf of religious freedom and Masterpiece Cake Shop’s Jack Phillips this morning at the #SCOTUS #JusticeforJack rally.
[….] 8:39 AM – 5 Dec 2017
Nice touch there, using an image of Martin Luther King, Jr. to promote bigotry.
And, of course, some of the responses do not disappoint:
I love her thoughtful, heartfelt canned auto replys…makes me feel so special & I know my voice is being heard! #sarcasm
You’re the worst Vicky Hartzler.
In which Rep Hartzler spends more time trying to legalize discrimination than she does having face-to-face meetings with her constituents.
You are a comically terrible representative for Missouri.
It would be great if you spent half as much time championing the Missourians you theoretically work for as you do a baker in Colorado.
How sad that you feel honored to defend hate! Your hate is not based on the teachings of Jesus. Sad.
You must not be a biblical scholar. It’s all there in the book of Republicanonican
I am. However, I thought this hate is found in the book of Midas. You know the one that says “blessed are the rich for they are rich and job givers and have paid their way into heaven.”
omg they’re using mlk to support discrimination i am screaming
Are you kidding me???
Yeah, we noticed that, too.
Don’t you dare use MLK’s photo in this bullshit.
A bigot surrounded by bigots. This is unamerican.
You’re Free to practice your religion but NOT to impose your religion on society [….]
1) your constituents are in MO-4
2) why do you support bigotry?
We get it, you’re a bigot.
Your bio says ‘serve the hardworking Missourians’. But just the straight ones, right?
It was an honor to be a bigot? Because that’s exactly what you are.
Vile woman.
I’ve got a new campaign slogan for you– Homophobic Hater Hartzler from Harrisonville! Why don’t you spend your time helping fellow Missourians instead of a gay hater in Colorado? I really resent you spending my tax dollars this way. You truly sicken me!!! NO Vicky in 2018
And Jesus wept! Do you support all religious freedoms or only those of Christianity? America is not just a Christian nation. Freedom of Religion is for all religions or those that choose not to believe.
Bigot!
It would be even better if you learned how to give a shit about America being destroyed from within by a Kremlin Puppet. But nooooo, gotta keep those fake Christian values front & center.
My other question is why are you out there with a homophobe when you should be at your job trying to help fix the tax bill?
Good question, but you didn’t really need to ask to get an answer.
Missourians who believe in live and let live when it comes to religion ought to know that Todd Akin, the GOP candidate for the Senate, is, theologically speaking, best buds with one David Barton. Barton is the founder of Wallbuilders, an organization that, as Wikipedia puts it, “advocates the view that U.S. constitutional separation of church and state is a myth.” Here’s a video of Akin and Barton discussing the obligation of religious leaders to speak out from the pulpit and lead their flocks on political matters:
This type of effort to shape political policy through the medium of fundamentalist Christian religion is typical of a strain of evangelical fundamentalism called “dominionism,” or Christian reconstructionism, which advocates for the establishment of a Christian theocratic government in the United States that would give religious institutions control over political, social and cultural life. (Sound like any other countries we know about? Perhaps Iran under the Imams or Afghanistan under the Taliban?) According to journalist Frederick Clarkson, under the dominionist/reconstructionist regime:
… society would feature a minimal national government, whose main function would be defense by the armed forces. No social services would be provided outside the church, which would be responsible for ‘health, education, and welfare.’ A radically unfettered capitalism (except in so far as it clashed with Biblical Law) would prevail. Society would return to the gold or silver standard or abolish paper money altogether. The public schools would be abolished. Government functions, including taxes, would be primarily at the county level.
Women would be relegated primarily to the home and home schools, and would be banned from government. Those qualified to vote or hold office would be limited to males from Biblically correct churches.
Take a look at the statements of a certain Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Missouri and tell me Todd Akin (oops!) isn’t toeing the reconstructionist line right down the road – at least to the extent that he can and still manage to get elected.
Barton’s styles himself an historian although he lacks the requisite academic credentials – he has a Bachelor’s degree in Christian Education. His contribution to the reconstructionist movement has been to lend it legitimacy by purporting to show that the Founders intended the United States to be a “Christian Nation” in the reconstructionist sense. His scholarship has been repeatedly debunked in academic venues which, of course, has had little effect on the true believers – such as Todd Akin – who continue to rely on his scholarly veneer to justify their authoritarian goals, as well the more run-of-the-mill, right-wing politicians who find his willingness to give a biblical luster to their corporatist goals exceedingly covenient.
Yesterday, however, NPR’s All Things Consideredaired a segment on Barton (worth listening to or reading in its entirety) that might help to shine a light on the pernicious nature of his undertaking and, at the same time, help to expose the squishy intellectual underpinnings of theocrats like Todd Akin. The program “fact-checked” Barton’s most quoted claims and found that they were almost all entirely unfounded. Further, they pointed out that his recent book, The Jefferson Lies, which was on the New York Times Best-Seller list, was withdrawn by its publisher because of the number of factual errors it contained.
All well and good, shining a light on charlatans is always helpful, but considerations of truth and real scholarship aside, it’s unlikely that Barton will see his influence diminished any time soon – he’s too useful to the right-wing. And that’s a bad thing since as John Fea, chairman of the History Department at evangelical Messiah College, and a fellow evangelical, pointed out during the NPR piece, Barton is a “danger because he’s using a skewed version of the past to shape the future.” Fea declared that Barton is:
… in this for activism, […]. He’s in this for policy. He’s in this to make changes to our culture.
And one of the tools reconstructionist activists like Barton will use to change our culture are simple souls like Rep. Akin – if they can keep him in Washington, that is.
Don’t get me wrong – politicians have a right to their religious beliefs, but not at the expense of our religious freedom – real religious freedom, not that self-indulgent, authoritarian crap coming from the Catholic Bishops and the “war on Christmas” fanatics these days, but the type of freedom that does not subject our children to Christian triumphalism in their schools, or the pretense that religious freedom amounts to trampling the rights of liberal Christians and non-Christians. David Barton’s lies aside, real historians agree that the Founders wanted us to have just that type of freedom.
