As "This Week in God" settles in on Saturday mornings, the God Machine has plenty to offer again this week.
First up is a church-state case out of San Diego, where a 29-foot-high cross sits on a 14-foot pedestal on public land. The property was owned by the city, but Congress bought the space and declared it a war memorial a few years ago. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said the display violates the separation of church and state, but this week, the Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to overturn that ruling.
The federal government is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the case on the future of the Mount Soledad cross in La Jolla.
In a petition filed Monday with the high court, Justice Department lawyers said that a decision last year by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said the landmark was unconstitutional because it signified government support of a religion on public land, has to be reviewed.
The government argued the appeals court decision improperly nullified an official act of Congress and conflicts with recent Supreme Court decisions on the display of religious symbols on public property.
What strikes me as interesting about this is the larger political context: it's the Obama administration siding in support of religious activism, at a time when Republicans argue the Obama administration is waging a "war" on faith. Indeed, Steve Chapman recently explained that, GOP rhetoric notwithstanding, religious people "found Barack Obama and his Justice Department to be staunch allies."
As Chapman put it, "The president's detractors may continue to portray him as a secular fanatic with, as Rick Santorum claims, an 'overt hostility to faith in America.' Before they do, though, they might want to remember the Ten Commandments -- especially the one about bearing false witness."
Also from the God Machine this week:
* A Pennsylvania atheist group is under fire for racially-charged billboards in Harrisburg.
* The Catholic Church in Sacramento cut off funding for a homeless-services agency because its new director's supports Planned Parenthood and gay marriage. The agency, Francis House, is now relying on private donations, which have been generous in the wake of the church's decision (thanks to reader R.P. for the tip).
* In the week's most cringe-worthy religion story, radical TV preacher Pat Robertson shared his thoughts on whether oral sex within marriage is a sin. If you watch the clip, prepare to be uncomfortable.
Leave a Comment:
So "If you think it's a sin, then it's a sin" I had been led to believe that it's a sin if the religious right thinks it's a sin. Could free will actually be ok? Hold on Santorum, Pat Robertson said oral sex is ok if you think it's ok. Sounds as if a religious icon allows that birth control by nonmissionary position is a personal choice. I dare you to say Pat Robertson is wrong.
It's time the Left STOP ceding the ground of "religious activism" to the Right, which has perverted the New Covenant teachings of Jesus in order to trump them them with their Old Covenant and Epistles of Paul stone-age conception of God's teachings on the rest of us.
That includes their abusing the Constitution's "Free exercise of religion" Clause to cloak their agenda of foisting "FULL SPECTRUM DOMINION" over our bodies and minds and PRIVATIZE THE PUBLIC SPHERE (e.g., public schools, prisons, Social Security, Medicare, etc.).
For more, please see my Open Salon articles, (featuring clips from Rachel's shows).
http://open.salon.com/blog/ronrobinson/2011/08/02/crusader_christianity_tea_party_cult_the_left_wip
http://open.salon.com/blog/ronrobinson/2011/02/25/why_right-wing_christians_claim_obama_as_the_antichrist
Search for "bible" in this document.
Pat Robertson says other "very naughty things" should be legal.
The GOP seems to have found something that might get one of them elected.
Danger Danger Will Robinson!!
.....this sh@t is getting scarier by the minute......what's next?
And yet they really do't realize that they are making it up as they go along.
"Use your best judgement and study the matter, and use your best judgement to determine what is moral, and whatever seems the most moral option, ascribe that to God."
Really? Really!?!, and they argue, "no, no, no, we get all of our morality from the bible and from God." You don't, you've just been conditioned to give God all the credit.
And the Masochist said "Meow!"
There is no way I could tell the rest of the joke in here. But it is still relevant.
Pat Robertson thinks people could have prayed harder to stop the tornadoes in the south. He also insists that it's a FACT that Hatians made a pact with the Devil to get the French out (how could he know that?). I'm not sure I care what he thinks about oral sex. Maybe he's losing his marbles.
Maybe? I think the marble container is rapidly becomming MT
Scary thing, I agree with Pat Robertson. I think I need a drink. The message I got was that it's individual thought that matters. What the Republicans and the moralists don't get is ... you can't legislate thought!
shhhh Don't give the Republicans any more stupid ideas..
Viewing that clip did indeed make me uncomfortable. In fact, my sides are still splitting.
"cringe-worthy"? what's uncomfortable about either the question or the answer? well except for the woman acting like a jr high girl and giggling about it. perhaps you might try growing up some too.
Acting like a Junior High girl; I bet you *any* amount of money that chick's been on both sides of the oral sex practice.
And Pat's just jealous he hasn't.
That was an act...very bad acting I should add. That chic mostly likely has an extensive porn collection and a suitcase full of adult toys....Can't wait til her friends and past boyfriends / girlfriends "OUT HER".
what some people will do for a paycheck is amazing.....
Giggling and kicking the table nervously.
Thank you. I thought I was the only one.
Awkward? Clearly, but for heaven's sake... how could it NOT be on that show.
I expected far worse.
in other "twig" news with a bonus rachel maddow connection...
Suzi Parker
Junkyard Prophet, the Christian rap metal band from Minnesota, had some shocking words last week for a Dunkerton, Iowa, high school audience.
School administrators told local media that the group was supposed to talk about “bullying and making good choices.”
Instead, parents said, the band told girls in the audience that “they were going to have mud on their wedding dresses if they weren’t virgins.” In a break-out session for girls, the band told them to save themselves for their husbands and assume a submissive role in marriage. Then the girls were forced to chant a mantra about virginity.
Junkyard Prophet’s Facebook page links to two Christian groups – The Sons of Liberty and the nonprofit ministry You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International – both connected to Bradlee Dean, a minister who is also Junkyard Prophet’s drummer.
Last year, he sued NBC, MSNBC and Rachel Maddow for $50 million. He accused Maddow of defamation after she made what he called misleading statements on his views of gay rights and sharia law.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/post/christian-band-ignites-controversy/2012/03/13/gIQADEKN9R_blog.html?tid=pm_politics_pop
I've been reading Mad in America, which is a history of mental health in America. There was a portion on Eugenics, which was invented in this country. The idea here was about good, native born stock... I am starting to wonder if the War on Women is about keeping American filled with Americans. In the 1920s, immigration was a huge complaint, and the BIGGEST problem had by the believers in Eugenics was that immigrants reproduced at "alarming" rates. Middle and upper class Americans (most importantly "WASPs") were only having 1 to 2 children on average while immigrants (whose genetics were thought to be corrupt thus breeding mentally ill and criminals) were having 6 or more children. (the numbers may have been anecdotal, but during that era, facts weren't that important... kinda like the present day).
Fertility rates of native born Americans (meaning anyone here before 1970 having kids) is declining. It is predicted to continue declining until non-native births will outpace native births. So if women don't have access to abortion or contraception, the birth rate of native born children will increase instead of decline (or so is hoped) as long as we restrict immigration. The push may not necessarily take America back to the Stone Age, but a means to an end in keeping American genetics "pure".
Romania had a more severe problem with birth rates... and they enacted super-strict laws to boost their population. It looks as if we are headed down the same path and I have to wonder if its for similar reason...
But wait, there's more! In 2010, the Pew Foundation in this article http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/04/06/us-birth-rate-decline-lin... linked a decline in fertility and birth rate to the decline of the economy. This would make sense as the GOP has gone absolutely crazy with regulating women's bodies... and dismantling our rights. American women are terrorists bent on allowing the outsiders to get a strong foothold in our American gene pool while causing the economy to falter at the same time!!!!... sounds like a rational GOP narrative, huh?
hey, vaginaisnotadirtyword, you should tell Opra that. Or maybe change you name to va ja ja.
vagina. You REALLY stretch a point don't you? how ab out" murder: murder being illegal. is that ok ? Why don't YOU volonteer or actually become an abortion nurse or doctor. so you can help shred a fetus apart with forceps etc... ? And then suck the brains out of the scull. I would say that's a war on the unborn ( male AND female) . But I brand you a coward. because you won't do it. You'd sit back in your easy chair. and let others do the dirty work and claim it as " women's rights" to destroy an unborn child. It's laughable. Do you think you are also compassionate ?
Right far more compassionate to blow the brains out of an usher in church. Am I right? Far more courageous to kill or imprison people who do stuff you don't like, I guess.
In that case can I get the tax dollars I paid refunded that went into the Iraq War, and especially those spent paying Blackwater mercenaries who got 1 dollar blowjobs from children? And I want my tax dollars back that subsidies the gas and oil industry and that went to cover tax cuts for the wealthy and businesses that own factories and call centers over-seas.
If I can't have those tax dollars back, at least redirect them to public assistance for the poor and Planned Parenthood, so that women will not be denied the option of making heartbreaking decisions if they absolutely have to.
In short Jay, Its none of your goddamn business. Its not your life. You don't get a say. Because if I got a say, the world would be a far better place!
I've been reading Mad in America, which is a history of mental health in America. There was a portion on Eugenics, which was invented in this country. The idea here was about good, native born stock... I am starting to wonder if the War on Women is about keeping American filled with Americans. In the 1920s, immigration was a huge complaint, and the BIGGEST problem had by the believers in Eugenics was that immigrants reproduced at "alarming" rates. Middle and upper class Americans (most importantly "WASPs") were only having 1 to 2 children on average while immigrants (whose genetics were thought to be corrupt thus breeding mentally ill and criminals) were having 6 or more children. (the numbers may have been anecdotal, but during that era, facts weren't that important... kinda like the present day).
Fertility rates of native born Americans (meaning anyone here before 1970 having kids) is declining. It is predicted to continue declining until non-native births will outpace native births. So if women don't have access to abortion or contraception, the birth rate of native born children will increase instead of decline (or so is hoped) as long as we restrict immigration. The push may not necessarily take America back to the Stone Age, but a means to an end in keeping American genetics "pure".
Romania had a more severe problem with birth rates... and they enacted super-strict laws to boost their population. It looks as if we are headed down the same path and I have to wonder if its for similar reason...
But wait, there's more! In 2010, the Pew Foundation in this article http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/04/06/us-birth-rate-decline-lin... linked a decline in fertility and birth rate to the decline of the economy. This would make sense as the GOP has gone absolutely crazy with regulating women's bodies... and dismantling our rights. American women are terrorists bent on allowing the outsiders to get a strong foothold in our American gene pool while causing the economy to falter at the same time!!!!... sounds like a rational GOP narrative, huh?
in other "twig" news
Internal Komen documents reviewed by Reuters reveal the complicated relationship between the Komen Foundation and the Catholic church, which simultaneously contributes to the breast cancer charity and receives grants from it. In recent years, Komen has allocated at least $17.6 million of the donations it receives to U.S. Catholic universities, hospitals and charities.
Church opposition of Komen's longstanding ties to Planned Parenthood reached dramatic new proportions in 2011, when the 11 bishops who represent Ohio's 2.6 million Catholics announced a statewide policy banning church and parochial school donations to Komen.
Such pressure helped sway Komen's leadership to cut funding to Planned Parenthood, according to current and former Komen officials.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/15/us-usa-komen-catholic-idUSBRE82E12Q20120315
in other american catholic news, the war on obama continues
wapo:
Top U.S. Catholic bishops on Wednesday formally made their fight against a White House mandate for reproductive services the church’s top priority, saying “this struggle for religious freedom” demands their immediate attention.
The statement, issued by the leadership of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, came at the end of a closed, two-day meeting and as some close to the bishops say the men are concerned that their campaign is faltering in the public square.
Some longtime church-watchers said the bishops’ strong push into the public arena is a shift. During many other policy debates, they have been more divided but now perceive a genuine crisis, said Jim Towey, a former faith official under President George W. Bush and now president of the Catholic Ave Maria University. The Vatican’s years of promoting more conservative bishops have also resulted in a unified focus on issues including abortion and orthodox doctrine, he said.
“The bishops haven’t been in the rally business,” he said. “This is a dramatic difference from the past.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/catholic-bishops-say-fight-against-white-house-mandate-a-top-priority/2012/03/14/gIQAumB1CS_story.html?tid=pm_local_pop%20
As I understand Catholic teaching, any sexual activity that does not conclude with the sperm being deposited in the vagina is a sin. The Prime Directive at work here is that sex is for procreation - period, full stop.
This would make a certain widespread oral sexual practice sinful - under Catholic teaching. Remember, couples may not engage in activities that make procreation impossible.
I am not aware of any data on whether Catholic couples ignore this teaching as often as they ignore the Church's (related) teaching on birth control.
I hope that Rick Santorum will be sharing his viewpoint on this important topic.
I too wish to hear Rick Santorum's thoughts on oral sex, as well as Mitt Romney's. (Newt Gingrich, not so much.) Are there any more debates scheduled?
Yah, Greychin, that's what they taught me, too. With the extra added fillip that, if these 'guidelines' are disobeyed, immediate and AUTOMATIC EXCOMMUNICATION ensues on the disobeyer.
It's OK because nobody knows me and I'm not being prurient. We're practicing Roman Catholics, and we go to church as often as we can, except on Holy Days of Obligation which are mandatory.
We also go to confession. We have never EVER told a priest about our nightly sexual practices with one another, which are such that while we do have sex every night (sorry!) if we get laid more than once a week, for us that's a lot. None of the good Father's business, and anyway, sex (between married people, according to the Church itself) isn't a sin!
Now, when we get to Heaven we don't expect to hear any BS about 'our excommunicable sexual practices'. Because, then, we'd simply have to tell St. Peter: "OK, point us to where people DO have sex a lot, cause that's definitely US. And also where we can confess our sins--(of which we do NOT consider ANY of our sexual practices, to be).
"There must be a LOT of priests who diddled little boys, in this new place, so I know that we won't lack for PRIESTS TO WHOM WE CAN CONFESS!!!!"
I was once very surprised to learn that female organism during sex within marriage was considered a sin by the Catholic Church. Wonder if Santorum's wife goes along?
In reply to jjm-3261835: So when is the woman's orgasm permissible in the RC church?
This really gets me about those that are claiming that President Obama is a Muslim and that he's waging a war on religion.Where do these people get off telling these lies. What makes them think that they have the right to judge someone, by the color of their skin,ethnic background,sex,physical or mental disability, religion or otherwise. Racism, bigotry, and standing in judgement of others is not Christ like, last time i knew God doesn't condone this type of behavior.
I never thought I'd be supporting what Pat has to say, but the nominee debates make me more uncomfortable than that clip did. Why are people asking Pat for salvation in order to enjoy intimacy? It sounds almost as if Pat is suggesting a separation between church and bedroom. Solid advice from him again though, this one not as big as his recommended repeal of prohibition earlier this week, acknowledging the drug war just doesn't work and makes things worse.
You should see the Daily Show episode where Jon Stewart talks about how Pat Robertson seems to be gaining his marbles in old age instead of losing them. Very funny.
So when are the tealiban going to demand the crosses be removed and replaced with something else at Arlington?
I was surprised at Robertson's response that it was ok if you think it's ok. That wasn't at all the response I was expecting. Now we have to go to other members of the right wing contingent and ask them if they agree, Richard Santorum, thinking of you.
Did Robertson's comments - as mealymouthed as they were - support some kind of situational ethics? And doesn't that run absolutely counter to the (im)moral (non)majority's fundamentalist foundation? I fairly swoon ....
I believe his philosophy could be more accurately described as, "if it feels good, do it." Makes me think he may have personal motives for wanting to legalize marijuana. Get a haircut, Robertson, ya hippie freak.
You sound pretty judgmental "hellslittlestangel"! Making statements like "hippie freak". What is it you are against? What are you for?
That's my impression too, WisKoda. He's sounding an awful lot like a moral relativist. Maybe Newt--who claims to be an absolutist--should be asked to weigh in.
"The government argued the appeals court decision improperly nullified an official act of Congress and conflicts with recent Supreme Court decisions on the display of religious symbols on public property."
If an official act of Congress conflicts with the first amendment, then the first amendment takes priority, not the act of Congress. And if the SC decides that the first amendment is null and void, the SC loses. Having a huge cross on public property without a doubt is crossing the line and shows that the US officially favors christianity.
This isn't the only time that Obama has been less than eager to stand by the separation between church and state. He promised to ensure that taxpayer funds would not be used to discriminate against members of different religious groups in faith based funding, and then he forgot all about his promises.
Pat's response on oral sex in conjunction with his recent statement about marijuana decriminalization make me wonder if he's becoming less able to engage his long-held biases before speaking anymore! Perhaps somebody should ask if he now holds more libertarian views about homosexuality as well. Pat's aging brain appears to be a kinder, gentler (if more addled) thing.
This Week in Gods: Islam and the Future of Liberalism by Sam Harris.
Week in God on Saturdays a good move. Does not have to compete with Week in Geek which I love. A Place for Everything and Everything in its Place!
http://www.facebook.com/SeparateChurchState
for additional topic content
Sounds to me like he not only approves of legalizing marijuana but has been smoking it and is beginning to mellow out. It's about time. :-)
Next week, Pat Robertson advocates naked skydiving...
Why do people try to blend religion, sexuality and being an American. The 3 don't always mix the same for everyone. They are kept separate for that reason. That's why people don't have sex during church services during voting.
Institutionalized religious direction and supervision of procreation and voting: They're gonna have a tough time figuring out the legislative mandates and logistics on that one under privacy laws. We should probably stop them before they get too far along.
Obama once more is bullied into turning to the right and away from the constitution. That monstrosity of a cross was blatantly anti-separation and the fight to keep it is offensive to any true American.
I recall both the personal experience and oral history which reflects a heavy involvement of the senses (dancing) in tandem with the purpose of gaining as intimate a perspective with the deity (ies) as possible (exhaustion collapse) .
A collapsed group of frenzied celebrants cannot be easily be detached from the necessary physical investment leading to the most holy of swoons . If you try to remove an outlet that sanctifies the agony that is found in examining what is required to exist , you may soon discover the drums are where the voting happens .
I don't see how there can be a "Special" reserved place for articles having to do with Religion, after dealing with Rick Santorum and the radical conservatives all week.
How are we supposed to come off a week talking about Rush Limbaugh, Sexual Morality, Unesco losing funding because of recognition of Palestine, Warmongering with Iran, deaths from the burning of qurans in afghanistan, a texas man being murdered for being an atheist, and yet another poll about how a large percentage of the bible belt thinks the President is a Muslim,
and then say "Okay, now we're going to take a break and talk about the crazy religious stuff of the week."
Sin is by definition doing something against God's revealed will.
In the Old Testament, I can't recall ANYTHING about oral sex, and there's certainly nothing about it in the New Testament, so ... it's *NOT* a sin, however much some might want it to be.
Furthermore, Hebrews 13:4 says the bed is undefiled, it doesn't place any restrictions on what happens in it. And while I personally find the thot "Icky", I'd like to see Mr. Robertson questioned on his thots about anal sex. That ... I think I would pay to see.