Article: Bush's Religion -- Theocracy in America

[treeskin]

Orignally from here.

Bush's Religion: The Push For Theocracy in America
April 22, 2004
Josh Rhoderick
What do you get when you cross Jerry Falwell with Bluto? One of two things: either a really lame toga party or His Holiness, President George W. Bush.

In March of 2003, United States Marines stationed in Iraq were given a pamphlet entitled, "A Christian's Duty." It was a small book of prayers that featured a tear-out section that soldiers were instructed to remove and mail to the White House as an affirmation of their prayers for George W. Bush. The pledge reportedly said: "I have committed to pray for you, your family, your staff and our troops during this time of uncertainty and tumult. May God's peace be your guide." In addition, there was a set of daily prayers intended for the President. Such as:

"Pray that the President and his advisers will seek God and his wisdom daily and not rely on their own understanding."

"Pray that the President and his advisers will be strong and courageous to do what is right regardless of critics."


Now I'm going to curse. If you are offended by such language, turn down your volume.

What the fuck, man? What the hell is going on in America? How did these arrogant zealot sons-of-bitches manage to get into office and what would it take to get rid of them? How dare they send such things to our troops? If anybody deserved a prayer, it was the soldiers who put life and limb in harm's way doing the President's bidding. What makes the White House so sure that all of the Marines were even Christian? Or that they even wanted to pray for Bush? Don't even give me that "There are no atheists in foxholes" bullshit. I served in the US Army and I am an atheist (actually, I would technically consider myself an agnostic because I think absolute certainty one way or the other is impossible, and therefore, absurd). Phew...Okay, I'm done. Now for the professional part.

Bush's religion is no secret, and the Republicans wouldn't want it to be. Karl Rove especially helped Bush to forge his image as a Christian crusader because America digs the idea; and when Americans dig something, they spend money on it, and in politics, where there's money, there's votes. Using religion as a tool for political control is nothing new. It's been done for milennia. It goes all the way back to Babylonian and Egyptian¹ empires, and surely even before.

Has President Bush used his religion as a tool in controlling public opinion? Definitely. It's almost a requirement today that our Presidents express some sort of Christian faith. It's amazing what the words "Jesus" and "God" can do for a politician. A leader could rape, pillage and kill thousands, but mention "God" and voila! much of the population would be lulled into complacency. Don't take my word for it though, just look at history: although terribly overused, the Crusades or the Inquisition are a good example of this.

Napoleon said it best: "Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet."

When I point this out to some people, however, they seem to think that such blatant abuses of religion aren't possible today. "Nuh uh," they tell me. "We're smarter than they was back then." No. We aren't. Our technology has increased and our encyclopedias have gotten thicker; but no, we aren't any smarter than we were then. We continue to be tricked, bribed, hustled and taken advantage of, just as we were thousands of years ago. So if we apply this logic to Bush, it's easy to see just how thin of line we walk when it comes to crossing the streams of religion and government.

Even in his inauguration speech he revealed to America his religious agenda:



"Abandonment and abuse are not acts of God, they are failures of love. And the proliferation of prisons, however necessary, is no substitute for hope and order in our souls."

"...compassion is the work of a nation, not just a government. And some needs and hurts are so deep they will only respond to a mentor's touch or a pastor's prayer. Church and charity, synagogue and mosque, lend our communities their humanity, and they will have an honoured place in our plans and laws."

"I can pledge our nation to a goal: When we see that wounded traveller on the road to Jericho, we will not pass to the other side."



Sound a bit overblown on the religious rhetoric? No? How's this for size?



"Successful societies guarantee religious liberty -- the right to serve and honor God without fear of persecution." -- From this speech.


Or this?



"This ideal of America is the hope of all mankind. That hope drew millions to this harbor. That hope still lights our way. And the light shines in the darkness. And the darkness will not overcome it." -- From this speech.


Consider Bush's latest comments at a news conference with Tony Blair on April 22nd:



"I do say that freedom is the Almighty's gift to every person. I also condition it by saying freedom is not America's gift to the world. It's much greater than that, of course."


Still not convinced?

How about Bush's use of the term "axis of evil" or when he mentions the struggle between good and evil? And he says good will prevail, as if "God" could simply be substituted for "good" and "Satan" for "evil", ba-da-bing!, we have a religious sermon on our hands.

President Bush uses the terms "evil," "light" and "darkness" as if we were in the middle of Mordor. Or maybe standing at the gates of Dante's Inferno. In such a world, this black and white, all or nothing, way of thinking is dangerous. Especially when the man who speaks or thinks such things is the most powerful leader in the world.

It'd be impossible for me to list all of Bush's evangelical references to God and Christianity in his speeches. Such an act would require far more time than I'm willing to commit. And that's even without getting into Bush's faith-based initiatives, and other co-mingling projects that he's been working on since he's been in office. Bush has also admitted in the past that he felt God wanted him to run for President, and that God ultimately granted him the Presidency (actually, George, I think that was the Supreme Court).

What scares me the most, though, is the idea that Bush was prompted to go to war with Iraq because of his religious convictions. While doing research for his latest book, Bob Woodward spoke with President Bush at length. Bush told Woodward that as he approached the final decision to go to war, "I was praying for strength to do the Lord's will ... I'm surely not going to justify war based on God. Understand that. Nevertheless, in my case I pray that I be as good a messenger of His will as possible."

So maybe you're still not convinced that we have a preacher for a President. That's fine, you're probably a Christian who supports the intermingling of Church and State. I can assure you this however, the two were separated for a purpose, and that purpose wasn't trivial. The separation wasn't just to protect the State from the Church, or the Church from the State, but to protect both from one another. When the two collide, as they are now doing in America, we see the breakdown of democracy and of the freedom of speech.

Why have so many Americans lost touch with what makes this country unique? Why are we stepping aside and allowing our religion to infiltrate our government?

There's absolutely nothing wrong with our President being religious. Furthermore, there's absolutely nothing wrong with our President choosing to have his religious beliefs influence his personal decisions. But let's not forget who this man is. It is absolutely unacceptable for this president, or for any president, to invoke God into policy. It is absolutely unacceptable to allow religion to influence the course of national or world politics. If so, why isn't there a huge uproar?

Maybe that's because America's prime religion is Christianty, and most well-meaning Christians see nothing wrong with a little sprinkle of Christian morality entering into the political pie. After all, if it's Christian, it has to be good, right?

That's the attitude that will bury us. There is something wrong with that, and the first step in understanding that comes when we begin to separate our society from our government. Sure, there's nothing wrong with Christian morality in our society. Hell, it may even be beneficial if all of these "Christians" started playing the part. But government is no place for religion. Never should we construct a steeple on the White House. The founders of this nation fled England to escape religious persecution and institutionalized religion, be it here or in England or in Iran, breeds persecution. All of those who aren't a member of the state religion become second-class citizens, as did the Protestant pilgrims who dared all to come to America.

I could spend hour upon hour, and page upon page, providing endless proof, warning and speculation about the entanglement of church and state, but I'd be writing nothing new. The information is out there for those who choose to acknowledge it. Unfortunately, much of America simply doesn't understand how dangerous of a crossroads we've reached. And if we end up being thrust into a makeshift theocracy, we'll all soon understand why the Founding Fathers were so adamant about the separation of church and state.

If you don't think we've reached that crossroads yet, just open your web browser: The Passion of the Christ, homosexual marriage, the pledge of allegience, Janet Jackson's breast, Howard Stern, the ten commandments monuments. All of these are issues on the front lines of a cultural war started by those who wish to transform our government into a theocracy of their own image; and no, that isn't an exaggeration. You see, many of them are too ignorant to recognize that a state sponsored religion equates to a theocracy. They simply don't see it. If prompted, many of them would say, "I don't want a theocracy, I just want a Christian government." That's just as bad as when the Professor told Gilligan: "We need to evacuate everyone immediately," and Gilligan replied, "Yeah, and we need to get everybody out, too."

So, to those of us who know better, consider this your warning. If you do not speak up, if you do not act, if you do not vote, if you do not do something, you will soon find yourself a second-class citizen. We can longer be complacent and apathetic. We must move to counter the religious radicals who've managed to put lady liberty in a chokehold.

So? What the hell are you waiting for?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¹In ancient Egypt, for example, Akhenaten was known as the Heretic King because he abandoned all of the traditional Egyptian gods in favor of one: Aten, the Sun God. Some claim this was done as a move to lessen the political power of the Egyptian Priests, although historians are in dispute about this. But I don't doubt that politics had something to do with it. Regardless, Akhentaten and his wife, Nefertiti, were hated all over Egypt for their blatant attempts to convert Egypt to monotheism. Then, about two decades after Akhenaten commenced the shift, he died. His successor, Tutankhaten then removed the "aten" from his name to reflect Egypt's change back to the old ways. He was then known as Tutankhamun or, as most of us know him, King Tut. This little bit of history is incredibly important because it illustrates two things: 1) religion plays an important role in the people's view of their leader, and 2) religion can be an instrumental tool in controlling public opinion.