All about ideas…

Archive for the ‘Religion’ Category

Religious Right Leader Colson warns of Ayn Rand’s Negative Influence

with 8 comments

Given the growth in popularity of Ayn Rand’s philosophy among influential politicians such as Paul Ryan, John Campbell, Ron Paul and Ryan Paul, some Christian leaders are expressing their concern.

Religious Right leader Chuck Colson isn’t happy with the Ayn Rand retrospective. He made a two minute video attacking Rand and her devotees, deriding Rand as an anti-Christian atheist. “Not only should you stay away from the film,” Colson says, “you ought to stay away from anybody who wants to see the film, unless their interest is ironic.” Colson warns that Rand’s “patently anti-Christian ideas seem to be gaining steam” among conservatives, cautioning that her Objectivist philosophy is the “antithesis of Christianity” and that her followers are “undermining the Gospel”:

Mr. Colson wrote an article, expressing confusion on why any leader, especially one who describes himself as a Christian, would choose to follow Rand’s perverted philosophy.

What makes this newly-renewed regard especially troubling is that Rand’s worldview is explicitly anti-Christian. She once said she wanted to be known as “the greatest enemy of religion.” And when Rand said “religion” she meant Christianity, which she once called the “kindergarten of communism.”

For Rand the idea of God, as understood by Christianity, was “degrading to man.” According to her, the only god who can bring men peace and joy was not the great “i am” but “I.” Yet even some prominent Christians are being sucked in.

It shouldn’t surprise you to learn that her worldview, called Objectivism, which rejects love of God, has even less regard for love of neighbor. Jennifer Rubin, who wrote the definitive biography of Rand, says that “whereas traditional conservatism emphasized duties, responsibilities, and social interconnectedness, at the core” of Rand’s ideology “was a rejection of moral obligations to others.”

Thus, Rand could say that the world was “perishing from an orgy of self-sacrifice.” Not because it was true but because, for Rand, any regard for your neighbor was an offense against the only god who mattered: the self. How such a toxic idea can inspire “public service” is beyond me.

All of which makes the new respect for Rand, well, strange. There are better justifications for reducing the size and scope of government, ones that don’t sound like a scene from Lord of the Flies.[…]

We must re-build a culture of ethical behavior in America. And rejecting Rand and her odious philosophy is a very good place to start.

Additional reading: Ayn Rand: Goddess of the Great Recession


Written by Valerie Curl

May 11, 2011 at 4:03 PM

Remembering why they fell…

with 2 comments

Sixty-three years ago, on March 26, 1945, a young Jewish Rabbi with Fifth Marine Division at Iwo Jima gave an especially memorable memorial for the Division’s fallen comrades. This prayer made it into the Congressional Record, and now in this time, amongst all the heated rhetoric, repeating his majestic words seems only fitting. Here is just an excerpt and one upon which to give serious contemplation:

We dedicate ourselves, first to live together in peace the way they fought and are buried here in war. Here lie men who loved America because their ancestors generations ago helps in her founding, and other men who loved here with equal passion because they themselves or their own fathers escaped from oppression to her blessed shores. Here lie officers and men, Negroes and whites, rich men and poor… together. Here are Protestants, Catholics, and Jews… together. Here no man prefers another because of his faith or de­spises him because of his color. Here there are no quotas of how many from each group are admitted or allowed. Among these men is no discrimination. No prejudice. No hatred. Theirs is the highest and purest democracy. Any man among us, the living, who fails to understand that will thereby betray those who lie here dead. Whoever of us lifts his hand in hate against a brother, or thinks himself superior to those who happen to be in the minority, makes of this ceremony and of the bloody sacrifice it com­memorates, an empty, hollow mockery. To this, then, as our solemn, sacred duty, do we the living now dedicate ourselves: to the right of Protestants, Catholics, and Jews, of white men and Negroes alike, to enjoy the democracy for which all of them have here paid the price.

Written by Valerie Curl

August 24, 2010 at 1:39 PM

What would God say?

with one comment

A day or so I received this email regarding Glen Beck’s crusade against the “social justice” activities and pronouncements by Churches, Temples, Mosques and Synagogues. I’m proud to have joined the many thousands of people of all religions who spoke our religious teachings against Beck’s idiotic mouthings. I don’t know whether or not he believes what he says – certainly the Mormon Church to which Beck says he belongs does not agree with him – but he stains the true teachings of the three Abrahamic faiths and all others.

Last week in West Virginia, 29 coal miners were killed by an explosion of methane gas. The mine operator, Massey Energy Company, received 57 safety citations in March alone and workers had to evacuate three times in the last two months because of dangerous methane build-ups.

By nearly all accounts, the explosion was preventable. By nearly all accounts, the government agency responsible for preventing it has been rendered impotent. Enforcement mechanisms have been stripped to the point that Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis can simply state: “We don’t have the authority to shut down a mine as easily and as quickly as the public might think.”

We face a clear and urgent problem. The lives of American workers are in jeopardy. Diverse voices are clamoring for change. But not all. How did Tea Party leader Glenn Beck respond to this tragedy? Silence. The Tea Party is a movement ostensibly predicated on advocating for working Americans such as the miners. But when tragedy strikes, leaders like Glenn Beck have nothing to say.

The day following the mine disaster, Beck made no mention of the tragedy on his radio or television programs. He spent not a moment, not a syllable, addressing the corporate practices and regulatory failures that led to the immolation and suffocation of two dozen men a thousand feet underground. He focused instead on pillorying the Administration for their nuclear policy.

We must then ask: to what extent does Glenn Beck really care about solving the problems Americans face? It seems the answer is: little. He is more interested in providing scapegoats and straw men to those who might buy his books – scapegoats like our government and the agency that could have saved those lives. Sadly, so far, the Tea Party is following his lead.

We take a different approach. For 25 years, we’ve worked to create economic opportunity and security for all workers across this country. We support and partner with congregations, religious leaders, and institutions to develop and advocate for solutions that address the needs of Americans. We believe that social justice provides common ground across faith lines, and that, as I wrote in a post at the Washington Post’s On Faith blog, government must play a role in bolstering such efforts.

We stand resolutely in opposition to Beck’s implications that social justice is un-American and that the government shouldn’t be empowered. So, we’ve challenged him. Last week, you may have heard reference to us in an unexpected place: on Glenn Beck’s radio and television shows. (Here are the radio and television mentions in case Beck isn’t part of your regular media diet.)

Indeed, we made national news through our project Haik U Glenn Beck, a website that allows people to respond to Glenn Beck’s comments calling on people to leave churches involved in social justice work. The site, and our innovative “Twitterstorm” which flooded Glenn Beck with more than 3,000 haiku in support of social justice, generated dozens of headlines from USA Today, Huffington Post, and Washington Post to Boing Boing and Newsweek’s blog.

We designed Haik U Glenn Beck to provide an accessible platform for individuals to respond to Glenn Beck’s comments and views and to have some fun, using wit and satire – and thousands responded. Getting Beck’s attention is not the point or purpose of our efforts, but if it helps shift the national dialogue about the validity of his opinions, our efforts are worthwhile.

The government of the United States – constructed of, by, and for the people, as Lincoln so timelessly put it – plays a critical, irreplaceable, and often unseen role in our lives. It is not the cause of all of our problems. Blaming the government to sell books – that’s the problem. Pointing at scapegoats instead of solutions is the problem. We must step in where Beck and his peers step aside. How can we protect and improve the lives of American workers? We strengthen the movements and institutions that help people address the real problems they and their communities face, and advance strategies that will put our country back on track.

That’s what we do every day. As always, thank for your partnership in these efforts.


Simon Greer
President and CEO, Jewish Funds for Justice

*Jewish Funds for Justice

Written by Valerie Curl

April 16, 2010 at 8:41 AM

An Open Letter to Dr. Laura Schlesinger

with 6 comments

I picked the following up from Yves Smith’s Naked Capitalism blog. It was just too good to pass up.

Time for a change of pace. This came via e-mail from Marshall Auerback:

In her radio show, Dr. Laura Schlesinger (a popular conservative radio talk show host in the USA) said that homosexuality is an abomination according to the Bible Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr. Laura, and was attributed to a James M. Kauffman, Ed. D.

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination… end of

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God’s Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual unseemliness – Lev. 15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord – Lev. 1:9. The problem is my neighbours. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination – Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this? Are there ‘degrees’ of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really
necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev. 24:10-16. Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.

Your adoring fan,

James M. Kauffman, Ed. D.
Professor Emeritus Dept. of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education
University of Virginia

NOTE: A responder left this comment: Kaufman didn’t write it and no one really knows who did:

Written by Valerie Curl

March 25, 2010 at 7:15 PM

Posted in Religion

Is this the United States of America envisioned by Washington, Adams, Jefferson and Madison?

leave a comment »

Is this the kind of nation our forefathers pledged their lives, their sacred honor, and the fortunes for? I don’t know about your ancestors, but mine fled England and France to escape exactly what these “good” Christians are carrying out.

Christian Hate Group ‘Repent Amarillo’ Terrorizes Texas Town, Harassing Gays, Liberals, And Other ‘Sinners’

Hate Groups in America

An evangelical Christian hate group called “Repent Amarillo” is reportedly terrorizing the town of Amarillo, Texas. Repent fashions itself as a sort of militia and targets a wide range of community members they deem offensive to their theology: gays, liberal Christians, Muslims, environmentalists, breast cancer events that do not highlight abortion, Halloween, “spring break events,” and pornography shops. On its website, Repent has posted a “Warfare Map” of its enemies in town.

From the Texas Observer:

They’ve posted a “Warfare Map” on the group’s Web site. The map includes establishments like gay bars, strip clubs and porn shops, but also the Wildcat Bluff Nature Center. Repent believes the 600-acre prairie park’s Walmart-funded “Earth Circle,” used for lectures, is a Mecca for witches and pagans. Also on the list are The 806 coffeehouse (a hangout for artists and counterculture types), the Islamic Center of Amarillo (“Allah is a false god”), and “compromised churches” like Polk Street Methodist (gay-friendly).

As I’m preparing to leave the Grisham house, Russell announces that CNN has called and asked for a live interview. In January, Repent caused a stir when the group rolled out BoycottHouston.com, a Web site that urges economic sanctions against Houston because the mayor is gay and a large Planned Parenthood building is being built. In the Bible, Jesus commands his disciples to spread the good news of the gospel throughout the nations. It remains to be seen whether Pastor Grisham’s slightly less uplifting message will resonate outside the High Plains.

Regardless of the morality questions involved, one has to wonder why militia-clothed young men find it acceptable to run around any town, enforcing their will and ideas on other law biding citizens. I wonder what has happened in this country over the last decade that everyone has to conform to one religion, one style of living, one ideological thought, and one way of being.

This new brand of evangelical thinking is not what Jefferson envisioned.

What happened?

Written by Valerie Curl

March 6, 2010 at 8:52 AM

Government vs. the modern Promotion of Christianity

leave a comment »

My son-in-law and I enjoy many animated but mild conversations on the Constitution and the intent behind the Founding Fathers wording of the Bill of Rights. As a committed, devout Mormon and strict Constitutionalist, I suspect his gift to me this year was meant to alter my mind regarding the First Amendment. Or maybe he just wanted to give us something else to discuss.

A year ago, I told him the Queen Elizabeth I outlawed violent persecution of Catholics as revenge for what her sister had done to Protestants by saying that the practice of religion was a matter of conscience. Her words more exactly were that she would not peer into a man’s conscience regarding religion.

So, this year my son-in-law gave me Steven Waldman’s book, Founding Faith. In the book, Waldman uses historical records to elaborate on the faith of the Founding Fathers to explain the religious foundations of the United States and how the First Amendment came into being.

According to Waldman’s research, the U.S. was Christian at its’ conception. I doubt there is any disagreement of this fact as the early settlers were all from England – and later from Germany, Holland and other Northern European nations where one form or another of Christianity was practiced. However, many Christian sects – Anglican, Episcopal, Presbyterian, Baptist, Quaker, Congregational, Catholic and others – were practiced and/or violently discriminated against in the colonies. One has only to look at Catholic France to see the extreme violence practiced against Calvinist Huguenots (French Puritans) to understand the enmity that existed between varying Christian sects.

Waldman records that enmity as having existed in the colonies as well: popish Catholics being hated overall; Quakers being considered too anti-American in their pacifisms or too fond of Blacks; Baptists as not legitimate; Massachusetts and Connecticut approving only Puritan Congregationalists, and so on.

In each colony, each dominant religious sect sought to preserve its dominance even as the Revolution proceeded. However, Washington, leading an army of religiously diverse men, recognized that choosing one religious sect over another would be disastrous to the army…and to the country he was fighting to build. Thus, he sought to eliminate religious sectarianism in the ranks of his Army as well as during his years in public office.

Later during the Congressional Convention, men like James Madison, Geo. Mason and Baptist leader John Leland, who fought against religious discrimination in their home states, led the way to prohibit the national government from becoming involved, in any way, in religion. “At the Massachusetts convention, the Reverend Isaac Backus declared that religious tests had been the ‘greatest engine of tyranny in the world’ and praised the revolutionary new document (the Constitution sans Bill of Rights) for recognizing that ‘Nothing is more evident both in reason and Holy Scriptures, than that religion is ever a matter between God and individuals; and, therefore no man or men can impose religious test without invading the essential prerogatives of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ ‘After Pennsylvania ratified…. Watching from the side, Dr. Benjamin Rush noticed a rabbi [heretofore Jews having been banned in every colony from property ownership, business, and schools] and two Christian ministers marching arm in arm and thought it a perfect symbol of the Constitution’s ban on religious tests.’ “

But as Madison found when he returned home to Orange County, VA, the Constitution did not go far enough to secure the people’s right to religious freedom…or what was commonly called “freedom of conscience.”

What Madison had learned throughout his education at the College of New Jersey (later Princeton), an evangelical seminary known as both a citadel for republicanism and a haven for dissenting Presbyterianism, and in his travels was that religion was an individual choice – a matter of conscience for each person – and that no other person had the right to abridge that freedom of conscience. To him, the practice of any religion was a God given freedom of conscience. Thus, to say that government had the right or authority to tax or promote one religious sect over another was an abridgment of the freedom of conscience. It was his belief that religion was best served when government stayed out it completely.

What Madison sought from Congress, as he had from the Virginia Legislature earlier in his political career, was an assurance that government would not be involved in the sponsorship or promotion of religion in any way. Even though having been a Christian, he believed that religion was best served if government had no part in it. In this, Thomas Jefferson, who held a mild Christian attitude, influenced Madison. Jefferson believed in Christianity, as did all of his political contemporaries, but he held some purely anachronistic views, i.e. that Jesus was not born of a virgin or was The Son of God. He did believe that the philosophical views of Jesus were the best that had passed down through the ages of the human race.

Jefferson firmly believed that Christianity was best when government left it alone. That is, when government played no part in its recommendation or assistance or promotion.

While this ideology was commonplace in Franklin’s Pennsylvania, it was fairly new and different in Virginia and elsewhere in the colonies – in Massachusetts and Connecticut, in particular, where government sponsorship and taxation promoted and paid for a particular brand (sect) of Christianity.

As a result of Madison’s travels to Pennsylvania and potentially his tutelage from Jefferson, Madison developed the ideal that government – any government, whether national or state – should very strictly stay out of the realm of religion.

Thus, after Madison put the First Amendment to the House of Representatives, he agreed to New Hampshire Representative Samuel Livermore’s rewording: “Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or infringing the rights of conscience.” After much argument in the House and the Senate, the final wording is as we know it today: “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

Moreover, he believed that religion, if left alone without government help or assistance of any kind, would thrive and grow based on it’s own great merits…and that if government interfered or chose to assist it in any way, religion would weaken as had the Catholic Church in Europe. Madison, as most of his contemporaries, was a student of the Enlightenment and the Great Awakening. They understood the religious arguments of previous generations as well as those of their day. And they also knew that when government became involved with religion, by choosing one religious sect over another, that people died: when the rights of the minority are sacrificed to the majority, people suffer.

In the Federalist Papers, Madison argued this point, and in particular that government –keeping religion in mind – should prevent the majority from denying the rights of the minority. Given the violent religious discrimination Madison witnessed in Virginia prior to becoming a member of congress, he firmly believed that religion was best served when government was prohibited from partaking in religious delegation or general designation for the populace.

As he decided from first hand observation, when government becomes involved with a particular religion or religious sect, the majority ends up practicing extremes of cruelty against the minority. Thus, it is best for religion that government, whether national or stare, divorce itself entirely from religion of any sort. Only then will parishioners of religion, of whatever name, enjoy the choice of freedom of conscience. Only when government, in its entirety, is separated from religion will religion thrive.

Written by Valerie Curl

January 1, 2009 at 5:29 PM

Merry Christmas! Let a new world begin.

leave a comment »

Today is the celebration of Christ’s birth for the approximate 2.1 billion people on this small, blue planet who follow the Christian religion. (Christianity is the largest of all religions, exceeding number 2, Islam, by 600 million.)

On this day in the Western World, we open a horde of presents, eat vast quantities of food, drink too much celebration, and silently worry about what the next year will bring. I warrant that few of us, though, think about the many millions worldwide who have none of these things this holiday season: the many millions who have lost their jobs as a result of a deep recession caused by greed in the financial and real estate sectors; the many millions who have lost their homes because of the treachery practiced by unscrupulous mortgage bankers and brokers; the many millions who lost everything as a result of unexpected, and overly costly, medical care; the many millions worldwide who lost even their ability to buy food for their families.

Today is not just a day of glorious inebriation, it is a day to remember what this day is really all about. Not just the man for whom it is named, but the message he espoused.

The message that put him on the cross: love thy neighbor; give generously to the poor and sick; turn away from hate and jealousy; be just (honorable and ethical) in all you do throughout your life; think about others before yourself.

More than anything now, in these most difficult times, we need to build “community.” Community is an old fashioned idea of sharing and helping and creating friendship. It is coming together for the common good.

In a world wracked by anger and hatred and fear, it’s time to let go of prejudice. It’s time to open ourselves to our better selves and work for a world “community” as well as a local “community.” Government cannot do it all. Nor should we expect government to do it all. We all have a responsibility to our neighbors–to each other.

As this day is celebrated, my wish is that the next year will see a renewed mentality that creates “communities” to bring hope, wellness and happiness to the many millions who currently are suffering and worrying and praying for help. My wish is that those who have here-to-fore lived their lives only for themselves, to gratify their own egos, will experience an epiphany–an epiphany of the heart and soul.

So, Merry Christmas, World! May this day usher forth a new day in the human psyche, one that brings forth an actualization of the messages spoken by Jesus.

Written by Valerie Curl

December 26, 2008 at 1:46 AM

%d bloggers like this: