Churches Violate Tax Law, Then Yell Persecution!

I despise hypocrisy, and I really hate it when Christians shout "Persecution!" at the top of their lungs and stomp their feet like angry children, just because they don't get special treatment.

The latest circus act was orchestrated by the Alliance Defense Fund. They called it Pulpit Freedom Sunday, and their goal was to break the laws that prohibit non-profit organizations from engaging in politics.

"Pastors participating in the Alliance Defense Fund’s 'Pulpit Freedom Sunday' will preach from their pulpits Sept. 28 about the moral qualifications of candidates seeking political office. The pastors will exercise their First Amendment right to preach on the subject, despite federal tax regulations that prohibit intervening or participating in a political campaign."

In other words, they want all the benefits of a tax-exempt organization, but they don't want to follow the rules.

This isn't persecution. Nobody is censoring these preachers. All they have to do is

What do Indian Grave Robbers and Atheists have in Common?

What does the atheist Dan Barker (head of the Freedom from Religion Foundation) have in common with two American Indian grave robbers who dug up a white person's body? More than you might guess!

Dan and FFRF are in the news again. They're well known for their hard-line stance on the separation of church and state in America. For example, last year the FFRF caused a ruckus when they responded to a Christian display at the Washington State Capitol building with a an atheist sign that closed with, "Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds." They did it again this year, prompting a lawsuit from an enraged Christian.

What does this have to do with grave robbing? Well, a few years back there was a darkly funny story about two young American Indian men who snuck into a graveyard and dug up a white woman's body, just to show whites how the Indians feel when whites dig up the Indians' ancestors. If whites can dig up Indian bones, why shouldn't Indians be allowed to dig up white people's bones?

This is so obvious it shouldn't have to be stated, yet even today Indian remains are not treated with the dignity that the American Indians' culture requires. Those two young men felt compelled to turn the tables on whites, and actually rob a grave. And quite predictably, there was outrage. But I hope their act of civil disobedience gave at least a few people a new perspective on what it means to desecrate the bodies of American Indians.

And that's exactly what Dan Barker and the FFRF are trying to do with religion in government. All Americans have a right to access their government, without any hint of religious bias. Christians in America are particularly insensitive to how their religion can give offense. Their purportedly innocent nativity scenes look cute and beautiful to a Christian, but to everyone else these displays are shouting, "You're going to HELL to burn FOREVER because you don't believe this cute little baby, who is actually God!"

The "winter solstice" display that the FFRF places alongside the Christian displays is deliberately designed to be edgy, to be slightly offensive. If atheists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Jains and Buddhists can't walk into their state capitol buildings without passing a "You're going to HELL" display, it's only fair that Christians should be treated to an equal amount of unpleasant rhetoric.

"How do YOU like it when we treat you the same as you treat us?" That's the message that both the FFRF and those two Indians were sending, and I hope both messages sink in. Government and religion should be separate, and it's impossible to mix the two in any way without offending citizens.

(P.S. If anyone can find a link to the news articles about those two American Indians, or correct my memory, please send it along. I googled it a bit but couldn't find that particular story among the thousands of others about whites digging up Indian graves. It was probably ten or twenty years ago.)

Atheist Congressman Pete Stark: Tell it like it is!

The highest-ranking openly atheist member of the US government, Representative Pete Stark (D-Fremont, California), once again is raising eyebrows and making waves in Washington, simply by asking reasonable questions – as usual, trying to remind the President and others that we have a "wall of separation" between church and state in this country.

One of the surprising, and somewhat disappointing, features of the Obama presidency is that he advocates government support of faith-based initiatives. It is wonderful when groups of citizens get together to help the less fortunate, whether they are churches, schools, or civic groups. And there is nothing wrong with the government supporting these efforts. But when the government specifically targets faith-based initiatives, it is plainly unconstitutional.

One of the hardest tasks of being American is to avoid pragmatism, and embrace our constitution. It's so easy to lock up the Japanese during wartime, or to create blacklists of "communists" during the cold war, or to deny access to a fair trial at Guantanamo when terrorists attack our country. Whether it's fear, or loathing, or hatred, all too often Americans have been willing to give up their principles for expedience, all down through our history.

Fortunately, in each generation, there have been a few courageous individuals who understand that our Constitution requires sacrifice, and are willing to stand up and say so. They remind us that we can't take the easy road, the simplistic road, any time something bothers us. Rep. Pete Stark is one such individual.

The faith-based initiative, though not as damaging as other failures in the past such as the Japanese internment camps, is still another example of expedience. Most Americans don't really care that much about the separation of church and state, they don't see the dangers, nor do they appreciate the role of religious governments in America's own history. They've forgotten the lessons of the past, the very foundations of this country.

Faith-based initiatives seem harmless, they get the job done, and since the majority of Americans are religious, they don't see the problem. But it IS a problem: it's a plain and egregious violation of our constitution.