The Progressive Left’s Secular Theocracy
August 18, 2012 at 2:00 pm in Blog, Social by Phillip Dennis 28 Comments
I’m a Christian and a Tea Partier. Obviously I want to overthrow America’s constitutional government and replace it with an oppressive theocracy.
Or so the progressive left tells me.
I encounter this accusation often, as wild-eyed MSNBC anchors shout it toward their cameras, increasingly silly columnists write it in the New York Times, and my own acquaintances say it in our political conversations. I don’t know if these people actually believe their rhetoric or if they’re simply trying to scare others away from all things Tea Party and religious. I suspect that it’s a combination of both. Regardless, I can’t help but chuckle at the irony my friends on the left are simply too partisan (devout?) to notice.
The Tea Party is a small-government movement that supports freedom of religion, not the establishment of one. I — and many Christians like me — believe in the maximum freedom possible under the minimum government required to protect us and our property. This type of system bears no resemblance to a theocracy, which is based on strict and specific religious code. It is God’s — not government’s — role to teach us right and wrong and our role to live by His standards. This is best done in a free society without government intervention wherever possible.
Now — what type of system does the left support, especially those most vocal against the supposed theocratic Tea Partiers?
Massive, centralized command-and-control, of course.
In a town hall meeting in 2010, Representative Pete Stark (D-CA) said that the federal government “can do most anything in this country.” In other words, it is Almighty.
This basic view of government — that it should wield unlimited power over every aspect of its citizens’ lives — is the opposite of the Founders’ intention for We the People to largely self-govern as free individuals. But the left brazenly advances the Almighty version instead, wanting and expecting government to address all societal ills (both real and imagined), acting as America’s Provider, Comforter, Father, Hope, Foundation, Great Physician, Owner of All Things, Judge, One and Only Savior, and Ruler, who is the Beginning of All Wisdom and Worthy of All Praise.
Does anything strike you about that list of attributes? Might they be used to describe someone else — such as the actual Almighty?
So while the Tea Party advances small-government principles, wanting to leave citizens free to make their own decisions and reap the benefits or suffer the consequences accordingly, the left pursues a system of big-government command and control. They then turn around and accuse the small-government Christian Tea Partiers of attempting to impose a theocracy in America, when it is the left’s plan that is often indistinguishable from theocratic rule.
Furthermore, though many of them are secularists, they serve their plan with a religious fervor that surpasses that of Pat Robertson. They are 100% faithful to their big-government doctrine and committed to silencing all heretics — pointing their fingers at their political opposition, condemning them as evil. In my latest book, Saving America, I call these fanatical statists “Big-Government Disciples” and argue that they are erecting a kind of secular theocracy in which government is god, ascribing to it all the attributes listed above that typically are used to describe the True God.
So what happens if the Big-Government Disciples ultimately get their way? What does it mean for the rest of society if the government succeeds in a taking over of every aspect of our lives and fully controlling, for example, the distribution of health care and energy (a goal that is dangerously close to being met)?
Easy: we become their servants.
Freedom of choice, thought, and expression will vanish completely. We will all be forced to worship at the altar of their secular theocracy, serving it in the manner it commands — or suffer its wrath. The only people this benefits are the elitists who hold the reins of power, making the rules for the rest of us (which they themselves will never follow).
If the Tea Partiers get our small-government way, though, the opposite will result. All Americans will be free to live their lives according to their consciences, worshiping whomever (or whatever) they want, including no one or nothing. Americans will not be forced to obey someone else’s earthly commands, except those that protect the unalienable rights of others.
So, as a Christian Tea Partier, I stand committed to restoring the constitutional small-government system that will re-liberate my fellow Americans and protect them from those who actually want to overthrow our constitutional government and replace it with an oppressive theocracy. May freedom-lovers everywhere unite to defeat the Big-Government Disciples and dismantle their secular theocracy before they grow powerful enough to execute a Judgment Day on us all.
Jonathan Wakefield is a Tea Party leader and the author of Saving America: A Christian Perspective of the Tea Party Movement. Visit his website teapartyforchristians.com.
Originally posted at American Thinker
What about the people that dont believe in God? Are they not Americans? Separation of church and state is the distinct difference between us and countries like Saudi Arabia.
It sounds like you didn’t read the article.
Of course atheists can be U.S. citizens. Many are. If you read the Constitution you will see that religious tests are not allowed.
The secular religion of the ‘progressives’/communists/socialists/collectivists that is the topic of the article, if allowed to take control of a government, DOES have a religious test- no religion allowed!
I suspect like so many that Obama cares little for or against God in any form. This is all about his way of remaking America. It may or may not be that he is an anti-colonialist but one thing is for sure he abandons religion as fast as anything else to press his agenda which seems to be to ruin this country. He has lied to everyone about everything and continues to know exactly what he is doing. There is nothing more dangerous than a smart idealist who has really bad ideas. Which in short makes him not so smart doesn’t it?
i am also a christian and a very proud to b a democrat i will continue to support obama since i know if mittens is elected and any of the t party nitwits dont go away go where the sun doesnt shine the usa will b destroyed with all of ur crazy numnut ideas dont disappear i pray to GOD for obama to save our country
Katricia: Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
Joe, maybe you would like the Islamic Republic of Iran……..same deal, different turban.
Teaswiller: No, not a fan of Iran. I am a fan of John Adams, who originally said what I wrote earlier. The difference here is that we have freedom to believe and share what we feel is correct whereas those in Iran do not. I feel John Adams had it right, our constitution was written and is intended for a moral and religious people because it stands on the ideal that people have free will and can govern themselves.
Joe, I’m also a John Adams fan. I like Thomas Jefferson too.
Realistically, many different religions have provided, and can provide, moral guidance. There are also non-religious means to reach fundamental moral precepts.
Even in the absence of any religion or morality, adherence to the Constitution that Adams and Jefferson understood would guarantee that the U.S. was a free Republic with limited government and the preservation of individual rights.
I agree with alot of the post. But, it is alarming that many politicians, like George W Bush, use their Christian beliefs and justification to do many things that are not in line with the religion they say they are following. Starting wars, taking hundreds on billions from seniors (Bush raided Medicare-it’s true!), reducing help for the poor, sick and old, and helping the rich get richer at the expense of the sick and old. I am not sure what religion would support that.
America was built of Freedom of Religion. All religions Amen.
Would your god be for Romney Care? A system that allows everyone to have affordable health coverage? Getting cost in line in the FOR PROFIT health industrty controlled by drug companies and share holders.
Everyone wants to support success and everyone wants to be successful, that is the American way. But would your god (no matter your religion) want the everyday laborors (you and I) paying a higher percentage of our income for roads etc than people who make 2-3-5 times what we do. Should they pay 10-15% of their income while you and I pay 25-30%. Would your god support us all pay the same percentage of our income, no matter what it is?
I don’t think God, no matter whose idea of God you’re talking about, has had much to say about how governments should be constituted or run.
Luckily for us, our Constitution allows free exercise of religion, keeps the government from establishing a State Religion, and prevents religion from be being a factor in participating in our government.
Your own personal religion and morality will govern you in your dealings with other individuals or groups- or not.
Our Constitution is meant to govern and limit the government we created. It is supposed to limit the government to the few enumerated Powers. it is supposed to create a government that protects our lives, our liberty and our property.
The religion and beliefs of individuals elected to office in the Federal Government make absolutely no difference if that government is held to it’s legitimate enumerated powers.
The only answer is the correct one. No republicans. No now. Not ever. Hunt them down, capture them and put them in small cages. Forever.
It’s really not the old guard GOP, it’s these whack job Tea Party morons who are the problem. Now, if you want to hunt them down, let me get my dogs..
Bring it on. We’re waiting.
Good. Because WE are already outside your door. WE are not waiting.
Hi. I’m a secular mostly-democrat. I’m here because I think there’s validity in the Tea Party’s views, and I want to find out more. I too am weary of the eagerness of people in my party to prescribe more government for every civic ailment they encounter. I understand the lack of logic.
I definitely see your points, and understand how and why I agree or disagree with various points in your article.
What I don’t agree with are some of the comments above:
-Nancysnead sounds like the type of person democrats consider Fox News republicans to be: ignorant and belligerent and with zero proficiency in basic English communication.
-Joe Davis’s claim that our Constitution was written by and for religious seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of morality. I’ve grown to understand people like that: you tie your moral values to your faith, so you can’t see how a person can have one without the other. I assure you though that we secular folks are indeed moral. I have a wife and three beautiful kids, and believe me, I am raising my kids to be responsible and compassionate adults. I also respect your religion and your right to practice, just how I expect you to respect my lack of religion and my right to not practice. I hope you understand I have no enmity for you. We’re different, but not in that you have morals and I don’t–you just grew up with religion and I didn’t.
-No Repubs is clearly just being a troll and should shut up.
I am happy to hear from an objectively thinking individual. It reminds me of a quote from Winston Churchhill. Permit me to paraphrase;
If a person is under a certain young age and doesn’t vote as a “Liberal;” Than they have no Heart” ~ HOWEVER ~ If the same person reaches a certain older age and doesn’t began to vote as a “Conservative,” Than they have No Brain. The Moral:
Governments cannot give anything unless it is taken from other people.
Brother Richard
Ohh the problem here is Christianity is failing and christians and losing their hold on morality by siding with bankers and criminals.
Good Call, let us not forget that religion, in many cases, is used to control society
Neil: I wouldn’t have said it so forcefully, but it could not have been said better. The Christian world of old is dying. In its death throws it has abandon all it once held dear.
Good riddance to bad garbage, i.e., Christianity. Now, if we could also get rid of Islam……
So, you think all TEA party people are Christians is that it? Really? Oh and gun carrying too don’t let me forget that one. Wow, you are so wrong. I don’t belong to any church, have a gun at home and sometimes carry since I live just 12 miles North of Mexico and there are drug runners around. Oh yeah all TEA party members are 67+ years old too. Dangit they let me in at 48 years old, go figure and they never asked if I was a Christian nor assumed it. I just want Obama out of office and for us to get a handle on the spending and work on beating the deficit that is out of control. I would allow higher taxes for that and maybe some other things, but not bailouts, stimulus, green plans and so on. These are core values of the TEA party and watchout there are a heck of a lot of us in this country and we are not crazy just pissed!
Did I really see this guy say he believes that if “small government gets it way”…”all Americans will be allowed to live according to their own conscious”…”Americans will not be forced to serve someone else’s earthly commands”…..???? FINALLY someone in the Tea Party with the balls to stand up for a woman’s sovereignty over her own body and the difficult choices she may have to make.
The left’s plan is all too clear–Marshall Scott said it best in “Hidden Agenda”, that they use so many topics as a red herring to advance deconstruction.
Please note: “Clearly, the Democratic Party is the anti-Christian Party in this nation. They reject the Bible, what Bible-believing Christians embrace and they encourage the growth of what we can a ‘non-traditional’ family. That is morally wrong and a disgrace to our nation and our Lord,” said Jackson.
A Christian Soldier! Who is speaking out! Bishop E.W. Jackson, a veteran of the Marine Corps and Harvard Law graduate.
By Paul Stanley , Christian Post Reporter
August 8, 2012|2:31 pm
A black Virginia bishop is calling for Christians to leave the Democratic Party over what he describes as a “cult-like devotion” to abortion and what he terms as a “rejection” of the traditional family.
Bishop E.W. Jackson, a veteran of the Marine Corps and Harvard Law graduate, says the Democrats’ enslavement of some Americans, most notably black Americans, is the modern day equivalent of slavery and his focus is to lead an exodus, similar to what Moses did in the Old Testament.
“Let God’s people go,” Jackson told The Christian Post in a telephone interview.
“Clearly, the Democratic Party is the anti-Christian Party in this nation. They reject the Bible, what Bible-believing Christians embrace and they encourage the growth of what we can a ‘non-traditional’ family. That is morally wrong and a disgrace to our nation and our Lord,” said Jackson.
Jackson pointed to recent statements from liberals attacking Olympic gymnast Gabrielle Douglas, the 16-year-old sensation who won the all-around gold medal in gymnastics at the 2012 London summer Olympics.
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/black-bishop-encourages-christians-to-leave-democratic-party-79691/#HG3oxPO0RJBK2pHb.99
Another statement of Bishop E. W. Jackson:
“In other words,” says the Bishop, “all statements and policies of conservatives are by definition ‘racist.’ Joe Biden’s statement was not a gaffe, but in furtherance of an explicit racial strategy. This also demonstrates the low opinion Democrats have of black Americans. They believe we can be manipulated by any racial charge, no matter how outrageous.”
There is an anti-Christian “thing” going on with the Democratic party but it is not with all Democrats. We see the noisy angry atheists that hate themselves and want company and thus hate everyone else as well. How come it is so wrong to have a belief in a higher power, in a God or god whichever you believe in? Why is that alone so bad? Because it can be used for an evil purpose? Yeah, so can just about anything else as well. Your love for cuddly puppies could be an evil thing too since puppies grow up to be dogs and the puppies might be trained to kill. Yeah, it’s all on how you use your belief and not belief itself. If you keep it to yourself and your close family and it is not used to spread hate, evil, and what not, how is it so wrong? Stop hating Christians. Get over yourself!
None of that is directed at you Bob…of course not. I just don’t agree that all Democrats are Christian haters and those in the Democratic party are a minority even there. Though I do agree there are probably more atheists that are Democrats than Republicans but I don’t have a study to back that up. What you are saying is that there is a clear division of Christians on the Right and Atheists on the left. Fine. I can agree with that, but it is a blurred line in my opinion.
I don’t understand why there is ANY religious discussion here. The Tea Party is not about religion. I’m sick and tired of the religious right trying to use us to advance their own religious beliefs. SICK of it! Any more of this crap and I am putting the wallet away.
Why Martin Luther King Was Republican
It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.
It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s.
During the civil rights era of the 1960s, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools. President Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation. Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman’s issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military. Not mentioned is the fact that it was Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.
Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act while he was a senator, as did Democrat Sen. Al Gore Sr. And after he became President, Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black Republican. President Kennedy, through his brother Atty. Gen. Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a Communist in order to undermine Dr. King.
In March of 1968, while referring to Dr. King’s leaving Memphis, Tenn., after riots broke out where a teenager was killed, Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd (W.Va.), a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, called Dr. King a “trouble-maker” who starts trouble, but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited. A few weeks later, Dr. King returned to Memphis and was assassinated on April 4, 1968.
Given the circumstances of that era, it is understandable why Dr. King was a Republican. It was the Republicans who fought to free blacks from slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment). Republicans passed the civil rights laws of the 1860s, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. Republicans also started the NAACP and affirmative action with Republican President Richard Nixon’s 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher) that set the nation’s fist goals and timetables. Although affirmative action now has been turned by the Democrats into an unfair quota system, affirmative action was begun by Nixon to counter the harm caused to blacks when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 kicked all of the blacks out of federal government jobs.
Few black Americans know that it was Republicans who founded the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Unknown also is the fact that Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen from Illinois was key to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen wrote the language for the bill. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. President Lyndon Johnson could not have achieved passage of civil rights legislation without the support of Republicans.
Critics of Republican Sen. Barry Goldwater, who ran for President against Johnson in 1964, ignore the fact that Goldwater wanted to force the Democrats in the South to stop passing discriminatory laws and thus end the need to continuously enact federal civil rights legislation.
Those who wrongly criticize Goldwater also ignore the fact that Johnson, in his 4,500 State of the Union Address delivered on Jan. 4, 1965, mentioned scores of topics for federal action, but only 35 words were devoted to civil rights. He did not mention one word about voting rights. Then in 1967, showing his anger with Dr. King’s protest against the Vietnam War, Johnson referred to Dr. King as “that Nigger preacher.”
Contrary to the false assertions by Democrats, the racist “Dixiecrats” did not all migrate to the Republican Party. “Dixiecrats” declared that they would rather vote for a “yellow dog” than vote for a Republican because the Republican Party was know as the party for blacks. Today, some of those “Dixiecrats” continue their political careers as Democrats, including Robert Byrd, who is well known for having been a “Keagle” in the Ku Klux Klan.
Another former “Dixiecrat” is former Democrat Sen. Ernest Hollings, who put up the Confederate flag over the state Capitol when he was the governor of South Carolina. There was no public outcry when Democrat Sen. Christopher Dodd praised Byrd as someone who would have been “a great senator for any moment,” including the Civil War. Yet Democrats denounced then-Senate GOP leader Trent Lott for his remarks about Sen. Strom Thurmond (R.-S.C.). Thurmond was never in the Ku Klux Klan and defended blacks against lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats. If Byrd and Thurmond were alive during the Civil War, and Byrd had his way, Thurmond would have been lynched.
The 30-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party began in the 1970s with President Richard Nixon’s “Southern Strategy,” which was an effort on the part of Nixon to get Christians in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were still discriminating against their fellow Christians who happened to be black. Georgia did not switch until 2002, and some Southern states, including Louisiana, are still controlled by Democrats.
Today, Democrats, in pursuit of their socialist agenda, are fighting to keep blacks poor, angry and voting for Democrats. Examples of how egregiously Democrats act to keep blacks in poverty are numerous.
After wrongly convincing black Americans that a minimum wage increase was a good thing, the Democrats on August 3 kept their promise and killed the minimum wage bill passed by House Republicans on July 29. The blockage of the minimum wage bill was the second time in as many years that Democrats stuck a legislative finger in the eye of black Americans. Senate Democrats on April 1, 2004, blocked passage of a bill to renew the 1996 welfare reform law that was pushed by Republicans and vetoed twice by President Clinton before he finally signed it. Since the welfare reform law expired in September 2002, Congress had passed six extensions, and the latest expired on June 30, 2004. Opposed by the Democrats are school choice opportunity scholarships that would help black children get out of failing schools and Social Security reform, even though blacks on average lose $10,000 in the current system because of a shorter life expectancy than whites (72.2 years for blacks vs. 77.5 years for whites).
Democrats have been running our inner-cities for the past 30 to 40 years, and blacks are still complaining about the same problems. More than $7 trillion dollars have been spent on poverty programs since Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty with little, if any, impact on poverty. Diabolically, every election cycle, Democrats blame Republicans for the deplorable conditions in the inner-cities, then incite blacks to cast a protest vote against Republicans.
In order to break the Democrats’ stranglehold on the black vote and free black Americans from the Democrat Party’s economic plantation, we must shed the light of truth on the Democrats. We must demonstrate that the Democrat Party policies of socialism and dependency on government handouts offer the pathway to poverty, while Republican Party principles of hard work, personal responsibility, getting a good education and ownership of homes and small businesses offer the pathway to prosperity.
PLEASE SEND THIS TO EVERYONE. LET THE TRUTH BE TOLD!!!