The American Prospect: "Religious Liberty": The Next Big Front in the Culture Wars
Think Progress: Abstinence-Only Course In Texas Tells Kids That Having Sex Makes Them Like A Chewed-Up Piece Of Gum
Huffington Post: Keeping Church at Arm's Length From State
Joe. My. God: New Mexico: Hate Group Petitions SCOTUS On Behalf Of Photographer
The Guardian: Government shutdown just the start for America's Biblical revolutionaries
Miscellanea Agnostica: Myths About Christmas In The U.S.
What Would JT Do? Doug Phillips resigns from Vision Forum Ministries over extra-marital affair...but his marriage is still sacred
Sunday, November 10, 2013
News Tidbits
Dallas Observer: Burleson Man Who Tried to Blow Up a Church Now Protesting Abortion at Local High Schools
Raw Story: Fox News’ Starnes outraged after NC pastor barred from placing ‘God’ posters in schools
Huffington Post: Ted Cruz's Dad Declares God Is Pro Death Penalty
Religion News Service: LifeWay president apologizes for its decade-old ‘Rickshaw Rally’ that offended Asian American Christians
Gay Star News: Washington DC next to ban attempts to turn gay kids straight
Women's eNews: NARAL Celebrates Success of Its 'StopKen' Campaign
Pew Research Center: Evangelicals’ support not enough to turn tide for Cuccinelli in Virginia governor race
Christian Post: The Bible TV Series Producers Go Big Screen for Jesus
Raw Story: Fox News’ Starnes outraged after NC pastor barred from placing ‘God’ posters in schools
Huffington Post: Ted Cruz's Dad Declares God Is Pro Death Penalty
Religion News Service: LifeWay president apologizes for its decade-old ‘Rickshaw Rally’ that offended Asian American Christians
Gay Star News: Washington DC next to ban attempts to turn gay kids straight
Women's eNews: NARAL Celebrates Success of Its 'StopKen' Campaign
Pew Research Center: Evangelicals’ support not enough to turn tide for Cuccinelli in Virginia governor race
Christian Post: The Bible TV Series Producers Go Big Screen for Jesus
Saturday, November 9, 2013
New HRC Grants to Help Fund LGBTQ Equality Efforts Worldwide
Several groups from the American Religious Right have encouraged homophobia across the globe, to the disgust of LGBTQ rights supporters. For example, the World Congress of Families shares anti-LGBTQ programming at its global summits, networking with counterparts in other countries. The role of Religious Right leaders in fomenting homophobia in Africa is well known, with Uganda serving as but one example. Earlier this year, the Southern Poverty Law Center published a report on the Religious Right's anti-LGBTQ work in Belize. Recently, American Religious Right voices have not only applauded and defended Russia's anti-gay "propaganda" bill, but reached out to Russian lawmakers and promulgated myths about gays. Homophobes will not limit their messages to the U.S., and neither should activists for equality.
An American LGBTQ rights organization is playing a larger role in promoting global LGBTQ equality. However, some of the grants for their global initiatives may be a source of controversy soon. What will this mean for LGBTQ equality efforts?
Human Rights Campaign (HRC), an LGBTQ civil rights organization based in Washington D.C., has announced two new projects related to global LGBTQ rights. First, as the Sochi Winter Olympics in Russia approach, Human Rights Campaign launched its new "Love Conquers Hate" campaign. The purpose of the campaign is to stand in solidarity with Russia's LGBTQ community, which has suffered under the Russian government's anti-gay policies and homophobic attacks. The Love Conquers Hate campaign includes high-profile participants such as Anthony Bourdain, Fergie, America Ferrera, Ricky Martin, Jonah Hill, and other celebrities. In light of a recent Russian law banning gay "propaganda" aimed at minors, as well as high-profile homophobic attacks in Russia, the "Love Conquers Hate" campaign is timely.
Another HRC project is broader in scope. According to a November 4th statement on the HRC website, the Paul E. Singer Foundation and the Daniel S. Loeb Family Foundation have awarded HRC grants to promote LGBTQ rights worldwide.
The namesakes of both foundations are hedge fund managers who have longstanding, if controversial reputations. For instance, Daniel Loeb is on the board of trustees for the conservative Manhattan Institute. Paul Singer has funded Republican campaigns and conservative causes, served as chairman of the board for the Manhattan Institute, and operated controversial hedge funds ("vulture funds"). However, both men have solid histories of supporting LGBTQ rights. Loeb signed a 2013 amicus brief supporting freedom to marry on a state basis, as well as a 2011 open letter from New York business leaders advocating marriage equality. Singer, a Giving Pledge philanthropist, has donated millions of dollars to marriage equality efforts. Singer was also a speaker at the 2012 Out on the Street Leadership Summit, a event that promotes LGBTQ equality in the financial community.
Loeb and Singer's contributions to HRC leave me with mixed feelings. Their commitment to LGBTQ rights was never in question, as their donations and public statements demonstrate. The grants their foundations have donated to HRC can do enormous good in the global struggle for LGBTQ equality. However, I'm concerned about their ties to controversial investments and conservative forces. What impact could this have on HRC and its efforts? Could this potentially divide HRC's progressive allies? I don't know.
Justice for sexual minorities will require a global movement, with networking and activism in many corners of the globe. Support for that struggle must also come from different quarters if the LGBTQ rights movement is to have the resources and critical mass it needs. What happens, however, when some of those supporters are controversial? What happens when the different factions supporting a movement don't see eye to eye on their other agendas? Is controversy an unavoidable part of any movement's growth? We need to wrestle with these questions. And since the Religious Right is wasting no time spreading homophobia across the globe, we need to wrestle with these questions soon.
An American LGBTQ rights organization is playing a larger role in promoting global LGBTQ equality. However, some of the grants for their global initiatives may be a source of controversy soon. What will this mean for LGBTQ equality efforts?
Human Rights Campaign (HRC), an LGBTQ civil rights organization based in Washington D.C., has announced two new projects related to global LGBTQ rights. First, as the Sochi Winter Olympics in Russia approach, Human Rights Campaign launched its new "Love Conquers Hate" campaign. The purpose of the campaign is to stand in solidarity with Russia's LGBTQ community, which has suffered under the Russian government's anti-gay policies and homophobic attacks. The Love Conquers Hate campaign includes high-profile participants such as Anthony Bourdain, Fergie, America Ferrera, Ricky Martin, Jonah Hill, and other celebrities. In light of a recent Russian law banning gay "propaganda" aimed at minors, as well as high-profile homophobic attacks in Russia, the "Love Conquers Hate" campaign is timely.
Another HRC project is broader in scope. According to a November 4th statement on the HRC website, the Paul E. Singer Foundation and the Daniel S. Loeb Family Foundation have awarded HRC grants to promote LGBTQ rights worldwide.
"Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) communities around the world face stigmatization, harassment, violence and blatant human rights violations. To combat these horrific acts and to advance the cause of LGBT justice internationally, The Paul E. Singer Foundation is teaming up with the Daniel S. Loeb Family Foundation to award the Human Rights Campaign Foundation (HRC), the education and research arm of United States’ largest LGBT civil rights organization, major grants over three years.
In keeping with HRC’s mission to end discrimination against LGBT people, the grants will help fund efforts to educate Americans on the human rights of LGBT people around the world; provide fellowships at HRC for foreign LGBT advocates; expose the work of prominent anti-gay American organizations that have pushed anti-gay laws and legislation overseas; and leverage its relationships with American policymakers, faith communities, corporations and other change agents to help protect the human rights of LGBT people abroad."
The namesakes of both foundations are hedge fund managers who have longstanding, if controversial reputations. For instance, Daniel Loeb is on the board of trustees for the conservative Manhattan Institute. Paul Singer has funded Republican campaigns and conservative causes, served as chairman of the board for the Manhattan Institute, and operated controversial hedge funds ("vulture funds"). However, both men have solid histories of supporting LGBTQ rights. Loeb signed a 2013 amicus brief supporting freedom to marry on a state basis, as well as a 2011 open letter from New York business leaders advocating marriage equality. Singer, a Giving Pledge philanthropist, has donated millions of dollars to marriage equality efforts. Singer was also a speaker at the 2012 Out on the Street Leadership Summit, a event that promotes LGBTQ equality in the financial community.
Loeb and Singer's contributions to HRC leave me with mixed feelings. Their commitment to LGBTQ rights was never in question, as their donations and public statements demonstrate. The grants their foundations have donated to HRC can do enormous good in the global struggle for LGBTQ equality. However, I'm concerned about their ties to controversial investments and conservative forces. What impact could this have on HRC and its efforts? Could this potentially divide HRC's progressive allies? I don't know.
Justice for sexual minorities will require a global movement, with networking and activism in many corners of the globe. Support for that struggle must also come from different quarters if the LGBTQ rights movement is to have the resources and critical mass it needs. What happens, however, when some of those supporters are controversial? What happens when the different factions supporting a movement don't see eye to eye on their other agendas? Is controversy an unavoidable part of any movement's growth? We need to wrestle with these questions. And since the Religious Right is wasting no time spreading homophobia across the globe, we need to wrestle with these questions soon.
Friday, November 8, 2013
Kevin Swanson on Doug Phillips' Resignation
As mentioned in a prior post, Doug Phillips resigned from his position as president of Vision Forum Ministries on October 30th, citing an inappropriate relationship. Fundamentalist voices have weighed in on the scandal, and now Kevin Swanson has shared his opinions. Swanson is closely affiliated with Vision Forum, having spoken at Vision Forum events and interviewed Doug Phillips on Generations with Vision several times.
Recently, Swanson discussed the Phillips scandal on his Generations with Vision program. In an episode entitled "Hypocrisy is Everywhere", he and his co-host Dave Buehner discussed Phillips' resignation alongside other Christian scandals, sharing commentary on everything from our "fallen sinful world" to the sexual revolution to the marriage bed. Not surprisingly, the two men's attitudes about infidelity and sexuality were unhealthy, even victim-blaming.
Swanson began the program by insisting that Christians confront scandals in their midst. "We can say this is what it is, and we don't have to create monuments to our hypocrisies, as the liberals are like to do," he said. He talked at length about scandals in the Christian community, such as Christian leaders who committed sexual indiscretions, came out as LGBTQ, or experienced tragedy in their lives (i.e., Rick Warren's son committing suicide).
Discussing a young man's suicide in the same breath as sexual misconduct struck me as mean spirited, and labeling all Christians who come out as LGBTQ struck me as homophobic. Sexual misconduct is one thing, but how is being LGBTQ or experiencing a family tragedy related to scandal? I thought.
Swanson's monologue suggested that the roots of church scandals lie in part in society's alleged moral disintegration. Swanson claimed that today's world was living in an "age of apostasy" in which the church in the western world was "languishing". Since the 1950s, people have recognized that America isn't quite the Christian country they thought it was, now that the "facades have come off", he claimed.
Throughout the webinar, Swanson and Buehner offered mixed messages about Doug Phillips and his family. At first, Swanson was sympathetic to the Phillips family, expressing sorrow and wishing them healing. At the 4:51 mark, he told listeners that he and his family were praying for the Phillips.
Swanson's co-host, Dave Buehner, stated that scandal and humiliation are the means by which God cleanses the church at the 9:02 mark.
When the discussion turned to sex and infidelity, the two men revealed their problematic attitudes about marital sexuality. At the 21:17 mark, Swanson blamed the sexual revolution for unleashing "horrific forms of sexual expression" on the world and tainting the church. By lumping together homosexuality and child sexual abuse, he suggested a moral equivalency between LGBTQ status and sexual violence that revolted me.
Dave Buehner argued that directing one's sexual energy at one's spouse inoculates couples against adultery. At the 24:03 mark, he argued that sexual temptation can be corrected by redirecting it at the marriage bed.
Swanson agreed with Buehner's statements. As an example, Swanson described a time when his wife was talking with church elders' wives who wanted to know how to support their husbands. Swanson's wife reminded them of their conjugal duties outlined in 1 Corinthians 7. Again, sex was understood as a wife's duty and a husband's entitlement instead of an act of mutual pleasure and intimacy.
Swanson concluded the program with a warning about excessive involvement in "parachurch" organizations -- that is, Christian organizations that are distinct from churches. While there is nothing wrong with parachurch organizations, believers must be accountable to local churches, he insisted. Since the program touched on Doug Phillips, I wondered if this was a reference to Vision Forum. Were Swanson's admonishments about "parachurch" organizations a jab at Phillips' ministry, or an innocent remark about the importance of accountability in church communities? I don't know.
In conclusion, Swanson and Buehner not only failed to address the bigger moral questions of the Doug Phillips scandal, but revealed their toxic attitudes toward sexuality. First, Swanson attributed Doug Phillips' infidelity (and that of other Christian leaders) to sin, pride, and a fallen world. He failed to consider that the Phillips scandal might point to larger problems within the Christian Patriarchy movement, such as lack of accountability for men, attitudes of male entitlement, and a misogynist culture than leaves women vulnerable.
Second, Swanson and Buehner promoted unhealthy ideas about sexuality, claiming that they represented some Biblical ideal of marital purity. For example, ample sex within marriage does not necessarily preclude adultery. Buehner assumes that adultery occurs when spouses (read: wives) fail to 'put out', ignoring other culprits such as boredom, loneliness, and entitlement. However, sex should never be an obligation, and should always take place with the enthusiastic consent of both partners. No one is obligated to have sex on command. Couples should instead approach sex as a consensual, mutually enjoyable form of intimacy instead of a commanded chore.
Was Swanson and Buehner talking about marital sexuality in general, or were their words a subtle jab at Doug Phillips' wife? I don't know. What I do know is that attitudes such as these do not offer insight into the Phillips' scandal, but instead demonstrate the flawed thinking of some fundamentalists. If communities wish to address sexual misconduct, they need to address the real roots of such misconduct instead of responding with stereotypes and misconceptions.
Recently, Swanson discussed the Phillips scandal on his Generations with Vision program. In an episode entitled "Hypocrisy is Everywhere", he and his co-host Dave Buehner discussed Phillips' resignation alongside other Christian scandals, sharing commentary on everything from our "fallen sinful world" to the sexual revolution to the marriage bed. Not surprisingly, the two men's attitudes about infidelity and sexuality were unhealthy, even victim-blaming.
Swanson began the program by insisting that Christians confront scandals in their midst. "We can say this is what it is, and we don't have to create monuments to our hypocrisies, as the liberals are like to do," he said. He talked at length about scandals in the Christian community, such as Christian leaders who committed sexual indiscretions, came out as LGBTQ, or experienced tragedy in their lives (i.e., Rick Warren's son committing suicide).
Discussing a young man's suicide in the same breath as sexual misconduct struck me as mean spirited, and labeling all Christians who come out as LGBTQ struck me as homophobic. Sexual misconduct is one thing, but how is being LGBTQ or experiencing a family tragedy related to scandal? I thought.
Swanson's monologue suggested that the roots of church scandals lie in part in society's alleged moral disintegration. Swanson claimed that today's world was living in an "age of apostasy" in which the church in the western world was "languishing". Since the 1950s, people have recognized that America isn't quite the Christian country they thought it was, now that the "facades have come off", he claimed.
Throughout the webinar, Swanson and Buehner offered mixed messages about Doug Phillips and his family. At first, Swanson was sympathetic to the Phillips family, expressing sorrow and wishing them healing. At the 4:51 mark, he told listeners that he and his family were praying for the Phillips.
"My first reaction is I'm very sad and very concerned for Doug and for the family, and we've been praying for him in family worship, and praying that God would bring repentance and restoration, and for his family as well, that there would be some restoration, and that God protect and preserve and save this precious family. We're concerned about this."At the 5:15 mark, however, Swanson's tone changed. After expressing sympathy for the Phillips family, he brought up the deception and deaths of Ananias and Sapphira in the Book of Acts. From there, he lashed out at critics of Doug Phillips, calling them "ungodly" and "sons of Belial".
"Acts 5 speaks of what happened with Ananias and Sapphira who did not present themselves as they should have presented themselves. In other words, they presented themselves as something better than what they really were ... They tried to present themselves as holier than what they really were. And because of that, because it was a public sin, God killed them. And then we read that fear fell upon the entire church at that point. Dave, this is why there is a spirit of fear that has spread across much of evangelicalism. The ungodly, the sons of Belial are making fun of Doug and they're making fun of the church. They use these as excuses to degrade the church of Christ, and that's a sad but inevitable consequence of what happens with the ungodly. Their business, what they do is make fun of the church of Jesus Christ until they go to hell or repent."Jesus wants Christians to participate in the Lord's supper and "eat of unleven bread of sincerity", Swanson claimed, arguing that Jesus doesn't want "unlevenous activity" in the church. Hidden sins must be brought out in the open and confessed, and fear must spread across the church, he insisted. Swanson admitted that he'd had marital and family problems, and that he confessed those issues to church leaders in the name of transparency.
Swanson's co-host, Dave Buehner, stated that scandal and humiliation are the means by which God cleanses the church at the 9:02 mark.
"Jesus is ... trying to fit us for heaven, and to the extent that we resist our being made holy, resist that he is trying to remove the spots and iron out the wrinkles in the church, is to the extent that the Holy Spirit is going to have to use harsher measures to get rid of that sin, and sometimes that's public scandals, sometimes that's humiliation, sometimes it's very drastic. When you have a cancer, sometimes surgery is required."Swanson, who painted the world as a corrupt, sinful setting, stressed that sins and scandals such as those of Doug Phillips serve as evidence for the evil nature of the world. At the 10:14 mark, he grew increasingly agitated as he outlined the dire situation of the world.
"The world may look at us and say, 'Wow, these Christians are being a bunch of hypocrites." In the end, I think what we're seeing, Dave, with sin is a verification of exactly what the Bible says concerning the problem with man, and that is we live in a fallen sinful world and the situation is far more desperate than any of us think it is, and sin is way, way more deceitful than we even think it is. The Devil himself, Satan, is way more powerful than the average person thinks he is, and these are true blue realities. The world denies them, but I think every one of these circumstances that rises to the surface and becomes very, very public is just a substantiation of the truth of scripture concerning the fact that we live in a fallen, sinful world! And we need God's redemption."Swanson and Buehner talked at length about the peril of lionizing men over God, since human beings are capable of mistakes and sins. They named several Christian evangelists who divorced or committed adultery (thereby lumping divorce in the same moral category as infidelity), lamenting the ways that "power, sex, and money" corrupt people.
When the discussion turned to sex and infidelity, the two men revealed their problematic attitudes about marital sexuality. At the 21:17 mark, Swanson blamed the sexual revolution for unleashing "horrific forms of sexual expression" on the world and tainting the church. By lumping together homosexuality and child sexual abuse, he suggested a moral equivalency between LGBTQ status and sexual violence that revolted me.
"I think that the sexual revolution did unleash the curse of all kinds of child molestation, homosexuality, just the whole coming-out-of-the-closet and all of the demons in this Pandora's box unleash in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s. I think it did lead to more egregious examples ... The world has opened up zeitgeist or spirit of the age that involves sexual freedom, and of course the whole pornography explosion of the 1980s and the 1990s and the internet and everything else has opened up so many opportunities for the most horrific forms of sexual expression that the world has known, and it's gone mainstream, and there's no real surprise that the world is sucking the church into its vortex."Swanson ignores the fact that being attracted to adults of the same sex is not in the same moral category as harming children. This is sloppy moral reasoning, full stop. Furthermore, he conveniently forgets that child abuse and other forms of sexual misconduct have existed since time immemorial, and are not recent phenomena. To blame Phillips' infidelity (or any other acts of sexual misconduct) on a real or imagined sexual revolution is to be woefully confused.
Dave Buehner argued that directing one's sexual energy at one's spouse inoculates couples against adultery. At the 24:03 mark, he argued that sexual temptation can be corrected by redirecting it at the marriage bed.
"The Bible talks about repentance. It doesn't say replace sin with nothing. It actually talks about replacing it with something...The marriage bed is holy. 1 Corinthians 7 says if your burn, get married. If you have a sexual problem, take your sexual energy and take it into this holy marriage bed, this thing that's pure and undefiled, and use your sexual energy there that two will become one. Rather than sex leading you into sin, let it lead you into unity with your wife."At the 24:52 mark, Buehner claimed that people stray when their spouses don't provide a sexual outlet.
"When that vow is broken, then a wife or a husband is turning their spouse over to be tempted by the Devil. You're turning your spouse over to say, 'Devil, have at my husband or my wife. I was the protection of that sexual desire. I was the outlet, and I've decided that I would rather that person be tempted by the Devil.'"I was disgusted. Adulterous spouses make a conscious choice to engage in infidelity, but Buehner's comment practically absolves them of responsibility. The betrayed spouse is scapegoated for allegedly not putting out and given the unrealistic task of being someone else's moral gatekeeper. I hope he was not implying that this was the case in the Phillips' marriage and thereby deflecting responsibility off of Doug Phillips for his inappropriate relationship.
Swanson agreed with Buehner's statements. As an example, Swanson described a time when his wife was talking with church elders' wives who wanted to know how to support their husbands. Swanson's wife reminded them of their conjugal duties outlined in 1 Corinthians 7. Again, sex was understood as a wife's duty and a husband's entitlement instead of an act of mutual pleasure and intimacy.
Swanson concluded the program with a warning about excessive involvement in "parachurch" organizations -- that is, Christian organizations that are distinct from churches. While there is nothing wrong with parachurch organizations, believers must be accountable to local churches, he insisted. Since the program touched on Doug Phillips, I wondered if this was a reference to Vision Forum. Were Swanson's admonishments about "parachurch" organizations a jab at Phillips' ministry, or an innocent remark about the importance of accountability in church communities? I don't know.
In conclusion, Swanson and Buehner not only failed to address the bigger moral questions of the Doug Phillips scandal, but revealed their toxic attitudes toward sexuality. First, Swanson attributed Doug Phillips' infidelity (and that of other Christian leaders) to sin, pride, and a fallen world. He failed to consider that the Phillips scandal might point to larger problems within the Christian Patriarchy movement, such as lack of accountability for men, attitudes of male entitlement, and a misogynist culture than leaves women vulnerable.
Second, Swanson and Buehner promoted unhealthy ideas about sexuality, claiming that they represented some Biblical ideal of marital purity. For example, ample sex within marriage does not necessarily preclude adultery. Buehner assumes that adultery occurs when spouses (read: wives) fail to 'put out', ignoring other culprits such as boredom, loneliness, and entitlement. However, sex should never be an obligation, and should always take place with the enthusiastic consent of both partners. No one is obligated to have sex on command. Couples should instead approach sex as a consensual, mutually enjoyable form of intimacy instead of a commanded chore.
Was Swanson and Buehner talking about marital sexuality in general, or were their words a subtle jab at Doug Phillips' wife? I don't know. What I do know is that attitudes such as these do not offer insight into the Phillips' scandal, but instead demonstrate the flawed thinking of some fundamentalists. If communities wish to address sexual misconduct, they need to address the real roots of such misconduct instead of responding with stereotypes and misconceptions.
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Commentary Tidbits
Washington Post: Who would God discriminate against?
Political Research Associates: Profiles on the Right: World Congress of Families
Think Progress: U.S. Catholic Bishops Insist Upon Discriminating Against LGBT People
Homeschoolers Anonymous: So...About that "Homeschooled Hero" George Washington
Detroit Metro Times: Beware of the Christian Right’s Revisionist History
The Advocate: Harassing Transgender Minors, the Lowest Low
RH Reality Check: Anatomy of the War on Women: How the Koch Brothers Are Funding the Anti-Choice Agenda
Becoming Worldly: “We All Sin:” A 15 Step Path To Forgiveness for Doug Phillips
Huffington Post: Doug Phillips: The Big Scandal You Didn't Hear About and Why It Matters
Love, Joy, Feminism: "The Female Sin of the Internet”
Broken Daughters: My Sympathies: A Letter to D.P.
That Mom: Thinking Thoughtfully About Doug Phillips' Resignation: How the Patriocentrists Raise Daughters
Political Research Associates: Profiles on the Right: World Congress of Families
Think Progress: U.S. Catholic Bishops Insist Upon Discriminating Against LGBT People
Homeschoolers Anonymous: So...About that "Homeschooled Hero" George Washington
Detroit Metro Times: Beware of the Christian Right’s Revisionist History
The Advocate: Harassing Transgender Minors, the Lowest Low
RH Reality Check: Anatomy of the War on Women: How the Koch Brothers Are Funding the Anti-Choice Agenda
Becoming Worldly: “We All Sin:” A 15 Step Path To Forgiveness for Doug Phillips
Huffington Post: Doug Phillips: The Big Scandal You Didn't Hear About and Why It Matters
Love, Joy, Feminism: "The Female Sin of the Internet”
Broken Daughters: My Sympathies: A Letter to D.P.
That Mom: Thinking Thoughtfully About Doug Phillips' Resignation: How the Patriocentrists Raise Daughters
News Tidbits
Reuters: Global survey on family, gays, won't change doctrine, says Vatican
Huffington Post: Rick Santorum Renews Call to Defeat UN Disabilities Treaty
Christian Post: Art of Homemaking Conference Draws More Than 1,000 Women; Michelle Duggar Encourages Mothers
Washington Post: Most Republicans, evangelicals support ENDA
Raw Story: Alabama Republican: LGBT people ‘need to go back to California or Vermont or wherever’
Hawaii Civil Beat: Hawaii Police Union President Says He Wouldn’t Enforce Gay Marriage Law
Keene Sentinel: Support of lesbian gets mother booted from Tennessee church
Huffington Post: Rick Santorum Renews Call to Defeat UN Disabilities Treaty
Christian Post: Art of Homemaking Conference Draws More Than 1,000 Women; Michelle Duggar Encourages Mothers
Washington Post: Most Republicans, evangelicals support ENDA
Raw Story: Alabama Republican: LGBT people ‘need to go back to California or Vermont or wherever’
Hawaii Civil Beat: Hawaii Police Union President Says He Wouldn’t Enforce Gay Marriage Law
Keene Sentinel: Support of lesbian gets mother booted from Tennessee church
Monday, November 4, 2013
Commentary Tidbits
Away Point: Captive Virgins, Polygamy, Sex Slaves: What Marriage Would Look Like if We Actually Followed the Bible
Spiritual Sounding Board: Doug Phillips: Question about Pastoral Position, Timeline of Events, and Understanding True Repentance
Watch the Shepherd: Vision Forum and Friends: Turn Your Eyes Upon Jesus
Alex Reed: Subsidizing Hate: A Proposal to Reform the Internal Revenue Service's Methodology Test
Feminist in Spite of Them: Self-Preservation and Mental Health
Alternet: Surprise! Atheist Marriages May Last Longer Than Christian Ones
Kimberly Knight: Stop Saying “homosexual lifestyle”
Heresy in the Heartland: Of Beef Stroganoff and Italian Subs
Right Wing Watch: Right-Wing Groups Gear Up To Oppose Disability Rights Treaty, Again
Spiritual Sounding Board: Doug Phillips: Question about Pastoral Position, Timeline of Events, and Understanding True Repentance
Watch the Shepherd: Vision Forum and Friends: Turn Your Eyes Upon Jesus
Alex Reed: Subsidizing Hate: A Proposal to Reform the Internal Revenue Service's Methodology Test
Feminist in Spite of Them: Self-Preservation and Mental Health
Alternet: Surprise! Atheist Marriages May Last Longer Than Christian Ones
Kimberly Knight: Stop Saying “homosexual lifestyle”
Heresy in the Heartland: Of Beef Stroganoff and Italian Subs
Right Wing Watch: Right-Wing Groups Gear Up To Oppose Disability Rights Treaty, Again
News Tidbits
Washington Post: Supreme Court to hear new case on religion in public life
On Top Magazine: FRC Prays For God To Block Gay Protections Bill ENDA From Passing
Pink News: Couple sue New Jersey Governor Chris Christie for signing law to ban ‘gay cure’ therapy
The Advocate: Are Evangelicals 'Evolving' on LGBT Issues?
On Top Magazine: FRC Prays For God To Block Gay Protections Bill ENDA From Passing
Pink News: Couple sue New Jersey Governor Chris Christie for signing law to ban ‘gay cure’ therapy
The Advocate: Are Evangelicals 'Evolving' on LGBT Issues?
Sunday, November 3, 2013
The Botkin's "Ready for Real Life" Webinar, Part V
Introduction: Botkins Launch Webinar on Making Kids "Ready for Real Life"
Part I: Ready for What?
Part II: Are Your Children Ready for Real Life?
Part III: Arts and Culture
Part IV: Science and Medicine
Part V: History and Law
Part VI: Vocations
Part VII: Q&A Session
Conclusion
In part V of the Botkin's "Ready for Real Life" webinar, the Botkin family discusses the role of history and law in homeschooling curricula. Much of the webinar focused on teaching children a fundamentalist Christian interpretation of history and law, with obedience to God as a seminal virtue.
At the beginning of "Ready to Lead in the Gates", Geoffrey Botkin encouraged parents to raise children to be leaders, to "stand at the gates" without shame. At the 1:22 mark, he once again warned homeschooling parents about alleged "enemies" who rage against their efforts.
Geoffrey Botkin clearly believes that fundamentalist homeschooling families will have a massive impact on society. On the 4:39 mark, he shared his vision for Christian homeschool families establishing a thousand-year Christian civilization.
Geoffrey celebrated Isidore of Seville, a 7th century archbishop who compiled the Etymologiae, an exhaustive encyclopedia and curriculum Kings, princes, & statesmen who studied from the Etymologiae became nation-builders, Geoffrey said. However, the Etymologiae is out of date, so homeschooling families should reflect on what books and subjects make up their homeschool curricula.
In the Botkin home, Geoffrey explained, children are taught a range of subjects with a scriptural foundation: scriptural literacy, dominion, patriarchy, theonomy, the five solae of the Protestant Reformation, and applying scripture to life. As extensions of this scriptural foundation, the Botkin children are also taught about family life, multigenerational visions, history, the scriptural foundations of civil society, and the free market as an expression of scriptural liberty. To my amusement (and consternation), the Botkins also teach young earth theology and the great flood as a historical event, as Geoffrey explains at the 12:46 mark.
Tell that to ex-fundamentalists who were desperately unhappy, I thought. Tell that to countless people who are happy without Christian fundamentalism.
Biblical law is a delight rather than a burden, he claimed, adding that children will find rest for their souls if they take up the "yoke" of God's law. On the other hand, if one's children reject God's law, they will become "outlaws" and find themselves on the side of the wicked, he warned.
Geoffrey's son Isaac spoke next, categorizing all law as either natural law, positive law, or God's law. Isaac claims that Jeremiah 17:9 ("The heart is deceitful above all things") shows natural law to be insufficient, and that Romans 13 ("the authorities are God’s servants") shows that positive law is insufficient because civil authorities have a responsibility to God. Ultimately, the purpose of any law is to honor God, and obedience to God's law will bestow more happiness than any legal system humans could design, Isaac insisted. He elaborated on this at the 19:29 mark.
In their haste to glorify laws based on the Bible, the Botkins ignore barbaric laws in the Bible (which themselves were man-made, ironically). I would rather live in an America under the Bill of Rights than one under ancient laws condoning slavery, forced marriage, honor killing, religious persecution, and draconian punishments for trivial offenses. I would rather live in a country that acknowledges the Geneva Convention and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights than one that reduces people to chattel or expendable vermin. This is not to say that the U.S. human rights record is perfect, or that its ideals have been fully realized, only that its secular democracy is far superior to the state outlined in Deuteronomy and Leviticus.
Furthermore, the Botkins' blind praise for "God's law" ignores just how dysfunctional Christian theocracies have been throughout history. The European wars of religion following the Protestant Reformation, Savonarola's Florence, and the Salem witch trials are but a few examples of the flawed results of such ambitions.
David Botkin offered Nazi Germany as an example of a country that did not honor God's law. He claimed that because Germans feared a communist takeover of Germany, they brought the Nazis to power. When the German people did not want to take responsibility for the results of that election, and thus the Nazis turned the country into a "single-state democracy". Covetousness lead the Third Reich to invade neighboring countries, while evolutionary thinking resulted in their attempted extermination of other races, he argued. These "national sins" had devastating consequences for Germany, given that God's laws "will not be mocked", David reminded listeners. God uses war as a tool of judgment, and World War II cost Nazi Germany dearly.
David Botkin's history of the Third Reich was littered with problems. First, I find it ironic that a regime that practiced offensive war and ethnic cleansing would offend a deity who commanded both in the Hebrew Bible. Also, by depicting Nazi Germany as a country in rebellion against God, David ignored the fact that Germany was solidly Christian during the Third Reich, and that some Nazis wove Christianity into Nazi ideology. Nazi racism, not evolution, produced the Holocaust, with earlier Christian anti-Semitism setting the stage for Nazi racial policy. Finally, David's notion of "national sin" is problematic, as not all Germans were equally accountable for the Third Reich's atrocities. What about Germans who actively resisted the Nazis? What about the White Rose activists, the Rosenstrasse protesters, the German "Righteous Among the Nations", and other Germans who struggled against the Nazis? The idea that World War II was the Botkins' God punishing innocent and guilty alike is one I reject.
Geoffrey Botkin echoed his son's statements, telling listeners that all people and nations are subject to God's law. At the 25:33 mark, he warned that terrifying cosmic judgment awaits those who disobey God.
To be fair, Victoria had some positive advice for parents teaching their children history. For example, she reminded listeners that all history authors have their own perspective, and since none are perfectly objective, it's important to read several books on a particular topic in history. Unfortunately, she also espoused her family's beliefs about God in history, ascribing historical events to God's will. For instance, she claimed that the retreat of "pagan" Mongol invaders in Europe and the failure of the Spanish Armada were God's judgment against them and a deliverance for Christians.
The Botkins spent the remainder of the webinar discussing the role of economics (complete with a defense of the free market and jabs at the federal reserve) and military history in homeschool curricula. Geoffrey recapped with a discussion of God's authority, a father's authority within the family, and the importance of teaching the Bible to children.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Part V of the Botkins' "Ready for Real Life" webinar contained the following themes:
Hierarchy and obedience: The Botkins' understand the world as a hierarchy, with children submitting to parents, wives submitting to husbands, and governments submitting to God.
God's law as the ideal root of all law: The Botkins believe that all valid law must honor God and stem from scripture. Governments and legal systems not rooted in the Bible were framed as inferior at best and defiant at worst. Unjust elements of scriptural law were ignored.
History as a cosmic story: The Botkins, like other fundamentalist homeschooling voices, attribute historical events to divine intervention. History, in their eyes, is a record of divine intervention, as well as how humans obey or reject God across civilizations. In doing so, they shoehorn history into a narrow narrative, oversimplifying history and ignoring the complex causes of historical events.
Stay tuned for part VI!
Part I: Ready for What?
Part II: Are Your Children Ready for Real Life?
Part III: Arts and Culture
Part IV: Science and Medicine
Part V: History and Law
Part VI: Vocations
Part VII: Q&A Session
Conclusion
In part V of the Botkin's "Ready for Real Life" webinar, the Botkin family discusses the role of history and law in homeschooling curricula. Much of the webinar focused on teaching children a fundamentalist Christian interpretation of history and law, with obedience to God as a seminal virtue.
At the beginning of "Ready to Lead in the Gates", Geoffrey Botkin encouraged parents to raise children to be leaders, to "stand at the gates" without shame. At the 1:22 mark, he once again warned homeschooling parents about alleged "enemies" who rage against their efforts.
"Your children have enemies today. There are a lot of children out there who have enemies they know nothing about. You parents have enemies. The very fact that you're homeschooling your children is a remarkable statement against the current status quo, and there are people who have special interests in that status quo who really dislike what you're doing, a lot, and not just a little bit. They're very vigorously and viciously opposed to what you're doing."Christian homeschoolers have the freedom to give their children a free, generous, and fully-rounded education, according to Geoffrey. A home education should prepare children to serve as leaders in politics, the judiciary, business, media, religious communities, and other realms.
Geoffrey Botkin clearly believes that fundamentalist homeschooling families will have a massive impact on society. On the 4:39 mark, he shared his vision for Christian homeschool families establishing a thousand-year Christian civilization.
"Ten, fifteen, twenty years from now, what will history say about the homeschool families of the 21st century? What will they say a hundred years from now? This is my vision, and I want you parents to share it with me. I want historians to say those parents who took the risks, made the sacrifices, laid the foundation for the building of Christian civilization, and that foundation was used by families for a thousand years, that's what I want them to say. The foundation that you come up with, the things you teach your children, the subject matter, the generous education you give them will be used by families for a thousand years because it showed everyone what the kingdom of Christ looked like and what the tools of civilization were."Sadly, he fails to understand that society isn't morphing into a "Christian civilization", and that many Americans would reject his dominionism outright. Time for a reality check, Geoffrey, I thought.
Geoffrey celebrated Isidore of Seville, a 7th century archbishop who compiled the Etymologiae, an exhaustive encyclopedia and curriculum Kings, princes, & statesmen who studied from the Etymologiae became nation-builders, Geoffrey said. However, the Etymologiae is out of date, so homeschooling families should reflect on what books and subjects make up their homeschool curricula.
In the Botkin home, Geoffrey explained, children are taught a range of subjects with a scriptural foundation: scriptural literacy, dominion, patriarchy, theonomy, the five solae of the Protestant Reformation, and applying scripture to life. As extensions of this scriptural foundation, the Botkin children are also taught about family life, multigenerational visions, history, the scriptural foundations of civil society, and the free market as an expression of scriptural liberty. To my amusement (and consternation), the Botkins also teach young earth theology and the great flood as a historical event, as Geoffrey explains at the 12:46 mark.
"We want them to have historical literacy, beginning where history begins in the Bible. Genesis is incredibly important. All through their life, your children are going to run into people who are being tested morally by what they really believe about a young earth and an old earth, and those who side with the old earth theory are moving away from Biblical truth and a Biblical foundation. They're on shaky ground. The earth is young, and the Bible explains why. They need to know about the worldwide flood, that it really did happen and when it happened."At the 14:56 mark, Geoffrey urged parents to teach their children about the relationship between scripture and civil society. America has "walked away" from liberty and justice because it has abandoned the Bible, he claimed.
"Teach them about civil society and its scriptural foundations and find in the Bible where it talks about this, the law and its scriptural foundations ... Liberty -- and that doesn't mean libertinism, which just means every man just gets to do what's right in his own eyes -- and its scriptural foundations, liberty. Liberty and justice are the foundations of the United States experiment, and we've walked away from it. Why? Because we've walked away from scripture."Biblical law serves as the foundation for everything in their homeschooling curriculum, he emphasized, arguing that obedience to Biblical law is the key to all happiness and success in life.
Tell that to ex-fundamentalists who were desperately unhappy, I thought. Tell that to countless people who are happy without Christian fundamentalism.
Biblical law is a delight rather than a burden, he claimed, adding that children will find rest for their souls if they take up the "yoke" of God's law. On the other hand, if one's children reject God's law, they will become "outlaws" and find themselves on the side of the wicked, he warned.
Geoffrey's son Isaac spoke next, categorizing all law as either natural law, positive law, or God's law. Isaac claims that Jeremiah 17:9 ("The heart is deceitful above all things") shows natural law to be insufficient, and that Romans 13 ("the authorities are God’s servants") shows that positive law is insufficient because civil authorities have a responsibility to God. Ultimately, the purpose of any law is to honor God, and obedience to God's law will bestow more happiness than any legal system humans could design, Isaac insisted. He elaborated on this at the 19:29 mark.
"Christians need to be able to understand that the purpose of law, whether it's civil law of a government, or the rules of a church, or the rules of a household -- the purpose of those laws are to honor God and his standards so that we can obey him, and we're not pursing our own happiness, we're not doing what we think is orderly, we're actually trying to pursue God's standards since we know that his law is perfect. And we also know from Psalm 119 that adherence to his law will result in far greater happiness and order than we can ever define on our own sinful human terms."Isaac split all law into a false dichotomy between "man's law" and "God's law" at the 20:13 mark. Outrageously, he made no distinctions between democracy, dictatorship, and sharia, arguing that all are "fallen and destructive" vis–Ã –vis divine law.
"At the end of the day, there's only two kinds of law. There is God's law, and there is man's law. A dictatorship is one man making up his own law. A democracy is a whole bunch of men making up law. Sharia law is one man making up law and ascribing it to a false God. Only God's law in his revealed word is going to be any different from man's law ... Human law is fallen and destructive, and it's destructive to the principle of theonomy, which is pursuit of God's law."This kind of oversimplification is dangerous. Dictatorships, Islamic theocracies, and representative democracies are not the same thing! They do not hold their leaders to the same levels of accountability, and they do not afford citizens the same rights. Isaac Botkin's oversimplification betrays his ignorance about the ways that governmental systems operate in the real world.
In their haste to glorify laws based on the Bible, the Botkins ignore barbaric laws in the Bible (which themselves were man-made, ironically). I would rather live in an America under the Bill of Rights than one under ancient laws condoning slavery, forced marriage, honor killing, religious persecution, and draconian punishments for trivial offenses. I would rather live in a country that acknowledges the Geneva Convention and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights than one that reduces people to chattel or expendable vermin. This is not to say that the U.S. human rights record is perfect, or that its ideals have been fully realized, only that its secular democracy is far superior to the state outlined in Deuteronomy and Leviticus.
Furthermore, the Botkins' blind praise for "God's law" ignores just how dysfunctional Christian theocracies have been throughout history. The European wars of religion following the Protestant Reformation, Savonarola's Florence, and the Salem witch trials are but a few examples of the flawed results of such ambitions.
David Botkin offered Nazi Germany as an example of a country that did not honor God's law. He claimed that because Germans feared a communist takeover of Germany, they brought the Nazis to power. When the German people did not want to take responsibility for the results of that election, and thus the Nazis turned the country into a "single-state democracy". Covetousness lead the Third Reich to invade neighboring countries, while evolutionary thinking resulted in their attempted extermination of other races, he argued. These "national sins" had devastating consequences for Germany, given that God's laws "will not be mocked", David reminded listeners. God uses war as a tool of judgment, and World War II cost Nazi Germany dearly.
David Botkin's history of the Third Reich was littered with problems. First, I find it ironic that a regime that practiced offensive war and ethnic cleansing would offend a deity who commanded both in the Hebrew Bible. Also, by depicting Nazi Germany as a country in rebellion against God, David ignored the fact that Germany was solidly Christian during the Third Reich, and that some Nazis wove Christianity into Nazi ideology. Nazi racism, not evolution, produced the Holocaust, with earlier Christian anti-Semitism setting the stage for Nazi racial policy. Finally, David's notion of "national sin" is problematic, as not all Germans were equally accountable for the Third Reich's atrocities. What about Germans who actively resisted the Nazis? What about the White Rose activists, the Rosenstrasse protesters, the German "Righteous Among the Nations", and other Germans who struggled against the Nazis? The idea that World War II was the Botkins' God punishing innocent and guilty alike is one I reject.
Geoffrey Botkin echoed his son's statements, telling listeners that all people and nations are subject to God's law. At the 25:33 mark, he warned that terrifying cosmic judgment awaits those who disobey God.
"All men in all nations are equal before the law of God, and it's binding. It's binding on the Jews, it's binding on the Christians, it's binding on the gentiles, it's binding on every single nation. The Lord held Nineveh accountable, and Tyre and Sodom. They were all accountable to God's law, and that's why he ultimately had to judge them because they wouldn't turn, they wouldn't repent, they wouldn't submit themselves and make themselves subject.Geoffrey returned to the study of history, slamming education reformers such as Harold Rugg and John Dewey as "historical revisionists". At the 29:00 mark, he poured his wrath on Rugg and Dewey, accusing them of hating history, time, and eternity (!?).
Now, one reason that the Lord allows you to have several years with their children is so they can understand this fact. They are not allowed, and parents, you're not allowed, and your children need to see that the parents are not allowed to go their own way. They have to obey the Lord in the way that they raise up their families. Daddies, you have to submit to the authority of God Almighty, and wives are required, yes, to submit to the husbands, and this is why husbands, you really need to set this example and show that you literally, you are willing to lose your life in submission to the Lord's authority, and you're willing to lay your life down for your wife."
"Rebellions men like Harold Rugg and John Dewey and the other men who were getting the funds together to rewrite all the textbooks, they hate the past because it is providential. That means God was in charge. God was decreeing everything. Because of that, it's full of meaning. And rebels hate the future because it is unpredictable and uncontrollable. They hate time because it's limited and it reminds them of their appointment with death, and they hate eternity because they cannot control it or they can't access it on their terms. And so rebellious men like Harold Rugg seek to make God and Christ remote from the present by abstracting them from the past and the future. That's why they mess up history. They seek ways to manipulate history by denying Providence and manipulating other men. Your children simply need to know this."David Botkin chimed in, stressing the importance of finding sound, accurate history books. At the 34:13 mark, he claimed that some books sugar-coat history, but he provided no examples of books that do so.
"History also teaches us about the sinful nature of men apart from Christ. As we read sound histories, we learn about what the real world is really like ... There's some historians that try to clean up history and remove some of the wickedness. They paint the world as a happy place where there's no real bad guys, or at worst, just confused people that make some bad decisions, and if you fall victim to this theory of history, it will warp and destroy your ability to really understand the world we live in. I'd like to give you an example. Stalin, in some history books, becomes a nice man with a mustache that's just trying to save the Russian peasants and stop the mean Germans."Victoria Botkin offered guidance on teaching history to homeschooled children, arguing that parents and children learning about history together is the best strategy. She claimed that she knew nearly nothing about history when she began homeschooling, a result of her public school education.
To be fair, Victoria had some positive advice for parents teaching their children history. For example, she reminded listeners that all history authors have their own perspective, and since none are perfectly objective, it's important to read several books on a particular topic in history. Unfortunately, she also espoused her family's beliefs about God in history, ascribing historical events to God's will. For instance, she claimed that the retreat of "pagan" Mongol invaders in Europe and the failure of the Spanish Armada were God's judgment against them and a deliverance for Christians.
The Botkins spent the remainder of the webinar discussing the role of economics (complete with a defense of the free market and jabs at the federal reserve) and military history in homeschool curricula. Geoffrey recapped with a discussion of God's authority, a father's authority within the family, and the importance of teaching the Bible to children.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Part V of the Botkins' "Ready for Real Life" webinar contained the following themes:
Hierarchy and obedience: The Botkins' understand the world as a hierarchy, with children submitting to parents, wives submitting to husbands, and governments submitting to God.
God's law as the ideal root of all law: The Botkins believe that all valid law must honor God and stem from scripture. Governments and legal systems not rooted in the Bible were framed as inferior at best and defiant at worst. Unjust elements of scriptural law were ignored.
History as a cosmic story: The Botkins, like other fundamentalist homeschooling voices, attribute historical events to divine intervention. History, in their eyes, is a record of divine intervention, as well as how humans obey or reject God across civilizations. In doing so, they shoehorn history into a narrow narrative, oversimplifying history and ignoring the complex causes of historical events.
Stay tuned for part VI!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)