Ignorance or bigotry?

Rex Duncan, a member of the Oklahoma House of Representatives, has refused the  “Centennial Qu’ran” offered as a gift by the Governor’s Ethnic American Advisory Council.  Duncan is one of sixteen members of the State House who have refused the offer.  Duncan is free to refuse any gift.  There is nothing that says that he must accept the gift of a Quran, Bible or any other religious text.  Sure, it’s impolite, but well within his rights.  But his rationale for refusing the gift is quite striking.  The Norman Transcript reports that

“Most Oklahomans do not endorse the idea of killing innocent women and children in the name of ideology,” he said in an interview with the Associated Press. Duncan said he objected “to the use of the state Centennial Seal and the state Seal all in an effort to further their (Muslims’) religion.”

However, earlier in the year he accepted a “Centennial Bible”

This spring, the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma distributed copies of a centennial Bible.

Duncan said he was pleased to receive the Bible.

“I don’t know any Christians who run around using the Bible as their basis of justification or instruction booklet to keep killing innocent people,” he said.

This raises a number of interesting questions.  Is Duncan (a member of the First Methodist Church of Tulsa) ignorant of what the Bible says?  Is Duncan unaware of the long history of Christian terrorism in the United States?  Or is he simply being a bigot?

Duncan says that he rejects “killing innocent women and children in the name of ideology”.  It makes me wonder if he has ever read much of the Bible.  Unlike the Qu’ran, the Bible commands genocide in the book of Joshua, specifically calling for the murder of women and children.  Failure to commit genocide is criticised in the books of Judges and Samuel.  The assertion that one would reject the gift of a Qu’ran because it endorses the “killing innocent women and children”, and yet accept a Bible, is ludicrous.

Duncan’s further assertion that he doesn’t “know any Christians who run around using the Bible as their basis of justification or instruction booklet to keep killing innocent people” is equally amazing.  Has he not heard of Eric Rudolph?  What about the Army of God?  The Lambs of Christ and James Kopp (who murdered Dr. Barnett Slepian)?  The Ku Klux Klan?  The organisers of “Paul Hill Days“?  There have been strong suggestions of a connection between the Christian Identity movement and the Oklahoma City bombing.

Duncan’s actions were criticised by Darryl DeBorde, pastor of Braden Park Baptist Church and a board member of the Tulsa Interfaith Alliance

“The Tulsa Interfaith Alliance expects all of our elected officials to treat all of their constituents with dignity and respect,” he said.

“To purposefully condemn and denounce all Oklahomans who are members of one religious body is just wrong, whether they be Muslim, Baptist or anything else.” 

H/T Bruce Prescott.

Non-Christians keep out

Apparently non-Christians are not welcome in Alorton, Illinois.   Signs around the town proclaim that in that town, “Jesus is Lord” (and Randy McCallum is mayor).  According to the St. Louis Post Dispatch:

In this town of 3,000 residents, there are at least 15 churches. Maybe 20. They’re featured prominently on business street corners. They’re also tucked away — hidden almost — on residential blocks.

So you don’t need to travel far to find the good Lord, as they say. In fact, visitors can’t drive into town without a holy hello.

“Welcome to The Village of Alorton,” say two green-and-white billboards with lights shining on them. “Where Jesus is Lord. Randy McCallum Mayor.”

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the US Constitution prohibits the “establishment of religion”.  The Fourteenth Amendment extended this to the States (most state constitutions also mirror the First Amendment anyway).  For a local government body to spend taxpayer money to erect and maintain signs like this is illegal.  Despite this, the mayor of Alorton justifies his contempt for the law and the constitution by blaming her predecessor:

“But that wasn’t my doing,” he said. “They’ve been there at least 13 years. Maybe 14. They were put up before I was mayor.”

So, in her eyes, if you continue to participate in illegal activities that were established by someone else, you’re off the hook.  What idiocy.  Of course, he then continues with the standard “no on is complaining” line:

McCallum identifies himself as a Christian. Still, he said, he recognizes how the signs might be a problem for those who don’t subscribe to the message. McCallum said he would ask the council to remove them if people pushed for it.

“If the community didn’t want that Jesus there, I’d take the signs down immediately,” the mayor said.

Of course, signs like this make it clear to non-Christians that they are unwelcome in the town.  It goes beyond the whole issue of contempt for the law of the land – the people of Alorton are telling people who don’t agree with them “keep out!”  They couldn’t put up a sign that proclaimed the town to be one where a certain race was paramount.  So why do people feel like it’s ok to exclude people from the town on the basis of religion?

Discrimination like this is utterly disgusting.  It appears that there’s a pattern of contempt for the law among mayors of this town anyway.

Former Mayor Callie Mobley, who took office in the early 1980s, said she immediately pushed for the signs. The City Council approved them, and the city paid maybe $250, $350 tops for each, Mobley said. The reason for the signs was simple.

“I believe in one God, one Baptism, and one Lord,” she said.

…

In March 2000, Mobley pleaded guilty of income tax evasion during her federal corruption trial, where she and her husband stood accused of stealing $140,000 from the town. McCallum became mayor.

Of course, the dominionists at Focus on the Family just love this sort of stuff.  Another excuse to whine about discrimination.  Obviously they aren’t bound by the law.  Free exercise of religion only applies to the dominionists and their allies.  Expecting these sorts of Chri$tian groups to obey the law is out of line.  Yep.

H/T Narciblog.

Are non-Christians second-class citizens in the US?

On Thursday morning, history was made when the first Hindu prayer was offered at the opening of the US Senate. Rajan Zed’s prayer, which should have been an important milestone for religious freedom, turned into a display of religious intolerance by the Christian right. The prayer was disrupted by screams of

“Lord Jesus, forgive us father for allowing a prayer of the wicked, which is an abomination in your sight,” the first protester began.

“This is an abomination,” he continued. “We shall have no other gods before You.”

(more at TPM, dKos, AmericaBlog, AUSCS and WaPo)

You would think that this sort of blatantly dishonest bigotry would be repudiated by all but the most extreme nuts. So when Tony Perkins of the (relatively mainstream) Family Research Council comes out in support of these bigots, it tells you what sort of an extremist theocratic organisation the FRC is. Perkins wrote:

There is no question that under the first amendment Zed enjoys freedom in this country that Christians do not enjoy in his home country. But does that mean it is appropriate for him to open the nation’s highest elected body in prayer? I think not.

Under the first amendment Hinduism is no different from any other religion in the eyes of the government.  Of course, the Indian constitution declares that country to be secular, and the government can neither favour nor discriminate against any religion.  So in theory Christians in India have the same rights as Hindus in the US.  But more importantly, the assertion that it isn’t appropriate to for a Hindu to open the Senate in prayer is an outright attack on the US constitution.

What Perkins seems to be saying is that non-Christians are second-class citizens in the US.  That assertion places him clearly within the dominionist camp, as is an increasing proportion of the religious right.