May 3, 2008
May 17, 2008
June 7, 2008
The Religious Right
First
delivered at UUCB on December 10, 2006
This sermon was presented within the context of a worship
service adapting Workshop #7 "The Radical Right" in the Welcoming
Congregation Handbook: Resources for Affirming Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, and/or
Transgender People for UUCB congregational use.
Identifying
the Religious Right is tricky as terms are thrown about indiscriminately.
-
Conservative Christians
-
Fundamentalists
-
Evangelical Christians
The
Religious Right is comprised of all of the above, but not all of the above are
part of the Religious Right. Clearly not
all Christians belong to the Christian right, but neither in fact, do all
fundamentalists. President Jimmy
Carter identifies himself as an evangelical Christian and he couldn’t remotely
be considered a member of the Religious Right. In fact, he was one of their
earliest victims of concerted political attack.
The
Religious Right and the Political Right are not synonymous although they overlap
quite a bit. This relationship is fairly difficult to dissect. Who is using
whom?
A recent
book by David Kuo, a special
assistant to the president from 2001 to 2003, deputy director of the White House
office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, is highly damning in its
disgust with the politicians openly mocking the religious leaders who believe
they have the president’s ear. Previously, John J. DiIulio Jr., described his
tenure in the White House in a January 2003 Esquire article in which the
phrase "It's the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis" was coined.
It is
important to keep in mind the Religious Right is one wing of a conservative
movement that includes the secular, political right and the neo-Nazi far right.
The Religious Right should not be confused with either one of these groups, but
should certainly be given proper credit for providing the grassroots activists
doing the groundwork for the social change they envision and desire.
Quite
frankly, I’m of the opinion the Religious Right is being grossly exploited by
the secular political right whose idolatrous worship is restricted to capital
gains and power accumulation. Their only concern regarding family values is
valuing families whose votes they can sway.
The Religious Right has been a part of our religious, social and political environment for the last several decades. Too often they have been dismissed as inconsequential, a temporary aberration, a radical fringe movement not to be taken seriously or simply just ignored. On occasion they have been regarded with an over-inflated degree of power. Only in the last several election cycles have alarm bells begun to ring with the appropriate intensity. This is a group that most definitely should not be ignored, but neither should they be considered omnipotent. They can, and should, be challenged.
The Religious Right began as a counter to the Civil Rights movement. They seriously believed the civil rights movement and the liberation movements for women and homosexuals to be the cause of the breakdown of society. In a way they were right. Not about liberation resulting in the breakdown of society, but society does change when power relationships are altered. Of course, the Religious Right believed the changes were for the worse.
They
countered the democratic call for justice, liberation and inclusive
participation of diverse groups with an authoritarian cry for exclusion and
oppression. They feared the social change of the 60s would undermine and rent
the social fabric of the United States. They urgently desired a return to the
past and their perceived norms of the 1940s and 50s. A time when male authority
was unchallenged by women and lesbians and gays were invisible—in short, they
desperately cling to the supremacy of the white heterosexual male.
In the 70s
and 80s, the movement experienced early success attacking gains of the Civil
rights movement, initiating a campaign against homosexuals led by Anita Bryant,
the defeat of the ERA and an attack against abortion rights. Of course their
most visible political success was the coalition formed to elect Ronald Reagan.
We cannot fail to appreciate the impact of Reagan’s 425 judicial appointments
to federal district and US circuit courts of appeal.
The
Christian Right is riddled with irony and hypocrisy. Look at some of the
founding public faces. Jerry Falwell, Jimmy Swaggert, Jim and Tammy Faye
Baker—paragons of virtue all. The quality of character in the movement’s
leadership has hardly improved. These days it seems as if someone is resigning
from a pulpit in disgrace on virtually a weekly basis. Maybe there really is
such a thing as miracles. I find it absolutely miraculous this movement can
continue despite the conclusive and consistent proof of personality-impaired
leadership.
It’s
important for us to understand some of the key tenets and goals of the Religious
Right. As opposed to the majority of Christians who firmly support the
Separation of Church and State, the Religious Right is firmly committed to the
merging of politics and theology. Why? To produce a system of social control.
Their approach to the separation of church and state is that while the state
should not interfere in religion, it is perfectly acceptable for their religious
beliefs to not just influence, but direct and control the power of the state.
They are
reformist in the sense that they wish to reform our institutions through
influence and infiltration to put in place a Christian authority. I must
emphasize that using the modifier “Christian” is, in my opinion, a grossly
inaccurate use of the word. The fundamentalist and literal biblical
interpretation is flawed to say the least. The hermeneutics applied by the
Christian right not only ignores much of contemporary scholarship, but scorns
and ignores it as irrelevant. The fact that the word homosexual never even
existed until the late 19th century does not prevent them from using
scriptural translations that bandy it about with abandon.
“Loretta
Ross of the Center for Democratic Renewal has said that for white fundamentalist
Christians the original sin is considered to be sex whereas for Jews and African
Americans the original sin is thought to be slavery.” A belief in the origin
of sin being associated with sex helps explain why the Christian right is so
shrill in its positions on abortion and homosexuality. These two areas strike at
the heart of male power and control—one through freedom of choice and the
other through freedom of expression.
The Christian Right has been so successful because they did not seek control in the very first election cycle. Their agenda is not one of a temporary exercise of power, but one of permanent dominion. The battle has been fully engaged at the local level. School boards, county commissions and county courts serve as the training ground for future Senators, governors and federal judges.
I use the
word agenda deliberately. I have heard the phrase “right wing conspiracy”
and while I have no doubt there are backroom deals being made from here to
Timbuktu, the Religious Right is not conspiratorial. They have been from
the beginning, and still are, quite open with respect to their beliefs and
goals. I couldn’t put more bizarre words into their mouths if I tried.
Remember, we are talking about a group of people who still advocate Judge Roy
Moore of Alabama for a federal judicial appointment—a man who openly proposed
the death penalty for practicing homosexuals. The movement has leaders who
openly threaten Supreme Court justices and call for the assassination of foreign
leaders.
The
political and religious left has thus far countered the Religious Right
ineffectively to say the least. The response has been one of extreme secularism
providing a smidgeon of legitimate ammunition for Christian right attacks. Now
it is hardly fair for the Religious Right to host Justice Sunday and claim the
Democrats are appointing activist judges who hate Christianity and want to
eradicate religion entirely. This would be a ridiculously hilarious
double-standard if it weren’t taken so seriously by far too many people
subsequently energized to vote—against their own self-interests.
The
Religious Right, with their behavior on Justice Sunday and this inane accusation
of a purported “war on Christmas” reminds me of the Siamese cats in
Disney’s “Lady and the Tramp.” These two obnoxious felines absolutely
wreck the joint. When the human walks in they immediately roll over on their
backs and assume a victim stance casting the innocent dog as the egregious
aggressor. Come to think of it, such behavior reminds me of the political right
as well.
Unfortunately,
the words and deeds of the Religious Right have not only given Christianity a
bad name to the detriment of our liberal Christian brothers and sisters, but it
has soured many progressives and liberals on religion entirely. A pity since
religion does have a legitimate and fulfilling role to play in our lives.
Religion isn’t the problem, misuse of it is.
Rabbi
Michael Lerner’s Network of Spiritual Progressives is
challenging the misuse of religion, God and spirit by the Religious Right while
also challenging the many anti-religious and anti-spiritual assumptions and
behaviors that have increasingly become part of the liberal culture. There is
a place for spirituality to help guide our political choices. I highly
recommend Rabbi Lerner’s book, “The Left Hand of God” and urge everyone to
check out spiritualprogressives.org. Spiritually needy people have become the
foot soldiers of the Religious Right, amazingly effective even when directed to
act against their own self-interests.
If the Religious Right succeeds as a tool of the Political Right, our democratic principles will vanish in the wake of theocratic self-righteousness. It will take a concerted effort to successfully counter a religious movement that is well-funded, operates media outlets, and administers a variey of educational institutions from summer camps to universities.
They have correctly identified a spiritual hunger rampant in the United States and used the weapons of fear and hate-mongering against minorities to satisfy it. They are feeding us junk food. It’s time to get Americans off this unhealthy diet. Our spiritual and political leaders on the left must satisfy our spiritual appetite with a wholesome meal of inclusion with love and justice.
Copyright © 2006
Ann Fuller, December 2006
Resources
Lerner, Michael. The
Left Hand of God: Taking Back Our Country from the Religious Right.
Harper San Francisco. 2006.
Moser, Bob. The
Crusade
Network of
Spiritual Progressives: http://www.loveembodied.org/nspnew/
Pharr, Suzanne. The
Christian Right: A Threat to Democracy in The Welcoming Congregation
Handbook 2nd Ed. Unitarian Universalist Association, Boston, 1999.