Opponents of US Dominionists

[Recusant]

People who're willing to publicly oppose the Christofascist agenda will necessarily become more prominent as the agenda is advanced. Noting the incoming government's further empowerment of power-hungry Christian loony-tunes, also noting harbingers of public endorsement of religiously motivated repression--things are heating up.

I hope this thread will chronicle an active opposition but that remains to be seen.


"Satanic Temple begins religious release program at Ohio elementary school" | Cleveland.com

A public elementary school will begin offering a religious release program for students sponsored by the Satanic Temple, reportedly in response to a Christian program already established in the school system.

Hellion Academy of Independent Learning (HAIL) begins this month at Edgewood Elementary School in Marysville, according to a Facebook post from the Satanic Temple. Students can attend the program once a month during school hours but off the school campus.

An ordained minister with the Satanic Temple, the only Satanic religious organization recognized as a church by the IRS and federal courts, tells WCMH Channel 4 that a parent approached the group and asked for HAIL to be offered at the school.

The minister, June Everett, tells WCMH that HAIL is only offered when requested and only at schools where other religious programs already are established.

LifeWise Academy, an Ohio-based program operating in 200 schools in Ohio, is offered at Edgewood Elementary School, WCMH reports. LifeWise removes participating students from schools for 55 minutes once per week to study the Bible.

The parent requested HAIL as an alternative to LifeWise, Everett tells WCMH. "We aren't trying to shut the LifeWise Academy down, but I do think a lot of school districts don't realize when they open the door for one religion, they open it for all of them," Everett said.

[Continues . . .]

[Firebird]

I've donated to the Satanic Temple for years. Located in my state as well!

[Recusant]

James Talarico, the Democratic candidate for US Senate in Texas, has been ruffling the feathers of Christofascists. They don't like him spouting the words of Jesus, which directly contradict their version of Christianity.

"Christian right calls James Talarico 'demonic' — for quoting Jesus" | Salon

James Talarico has been found guilty of quoting Jesus. The sentence he uttered, according to right-wing media, was "demonic" and "blasphemous," exposing him as a "fake Christian." Talarico is running for the U.S. Senate in Texas on a platform The New Yorker recently described as basically the New Testament. One Newsmax host accused him of using fake Bible passages.

The passages in question are familiar ones, found in Matthew 22 and Matthew 25. Love God and love your neighbor. Feed the hungry, heal the sick, welcome the stranger. They are, in fact, in the Bible.

The right's attacks on Talarico aren't about him, or at least not entirely. They're about a much older argument — one progressive Christianity has been losing in public for 50 years — about whose version of the faith gets to count as real. The answer to that question has consequences far beyond any Senate race. When Christianity becomes a tool of power rather than a challenge to it, it doesn't just damage the church. It destabilizes democracy. We are watching that happen in real time.

[. . .]

The Christian right spent decades narrowing the Gospel down to two issues, abortion and gay marriage. Talarico told Stephen Colbert something that's obvious to anyone who has read past the cover of the Bible, rather than carrying it around for show: Jesus never mentions either of those things. But in Matthew 25, words in plain language, attributed explicitly to Jesus, tell us we will be judged by how we have treated the hungry, the sick, the stranger and the imprisoned.

[Continues . . .]

[Icarus]

If I was a Texan, I might vote for Talarico. I do not believe in his religion but he has been pretty good about restraining himself from demanding that we commit ourselves to the Jesus thing.

[Recusant]

Given that he's running against one of the most corrupt politicians in the US (that we know of) it wouldn't be a difficult choice for me.

[Recusant]

These guys are trying, but I don't think they're going to get much action from atheists. Probably not from liberal/non-fascist believers either. More emphasis on kinder, gentler religion to counter the frothing right-wing evangelical MAGA types? I admire the basic intention while being skeptical that their proposed path forward is promising.

"To save democracy, you might want to go to church" | Vox

To the average observer concerned with the future of American democracy, it might be easy to conclude that religion has been part of the problem — particularly over the last few years. Right-wing religious leaders, including the leading Southern Baptist televangelist Robert Jeffress, have endorsed "Christian nationalism"; other evangelical pastors and conservative Catholic intellectuals have been openly pondering if America should become more of a theocracy; Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who once called for an "American crusade," evoking bloody medieval religious campaigns, has referenced Christian theology in statements about the Iran war.

To critics, these examples show that American religion is becoming an active threat to pluralism and tolerance — the ideas that make American democracy work.

But what if the solution to this anti-democratic slide is also religion — more religion than the US currently has?

A new book by two thinkers from opposing ends of the ideological spectrum argues that declining levels of religiosity across the board, but particularly among liberals, have deepened political polarization, which in turn has corroded democratic norms. Now, they argue, one of the most effective ways for liberals to stand up for democracy is to engage with religious communities and their scriptural traditions with more respect, openness, and curiosity. The authors also urge liberals who are believers themselves to embrace organized religion and return to it themselves.

Conservative evangelical Christian Matthew Kaemingk and liberal Muslim writer Shadi Hamid argue in Can Religion Save Democracy? that there's a necessary and unique role that religious institutions and organized religion must play in American public life. Religion serves a fundamental regulating purpose, tempering emotions, fundamentalism, and nihilism. And when that fades away, those base instincts and emotions get channeled into our politics.

They write:

As Americans exit churches in droves, they're not leaving behind their religious passions. Instead, they're transferring those passions to the political battlefield. In this new post-religious context, Christian faith and Scripture function less as moral constraints within evangelical circles and more as political cudgels to use against one's opponents.

"We're not trying to convert [nonbelievers]," Hamid told me in an interview. "Believing is one thing, but believing that religion can play a positive role is another. And we want to encourage secular readers to embrace the second proposition, even if they don't believe religion is true or don't believe God exists."

[Continues . . .]

I note that they give some "credit" to New Atheism for the decline in religion in the US. In my opinion that seems like a desperation move--religion has been digging its own hole for a while now and doesn't need help from atheists.

[billy rubin]

i think that religion in the public sector has been around long enough for its tendencies and influence to be apparent. im not sure what these people think is going to be different by . certainly i wouldnt contribute money and effort to the cause.

Now, they argue, one of the most effective ways for liberals to stand up for democracy is to engage with religious communities and their scriptural traditions with more respect, openness, and curiosity.

how about we dont do ^^^that

[Dark Lightning]

i think that religion in the public sector has been around long enough for its tendencies and influence to be apparent. im not sure what these people think is going to be different by . certainly i wouldnt contribute money and effort to the cause.

Now, they argue, one of the most effective ways for liberals to stand up for democracy is to engage with religious communities and their scriptural traditions with more respect, openness, and curiosity.

how about we dont do ^^^that

Agreed, though I don't know an effective answer. I'll have to think about that. I've seen where people who are not religious get together for meetings of some sort, but I haven't paid a lot of attention to that. It's an atheist's "thing" to not do those sort of activities. We're too independent to just join into an activity without a reason.

[Recusant]

The idea doesn't sound like a good earner, and that's important with many religious types. I don't see a "Kindness of Jesus" channel in the future. How do you compete with powerhouses like Joel Osteen the late Jim Bakker?