![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Well, now I know why they were playing this one down a bit, compared to the previous two; this one is much more religious even than the previous meetings. This one is a revival meeting in no uncertain terms, and they talk rather more forthrightly about their religious goals for the United States. Much of the session had a Christian Reconstructionist-lite feel to it, with Bishop Wellington Boone saying things like this: "How are the people gonna shut us up? How are a bunch of liberals who don't have a clue gonna shut us up? You were saying, that we are, we're intolerant? Intolerant?! We are become the nation that allowed for all these other people to come in here to be able to worship their God! Yes, we are Bible-believing, Bible-carrying people, you say you're trying to proselytise - what do you mean? Of course! What do you think, they're going to get saved by osmosis?! (applause starts) Of course we're gonna get people saved! Of course we're gonna talk about Jesus! (standing ovation starts) Of course we're gonna say the name of Jesus without compromise!" (All emphasis in original.)
There's also a recurring theme, particularly in the first hour, about needing to pray for authority, and respect authority. This fits in with the hierarchical worldview, and what we know about Alito's deference for anyone in a position of authority - his general assumption has been that the rich and/or powerful generally have very good reasons for doing what they do, and should be granted significant amounts of doubt and leeway in that regard.
In terms of the courts, they've moved the "bad judicial system" line further back again; it used to be the big focus was Roe v. Wade, but that's not even mentioned anymore; they went back to the rulings against teacher-led student prayer in 1961 last time; this time, they've moved the goalpost all the way back to 1947, in Everson v. Board of Education, where, "Justice Hugo Black changed the meaning of 'Separation of Church & State'" in a dissent where state funding for religious school bussing systems was upheld. They like the ruling, but point to this case as the start of a supposed judicial war on Christianity. Tony Perkins (Family Research Council), Ed Meese (Reagan administration), and Alan Sears (Alliance Defense Fund, an anti-gay/fundamentalist legal group) spends a lot of time talking about this, in particular. IIRC, the ADF actually backs up the "bad decisions" line to 1812, Marlbury v. Madison, and do not think the courts should be able to rule laws unconstitutional at all. But that's not mentioned here and I may be confusing my fundamentalist legal entities.
The fundamentalist right as represented here firmly believe that Alito will rule in exactly the ways they want to. James Dobson issues one of several ACTION ITEMs to support Alito. Falwell calls the Alito nomination the culmination of 30 years of work - "I feel that this is a crucial, crucial time. Judge Alito. What we've worked on for 30 years, to mobilise people of faith and values in this country. And no one's done it better than Dr. Dobson in recent times. So what we have done through this years is coming to culmination, to consummation, right now. We were able to hold off Michael Moore, and most of Hollywood, and most of the national media, and George Soros, and the Kennedy and other crowds who fought so fiercely against the re-election of George Bush. That was just a year ago. And now, now we're looking at what we really started on 30 years ago; a reconstruction of a court system gone awry." (Emphasis his. Is this a Christian Reconstructionist/Dominionism message? I suspect so.)
Don Feder of "Jews Against Anti-Christian Defamation," jews4fairness.org, says that the American government can't work without Christianity: "I think it's important for all religious people to work against anti-Christian defamation. Obviously, we're all in this together; America's a country that's 76% Christian, America's survival depends upon the survival of Christianity. I think John Adams, our second president, said it best, when he commented that our Constitution was made for a moral and a religious people; it is wholly inadequate for the government of any other. That religion happens to be Christianity. If Christianity fails in America, if the left has its way, America as we know it will cease to exist."
Rev. Herbert Lusk, one of the hosts, speaks pretty freely about abortion and being against marriage rights, and seems to equate the United States to the "rock" upon which Jesus builds his church, here: "The fact of the matter is the foundations [of our culture] will not be destroyed, because Jesus said, upon this rock, I build my church! And the very gates of hell shall not prevail against it!" Similarly, he's certainly colourful towards opponents: "Be careful how you fool with the church! When you start messing with the church, something stirs up inside of me! You be careful because the church has surviving power! My friends, you know this, and know this well, don't fool with the church, because the church has buried a many a critic! And all the critics that we have no buried, we're making funeral arrangements for them!" That's part of a long sequence that got a standing ovation.
Regardless - here's my transcript.
( Begin transcript )
There's also a recurring theme, particularly in the first hour, about needing to pray for authority, and respect authority. This fits in with the hierarchical worldview, and what we know about Alito's deference for anyone in a position of authority - his general assumption has been that the rich and/or powerful generally have very good reasons for doing what they do, and should be granted significant amounts of doubt and leeway in that regard.
In terms of the courts, they've moved the "bad judicial system" line further back again; it used to be the big focus was Roe v. Wade, but that's not even mentioned anymore; they went back to the rulings against teacher-led student prayer in 1961 last time; this time, they've moved the goalpost all the way back to 1947, in Everson v. Board of Education, where, "Justice Hugo Black changed the meaning of 'Separation of Church & State'" in a dissent where state funding for religious school bussing systems was upheld. They like the ruling, but point to this case as the start of a supposed judicial war on Christianity. Tony Perkins (Family Research Council), Ed Meese (Reagan administration), and Alan Sears (Alliance Defense Fund, an anti-gay/fundamentalist legal group) spends a lot of time talking about this, in particular. IIRC, the ADF actually backs up the "bad decisions" line to 1812, Marlbury v. Madison, and do not think the courts should be able to rule laws unconstitutional at all. But that's not mentioned here and I may be confusing my fundamentalist legal entities.
The fundamentalist right as represented here firmly believe that Alito will rule in exactly the ways they want to. James Dobson issues one of several ACTION ITEMs to support Alito. Falwell calls the Alito nomination the culmination of 30 years of work - "I feel that this is a crucial, crucial time. Judge Alito. What we've worked on for 30 years, to mobilise people of faith and values in this country. And no one's done it better than Dr. Dobson in recent times. So what we have done through this years is coming to culmination, to consummation, right now. We were able to hold off Michael Moore, and most of Hollywood, and most of the national media, and George Soros, and the Kennedy and other crowds who fought so fiercely against the re-election of George Bush. That was just a year ago. And now, now we're looking at what we really started on 30 years ago; a reconstruction of a court system gone awry." (Emphasis his. Is this a Christian Reconstructionist/Dominionism message? I suspect so.)
Don Feder of "Jews Against Anti-Christian Defamation," jews4fairness.org, says that the American government can't work without Christianity: "I think it's important for all religious people to work against anti-Christian defamation. Obviously, we're all in this together; America's a country that's 76% Christian, America's survival depends upon the survival of Christianity. I think John Adams, our second president, said it best, when he commented that our Constitution was made for a moral and a religious people; it is wholly inadequate for the government of any other. That religion happens to be Christianity. If Christianity fails in America, if the left has its way, America as we know it will cease to exist."
Rev. Herbert Lusk, one of the hosts, speaks pretty freely about abortion and being against marriage rights, and seems to equate the United States to the "rock" upon which Jesus builds his church, here: "The fact of the matter is the foundations [of our culture] will not be destroyed, because Jesus said, upon this rock, I build my church! And the very gates of hell shall not prevail against it!" Similarly, he's certainly colourful towards opponents: "Be careful how you fool with the church! When you start messing with the church, something stirs up inside of me! You be careful because the church has surviving power! My friends, you know this, and know this well, don't fool with the church, because the church has buried a many a critic! And all the critics that we have no buried, we're making funeral arrangements for them!" That's part of a long sequence that got a standing ovation.
Regardless - here's my transcript.
( Begin transcript )
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
