qv…
the present political climate invites a new version of this word: ‘re-establishmentarians’ favor and advocate the establishment of a religious government for the US. also known as ‘evangelicals’, these people and politicians work to change our laws to reflect biblical dictates. other names for this insidious effort are “renewal”,
Rintin, welcome to the Straight Dope Message Boards, we’re very glad to have you here.
The Staff Report/Mailbag column that you are referring to is (I presume): What does antidisestablishmentarianism mean?
When opening a new topic here on the Message Board, we like to provide a link to the Staff Report being commented upon, so that others can read it, to better understand your comment and to avoid duplication.
::: blush ::: Sorry, fixed the link. – CKDH
[Edited by C K Dexter Haven on 04-11-2001 at 09:56 AM]
We also like to provide links that work: What does antidisestablishmentarianism mean?
rintin, “re-establishmentarian” doesn’t fit for a couple of reasons. First, it doesn’t make sense semantically since the U.S. has never had a religious government, so there is nothing to “re-establish”. Second, it doesn’t work politically since there is not really a “movement” to set up a religious government. There are certainly people who would like to use their view of Christian morality as the basis for legislatiion, but that covers a broad spectrum of ideas.
Also, not all “evangelicals” support a strong political activism.
Hi jeff~
(Thanks for the working link!)
The historical framework of my suggestion extends beyond our own constitution to England’s state church (see Jeff’s link).
Your naivete about american reconstructionists ably demonstrates the effectiveness of their soft sell savvy. May I suggest a few sources/organizations which keep on top of their efforts at re-establishing what they refer to as their ‘kingdom’ at the expense of our democratic republic.
I also like the term ‘neo-monarchists’ because they often use the same language as the original antidisestablishmentarians when gushing about their religious kingdom.
Your argument that “not all ‘evangelicals’ support a strong political activism” doesn’t apply, as my concern is with those that would obtrude this theocracy upon us.
Regards,
Rintin scrabbleweed
http://www.religioustolerance.org/reconstr.htm
http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/ChRecon.html
other:
http://www.swrb.ab.ca/Puritan/christian-reconstructionism.htm
http://www.christocracy.com/
Not to worry. As long as the dominant religion in America is Touched-By-Da-Good-Fairy-ism (the religion of 99% of our politicos), it will never have enough intellectual muscle to pull off any kind of coup.
John W.Kennedy presumes that the suasion employed by religious reconstructionists is intellectual; it is plainly and boldly anti-intellectual.
Tune to any of their advocates and one finds polished –and bald faced- manipulation of emotions, appeals to ignorance, exploitation of fear and racism, mischaracterization of science and philosophies, character assassination of biblical proportions, and even divisive bashing of competing religions…
Moreover, their success will not arrive in the form of a “coup”; The slow boil tactics of nazism is a clear example of the effectiveness of their approach.
A few more popular reconstructionists:
Charles Colson
http://www.christianity.com/breakpoint
James Kennedy
http://www.reclaimamerica.org/
Pat Robertson
http://www.chief.org/purpose.html
Hank Hanegraaff
http://www.powertochange.com/contact/aboutus.html
http://www.equip.org/inside/goals.html
Today on cable there was a show (on PAX) that was supposed to portray the latest findings on what parts of the story of Jesus stand up to investigation. The introduction made you believe that there had been lots of research done for this show and many experts would tell about their findings. They went thru the virgin birth, the star in the east and then to John the Baptist. That was when I gave up on the show. The only recent finding that they used was 5 Hittite temples have been found, proving that the mention of the Hittites in the old testament is valid. The only opposing view was short and completely ignored, so that I can’t even remember what it was. Everything else was straight out of the fundie interpretation of the bible and considered true on that basis. What I am objecting to is that this is a type of brainwashing. If you hear it enough you are going to believe it, especially if they say it has been proved. The funny thing is that this program was put on by capitalists that really aren’t trying to convert us, but who are just looking to please a large audience and they don’t care what the message contains.
<< The funny thing is that this program was put on by capitalists that really aren’t trying to convert us, but who are just looking to please a large audience and they don’t care what the message contains >>
Not so funny, do some reading on the Protestantism and the Work Ethic, the foundation of “capitalism.”