In decades past, the religion known as Christianity has been an agent of positive change and social support. In the past, luminaries such as Leonardo Da Vinci, Michelangelo, and Gregor Mendel advanced both art and science in the service of Christ. In the modern day, however, the Evangelical branch of Christianity bears little resemblance to its more open-minded, benevolent roots.
A peculiar brand of Christianity has evolved in the Southern
The RSC evolved out of the undereducated, economically depressed areas of the South prior to the Civil War. In those days, Christians used the certain passages out of the Old Testament to justify slavery, racism, and institutionalized prejudice. The infamous Ku Klux Klan (otherwise known as the Knights of the South) began, and remains, a Christian organisation. By citing Old Testament scripture, they carried out violence, torture, and murder of people of colour as well as Jews and anyone who supported racial equality.
Later, following the close of the Civil War, leaders of the RSC fought to deny women the right to vote and hold elected office. They again quoted disjointed, unconnected passages from the Old Testament to justify this “deeply held religious belief” (which shall henceforth be referred to as a DHRB). While they failed to keep women out of the voting booth, only a small percentage of female citizens today manage to hold elected office – particularly in the “red” states. Moreover, as of the last census, female workers earn only 87% as much as male workers who occupy a comparable position. This disparity is greater in “red” states.
In the early-to-mid 1900’s, the leaders of the RSC shifted focus again. This time, their target was interracial couples. Despite having no Biblical backing whatsoever, religious leaders in the South made the case that allowing interracial couples to marry somehow constituted a moral crisis for the then-contemporary society. Those who entered into such marriages were the target of harassment and violence. In some “red” states, interracial marriage was outlawed as recently as 1962.
In the 1960’s, the RSC leaders grew increasingly allied to the modern-day Republican Party. The RSC put forth the notion that political disagreement against the established conservative rule was “sinful”, particularly as it pertained to the Viet Nam War. Those who disagreed with the Draft and our presence in what was essentially a foreign Civil War were taunted as “godless” and “communist”. Pacifists were painted as cowards by the RSC and their allies on the Right. As usual, the RSC maintained a brutal cadre of thugs to carry out intimidation and violence against their foes and detractors.
In the modern day, the RSC leaders now target homosexuals as their object of wrath. The Red State Christians spend copious amounts of money buying political services in order for their “right” to practice bigotry and prejudice. For example, the RSC fights every day for the “right” to fire (or not hire) employees simply because of their sexual orientation. The Red State Christians approved of the vicious murder of Matthew Sheppard (usually with the disclaimer, “The Bible say murder is a sin, but he was gay . . .” The RSC also attempted to blame the gay community for the 9/11 terrorist attacks, quoting, “Because this country tolerates homosexuals and witches, God let out country be attacked as punishment.”
For the second time in as many years, the RSC is attempting to push through a Constitutional amendment that would forever relegate homosexuals to the “back of the bus”. This amendment, if passed, would forever deny homosexuals equal footing with respect to taxation, inheritance, military service, hospital access, child adoption, and certain career options. This move, apparently, is to satisfy the DHRB of the Evangelical Right.
One must be aware, however, that the sole source of Biblical condemnation of homosexuality is from the Book of Leviticus, in the Old Testament. This book of law was not even meant as a guide for the average Jewish citizen, only as a code of behaviour for the Tribe of Levi (the Priestly caste of the Jewish faith). In other words, the Bible outlawed being a gay Rabbi, but not necessarily being a gay human being. Jesus Christ, who is the fulfilment of all Old Testament prophecy, never said one word either for or against homosexuality – ever.
In short, the cult of Red State Christianity is a lot less about proffering the Word of Christ, love, faith, and forgiveness. It is more about the subjugation of women and ill-favoured minorities.
By contrast, mainstream Christianity understands that Christ
had only two commands: 1.) Love God; 2.) Love thy neighbour as thyself. There
was no asterisk after either command. Jesus never condoned violence against
blacks, Jews, gays, interracial couples, women, or any other ill-favoured
minority. He did say that all of mankind is one’s neighbour. He did say that if
a man slaps you in the face to offer the other cheek to slap as well. Jesus never advocated the murder of one’s
children, nor their physical abuse.
Aside from the peace that comes from a true spiritual union with Christ, there is also a freedom that comes from being in communion with God. Jesus did not come to enslave, but instead came to free mankind.
The Red State Christians would seek to enslave the common citizen so that they might enlarge their own power base, and use hate and superstition to do so. Real Christians seek to set people free using the power of love and faith.
Like many cults, the RSC exists as an amalgam of contradiction. They squander huge sums of money to elect/bribe far-right extremist conservative politicians, despite the fact that Jesus was something of a socialist during his incarnate existence. They dredge up every hateful passage from the Old Testament in order to justify their narrow-minded political objectives, but seem to ignore Old Testament laws that would pertain to their own behaviour. For instance, they would keep females from becoming secular political leaders, but it doesn’t stop them from eating pork or from wearing clothes that are of a poly/cotton blend. They won’t work on Sunday, but it doesn’t stop them from shopping on Sunday (thus causing someone else to have to work on the Holy Day.)
If the RSC were true in their dedication to the Old Testament, then they would also sacrifice a flawless bull upon the Altar of God once each year. They would refrain from sexual intercourse for 24 hours before going to church. Females would be forbidden to attend church while menstruating. Anyone with a skin disease would have to move into a shack situated outside of the city limits. If a man went bald, he would have to sacrifice of a pound of grain or a dove prior to attending church. Eating leavened bread during Passover would be outlawed. Sewing a patch in order to repair a damaged garment would be a sin. Pouring recently distilled alcohol into an old container would be a sin.
Curiously, certain behaviours, such as drinking, gambling and polygamy, are allowed in accordance with Old Testament scripture, yet the RSC forbids these activities as a sin. Likewise, the RSC’s visceral fear of science, art, and literature is unfounded in Scripture.
Likewise, RSC cultists frequently murder their children (an act that is certainly outlawed by the Old Testament.) In the recent past (as of this writing), RSC parents have: drowned their children in a bathtub, drowned their children in a car that was pushed into a lake, starved their children by locking them in a basement, bludgeoned their children to death with hammers and shovels. There was also, recently, a RSC parent who tried to sacrifice her son on a church altar (she was stopped before she succeeded.) RSC cultists also use Old Testament passages to excuse beating their children. They actually view not beating one’s children as a sin.
The freedom of religion is obviously one of the most paramount rights that we, as American citizens, possess. The Constitution does not, however, give the right of one group of citizens to take away the rights of another by way of DHRB. Because of this cult’s irrational thinking, its longstanding history of advancing hate and violence, and its drive to demonize those who do not comply with its demands, the RSC cult members should be classified as mentally ill. Moreover, their tendency towards infanticide must also be considered a factor in this classification. Membership in a RSC sect should be considered prima fascia evidence of mental illness.
The ramifications of this classification are simple. In accordance with existing laws pertaining to the mentally ill, members of the RSC cults would simply be unable to own firearms, vote, hold elected office, or home-school their children. By keeping these mentally ill cultists out of politics, our country might be saved from a slow descent into fascism and theocratic oligarchy.