"Religious" Right

John Cole: Just Like Jesus!

I basically go to church about as often as the Nets make the playoffs Cubs win the World Series (might as well be honest), so my memory of the religious mythology might be off, but I didn’t remember this piece of lore:

The leader of the nation’s second-largest diocese urged his congregation to pray for the pope, saying he was suffering some of the same unjust accusations once faced by Jesus.

Can someone show me in the bible where Jesus was unjustly accused of covering up systematic pedophilia?

DougJ: The only survivors of the National People’s Gang

I don’t know why I find the Hutaree rank system so funny (h/t Bronze Rifleman Doctor Science):

RANKS:
RADOK [RD]
BORAMANDER [BM]
ZULIF [ZL]
ARKON [AK]
GOLD RIFLEMAN [GR]
SILVER RIFLEMAN [SR]
BRONZE RIFLEMAN [BR]
LUKORE [LK]
MASTER GUNNER [MG]
SENIOR GUNNER [SG]
GUNNER [GN]

I think this may be an example of the post-wingnut mythology we’ve discussed before. It’s part Dungeons and Dragons, part Finnegans Wake, part modern corporatese (I like that “Senior Gunner” is the second-lowest rank).

The jack-booted thug meme is already taking hold, BTW (as John noted in the last post).

From now on, I would like you all to address me as Arkon DougJ.

Think Progress: Attempting To Strip Gays Of Hate Crimes Protections, Oklahoma Removes Protections For Race/Religion Instead

In October, President Obama signed The Matthew Shepard Act, expanding the reach of the 1969 hate crimes law to “authorize the Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute certain bias-motivated crimes based on the victim’s actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or disability.” Previously, the law only allowed for the federal prosecution of anyone who “willingly injures, intimidates or interferes with another person, or attempts to do so, by force because of the other person’s race, color, religion or national origin.”

State lawmakers in Oklahoma argued that the Shepard Act would trample on the free speech rights of religious leaders “who preached out against the lifestyle of the victim who was attacked.” On March 10, the Oklahoma state Senate thought it was passing a bill prohibiting “local and state law enforcement agencies from sharing information about hate crimes with federal authorities if the state of Oklahoma did not recognize the crime as a hate crime by its own statutes.” Oklahoma state law does not recognize “sexual orientation or gender identity” as a special class and fails to provide gay and lesbians with hate crimes protections.

But in trying to strip gays and lesbians of protection, the Oklahoma State Senate inadvertently cited the wrong section of the U.S. code. The bill stripped rights under Title 18 U.S. Code Section 245, but protections for sexual orientation and gender identity is actually under Section 249. From the bill:

Section 24A.12. Except as otherwise provided by state or local law, the Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma and agency attorneys authorized by law, the office of the district attorney of any county of the state, and the office of the municipal attorney of any municipality may keep its litigation files and investigatory reports confidential, except they shall keep their litigation files and investigatory reports confidential upon request of any federal agency when such request is made for the purpose of an attempt to investigate or prosecute an individual or individuals pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 245, except for those records of any individuals convicted pursuant to Section 850 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes.

Section 245 of the Code refers to race and religious protections. Therefore, Oklahoma actually passed a statute allowing state law enforcement officials to keep information about crimes motivated by race or religion out of the hands of federal authorities.

“The bill in its current form doesn’t take away rights from gays and lesbians,” Oklahoma State Senate Minority Leader Andrew Rice explained. “It takes away rights for religion and race.” Rice said the error occurred during the creation of the bill. “This is most likely a legislative error or at least a typo,” he said. “Gay and lesbian citizens should be upset because someone tried to take their rights away, but minority groups should be concerned that their rights have already been voted to be taken away by the Senate.” “People who consider themselves Jewish, black, even Christians should be outraged,” he added. The bill will likely be modified before it is voted on in the House.

BarbinMD (Dkos): Headlines around the country

They say that there's no such thing as bad publicity ... and with that thought in mind, let's look at just a few of today's headlines:

• GOP FEC report: $1900 to bondage club
• Bang for Their Buck?: A Critical Précis to the RNC's Night at a Bondage Club
• Steele, strip clubs and the GOP's family values
• Republicans Go Bondage Clubbing In LA On Party Dime
• RNC Denies Steele Expensed Trip to X-Rated Club
• Down $25 Million, Steele blows RNC funds on private jets and lesbian-bondage ...
• Strip club tab roils Republican committee
• RNC spent $2000 on lesbian-themed voyeur nightclub in Hollywood

• 
  

Aravosis: Religious right upset with RNC over lesbian sex voyeur bondage club, etc.

It seems the men at the Concerned Women for America have a problem with the RNC frequenting voyeur lesbian sex simulation bondage clubs.

Booman: A Question for Ed Koch

I have a question for Ed Koch. I think I understand Koch's basic position on Israel and America's relationship to Israel. Basically, Israel is entitled to all of Jerusalem as their capital, and it is America's job to facilitate the theft. I don't know where Koch gets the rationale for his position, but it comes across fairly clearly. But, just for the sake of argument, Ed, what if the American administration doesn't share that view? What if they think that Israel is only entitled to land that was set aside for them and ratified by the United Nations? Or, let's even be more generous and say that Israel can keep some of the land they've stolen in the intervening years (say, as compensation for having to defend their acknowledged borders), but they can't continue to grab more than they have now. And, let's say that the Israeli prime minister responds, in substance, by telling the American administration that they can go fuck themselves. What then?

How should the president respond? Should he invite the PM to the White House, have a nice photo-op, reiterate his undying commitment to Israel, and then serve him dinner? Is that how a statesman responds to being told to go get fucked?

Because I don't think that is the proper way to show displeasure, Ed. I don't think business-as-usual is going to convince Netanyahu or the Israeli public that we don't recognize and will not countenance the de facto theft of East Jerusalem. You call it "part of Israel's capital." No, it isn't. And if you attempt to make it so, expect the whole world to cry foul. Why should it be any other way? Under what law or principle would it be any other way?

You tell me, Ed, on this Passover evening, why a failure to cede all of Jerusalem to the State of Israel is the second-coming of the Nazis. You insult our president far more than our president insulted Netanyahu. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.