Embracing Evil: Christofascism's Love For Trump, Putin and Prince Tips Its Hand In The Game Of Religion and Poltics

First, The Sanctimonious Hypocrisy

Yesterday, President Trump's attendance of Easter services at his local Episcopal Church in Palm Beach was hailed as the sign that Donald Trump was indeed the most religious President ever.

According to the Christian Right.

The fact that his attendance at church was the first since his inauguration matters not. Why? Because, according to self-prophet and Christian Leader, Mary Colbert, Donald Trump is "The Chosen One" and all of his opponents will be cursed (plus their children and their children's children).

Colbert's religious whitewash of Trump is not new - the extreme pretzel-twisting reasoning of the Christian Right `began well before Trump's campaign. It only got more ridiculous as Trump's lies, scandals and ineptitude became increasingly apparent.

Colbert called Trump "not perfect." Forget "pussygate" and Russian prostitutes peeing on each other, as a leader of the free world, he has exhibited many many vices (sins), so we know he's not perfect, but  here's what "not perfect" includes in Donald Trump:

The sin of Pride: BRITAIN: Trump Demands Royal Carriage Procession For October Visit Despite UK Security Concerns

Secrecy is not necessarily a virtue:
White House says it won't make visitor logs public

Donald Trump has a problem keeping promises:
Trump Flips On Four Campaign Positions In One Day: NATO, Janet Yellen, Chinese Currency, The EXIM Bank

The sin of Greed: Washington Post’s David Fahrenthold wins Pulitzer Prize for dogged reporting of Trump’s philanthropy

A Champion of conspiracy: Guardian Report Claims U.S. Has “Concrete Evidence” of Trump-Russia Collusion

Added to the above is the fact that Trump has continued to disappoint (sometimes enrage) his stalwart supporters:

Last night Ann Coulter appeared on the Fox News show of Trump sycophant Lou Dobbs, where she angrily denounced Trump’s strike on Syria, saying, “I feel like I’m watching Dr. Strangelove.” Dobbs then moved the conversation to Trump’s other failing campaign promises including the Mexican border wall, prompting Coulter to sneer, “I didn’t know we elected Jeb Bush.”

So why is Trump still "The Chosen One" among people like Colbert? 

Enter Putin and Prince

In some ways, Vladamir Putin is like Trump (with more intelligence): he is considered a con man who declares himself to be deeply religious and totally family-oriented. He is also secretive ... and greedy (no one knows his net worth)

Money:

Figuring out the Russian president’s net worth has long been the holy grail of spooks and hacks around the world. But the personal wealth of Putin—a former KGB agent—is nearly impossible to decipher, and is likely distributed across a secret web of company holdings, real estate, and other people’s accounts. In fact, at a time when his political motivations are under scrutiny across the world, the struggle to pin down Putin’s riches reveals something about the covert ways in which he wields his authority over Russia.

Putin, however, is perhaps THE most Christian of all world leaders because he openly hates gays - or so says Bryan Fischer:

Erik Prince

If Putin's friendship makes Trump look shady, the presence of Erik Prince makes the picture look positively sinister. 

Esquire:
On any list of loathsome Americans, Erik Prince has to be right at the top. He got rich behind Blackwater, the renegade mercenary army that is responsible for a great deal of the hatred directed toward this country in the Middle East. (Privatized hatred was Blackwater's primary gift to the world.) Since his brand cratered (Blackwater was renamed Xe, pronounced, I believe, "Kill." It is now known as Academi. Why? Who knows?), Prince has become an International Man of Sleaze, taking on clients from China to the UAE, which is probably how the meeting in the Seychelles came about, since it was brokered by the UAE government, and since prying Russia and Iran apart is something that the UAE would love to see happen. But what in the hell is Erik Prince doing negotiating on behalf of the United States government, even given the fact that administrations of both parties have done business with him overseas?

Erik Prince's exploits have been chronicled here and here at OpEdNews, and the articles make the point that Christfascism is ripe for conspiracy: Erik Prince is considered Islamophobic in the extreme, wishing to rid the world of Islam by brute force. His ties to both Trump and Putin are the stuff of spy novels. And let's not forget that he's Education Secretary Betsy DeVos's brother. 

An Unholy Trio

So in Putin and Prince, we have men who voice Christofascism's main concerns and the man who can implement their goals. It doesn't matter that the man is destroying American principles left and right. 

After all, he's The Chosen One. 

Battle of the Bullies?

Everyone agrees that bullying on a large scale is really fascism. Pushing an agenda with such force that the general populace has to submit to it is certainly against American ideals. There are degrees, to be sure, but America is sensitive to the least of it.

Last week's resignation of Brenden Eich at Mozilla brought about a furious reaction to bullying (fascism) ... on both sides of the cultures war.

Andrew Sullivan:
Will he now be forced to walk through the streets in shame? Why not the stocks? The whole episode disgusts me – as it should disgust anyone interested in a tolerant and diverse society. If this is the gay rights movement today – hounding our opponents with a fanaticism more like the religious right than anyone else – then count me out. If we are about intimidating the free speech of others, we are no better than the anti-gay bullies who came before us.

The New Yorker:
The real mystery here, then, is not why Eich stepped down but why he ever got hired in the first place. His unquestioned technical ability notwithstanding, this was a candidate who divided the board, who had already been controversial, and whose promotion was guaranteed to generate reams of bad publicity.

Slate:
Simply put, if conservatives are frustrated by the treatment of Eich for his role in Proposition 8, then they should be outraged by the treatment of ordinary people at the hands of the people who employ them.

LA Times
The "witch hunt" theory of Eich's ouster holds that his personal views shouldn't matter: If he's gone because of his donation to Prop. 8, why not purge every corporate employee anywhere who did the same? This argument is exemplified by Slate's William Saletan, who calls disapproval of support for Proposition 8 a "new standard" and writes, "perhaps we should put down the pitchforks."

The term homo-fascism has been thrust into the mainstream dialogue (actually, not a dialogue, but a shouting fest). And with an error-ridden fury that is hard to believe:

homofascism (Urban Dictionary)
Homosexual activists are vehemently promoting homosexuality throughout the media, academia, and politics as spelled out in their manifesto titled After The Ball. "Sensitivity" classes in schools are required to children as young as kindergarden where they brainwash a child within minutes into believing homosexuality is the same as trying a new food. This is pure Pavlonian style brainwashing, indoctrination, and ideological subversion. All states that legalize same sex "marriage" require schools to have these classes, and parents who opt their kids out can potential get thrown in jail and pay fines.

Not used in the melee (yet), is the term Christofascism.

Christofascism (Urban Dictionary)
Evangelical, semi-theocratical movement or temperment of Americans who stand against abortion, sexual education, homosexuality, science, anti-Zionism, and the separation of church and state. 

Not as vindictive as the prior definition, but just as definitive of certain viewpoints.

The saga of Brendan Eich has broadened to conservative free speech in general it seems, but with the passage of Mississippi new religious freedom bill, enabling small businesses and individuals to discriminate on the grounds of religious conscience, the Christian Right and Christofascism are the subjects of focus.

Who Is The Bigger Bully?

There little doubt that gay rights advocates have been flexing their collective political muscle lately, with so many states now granting (or about to grant) same-sex marriages. Some see the flexing as abuse of power, while others simply see it as a natural reaction to years of being bullied - on the playground and in the workplace - by predominantly Christian Right forces. Nobody wants to be labeled a bigot any more than they want to be labeled a sinner. Yet Andrew Sullivan's concern is legitimate: more than a condemnation, it is a warning not to become as bloodthirsty as the enemy. (He may be wrong, however, to consider it a free speech issue as Michael Hiltzik of the LA Times points out). 

What full analysis of the situation seems to point out in the long run, is that Brendan Eich was not a victim of dreaded homofascism, but Christofascism itself: supporting a Christofascist enterprise (e.g. Prop 8) has come to mean to both sides that you support the Christian Right wholeheartedly. In a sense, Eich was a victim of his own ideology (indeed, he still holds same-sex marriage to be wrong) probably thrust upon him by the Christian Right in a Christofascist manner. 

Christofascism is definitely the big bully - a bully gay rights advocates would be wise not to emulate. 

Coming Out Of The Hate Closet For The New Year: Answering A "Patriot"

Hate Begets Hate

With this writing, I am coming out of the hate closet. I've tried my whole life to "love" everyone - even my enemies, but I've sinned in this regard and I can no longer be hypocritical about it.

I hate the Christian Right.

A big "DUH!" just exploded from the internet ether. Yes, I'm stating the obvious, but this is one of the few times I've ever admitted to pure, unadulterated hatred. I have to admit the admission feels good, since hatred is part of the "human condition" and comes easily to everyone - certainly easier than love. In admitting it, I feel more human.

What brought about this admission? Pressure has built up over the years to admit my guilt, but today, I received a comment for an article, Why I Hate Duck Dynasty. (As If It Matters). I will not name the person commenting. All I can say to describe him is that he is a member of the Patriot Movement according to his avatar. 

     "You claim to be a reverend and yet seem to have no religion in you. You are filled with hate for anyone who might not like homosexuality and homosexuals. You are angry and bitter and write mostly negative pieces about one subject only. You say you are angry because you have to write about it when you don't. You simply are ego driven to project yourself out there on others because you want everyone to listen to you, you, you... You are angry because you judge icon Phil Robertson to be shallow, but maybe you should look in the mirror?

     "And you say America is easy to deceive and this is precisely why liberalism and homosexuality have been allowed to dominate our culture in recent years which many are now coming to regret. Many growing millions out there are now more resentful than ever reverend. And since it is politically incorrect to have such views, those tens of millions will just keep it to themselves. Homosexuals come out of the closet and push anti-homosexuals into the closet. Way to go there reverend.

     "Yes America is easy to deceive which is precisely why you and others have taken advantage of it to ram your platform down everyone's throats whether they want it or not. You don't seem to care.

      " Why I Hate Duck Dynasty. (As If It Matters)" And it don't matter, but project your hate anyways reverend.

It was the last sentiment that prompted me to come out of the hate closet: hate always matters and the comment's vituperative rant made me realize that I have hated some people just as much as they hate me. But WHY I hate, ah, that is something of which the commenter doesn't have a clue.

"... you seem to have no religion in you."

God, I hate that.

Response: there is none of YOUR religion in me.Which may be a good thing. I have FAITH in more than a codified religion: I have faith in God, in scholarship and humanity (in that order). Note: I did not write "God, the Bible, and America," which is what you would have preferred.

"You ... write mostly negative pieces about one subject only."

I hate that too.

Response: you (like the rest of the Christian Right), assume that because someone writes negatively about something on a consistent basis, they are obsessed (or possessed). I've written about a myriad number of things regarding religion and politics, but I think of myself as merely focused (another good thing).

"You simply are ego driven to project yourself..."

Response: Writing is almost always an egotistical act. You write when you comment (and you comment extensively here at OpEdNews - over 1000!). Interestingly, I've noticed from your profile that you have not contributed articles, only comments. Perhaps you are an avowed apologeticist. Perhaps the only way you can get your point across is by posing a negative against a negative. Perhaps you are an ardent cynic. That is a contribution, to be sure, yet you've never written any unique article on this progressive (read: liberal, to you) site. Lamenting the sad state of American culture seems to be your raison d'etre, commenting constantly and very, very often, as if you have nothing better to do with your life.

" ...politically incorrect to have such views ..."

Response: "Political correctness" was formed so that people could speak politely to and about one another. True, it has been formed by some rather stringent codes, but the Christian Right has never bowed to political correctness: it speaks its mind no matter how insulting, degrading, or demonizing it may be. It speaks against what it wants and who it wants and is never slapped on the wrist: the myth of pulpit hate speech being criminalized is just that - a myth. 

" ...the "growing millions"

Response: The "growing millions" of which you speak may be the wounded tiger about which I often write: dangerous in its stance against personal freedoms (freedom that seem to go contrary to "religious freedom" but do not). It is also dangerous in its stance against diversity of any kind: those "millions" who are "coming to regret" are merely the ones who despair of the change to diversity and want everything to be as it (never really) was: a Father-Knows-Best-flag-waving-Christian-only nation. You claim to be a patriot, but is that true patriotism? I wonder. The first patriots were for freedom ... and change. They took a big first step into the future and did not dwell on the past. They embraced new and diverse thinking because they loathed the chains of a theocracy as well as a monarchy.

"... ram your platform sown everyone's throats"

Response: It's not so much ramming down throats as repeating dictums of love and tolerance (some Biblical) because many people like yourself are so narrow-minded as to be thick-headed. Seems to be an oxymoron but it is not. But herein is where a common in-your-face myth stands: those asking for tolerance are not hypocritical, lacking tolerance, because we ask for tolerance only from the people we think are reasonable. Have we ever asked for tolerance specifically from you? I doubt it. We're not into butting our heads against stone walls. After viewing your other comments, for example, I would never ask for tolerance from you - or your compatriots.

Thanks and No Thanks

I do have to thank you, of course, for forcing me out of my hate closet. Others have tried, but missed the mark. Your comment made me realize that I am human and cannot therefore, like God, love every human in existence. I strive to love, but slip into intolerance and hatred occasionally.

I do not hate Christianity. I believe myself to be Christian in that I try to follow the teachings of Christ. True, I do not believe some other things the Christian Right believes to be true: I do not believe, for example, in Creationism, the inerrancy of the Bible, Augustine of Hippo's construct of Original Sin, or the theology of being "born again." I am certainly not YOUR kind of Christian, but I am Christian in my own way and (hopefully) in the eyes of the Creator. 

As to the Christian Right: I hate them, of course, for their abhorrent righteous arrogance. Theirs is not the "one, true faith" simply because there is no one, true faith. Any faith that enlightens, inspires man to better himself and his neighbor is a "true faith." And hypocrisy? The Christian Right has always been rife with it - lousy with a hypocrisy that has corrupted everything it has touched. 

It may well have corrupted you. 

God bless you.

Are Atheists More Christian Than Christians?

Listen to this dialogue on Atheist Experience. Even the "piece of shit" comment is something we've all been itching to say to a Christofascist.