The Canadian Manifesto: 1. The Centre of the Universe

In 1933, a small group of religious leaders got together, via the post office, to establish a Humanist doctrine. According to Time Magazine (May 15, 1933):

Humanism used to be a good subject for parlor and dinner table discussions. Few people knew what it actually was or ' where literary Humanism left off and religious Humanism began. Nor did Humanism's expounders get together and codify their beliefs for popular enlightenment.(1)

Key leaders were often at odds over how to define the movement and what its key goals should be.

But that was about to change.

Last week, for the first time, the religious Humanists were on common ground. After discussing many questions (by letter) they had drawn up, signed and circulated a manifesto containing their articles of faith. More & more Humanists are to read the manifesto, sign it, make suggestions which may perhaps be incorporated after due consideration.(1)

Key elements included:

- The universe is self-existing, not created.

- Man is part of nature, product of his culture, his environment, his social heritage. The traditional dualism of mind and body must be rejected.

- Humanism also rejects cosmic and supernatural "guarantees." The Humanist eschews theism, deism, modernism, "new thought'' and instead of feeling religious emotions concentrates on human life—labor, art, science, philosophy, love, friendship, recreation.

- Humanism is for "a socialized and co-operative economic order—a shared life in a shared world."

Its adherents say that it will: "Affirm life rather than deny it ... seek to elicit the possibilities of life, not flee from it ... establish the conditions of a satisfactory life for all, not merely for the few." (1)

How could you argue against this set of principles?

Yet argue they did. When the Humanist Manifesto, written primarily by Raymond Bragg (shown above) appeared, it created quite a sensation, because it challenged the principle of God being the centre of the universe.

Instead they embraced science, human compassion, and equality in a shared world.

The late Francis Schaeffer, author of A Christian Manifesto, that prompted the creation of the Religious Right/Moral Majority, has built a career challenging, what he refers to as "secular Humanism". He believed that all of our current problems are the result of not embracing God as the center of the universe.

He felt that if all law and governance was based on the Old Testament, all of our problems would disappear. He encouraged Christians to become confrontational, and did not rule out violence as a means to an end.

There does come a time when force, even physical force, is appropriate. The Christian is not to take the law into his own hands and become a law unto him­self. But when all avenues to flight and protest have closed, force in the defensive posture is appropriate. This was the situation of the American Revolution. The colonists used force in defending themselves. Great Britain, because of its policy toward the col­onies, was seen as a foreign power invading America. The colonists defended their homeland. As such, the American Revolution was a conservative counter­revolution. The colonists saw the British as the revo­lutionaries trying to overthrow the legitimate colonial governments. (2)

This certainly helps to explain the Tea Party and the Religious Right's obsession with guns.

When Stephen Harper's former Chief of Staff, Darrel Reid, suggested that our laws should be changed to reflect those in the Bible, the story pretty much ended there.

Reid is now with the Manning Centre, but continues his work with several current Harper MPs, toward Reconstructionism.

The media is doing us a grave injustice by not staying on top of this story. In the United States, after learning that Presidential hopeful, Michelle Bachmann, is a follower of Francis Schaeffer, their media is all over it.

Ryan Lizza wrote an in depth article for the New Yorker, under the heading Leap of Faith. In it he refers to Bachmann as "an ideologue of the Christian-conservative movement." A term once used to describe Stephen Harper, before he took the happy pills and became a "Tory".

Lizza reveals how the Bachmanns (Michelle and Marcus), experienced a "life-altering event" after watching Schaeffer's film series “How Should We Then Live?”

Schaeffer’s film series consists of ten episodes tracing the influence of Christianity on Western art and culture, from ancient Rome to Roe v. Wade. In the films, Schaeffer—who has a white goatee and is dressed in a shearling coat and mountain climber’s knickers—condemns the influence of the Italian Renaissance, the Enlightenment, Darwin, secular humanism, and postmodernism. He repeatedly reminds viewers of the “inerrancy” of the Bible and the necessity of a Biblical world view. “There is only one real solution, and that’s right back where the early church was,” Schaeffer tells his audience. “The early church believed that only the Bible was the final authority. What these people really believed and what gave them their whole strength was in the truth of the Bible as the absolute infallible word of God.” (3)

I've been watching the series and reading the book, and was surprised to find that chunks of his speeches have found their way into the vernacular of many members of the Harper government.

Including Harper himself, but I'm getting into that later.

The rise of Michelle Bachmann, has given the Americans an opportunity to discuss this movement and what it could mean to their future. Schaeffer is very clear on what fundamentalist Christians need to do.

And in his Christian Manifesto, he states that the movement must include Canada, Australia and New Zealand (p.24), if it has any hope of succeeding.

We're probably going to hear a lot more as the U.S. election campaign heats up, so I thought this a perfect time to put together an essay on Canada's Religious Right movement, that is being allowed to operate in almost total secrecy, simply because we are too squeamish to talk about religion.

But we have to remember, that this is a political movement, and one that could have a profound affect on who we are as Canadians.

We need to become part of the conversation since clearly we are to play an important role.

Marci McDonald had spent several years as a Washington correspondent, where she covered the rise of the Christian Right.

When she returned to Canada, she was shocked to discover that the same movement had embedded itself here. Like Ronald Reagan, Stephen Harper has moved these fundamentalists into the courts, the civil service and even the foreign service, creating a new office of religious freedom.

From her piece for Walrus Magazine: Stephen Harper and the Theo-cons: The rising clout of Canada's religious right:

"For Harper, the courtship of the Christian right is unlikely to prove an electoral one-night stand. Three years ago, in a speech to the annual Conservative think-fest, Civitas, he outlined plans for a broad new party coalition that would ensure a lasting hold on power. The only route, he argued, was to focus not on the tired wish list of economic conservatives or “neo-cons,” as they’d become known, but on what he called “theo-cons”—those social conservatives who care passionately about hot-button issues that turn on family, crime, and defence.

"Even foreign policy had become a theo-con issue, he pointed out, driven by moral and religious convictions. “The truth of the matter is that the real agenda and the defining issues have shifted from economic issues to social values,” he said, “so conservatives must do the same.

"Arguing that the party had to come up with tough, principled stands on everything from parents’ right to spank their children to putting “hard power” behind the country’s foreign-policy commitments ... " (4)

McDonald would turn her piece into her best seller: The Armageddon Factor

However, the Canadian Manifesto, is about more than religion, but is intended to show how the American Neoconservative movement as a whole, is dictating how our country does business.

There are many questions that we need to ask ourselves, including:

Why did top Republican pollster, John Mclaughlin, personally handle Stephen Harper's political career?

Why did the National Citizens Coalition meet with Republican politicians to help draft strategy?

Why did Richard Nixon's magician, Art Finkelstein, work with the NCC for 16 years, guiding Stephen Harper in the art of destroying liberal democracy?

Milton Friedman from the Chicago School, spent a lifetime engineering the takeover of the economies of foreign nations. Why was he so interested in Canada, becoming a regular speaker at the Fraser Institute?

Why was Religious Right leader, Paul Weyrich, so keen to have Stephen Harper on the throne?

Why is a Goldman Sachs' executive, now the head of the Bank of Canada?

It's not hard to see that there is a plan for us, but unfortunately, we are not in the loop.

So maybe if I can create a Canadian Manifesto, as it might look if there is one locked away in the Republican Party HQs, we can at least talk about it.

Is this what we want for Canada?

Sources:

1. Religion: Humanism on Paper, Time Magazine, May 15, 1933

2. A Christian Manifesto, By Francis Schaeffer, Crossway Books, 1981, ISBN: 0-89107-233-0, p. 117

3. Leap of Faith: The making of a Republican front-runner, By Ryan Lizza, The New Yorker, August 15, 2011

4. Stephen Harper and the Theo-cons: The rising clout of Canada's religious right, By Marci McDonald, The Walrus, October 2006

David Sweet, Spiritual Capital and Reconstructionism

When Darrel Reid was defeated as a Conservative candidate in 2006, he became "Vice President of Project Development for the Work Research Foundation, an organization with the stated mission to “influence people to a Christian view of work and public life.”"(1)

I must admit that I'd never heard of the 'Work Research Foundation' and wasn't quite sure what was meant by a "Christian view of work and public life". So I perused their site, and though they are now calling themselves Cardus, what I found was a bit alarming, beginning with this:

"Our mission is to rethink, research and rebuild North America's social architecture."

If you link to their audio section and scroll down to a 2005 recording, you can listen to a lecture series on something they call "spiritual capital." And just so there's no mistake, the re-introduction by Michael Van Pelt, clearly states that Cardus is the new name for Work Research Foundation. And Darrel Reid, Stephen Harper's deputy chief of staff, went right from there to Harper's office. From their site:

The third installment of our thINK audio series is here, and our latest WRF product is just in time: spiritual capital is a concept which provides the tread for walking faithfully in a society that gets more secular every day. First, David Sweet introduces, in layman's terms, the idea of "spiritual capital." (2)

For those who don't know, David Sweet is the MP for Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale, a backbencher in the Harper government. He introduces himself as the Vice-President of Business Development for the group.

I listened to all of the speakers and if there was ever a scripted mandate for a theocracy this is it. On his website, Sweet refers to himself as a motivational speaker, and it's pretty clear after listening to 15 minutes (twice) of his speech, that he is motivating business leaders to create a Christian workplace.

He praises one such leader for printing that his "Purpose was to honour God" on his business cards. Sweet goes on to describe what spiritual capital is, by suggesting that it could be equated to social, physical and human capital, all requirements to maximize profit. "Faith" economics and devoting your business to the "Glory of God". (when I was roaming I was linked to The Christian Labour Association, that even encourages companies be unionized by Christians)

The next speakers continue along the same vein, and what they describe is a Utopia where a company's mission statement is reflective of "Christian values", with a healthy dose of redemption.

They suggest that if a company bases their business on these "Christian values", it will be a workplace with integrity and little conflict. And rather than discouraging employees from discussing their religious beliefs, they encourage open discussion, even for non-Christians.

It's not too difficult to see what would take place here. You have a business with a stated Christian hierarchy. You employ non-Christians and then encourage open discussion of religious beliefs. Sounds like proselytizing to me. And what happens if those non-Christians don't see the light? Will there be accusations of religious harassment, that would be similar to sexual harassment, where an employee is "saved" or risks losing their job?

Darrel Reid once suggested that gay rights are a form of Nazi tyranny. Is there a place for gays in this wonderful, non-conflict workplace?

Templeton Foundation

One of the groups that David Sweet promotes is the Templeton Foundation:

The mission of the Templeton Foundation is: to serve as a philanthropic catalyst for discoveries relating to the Big Questions of human purpose and ultimate reality. We support research on subjects ranging from complexity, evolution, and infinity to creativity, forgiveness, love, and free will. We encourage civil, informed dialogue among scientists, philosophers, and theologians and between such experts and the public at large, for the purposes of definitional clarity and new insights.

One of those 'Big Questions' is answered through intelligent design, rather than evolution. The foundation has also been embroiled in controversy, because despite the fact that they claim to be non-partisan, they regularly provide funding to Conservative groups, including Ari Fleischer's Freedom's Watch.

They have also garnered "criticism from some members in the scientific community who are concerned with its linking of scientific and religious questions."

Another speaker mentions that they had just completed a project with the Max De Pree Center, in Pasadena California, where they promote a 'servant leadership' program, and recently hosted a seminar on the "Morality of the Market."

So what does this all mean?

David Sweet and Darrel Reid from the Harper government are both involved with the Work Research Foundation, now Cardus, who are working to 'Rebuild North America's social architecture' by promoting Christian businesses.

Michael Van Pelt, another speaker on the podcast, is a new appointee at Rights and Democracy, which has been embroiled in controversy after their hostile takeover by the Harper government.

Ray Pennings, another speaker, is the chair of Redeemer University College, where the 4th speaker, Gideon Strauss is one of the faculty.

David Sweet hosted a National House of Prayer 'dessert reception' there, where the faithful were invited to "Come and hear what God is doing in our Government." And Redeemer College recently received three million dollars of public money - our money; despite the fact that they are an elite private Bible school.

Welcome to Reconstructionism 101. Leave your souls at the door.

Sources:

1. Wikipedia: Darrel Reid

2. Spiritual Capital, By Ray Pennings and Michael Van Pelt, CARDUS, July 1, 2005

Desert Stream and Living Waters Ministries are Both Contaminated

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

"God caused Hurricane Katrina to wipe out New Orleans because it had a gay pride parade the week before and was filled with sexual sin ... All hurricanes are acts of God, because God controls the heavens. I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God, and they were recipients of the judgment of God for that." Pastor John Hagee

Reading a statement like that made by Charles McVety's business partner, John Hagee, would certainly not adhere you to his God. If he is that vengeful, maybe we don't need to eradicate homosexuals, as the Religious Rights suggests, but simply get rid of their God. He sounds down right nasty.

Fortunately, most Christians follow a loving God who would never destroy an entire city, killing more than 1800 people, and uprooting thousands more, just to exact revenge for a gay pride parade. They believe that God made gays too.

However, this isn't really about the Christian Extremists, and their twisted version of the faith. Others have been warning about the dangers associated with this growing group of radical fundamentalists, many of whom have close ties to many members of our current government, but I decided to also expose the rampant hypocrisy that is also often associated with the Religious Right.

An excellent example of this are two 'ministries', actually linked financially, Desert Stream, part of the Exodus group, in the United States, and Living Waters ministry under the umbrella of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada.

Both of these groups claim to be able to "cure" homosexuality, but the two videos (the one above and below) show how they really operate.

Desert Stream

This organization was established by an ex-gay (?) minister, Adam Comisky, who offered "healing" to those who were "sexually broken".

On March 8, Comiskey wrote a blog post entitled “Falling Mercies” where he says DSM had been, “cast out of our home church”, Vineyard Anaheim, as a result of “a darker strain of sin in our own ranks.” He goes onto reveal that this sin was, “a longstanding staff person from Desert Stream had sexually abused at least one teenager who had sought help from us.”

Comiskey alleges that he was a victim of seven-figure blackmail from the relative of one of the abused boys. This led to, “a scourging of our entire ministry through police interrogations, the naked bulb of insurance agents and their lawyers, and Vineyard elders who for good reason wanted to know what was really going on in Desert Stream Ministries.”

As a result of the investigation, Comiskey says DSM was “torn in two” and that “we the righteous became the scum of the earth–not only the defender of victims, but the predators.” (1)

This was not the first time this group was charged with sexual misconduct, and many people refer to them as a cult. In 1998, The Los Angeles Times reported that one family had sued Desert Stream, alleging that a minister had sexually abused a teenager while the youth was undergoing 'therapy' to turn him heterosexual.

It would appear that this ex-gay minister is using his hideaway as a dating service and yet Exodus is still standing behind him. The cult has not closed up shop but just moved to another state.

Now lets go to Canada.

Living Waters Ministry

According the the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, who have quite an array of groups all promising to "fix broken sexuality"

Living Waters is Canada’s most widely used Christian program for those who battle with sexual and relational problems. The intensive 30-week course originated in California in 1980, when Andy and Annette Comiskey started a Bible-based support group for people struggling with same-sex attractions ..

Canadian national directors Toni and Mardi Dolfo-Smith have overseen Living Waters programs from their headquarters in Vancouver for the past six years. The program is currently used in 22 cities across Canada and 20 countries around the globe. “We’ve seen Christians from all walks of life benefit from this interdenominational program,” says Toni.

“Jesus is committed to healing people so that individuals are free to love again. When we’re confused or broken in our sexual and relational identities, it limits our capacity to love others according to the will of Christ,” adds Mardi.

“People who join our program are willing to face their present state while delving into a painful past,” states Toni. “In an age when pornography is okay, same-sex relationships are accepted and abuse is rampant, it is God’s grace that heals and restores our sexuality. Living Waters aims to minister that healing.”

But while Jesus may be committed to healing people, Living Waters has a different goal. MONEY!

Ottawa, Ontario, June 8, 2009... The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has revoked the charitable registration of Living Waters Ministry Trust, a London-area charity. This revocation was effective June 6, 2009.

On April 24, 2009, the CRA issued a notice of intention to revoke the charitable registration of Living Waters Ministry Trust, in accordance with subsection 168(1) of the Income Tax Act. The letter stated, in part, that:

Our audit has concluded that from August 11, 2004 to December 31, 2006, Living Waters Ministry Trust issued in excess of $41.6 million in receipts for cash received through a tax shelter arrangement. The Charity, in turn, directed $40.7 million of the cash to another registered charity also participating in this arrangement. Our audit revealed that the vast majority of the cash sent to the other participating charity was subsequently paid to the promoters of the tax shelter arrangement. Of the remainder, the Charity itself paid $443,000 in fundraising fees to the tax shelter promoters and retained $416,000 for use in their own activities.

It is our position that the Charity has operated for the non-charitable purpose of promoting a tax shelter arrangement and for the private benefit of the tax shelter promoters

So Living Waters Ministry is simply a tax shelter that has taken in million of tax free dollars. And their parent company, Desert Stream, has preyed on and exploited minors for their own sexual gratification.

And yet both of these groups appear to still be operating. In Canada they are part of what is now called 'Jason Ministries', billed as 'International Christian ex-gay ministries' and their contacts in Canada are none other than Toni & Mardi Dolfo-Smith.

And they are part of an international group that all claim to be friends of Desert Stream. Other friends of this organization that has been referred to as a cult and charged with sexual misconduct, include Focus on the Family.

The Canadian founder of Focus on Family, who received seed money from their American counterpart, is Darrel Reid, who is now Stephen Harper's deputy chief of staff, and many members of Harper's caucus, including Rob Anders, Maurice Vellacott and Brad Trost, also belong.

Reid once compared those who support gay rights to Nazis, and Anders, Vellacott and Trost are vocal homophobics.

Sources:

1. Desert Scream: Exodus Leader’s Shocking Admissions of Ministry’s Sexual Abuse, By Wayne Besen, TWO, March 13, 2010

2. Healing For Sexual Brokenness, By Simon Presland, The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, May/June issue 2001

3. The Canada Revenue Agency revokes the charitable status of Living Waters Ministry Trust, Government of Canada

"Godly Men" and Access Codes. What is David Sweet Up To?

Many of the threats from the Religious Right are visible and already on our radar. However, there are a great many more that don't get as much attention as they should, and one of those comes from a Harper backbencher, David Sweet, and his group the "Promise Keepers".

When Sweet first ran in the 2004 federal election, in the Ontario riding of Ancaster, Dundas, Flamborough, Westdale; he posted on his website the fact that he was the Canadian founder of the Promise Keepers. When the media and others did a little investigation and discovered what PK really was, they went public and Sweet lost the election.

Learning his lesson, by 2006, he had removed all mention of PK and his name was all but purged from their website. At issue then was an old quote where he had said something to the effect that there was a reason why Jesus only called men as his disciples, because apparently they are "natural influencers" while women are "natural followers". Whatever.

I had researched the group a bit then, but most of the information available was from their U.S. counterpart, and according to Sweet and his supporters, they were quite different. Fair enough. Besides for awhile it appeared that the movement was fizzling out. Membership was down and their budget was shrinking. What was so threatening about a bunch of cowboys, getting together for a bit of scratch and sniff?

However, I came across an article from last summer, and apparently they are back and stronger than ever. Their founder has re-emerged and they have expanded their ministry. And guess what their goal is now? According the the Los Angeles Times, they are Plotting the Exit Strategy, with the help of McCartney's new organization "The Road to Jerusalem."

For thousands of years, prophets have predicted the end of the world. Today, various religious groups, using the latest technology, are trying to hasten it. Their endgame is to speed the promised arrival of a messiah. For some Christians this means laying the groundwork for Armageddon.

With that goal in mind, mega-church pastors recently met in Inglewood to polish strategies for using global communications and aircraft to transport missionaries to fulfill the Great Commission: to make every person on Earth aware of Jesus' message. Doing so, they believe, will bring about the end, perhaps within two decades.

WHAT???!!!

I'm getting too old for this.

And they have already "re-created priestly robes of white linen, gem-studded breastplates, silver trumpets ...." What no balloons? This sounds more like a Jason Kenney bachelor party for one.

It would appear that the PK have now invited Messianic Jews to join their club because as McCartney claims: "The Bible says Jews will be brought to jealousy when they see Christians and Jewish believers together as one -- they'll want to be a part of that. That's going to signal Jesus' return." Even the 700 Club Promotes this movement.

With this new information, I thought I'd take another look into David Sweet and his fundamentalism again, and I have discovered a pattern with the PK, that is disturbing without the whole white robe, gold breastplate thing. (and Sweet is still involved, mentioned as a speaker at their events)

David Sweet and the Promise Keepers

In the 1998 Canadian Christianity magazine, they ran an article about Sweet: Calling Men to Walk Together.

PROMISE KEEPERS (PK) want to be catalysts in the renewal of men across the nation. David Sweet, the 41 year old president and first CEO of the movement in Canada, is adamant that we're living in a time when Holy Spirit-driven men's ministries are crucial.

Citing the decay in moral and political authority that's increasingly becoming evident, Sweet observed that in any age we err if we take a look at the fruit of the age and determine what our behavior should be.

"This is the first time . . . historically that we have decided that we'll march to a morality drum that is governed by the voice of the day rather than having any bearing on what we've lived by in history" ... we have developed a psychology in our culture that we can divorce politics and morality. That is impossible to do."

Sweet goes on to tell the story of how he was arrested at the age of 12 for stealing cars and spent four years behind bars. I can imagine at that age, that it would have been quite traumatic and I'm glad he gave up that career choice.

At the time, PK was on their 'Living a Legacy' tour, and Sweet was appearing with some pretty heavy hitters in the evangelical trade. David Ring has been on all of the main mega church shows including John Hagee's. The late Selwyn Hughes also on the circuit and had written, according to his bio, 50 books on Christianity. Lee A. Jenkins runs a corporate Bible industry, promoting a theory of personal wealth paving the way to salvation (I paraphrase).

Steve Masterson and Brian Warren are both involved with the Canadian PK group. Masterson is listed as the Director of Teaching, Training & Development. David Warren is an ex-CFL player turned pastor, who is also on the PK 'team'. You can hear him speak a bit here.

So far, so good. Nothing yet to make you want to hide under the bed. But let's take a closer look at these 'Godly' men and their ministry.

Chest Thumping and Cross Bearing

Journalist Matt Taibbi went undercover on a weekend retreat with John Hagee's Cornerstone Church, and wrote a very revealing piece: Jesus Made Me Puke. Now some people might think that he was being sacrilegious, but I understand why the need for levity. It's often a defense mechanism.

Anytime I investigate these groups, I eventually have the same reaction, especially if I watch the videos. There is something about them that can be overwhelming. Watch the video at the bottom of this posting, and I think you'll see what I mean. They kind of tap into a raw emotion, and I can understand how the vulnerable could become mesmerized. The fact that I have to put it at the bottom says a lot. I'm not prepared to watch it again, and it's not the worst I've viewed in the past few hours. There were many I would never share with anyone.

But what Mr. Taibbi describes is an indoctrination.

Here I have a confession to make. It's not something that's easy to explain, but here goes. After two days of nearly constant religious instruction, songs, worship and praise - two days that for me meant an unending regimen of forced and fake responses - a funny thing started to happen to my head. There is a transformational quality in these external demonstrations of faith and belief.

The more you shout out praising the Lord, singing along to those awful acoustic tunes, telling people how blessed you feel and so on, the more a sort of mechanical Christian skin starts to grow all over your real self. You may think you know the answer, but by my third day I began to notice how effortlessly my soft-spoken Matt-mannequin was going through his robotic motions of praise, and I was shocked. For a brief, fleeting moment I could see how under different circumstances it would be easy enough to bury your "sinful" self far under the skin of your outer Christian and to just travel through life this way.

And what makes it more compelling to the average sinner are the people delivering the message. They will tell you stories of their own wasted lives, and as you identify with their 'anguish', there's a familiarity that develops. He's trusted you with his secrets.

But in relation to the PK and their retreats and conferences, they take on a 'macho' element. Some of it was witnessed during that weekend when a former athlete was whipping up the crowd.

The grown macho man unashamedly breaking into boyish tears in public is one of the weirder features of the post-Promise Keeper Christian generation, and Fortenberry - himself a Promise Keeper, incidentally - had it down to a science. "You never came to my ballgames, Dad," he'd screech, his face wrinkling like a raisin with grief at the word "ballgames

So you can imagine a conference where all of the motivational speakers are athletes and military leaders. Tough, virile men; crying and hugging each other, and encouraging others to cry and hug and each other. To take charge of their households come hell or high water. They are the kings of their castles and they now must head home to subjugate their queens.

I used to think however, that all that unleashed testosterone might encourage some men to take by force what would not be conceded, but after studying this movement a bit, I think there is a different strategy. They "love" their wives into "submission".

Love Your Wife Sacrificially

I think it's time to Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her; that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless. Ephesians

That term "love your wife sacrificially' is heard a lot at these meetings. Now I can't imagine ever being loved sacrificially. And of course it's always wives, never girlfriends, fiancees or significant others. There must be a husband. There must be a wife. And there must be a "sacrifice".

I've read several "testimonials" and articles on the PK site, describing how a man must define his relationship and win over his woman.

But first, according to one of their books that you can purchase for $ 24.95, you must "crack her access code". Sounds painful.

But only then will she "... grow in becoming who God designed her to be." And after cracking their "access code", it's pretty clear that God designed her to be; a baby making machine, subservient to her husband. She just had to be "loved" into submission.

Scared Straight

Another angle, or 'promise' is sexual purity. And that's where all these 'manly' men come in. When you peruse the 'sexual purity' part of the site, there is a bit on pornography, but most of it has to do with homosexuality. They have a cure. Unfortunately they don't have a clue.

They use a 'reduce an athlete or military leader' to a snivelling wreck and then show his tough side. Their little skits are always about an abusive father, believing that caused the 'poor' man to 'choose' this 'lifestyle'. Author, historian and political activist, Anton Chaitkin, wrote an expose on the "mind control" techniques used by the Promise Keepers.

He refers to them as a "cult" and after watching some of their videos, I agree. I think that's what Matt Taibbi was sensing when he stated that Jesus made him puke. You know that there is something happening, as you watch the robotic movements, flushed faces and glazed eyes. These people are no longer thinking for themselves.

And they believe they can use this power to convince their followers that they can now 'control' their wives and 'cure' homosexuals, or possibly be 'cured' themselves.

Chaitkin refers to them as a 'military ministry', and even 'religious terrorists'.

But what happens when this group of manly, muscular Christians, who feel they now have the power to subjugate women and cure homosexuals; start turning their attention toward "Plotting the End Times"?

Their messages are not terribly subtle. Play the video on the right of this page. It's pretty clear that they see a final struggle between Gentiles and Jews. And not just any Gentiles, but Gentiles moved to tears by the Bible.

They've already ordered their white linen robes and jewel studded breastplates.

So to borrow a phrase from Rick Mercer: If you find yourself in Ancaster, Dundas, Flamborough, Westdale, and you see David Sweet. First cross the road, make sure your access code has not been broken, then run like hell.

We really need to get this government out, because sadly Sweet may not be the craziest member of Harper's caucus. Oye!

Spanking and Dominionism, From Kelly Block to James Dobson

In October of 2009, Reform-Conservative Member of Parliament, Kelly Block, sent out a tax-payer funded flyer to her constituents that asked the question, "Are Parents Criminals?” The intent of this was to drum up support for her opposition to a senate bill that would see parents charged for inflicting corporal punishment on their children.

According to the Star Pheonix:

“The Liberal dominated Senate already voted to approve this terrible idea last year,” the mailout says. “(The bill) is designed to make moms and dads into criminals for using the traditional punishment of spanking to teach their kids right from wrong.”

Block did not return multiple interview requests seeking comment.

What Block was referring to was Liberal senator Céline Hervieux-Payette's, Bill S-209. Believing as many do that spanking or any form of corporal punishment can encourage violent behaviour, the senator felt a need to introduce consequences.

She includes the following video on her site:

While section 43 of the criminal code, prohibited spanking, it did not allow for criminal charges to be laid against the person inflicting the harm.

Kelly Block was not the only member of the Religious Right to be upset.

Charles' McVety's Family Action Coalition, suggested that "... section 43 of the criminal code [is] to be rescinded. That section allows parents to use "reasonable force" to correct behaviors of their (not the state's) children. If that allowance for spanking was rescinded then any parent who reasonably spanks a child could face criminal charges of assault."

REAL Women of Canada had already presented their views on their website:

The arrogant political left, which looks contemptuously down on those who disagree with its supposedly enlightened views, is attempting to revive the spanking issue. Apparently the opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada on the subject, handed down a year ago, was only a stopgap in the onward journey to ban the spanking of children in Canada. (2)

I'm not sure what 'arrogance' has to do with wanting to protect children, but spanking has come to mean something more to the Christian nationalist movement.

James Dobson, Dominionism or Destruction

James Dobson is the Founder of Focus on the Family and a leading member of the American Religious Right movement. He provided 1.6 million dollars to help set up the Canadian Focus on the Family group, founded by Stephen Harper's deputy chief of staff, Darrel Reid.

He has written extensively on the issue of spanking, and though he is a child psychologist, it's never from a scientific argument, only Biblical.

In his book, The Strong Willed Child he makes an extraordinary case to justify harsh discipline. In it he speaks of his small dog Siggie, who he claims to love very much, but when he was away for awhile, the dog had picked up some bad habits. And when he disobeyed him, Dobson retaliated. He describes the scene:

“At eleven o’clock that night, I told Siggie to go get into his bed, which is a permanent enclosure in the family room. For six years I had given him that order at the end of each day, and for six years Siggie had obeyed.

“On this occasion, however, he refused to budge. ...“I had seen this defiant mood before, and knew there was only one way to deal with it. The ONLY way to make Siggie obey is to threaten him with destruction. Nothing else works. I turned and went to my closet and got a small belt to help me ‘reason’ with Mr. Freud.”

“What developed next is impossible to describe. That tiny dog and I had the most vicious fight ever staged between man and beast. I fought him up one wall and down the other, with both of us scratching and clawing and growling and swinging the belt. I am embarrassed by the memory of the entire scene. Inch by inch I moved him toward the family room and his bed. As a final desperate maneuver, Siggie backed into the corner for one last snarling stand. I eventually got him to bed, only because I outweighed him 200 to 12!” (3)

What the good Mr. Dobson describes is animal cruelty and the fact the he outweighed him 200 to 12, makes the whole scene even more horrific. That man clearly should not own a pet.

He goes on from "destruction" being the only thing the dog understood, to the need to discipline children, and even uses capital letters:

"JUST AS SURELY AS A DOG WILL OCCASIONALLY CHALLENGE THE AUTHORITY OF HIS LEADERS, SO WILL A LITTLE CHILD — ONLY MORE SO.” (3)

And he doesn't just say a child but "a little child ", like the little 12 pound dog. And after describing ways that children will challenge their parent's authority, he states:

“Perhaps this tendency toward self-will is the essence of ‘original sin’ which has infiltrated the human family. It certainly explains why I place such stress on the proper response to willful defiance during childhood, for that rebellion can plant the seeds of personal disaster.” (3)

Nothing clinical befitting his profession, but children and "original sin".

You do get some insight into the reasons for his disturbing behaviour from this bio:

Dobson's own family was a bit out of the ordinary. His father was a preacher who often told the story that he had tried to pray before he could even talk. His mother routinely beat their son with her shoes, her belt, and once, a 16-pound girdle. His parents somehow instilled so much guilt in young Dobson that he answered his father's fervent altar-call, weeping at the front of a crowded church service and crying out for God's forgiveness for all his sins, when he was three years old. "It makes no sense, but I know it happened," Dobson still says of being born again as a toddler.

This would certainly prove senator Céline Hervieux-Payette's belief that children learn what they see. However, the spanking issue may be more complex.

For those who have studied the Christian nationalist movement, which is also referred to as 'Dominionism', submissiveness is required to make it work.

In a politico-religious context, dominionism (also called subjectionism) is the tendency among some conservative politically-active Christians, especially in the United States, to seek influence or control over secular civil government through political action. The goal is either a nation governed by Christians, or a nation governed by a conservative Christian understanding of biblical law. (4)

Movement conservatives see the end result as a nation whose laws are based on the Old Testament. There can be no exception. And they are very clear in their understanding that fundamentalist Christians must assume control of all levels of government, beginning with school and municipal boards. It stems from Genesis, where God commissions man to exercise "dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth."

George Grant, one of their founders (and I will be writing a lot more on this) states:

"Christians have an obligation, a mandate, a commission, a holy responsibility to reclaim the land for Jesus Christ -- to have dominion in civil structures, just as in every other aspect of life and godliness. But it is dominion we are after. Not just a voice. It is dominion we are after. Not just influence. It is dominion we are after. Not just equal time. It is dominion we are after. World conquest. That's what Christ has commissioned us to accomplish. We must win the world with the power of the Gospel. And we must never settle for anything less... Thus, Christian politics has as its primary intent the conquest of the land -- of men, families, institutions, bureaucracies, courts, and governments for the Kingdom of Christ." (5)

It's up to us to decide what kind of Canada we want for ourselves, our children and our grandchildren. This is not a movement with any flexibility and it does not represent Canadian values. When Stephen Harper decided to exploit the religious right for political gain, I'm not sure if he understood just what that meant. He is a "born-again" Christian, but I believe he worships on the altar of capitalism. This is now out of his control, I'm afraid.

Sources:

1. MP favours spanking, Star Phoenix, October 5, 2009

2. ATTEMPT TO REVIVE SPANKING ISSUE, REAL Women of Canada, Jan/Feb 2005

3. The Strong Willed Child, By James Dobson, Living Books, 1992, ISBN-10: 0842359249

4. Exiles: Living Missionally in a Post-Christian Culture, By Michael Frost, Hendrickson Publishers, ISBN 1565636708, Pg. 235

5. The Changing of the Guard, By George Grant, 1987, as quoted in "American Theocracy: Who is Trying to Turn America into a Theocracy?

Tony Clement Gets Speech Lessons From Jason Kenney. Now They Both Sound Like Idiots

Conrad Black, the former newspaper magnate and engineer of the Reform/Neoconservative movement in Canada, had a way with words.

Or should I say he had his way with words.

To mask his buffoonery, he became a wordsmith, and no matter what the question, his answer always included a bit of palaver that would have the questioner running to his dictionary for a definition, and then wonder what the possible context could be.

Well our little Jason Kenney fancies himself to be a wordsmith too, and like Black, his words of the day, rarely have a bloody thing to do with the topic being discussed. But that doesn't stop our little Jas from trying, poor thing.

I was reading an article recently discussing criticisms that Harper was getting from his own party. Quoting an MP who asked not to be identified, the statement was so convoluted, but with that magical medieval word, I knew right away who it was. She should have just said an MP who asked not to be identified, but his name rhymes with Mason Benney.

So has Jason Kenney been tutoring Tony Clement on how to sound like a fool?

After referring to educated Canadians as the 'chattering class' and the press gallery as the 'Ottawa media elite'; Clement had to find a way to put himself above the vast number of adults (and a large percentage of children) in this country, who are smarter than he.

So when defending his party's removal of the public and those pesky elected officials, he stated yesterday:

“We’ve used the intercession quite strategically to make sure that we are connected to Canadians’ concerns, their hopes, their aspirations.”

Intercession? Strange choice of word. By definition an intercession is:

1. An act or instance of interceding - but we never asked them to intercede on our behalf. In fact we protested strongly against it.

2. An interposing or pleading on behalf of another person - again no mandate from us.

3. From Roman history. the interposing of a veto, as by a tribune - This certainly fits since they vetoed all public debate.

4. A prayer to God on behalf of another - Bingo. When Stockwell Day was named to head up the treasury, it was a clear message to those of us who have followed the neoconservative movement, that the destruction of Canada was about to commence. And when the Christian extremist Darrel Reid, was named Harper's Chief of Staff; we knew that our constitution would be replaced with the old Testament.

I don't know whether to feel sad, angry or frightened. These guys still have a month of unbridled power. Look what they've already accomplished without debate:

- They've gutted our human rights agencies.

- They've cut funding to the Canadian Council on Learning and publicly announced that education was not a priority.

- They've put our public health care on the chopping block by making it part of NAFTA. Now that the Americans can get their hands on our Medicare it will no longer be sustainable.

- They've made a deal to privatize our civil service and are giving the contract to the Europeans. Heaven forbid a Canadian should benefit from anything. This is horrible because these good union jobs provide much needed revenue in the form of income tax. They also create consumers who again contribute through the GST. This move will further reduce government revenue, making it almost impossible to take care of our citizens.

- They've cut funding and threatened to further cut funding, to any NGO who dares to challenge Israeli aggression, while they build their damn boats.

- They've turned Haiti into a militarized zone.

- They've put out tenders under NAFTA to provide dairy products to our prisons that were once provided by an excellent rehabilitation project; the prison farms.

- They've cut 99% of the funding to Planned Parenthood, an agency that promoted women's health issues, suggesting they were abortion brokers.

- They've cancelled plans to build an HIV Vaccine plant, for fear that people receiving the vaccine might be gay.

At a time like this we need a real Governor General. Someone we could go to and ask her to stop this nonsense. But instead we've got little more than a Barbie doll, who loves the glitz and glamour, but has no idea what this country means to us.

Obviously this is what Tony Clement meant when he stated "... We’ve used the intercession quite strategically..." He has been pretty cocky, strutting around telling us to 'vote them out'.

We will and we'll take our country back, but will there by anything left by then? It's not looking good.

New Concerns About Harper's Social Conservative Agenda

Now that Stephen Harper has a dictatorship, there is a lot of concern about him pushing through his neo-conservative agenda of dismantling Canada's social safety net.

This includes all of the things he campaigned against for decades; like public health care, Canada Pension and Old Age Security.

But there is something else that we should be concerned with. His social conservative agenda.

It had been put on the back burner when he was trying to fool Canadians into thinking he was moving to the centre, but it no longer matters now.

And if in fact, if he does plan on forcing an election in the spring, as many anticipate (before the Liberals thinker's conference, which would probably get a lot of media attention), will he still try to silence the extremists in his party, or allow them to focus on social conservative issues again?

When you look at his actions in the past few months, there is definitely something going on. He's brought on an awful lot of Christian fundamentalists, who are now writing his speeches and directing policy.

This will guarantee that the Religious Right will bleed money for him, but what will it mean for a once progressive country like Canada?

Jason Kenney's new citizenship booklet, pretty much erased women's roles in the country's development. In fact, if you didn't know better you'd think it was written in the 1950's. I'm sensing something here that I don't really like.

I thought I'd revisit a posting on Buckdog's blog, written soon after the homophobic Nigel Hannaford was hired to write Stephen Harper's speeches. He shared an article from The Sasquatch, Briarpatch.

Harper's New Speechwriter Is A Strong Social Conservative And Gay Rights Opponent
Jenn Ruddy

It probably won’t come as much of a shock that the Prime Minister’s Office has hired a gay rights opponent to write speeches for Stephen Harper.

Former Calgary Herald columnist Nigel Hannaford is the latest — but certainly not the first, and probably not the last — social conservative to join the upper echelons of Harper’s government.

Hannaford, who was a member of the Calgary Herald’s editorial board until recently, has argued against gay rights in his column Slings & Arrows and scoffed at the legitimacy of human rights commissions. He once referred to human rights tribunals as “communist show trials, not courts” and implied that human rights advocates are “whiners.”

If you think that’s bad, here’s what he had to say about gay rights: Referring to former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau’s 1969 decision to decriminalize homosexuality, Hannaford wrote in 2005, “Fine, said lots of people. Leave gays alone? Fair enough. But, let ’em be Boy Scout leaders? Have each other’s benefits? Adopt kids? Marry each other? Ridiculous.

Anybody seeking political office who suggested it would have been laughed off the hustings. Yet, the Liberals are ready to legalize gay marriage. How did we get to this point?”

Of the 1998 Delwin Vriend Supreme Court ruling, which required that Alberta add sexual orientation to its human rights legislation, Hannaford wrote in 2003, “So much for democracy.”

And when Elsie Wayne, former deputy leader of the Progressive Conservative Party, was excoriated for saying in 2003 that gays should “shut up” about marriage and that Canadians shouldn’t have to “tolerate” gay pride parades, Hannaford wrote in her defence: “Wayne gets my vote. ... Canadian society has been turned upside down in the past 35 years and things regarded as sin in 1965 have special status in 2003.”

As recently, as his May 8, 2009 column, Harper’s new speechwriter lamented that Section 3 of Alberta’s Human Rights Act makes it difficult to prevent Albertans from bringing the same kind of “creepy curriculum” to the province that B.C. has allowed, “in which gay advocates design class material promoting their persuasion right down to kindergarten.”

Hannaford’s appointment troubles longtime gay activist and former Edmonton city councillor Michael Phair.“

Much of what Mr. Hannaford writes and has indicated in his work as a journalist, I suspect, reflects Prime Minister Harper’s and his party’s position on what they would like for Canadian society to be, and I think it harks back to a 1950s approach,” says Phair.

He worries that the Harper government will continue to look for back-door ways to reduce equality for the queer and other marginalized communities, as well as women.

Hannaford’s hiring is the latest in a string of appointments that place social conservatives in high-ranking positions of the Harper government. In July 2008, one of Canada’s most prominent Christian conservatives, Darrel Reid, was appointed director of policy for the Prime Minister’s Office and later moved to one of the top political posts in the country when he was promoted to deputy chief of staff in February. Another Christian evangelical, Paul Wilson, replaced Reid as director of policy.

NDP critic for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transsexual and Transgender Issues Bill Siksay says he’s not surprised to learn of Hannaford’s appointment.“We know that there’s still — within the Conservative Party and within the Conservative caucus — lots of folks who don’t support the full human rights of gay and lesbian Canadians, who are not friends of the queer community, and so in a sense it’s not surprising,” says Siksay.Some of those folks Siksay refers to within the Conservative caucus can be found right here in Saskatchewan.

In July, Saskatoon-Humboldt Conservative MP Brad Trost was critical of his government’s decision to fund Toronto’s gay pride week and pandered to anti-gay sentiment. Speaking to the right-wing website LifeSiteNews.com, Trost reassured the pro-life community, “The tourism funding money that went to the gay pride parade in Toronto was not government policy, was not supported by — I think it’s safe to say by a large majority — of the MPs.”

Shortly thereafter, Saskatoon-Wanuskewin Conservative MP Maurice Vellacott wrote a letter to his constituents supporting Trost’s comments and reassured them that their tax dollars would be used for more “suitable purposes.”

In 2003, the then MP for Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre Larry Spencer was suspended from the Canadian Alliance caucus for saying that homosexuality is a conspiracy theory to seduce and recruit young boys. Spencer said he would support any initiative to criminalize homosexuality.

And who could forget the media scandal last year in which Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre Conservative MP Tom Lukiwski was caught on videotape saying in 1991: “There’s A’s and there’s B’s. The A’s are guys like me, the B’s are homosexual faggots with dirt under their fingernails that transmit diseases.”

“There is a very one-sided message coming from the Conservative Party,” says Nathan Seckinger, executive director of the GBLUR Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity in Regina. “What we hear are a lot of anti-queer statements being made by individual politicians under a conservative banner. What we don’t hear are any pro-queer statements.”

Statistics Canada revealed in 2004 that gays and lesbians are nearly twice as likely to be the victim of a violent crime, including sexual assault, robbery and physical assault, and bisexuals are four-and-a-half times as likely, compared to heterosexuals.

In 2007, 10 per cent of police-reported hate crimes in Canada were motivated by sexual orientation.“What we’re really talking about is a sin of omission,” says Seckinger. “The concern for me isn’t so much the fact that Conservatives are shooting their mouths off about having anti-queer positions, because politicians say dumb things once in a while. My concern is more that they say them frequently and that they don’t have anybody saying anything else [about queer issues], and that’s what tells me that there’s a problem.”

When the Lukiwski scandal broke out last year, GBLUR, under the leadership of Seckinger, took the high road: it accepted Lukiwski’s apology and called for co-operation across political divides. GBLUR’s goal was to shift the debate toward the health and safety crisis facing queer people in Canada and away from the media’s sensationalized coverage of the scandal.

“The reality of it is that Mr. Lukiwski had been campaigning against same-sex marriage for years and nobody gave a damn,” says Seckinger. “The reason everybody got angry about that issue is because he used a dirty word. He got caught on tape using the word ‘faggot’ and it got put on TV and so, really, what people were upset about wasn’t the fact that the man is homophobic, because that should have been common knowledge already. What people were concerned about is the fact that he was being impolite about his homophobia.”

Seckinger says there’s no doubt that the Conservative Party panders to homophobic voting bases. But when the media lend coverage to, say, Harper’s new homophobic speechwriter or to the blatantly homophobic remarks of an individual politician, the pressing health and safety concerns of the queer community get ignored.

And the general homophobic discourse in government, which cuts across party lines, sneaks under the radar.“A question to ask yourself is, ‘how often do queer specific concerns get put forward in the form of bills?’” says Seckinger. “The mental health problems for the GLBT community are epidemic in Canada. Why is that not being dealt with?
---------------------------------------

And let's not forget Stockwell Day: Press reports revealed recently that Mr. Day, who is the Conservative Party’s foreign affairs critic, refused to send condolences to the Palestinian people on the death of President Yassir Arafat. Why? Because of Mr. Arafat’s support for armed struggle against Israel? No. Because he might have died of AIDS. In a November 16 email to his Conservative colleagues Mr. Day stated: "Some of you have asked why I have not released a statement of condolence or sympathy. As you know, there are two sides to the Arafat story. You pick...." He then included in the email an article by David Frum, former speech writer for George W. Bush, indulging in unfounded speculation about the cause of Arafat’s death. Frum suggested that Arafat’s symptoms “sounded AIDS-like.” (BTW: David Frum is a Harper insider and former speech writer of George W. Bush. He was the one who coined the term 'Axis of Evil')

Or Jason Kenney recently appointing an anti-gay activist to the Refugee Board, who will determine which of those claiming refugee status on the grounds of sexual orientation, will be given safe haven.

Or Pierre Poilievre and his shot about sex changes, declaring that the federal government should hold back any health fund transfers used for this purpose, ignoring health concerns.

And we know how many of them are anti-abortion. Will a woman's right to choose be abolished, as suggested by Dean Del Mastro?

Harper is certainly getting his ducks in a row.

How Focus on the Family is Destroying Children

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

James Dobson is the founder of Focus on the The Family, and one of the leading members of the Religious Right. He not only spent thousands of dollars campaigning for Stephen Harper's fight against equal marriage, but he provided four and a half million dollars to start a Focus on the Family in Canada.

Harper's assistant chief of staff, Darrel Reid founded the group, and several of Harper's MPs, including Maurice Vellacott, Rob Anders and Brad Trost, belong to it.

It is one of the oldest of these so-called "values", "families" groups, and is certainly one of the most profitable. Unfortunately, it is also one of the most damaging.

Brian Elroy McKinley, a former Christian, has launched a website, that not only exposes FOTF, but also acts as a support group for others who have been damaged because of Dobson. He doesn't feel that Focus are alone but speaks of how "... the illness of judgementalism, and prejudgementalism has infected the ranks of the faithful." (1) This should help to serve as their wake up call.

From one testimonial:

For fourteen years I attended church three times a week with my parents. this particular church seemed to have a very intimate relationship with Focus on the Family. I was taught women didn't deserve the same respect as men because they were not equal to them. This and other "values" were ingrained into my young, absorbent mind from the nursery to youth group. As a female, this contributed to my low self-esteem. My self esteem, in turn, led to my silence after my rape (my youth pastor convinced me it was my fault and that I was "ruined") and a relationship with an abusive boyfriend. My experiences drove me to reject Christianity as a whole. I would like to give my life back to Christ, but I can't let go of my haunting memories. I also can't separate Christianity'steachings from those of Dr. Dobson. (2)

And Another:

I was raised as a child by the Dobson's methods. I went to a Christian School whose idea of sexual education was to put on a Dobson tape and tell us to take notes. I was given "tough love" because my parents were confused with certain aspects of my personality that Dobson claimed was "passive rebellion". Ergo, I was given "spankings" (the details of which I will spare you, but I understand that not even Prisoners of War, according to the Geneva Convention, should be treated in such ways). It was all done by the book (Dobson's books) and his radio shows were always on the radio.

Three nervous breakdowns, years of therapy and support groups, and a lost childhood later, I am just starting to learn what Mr. Dobson's theories have done to me. Despite this, millions continue to listen and adhere to his destructive approach to parenting. For years, I thought I was alone in this opinion. My parents and I have made our peace over the past. But, it churns my stomach to know he carries on. (2)

And still another:

I am a gay man. Many years ago, I listened to Focus on the Family. They had a news show called 'Family News in Focus.' It was the only thing that I found that addressed homosexuality..albeit in a negative light. Their radio program really worked on me. I nearly killed myself before finally accepting myself as I am. A friend of mine was less fortunate and became obsessed with Bob Larson's 'Talk Back' program and later committed suicide.

After this happened, I started researching the Religious Right and found them out to be a very scary bunch. Bob Larson has a fan club these days. But, as you are seeing, it's hard to criticize them, because then you're the 'enemy' who is 'attacking' Christianity. It's a catch-22, and I know that it's not Christianity that you wish to attack! I have come across some 'Christian' sites and have sent letters to their editors when they come across so extreme, trying to get them to consider what they are saying. But I only get a bible verse back, and a polite letter that doesn't address what I said to them at all.

"Love the sinner but not the sin" is what I'm told. I asked one of them why don't they think that it's a sin using homosexuals in fundraising letters in order to stir up anger toward us (to get 'love gifts' from their followers)?

I'm hoping that one day being a Conservative Christian means things other than attacking homosexuals, focusing on abortion and prayer in schools. (2)

Groups like Focus marginalize anyone who doesn't fit into their narrow little definition of what a person or a family should be. And they have an almost cult like following.

Susan Greene, a columnist for the Denver Post discovered just how much of a cult following Dobson had, when she wrote criticizing his endorsement of spanking children.

Having been called all sorts of names as a columnist, I've got to hand it to some members of the religious right for their spirited invective. A column I wrote over the weekend criticizing James Dobson for his advocacy of corporal punishment prompted one reader to call me a "Jezebel," another a "dyke." Five men and two women have lobbed the c-word my way. And I have been called a "retard" three times and a "moron" twice since Sunday.

All purportedly in defense of Dr. Dobson and the moral righteousness of his teachings. Several readers took umbrage with my use of the verb "hit" as a synonym for "spank" — as if spanking were more virtuous, see, because it is focused on the family.

...Reader Charlie Haynes called to tout how effective he found it to have bitten his troubled young daughter and hit her head on the ground. Scott from Castle Rock phoned to threaten me with a spanking (with me wearing bobby socks, as he bothered to imagine it). No joke. Walter Smetana decried my criticism of Dobson as illustrative of a "mindless, bestial, even Satanic banality of evil."

...And Walt Morrison sent his warmest and fuzziest anti-Semitic regards, using the debate about discipline to launch into a hateful rant about the need to exterminate Jews. Way to spread the love, Mr. M!

What touches me, I mean really touches me, are all the good folks who have called to say they're praying for me and my hatefulness. That's code for insinuating that I'm headed for damnation because I don't spank my kids and am dubious when readers claim their own grown children have thanked them for whacking them.

"My daddy belted me. I belted my son. And God willing, my son will discipline his own boy," Paul White, a reader and self-described amateur pastor, phoned to tell me Monday morning. "It's called backbone. It's called firmness," he continued. Maybe, Mr. White. But it's also called abuse and repetition compulsion and being a big old bullying blow-hard, plain and simple. Now put your belt back on. (3)

Yes, it also churns my stomach to know that there are people out there like this.

Sources:

1. A More Honest Form of Faith, A Former Christian's Perspective, By Brian McKinley

2. People directly damaged by Focus and the people who follow them, Letters of Support

3. James Dobson evokes storm of responses, By Susan Greene, The Denver Post, March 2, 2010

The Media Have Finally Woken up to The Religious Right in Canada

There is something that is rarely discussed here in Canada, and that is the influence of the Religious Right on our current government.

But this is more than just a religious influence on policy, it goes much deeper. They have been behind cuts to science, medical research, and inaction on climate change because they believe that it is one of a number of catastrophes, that we must allow to happen on the road to Armageddon. They are also behind the new Anti-Semitism nonsense, because as another milestone on the road to the Apocalypse, all Jews must be put in boats and forced back to Israel.

And then of course, there are the obvious things like abortion, same-sex marriage, gay rights, health care and daycare; but the most troubling for me is their influence on foreign policy.

I'm glad that the mainstream media is finally waking up and accepting that they have to include this in their reporting, and we as Canadians must start including it as part of normal political discourse.

The religious right is not a religious movement but a political one, and they make a great deal of money feeding off people's insecurities.

I was hesitant to delve into it, fearing that I might offend; but then they themselves became so offensive when discussing the gay community, single mothers, working mothers, etc.; that I decided it was time to fight back.

I grew up poor in a rather rough neighbourhood, and credit the churches in our area with helping me stay on course. I attended Catholic school, played soccer for the United Church, belonged to a Baptist youth group and attended dances in the Anglican church basement.

I don't remember them at anytime trying to convert me, but they may have all had a hand in saving me. Not that I ever really lost my way. I had great parents who though Catholic, allowed me to explore. Mind you, maybe they were just happy that it kept me out of trouble.

Fortunately, most churches are still like that, especially in small communities.

But the religious right represents the mega churches. The wealthy evangelical movement that judges people, and tries to inflict their twisted moral values on the rest of us.

And if anyone believes that a Harper majority won't be their final victory, you're just fooling yourself. Listen to him in this video.

National affairs writer for the Toronto Star, Linda Diebel; wrote a great article on the subject. I have been investigating this for a while, so have added some of my own notes in brackets where comments needed to be corrected, or where I had additional information. I have also included links to my former postings on a particular subject.

Boom times for PMO's God squad
Do Harper's 'theocons' give a Christian tint to policy or simply keep the base happy?
By Linda Diebel National Affairs Writer
December 19, 2009

Darrel Reid used to shoot from the lip. Few Canadian evangelists can match his record for the controversial quote, whether accusing single moms of using welfare to have babies or likening hate crime laws protecting gays and lesbians to Nazi tyranny. Nowadays, not so much.

In 2006, with the advent of a Conservative minority, Reid, once a catalyst for the evangelical movement in Canada, began to go stealth. He became chief of staff to former environment minister Rona Ambrose, then moved to the Prime Minister's Office as an adviser. Last February, he dove further below the radar, apparently gaining more influence with Stephen Harper. He's not up there with Laureen, mind you, but arguably more important than many warm bodies around the cabinet able ....

...However, if he were to do something, McDonald concludes, it would be irreversible by the time it was detected and "would change Canada in a profound way... People seem to wake up to what Harper is doing too late."

IS THIS REALLY YOUR CANADA?