Today I’m writing from a particularly personal perspective. On November 4, the United States took a great step forward by electing Barack Obama in a contest that - in the end - wasn’t even really close. We also took three steps backwards as a nation by adding same-sex marriage bans in Arizona, Florida and, most disturbingly, California. I’ll tell you why California is the most disturbing of all. It’s the most disturbing because the state supreme court had already declared that denying gays and lesbians the right to marry is unconstitutional. Constitution be damned! The Roman Catholic church immediately jumped into action and appealed to their Mormon friends to help pass Proposition 8, designed to deny civil rights to one group of people by writing discrimination into the California State Constitution. That, my friends, is not only unconstitutional but also a grievous violation of the separation between church and state. So, the Mormons and Catholics should stop whining about being targeted. In case they do not ‘get it,’ they are being targeted by members of my community because they are the root of the problem. If they can’t take the heat, they should get out of the kitchen, as my mother would say.

Now that they’ve thrown themselves directly into a political firestorm, they should suck it up and prepare for the fight. Oh, and did I mention that they should also lose their no-tax status? Yep, that’s the way it’s supposed to be. Only, it will never happen because we have still have the spineless bunch in office. I am particularly angry about this issue because I happen to be gay (since the womb, according to my friends) and live in Massachusetts where the legislature and the people got it right. It just isn’t all that important and, contrary to the lies spread by the religious right, same-sex marriage has not caused the sky to fall in. Chicken Little doesn’t live here anymore. Didn’t you hear? He’s moved to California. I’m also angry because there are plenty of lies and misconceptions spread about us gay people. Let me tell you how perverse my family is.

My wife, yes - we live in Massachusetts - and I have been together for seventeen years. We had a commitment ceremony with many friends and extended family back in 1992 when we moved to Gloucester together. We also ‘registered’ in Provincetown when that city allowed gays to register as domestic partners. In 2002, we drove to Vermont and had an outdoor civil union in the pouring rain. We were legally married in Massachusetts in 2006. There were just four attendees. We have two children, an eleven-year-old girl and a seven-year-old boy. The children are ours. We planned and had them together. Like everyone else, we have had good and bad times together. We’ve managed to keep it together and are very happy. Our children get up every morning and go to school. They come home and do homework (or not, sometimes). We have three rescued cats, but our son is driving us nuts lobbying for a dog. In other words, we are the same as all of you except people are either reminding us that we are abnormal and do not count as a family, or somehow the religious right and government has colluded to attempt to take our civil rights away. And you know what? We just don’t get it. What is the threat to all of you heterosexual couples?

Yes, we know that your divorce rate is just about 50%. However, we know that doesn’t have anything to do with us. You’re managing that one all on your own. And that whole thing about same-sex marriage being abnormal? If that’s the case, then why is it that I’m always reading about how a sordid sexual encounter helped some heterosexual couple save their marriage?

Targeting one group for discrimination

This isn’t rocket science. The right to marry whomever you want is guaranteed in the Constitution and, despite what the right-wing nuts want you to embrace, the Constitution is the cornerstone of American democracy, not the Bible. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the right to marry is guaranteed only to one man and one woman. That’s something that right-wing Christian conservatives want to write into the Constitution. In other words, they want to write Biblical Law into the secular US Constitution, the basis of a democracy that is supposed to serve all Americans - not just Christians. They want to continue to blur the separation between church and state because they want to move towards a theocratic form of government. And that’s not okay because that is never the way our forefathers intended it to be. Now, we’ve heard some right-wing spin around that, but that doesn’t make it so. (Believe me, it doesn’t just stop at same-sex marriage. The theocrats have a huge agenda that also targets women’s health and reproductive rights, stem cell research, and sex education.)

While we’re aware of the role the Mormon and Roman Catholic churches have played in the passage of Proposition 8, the third largest private donor - at a whopping $900,000 - has slipped below the media’s radar. His name is Howard F. Ahmanson, a recluse. He’s a recluse because he’s a Dominionist and they like to operate under the radar screen. In a 1985 interview with the Orange County Register he stated, “My goal is the total integration of biblical law into our lives.” The proponents of Prop 8 have come up with an interesting spin on their oppressive activity. They are not targeting gays, they are protecting marriage. They have targeted gays for discrimination by denying them - and only them - the right to marry based on Biblical law, not on secular law.

Ahmanson, along with another major contributor - Elsa Broekhuizen, whose son is the founder of the controversial and less-than-Christian Blackwater mercenary firm - has found common ground with the Roman Catholic and Mormon churches. Strange bedfellows indeed! So intent were they to deny us the right to marry that the Mormon Church raised millions of dollars and conducted phone banking from Utah, interfering in the democratic process of another state. The fact that the Roman Catholic archbishop from San Francisco approached the Mormon Church for help in denying the civil rights of one group of people places them in collusion. The Mormon Church invested roughly $20 million, while the Knights of Columbus and the US Conference of Catholic Bishops invested $1.25 million and $200,000 respectively. This attempt to subvert the California State Constitution should result in the revocation of their non-tax status.

To maintain a no-tax status under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Service code, an organization may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities. In addition, these organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct. Clearly, $20 million later and after conducting phone banking across state lines, the Mormon church has shown flagrant disregard for the Section 501(c)(3) code. The Roman Catholic Church was part and parcel to this atrocity and deserves no break, having absolved themselves by funneling most of their financial support through the Knights of Columbus.

No longer content to be ’second class citizens’

Proposition 8 has prompted the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Lambda Legal and the National Center for Lesbian Rights to file suit against Proposition 8, stating it is unconstitutional because it will change the underlying principles of the California State Constitution and removes a protected right - the right to marry - from one group. Proposition 8 did something much more important, however. It galvanized a nationwide community to fight for its rights instead of sitting back and waiting for the government to do the right thing.

We (meaning the gay population) have reached the point where we are no longer content to be treated as second class American citizens. This message was sent loud and clear on Saturday, November 15, when gays and lesbians across the nation took to the streets in support of their brothers and sisters in California who deserve the right to marry whomever they choose. The battle has been officially joined. If we are good enough to pay taxes to this government and fight and die in the wars our nation creates, we are good enough to marry the partners of our choice. If, indeed, we are going to be denied rights and written out of the Constitution, then perhaps we should be absolved of financially supporting our government.

As for the Constitution, it has been amended over the years, but only to expand civil rights. It has never been amended to deny civil rights to one group of people. This is a precedent that we do not want to set. This despicable action does not ‘protect’ marriage. Rather, it subverts individual freedom. Where will it end? Today it’s gays and lesbians, but who will it be tomorrow? Who will be next to be denied their rights? Before people sign on in support of Proposition 8 or any other ballot measure that seeks to curtail personal freedoms, they should think long and hard about how setting such a precedent could adversely affect them some day.

If you think the insulting, vitriolic hate spread over the airwaves by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck is going to go away, you’re wrong. These clowns, along with their lower-level trainees in smaller markets around the country, are waiting in the wings for Barack Obama to be inaugurated so they can spread their toxic brew to more than 100 million Americans who are willing to listen.

While these idiots (for lack of a better description) are constantly whining about the vast left-wing media bias, here are some actual FACTS (you know, those things that Hannity, Limbaugh and their like would not recognize if it hit them in the face):

A 2007 analysis by the Center for American Progress and the Free Press shows that of all the news/talk stations in the top 10 radio markets in America, 76 percent are conservative while 24 percent are progressive. Sound like a vast liberal media bias to you?

The reality is that these talk show hosts do not deal in facts. They appeal to people’s fear and ignorance by spreading LIES. The link below will connect you to Media Matters for America, an organization that has done an excellent job of exposing the hate mongers:

http://mediamatters.org/reports/radio/index

I urge you to learn about these bigots, because they are not going to go away. They will continue to fuel the hate that exists in certain parts of this country, a hate based in stupidity and ignorance.

In the first part of this article, I provided a basic overview of Dominionism and what it would mean for America. The Christian right has gained extensive control of the Republican party. It is now evident that no GOP candidate will be able to capture the presidency without its backing. That’s how pervasive its control has become. I also mentioned in the first part of the article that the Dominionists like to operate under the radar screen. Back in 1986, Pat Robertson - himself once a presidential candidate - distributed a memo to the Iowa Republican County Caucus entitled “How to Participate in a Political Party.” Here’s what it said:

“Rule the world for God.

“Give the impression that you are there to work for the party, not push an ideology.

“Hide your strength.

“Don’t flaunt your Christianity.

“Christians need to take leadership positions. Party officers control political parties and so it is very important that mature Christians have a majority of leadership positions wherever possible, God willing.”

The goal was to be in control of the government by 2004. George Bush may not have been quite as rabid an idealogue as Sarah Palin, but he was close. Bush took care of those who helped get him elected by pushing faith-based initiatives. He stifled stem cell research. He held back funding for schools unless they taught abstinence-only sex education. George Bush actively sought a Constitutional ban on gay marriage more than once. Had George Bush not blown it in so many other areas, John McCain may well have been elected, bringing Sarah Palin with him. To be sure, Barack Obama’s election has thrown a monkey wrench into their time line, but do not believe for one minute that they are giving up the ghost.

The 2008 election

Although I’ve mentioned this before, I’ll mention it again because it’s that important. Sarah Palin was not John McCain’s first choice for the vice presidency. It has now been revealed that McCain and Palin barely spoke during the campaign. McCain himself was never the Christian rights first choice as president either. It was Mike Huckabee, a Dominionist who wanted to reclaim the land for Jesus, if you will remember. When it became evident that McCain was going to be the presumptive nominee, the Christians moved to Plan B, which was to control the game via the vice presidency. McCain was told that if he chose Joseph Lieberman (aka Benedict Arnold), he would not receive their support. The Council for National Policy vetted and chose Sarah Palin for him. She did what she was expected to do: She energized the Christian base and it’s an energy that will live on in anticipation of 2012 when they believe Sarah Palin with replace Barack Obama as president of the United States.

Since Obama’s election, there have been stories about Sarah Palin becoming a rogue candidate, not adhering to the campaign’s strategy, giving unapproved interviews, and attacking Obama with the Ayers allegation without the McCain camp’s approval. That’s because Sarah Palin has her own agenda. The mainstream media has interpreted this as Sarah Palin’s own ambitiousness, and they are right to a certain point. She wants to be president in 2012 and the Christian right wants her to be president in 2012. What the mainstream media is missing is why she’s driven. She’s driven because she’s a Dominionist of the worst magnitude. This is a woman who believes that we’re in Iraq and Afghanistan because it’s God’s will. Sarah Palin, much like the Reverend John Hagee, believes that a preemptive strike on Iran (in concert with Israel) will fulfill Biblical prophesy.

Here’s what Palin had to say to Greta Van Susteren of FOX News when asked about a 2012 presidential run, “You know, I have - faith is a very big part of my life. And putting my life in my creator’s hands - this is what I always do. I’m like, OK, God, if there is an open door for me somewhere, this is what I always pray, I’m like, don’t let me miss the open door.”

In keeping with that theme, she also hasn’t ruled out a run for a Senate seat. When Larry King asked if she’d serve out her term as governor, Palin replied, “I will do what the people of Alaska want me to do.” Then she added, “if they call an audible on me, and if they say they want me in another position, I’m going to do it…My life is in God’s hands. If he’s got doors open for me, that I believe are in our state’s best interest, the nation’s best interest,I’m going to go through those doors.” Should Senator Ted Stevens retain his seat, he will almost certainly be ousted for his felony convictions. Palin could run for his seat in a special election. Or, she could challenge Republican incumbent Senator List Murkowski in 2010.

I’d like to say that Sarah Palin will be back, but the reality is that she has not gone away. Her mug is occupying every news show she can find, and you can be that this is by design. Some Republicans believe she is the future of the Republican party while others believe she will be its downfall. With the leverage the Christian right has in Republican party politics, many believe that Sarah Palin will be a big part of the GOP retooling.

As one watches Sarah Palin today, there is a marked difference. She references God and her faith much more than she did during the McCain campaign. She is no longer restricted by his campaign strategy.

Pre-Palin Dominionist politicians

Republicans have already elected Dominionist public servants, perhaps unwittingly. Sam Brownback, who ran for president for a short time in 2008, is a Dominionist, along with Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and Colorado Representative Tom Tancredo. Perhaps the most famous, however, is former Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris - famous for helping George Bush win the presidency in 2000. She later went on to win a seat in the US House of Representatives.

In 2006, Harris went on a rambling, run-on explanation about how religion fits into government, “The Bible says we are to be salt and light. And salt and light means not just in the church and not just as a teacher or as a pastor or a banker or lawyer, but in government and we have to have the faithful in government and over time, that lie we have been told, the separation of church and state, people have internalized, thinking that they needed to avoid politics and that is so wrong because God is the one who chooses our rulers.”

Amen, Katherine.

One thing is certain. Regardless of the fact that many of these Dominionist politicians lost their seats in the 2006 mid-term elections, it will be essential for all of us to be vigilant in order to protect the US Constitution and our way of life.

“This Republican Party of Lincoln has become a party of theocracy.”

-US Representative Christopher Shays, Republican, New York Times, March 23, 2005

Chances are you really don’t know what the Dominionists are all about, and that’s just the way they like it. They like to operate under the radar screen, but they are there - and have been there for some time - working in the background. So, just what are the Dominionists all about? The short answer is that the Dominionists are members of one of the most extreme forms of Fundamentalist Christianity, and their goal is to replace the American democracy with a theocratic form of government. It is estimated that 35 million Americans who call themselves ‘Christians’ adhere to Dominionism, some without really understanding its dangers. This may seem unbelievable to you, but consider the transformation of the Republican party since the Ronald Reagan era.

President George W. Bush was once a binge drinking, coke snorting party boy. Today, he’s a Born Again Christian touting faith-based programs and denying schools funding if they teach anything but abstinence-only sex education. In 2004, while debating John Kerry, George Bush stated that the United States was founded as a Christian nation. One of the reasons George Bush has completely destabilized the Middle East by invading Iraq and Afghanistan is because he truly believes he’s on a mission from God to eradicate fundamentalist Islam.

In 2000, when John McCain first ran for president, he called the right-wing Christian movement’s infiltration of the Republican party its ‘ruination.’ He was right. By the time the 2008 election rolled around we had Mike Huckabee as a presidential candidate who wanted to reclaim America for Jesus Christ, and John McCain was forced to embrace them because their hold on the party had become so strong. It’s now a well-known fact that McCain wanted Joe Lieberman as his running mate but, in the end, he was forced to choose Alaska Governor Sarah Palin because the right-wing Christian extremists told McCain they’d never support him any other way.

Barack Obama’s election may have derailed the operation, but the Dominionists are not going away. A post-election Rasmussen Poll shows that 64% of Republicans view Sarah Palin as their top presidential choice in 2012. (I will get to her and other Dominionist public servants in part 2 of this article.) You can be sure that Mike Huckabee will be back as well. Dominionists will diligently continue to work toward their goal, Barack Obama notwithstanding. They are a very determined lot.

Dominionism defined

Dominionism is a natural extension of ‘Social Darwinism’ and is often called ‘Christian Reconstructionism.’ Dominionists are charged with replacing our democracy with a theocratic elite ruling class who will impose their interpretation of Biblical Law. Here’s how our society would change:

• The first task would be to eliminate religious choice and freedoms, and create a ‘Kingdom of God’ where much of the nation would be converted to Christianity. All religious organizations, congregations and churches other than those that are strictly viewed as ‘Fundamentalist Christianity’ would be suppressed. Nonconformist Evangelical, main line and liberal Christian religious institutions would be forbidden from organizing or holding services. Because society would revert to the laws and punishments of the Hebrew Scriptures, those practicing other religions outside their homes would be tried for idolatry and executed if convicted.

• Dominionists will eliminate labor unions, civil rights and public schools.

• Blasphemy, adultery and homosexuality would be treated as crimes, and those found guilty would be executed.

• Womens’ role in society would be relegated to homemaker (and baby maker, of course).

The only good thing in all of this is that Dominionists have come a long way in their method of execution. We heathens wouldn’t be stoned (thank God; I hate the thought of a slow, painful and bloody death). Instead the Dominionists would use either the electric chair or lethal injection (my choice, thank you very much).

What I have listed here are not the only characteristics of a theocratic, Dominionist society, but they are the high points. Others have spent a considerable amount of time studying Dominionism, so I urge you to read the links I’ve provided for the full effect.

The master plan

As I said, Dominionists operate in stealth mode. Their goal is to peacefully convert US laws to match those of Hebrew Scriptures (aka, The Old Testament). This will be achieved by using America’s freedom of religion to train children in private Christian religious schools. These trained children will then go out and form a new Bible-based political, religious and social order. Why children? Why not? The idea is to indoctrinate when future soldiers are the most subject to suggestion. However, the training doesn’t exist strictly at the elementary school level. It goes way beyond that.

Regent University, founded by televangelist Pat Robertson, provides “Christian leadership to change the world.” As of 2007, there were 150 graduates of Regent working in the Bush administration. The most famous of these graduates is Monica Goodling, a top aide to former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and, apparently, a central figure in the firing of the US Attorneys. Goodling, ever the good Christian soldier, has announced that she will take the Fifth rather than testify to Congress.

Patrick Henry College in Purcellville, Virginia, where faculty must sign a pledge that they share a literal belief in the Bible, trains young Christians to be politicians. Of the sixty graduates in 2004, two found work at the White House, six were on the staffs of conservative members of Congress and eight were working in federal agencies. Two also joined the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and at least one worked for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq. In 2004, Patrick Henry College also began offering a major in strategic intelligence, where students learn both the history of and tactics used in covert operations. Students majoring in strategic intelligence take on internships that allow them to graduate with a security clearance. Seniors must also complete a directed research project that is designed to mimic the work of an entry-level congressional staffer. According to Michael Farris, the school’s founder, “If you want to train a new generation of leaders, you have to get in on the ground floor.”

Part 2 of this article will post tomorrow, Wednesday, November 12.

In the end, it wasn’t even close. I had spent the two days before the election glancing at headlines that read things like: ‘polls tightening,’ ‘McCain gains ground,’ ‘Obama’s lead shrinks,’ but refusing to read the verbiage attached to them. I really began to worry that John McCain might actually be our president, bringing with him the dreaded (and dreadful) Sarah Palin. But that is not what happened. On November 4, 2008, a new chapter in American history was written when we elected our first African-American president, Barack Obama. It was so easy to get caught up in the euphoria because the Obama voters crossed all ethnic and racial lines - it was clearly a mandate for change. Obama simply rolled to victory.

My vote was never in question because I’m a Democrat and I firmly believe that - between the two men left standing - Barack Obama is the best man for the job. The bitter remnants of the John McCain camp can blame Sarah Palin for his loss all they want, but let’s remember that McCain chose Palin as his running mate. It’s also time for the McCainiacs to face the fact that he could barely differentiate himself from George W. Bush, whose popularity is - to put it bluntly - in the toilet (and rightfully so). Yet, in spite of the fact that I believe Barack Obama can improve the dismal state of our nation, is he enough of a progressive? There are issues where I, well, have issues with his positions. I was recently asked by a friend who reads my blogs if I intended to “quiet down and give Obama a chance.” It took me about two seconds to answer, and my answer was “no.” If Barack Obama is everything he says he is, he will embrace the opinions of the American people.

Aside from the the economy, which should be Obama’s priority, there are other clear-cut issues he must address in his first 100 days. The Bush administration has done extensive damage to civil rights in the name of fighting the shadow ‘war on terror.’ The biggest blight on America’s reputation is the illegal and immoral Guantanamo Bay. This has been the Bush administration’s playground for creating a whole new system of cowboy justice that violates US Constitutional and international law. Obama himself has pledged to close this facility. In 2006 he stated, “I have faith in America’s courts and in our JAGs. As President, I will close Guantanamo, reject the Military Commissions Act, and adhere to the Geneva Conventions. Our Constitution and our Military Code of Justice provide a framework for dealing with terrorists.”

That being said, remember that this is a hot potato issue. Obama runs the risk of alienating some conservatives, but he must be held to his word. The inhabitants either have to be charged and sent to prisons to await trial or released. Those who are charged must also be given access to legal representation. There’s no question that some unsavory characters will be released. However, we cannot hold these so-called ‘enemy combatants’ for what they might do. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) believes that Obama will deal with the issue of Guantanamo fairly quickly. However, she intends to introduce legislation to close the facility early next year anyway.

There are other civil rights issues Obama must deal with. First and foremost, he must outlaw torture in all its forms and make sure that the United States abides by the rules of the Geneva Conventions. Then, there is the Patriot Act. President-elect Obama wants to rewrite it. There is no place for such an act in a free and open society. Nobody, neither the FBI nor the CIA, should be given unrestricted access to the financial and medical files of US citizens. The Patriot Act should not be rewritten. It should be abolished, repealed, and as soon as possible. The illegal wiretapping and Internet surveillance of American citizens must stop, and the retroactive immunity given to the telecoms who took part in this Bush fiasco must be revoked.

The issues of Iraq and Afghanistan are also areas where I have differing opinions from president-elect Obama. In 2003, Obama voted against the decision to invade Iraq, calling it a “dumb war.” In a February 2008 victory speech in Texas, Obama said he’d end the war in 2009 if elected, but what exactly does that mean? He has also said he will bring troops home over a sixteen- to eighteen-month period, meaning that troops will be in Iraq well past 2009. What is even more disturbing to me is that Barack Obama wants to redeploy troops to Afghanistan where, he says, the true cradle of terror lies. Afghanistan is a quagmire, and nobody really knows why were are there. We were supposed to be going after Osama bin Laden after the 9-11 attacks, but that turned out to be another Bush lie. Why are we in Afghanistan? And can we effectively fight terrorism by fighting a war?

In addition to getting out of Iraq, we must pay reparations for the harm we have done there. If Iraq did not have oil, it’s unlikely that we would have invaded. This was George Bush’s attempt to privatize Iraq’s oil supply. More than a million innocent Iraqis have died as a result of our occupation. Millions more have been displaced. We have left destruction and devastation in our wake. To add insult to injury, the contractors we have hired to ‘rebuild’ Iraq have fleeced our government out of billions of dollars and constructed buildings that are, in some cases, uninhabitable. Our reputation as a fair and just nation is at risk here, and Barack Obama must see that justice is done.

The separation between church and state has become totally blurred under eight years of Bush rule. In California, the Supreme Court ruled that the 2000 ban on gay marriage was unconstitutional. Yet, somehow a Constitutional ban found its way onto the ballot in the 2008 election. The positions our
politicians take on gay marriage are clearly based on their religious ideology. This does not only refer to John McCain and Sarah Palin, but also to Barack Obama and Joe Biden, John Edwards, Bill Richardson and Hillary Clinton. While both Obama and Biden support equal rights for gay couples as well as civil unions, neither supports same-sex marriage. What is the difference? The difference is that the word ‘marriage’ is steeped in religion. That is the only difference.

The success of the discriminatory California initiative, as well as similar initiatives in Arizona and Florida, was bolstered by the very public positions that national politicians took on the issue. Regardless of the religious convictions these candidates hold, the issue of same-sex marriage is one of civil rights and upholding the basic tenets of the Constitution. That is the only position they should take on the issue of same-sex marriage.

Dennis Kucinich is the only presidential candidate who got this one right when asked, if elected, would he allow same-sex marriage. He replied, “The answer to your question is yes. And let me tell you why. Because if our Constitution really means what it says, that all are created equal, if it really means what it says, that there should be equality of opportunity before the law, then our brothers and sisters who happen to be gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered should have the same rights accorded to them as anyone else, and that includes the ability to have a civil marriage ceremony.” Where in the Constitution does it state that marriage is between a man and a woman? It doesn’t.This is a question of basic civil rights and it does not belong on any state ballot. In fact, it should not be left to the states. This should be a non-issue. Furthermore, since the Mormon Church put up thousands of dollars in support of Proposition 8 in California and even allowed phone bank calls from church property, it clearly violated the separation between church and state, and should immediately lose its tax-exempt status.

Reversing the Bush effect is a huge task and these are certainly not the only issues progressives see as critical. Which issues the president-elect chooses to address and the order in which he addresses them remains to be seen. However, the American people need only look back on the past eight years to be reminded about the danger of becoming a silent partner to the Obama presidency. It appears that we have a president-elect who will listen to the American people. Whether or not this proves to be true, it is incumbent upon all of us to never be silent again.