Tuesday night, Tim Russert made Barack Obama denounce the anti-Semitic statements of Louis Farrakhan ad nauseum. Farrakhan has said some abhorrent things over the years (which Russert recounted at length), and Obama is right to reject him.

Why aren't we seeing similar scrutiny of John Hagee's endorsement of John McCain? Will we?

Hagee has a long history of making bigoted statements. Like this from his book Jerusalem Countdown:

Most readers will be shocked by the clear record of history linking Adolf Hitler and the Roman Catholic Church in a conspiracy to exterminate the Jews

As a Catholic, I find this offensive. My Church has a far from perfect record with interfaith relations, but that statement goes too far.

But that's just the tip of the Hagee hate-berg

In an interview with NPR, he slandered Muslims and blames Hurricain Katrina on the "sins of New Orleans."

That offends me as a rational being.

So far, John McCain has welcomed Hagee's endorsement. I sure hope he reexamines this decision — Hagee is a perfect example of the "agents of intolerance" Sen. McCain has previously rejected.

Diverse Catholic groups including our friends at Catholics United are denouncing Hagee and calling on McCain to reject his endorsement. Will the media follow suit?

RLCC: It would take a great deal more than the mind of John Hagee to learn about the true relationship between Hitler and the Roman Catholic Church. Also, Hurricane Katrina was on account of sin, just not entirely the sins Hagee identifies as such and not by the people he means. The sin that caused Katrina extends way beyond New Orleans and way beyond the Black people Hagee mostly wants to blame. Sure, New Orleans was full of sin. What city of that size in the U.S. still isn't? At the same time, there were plenty of people in New Orleans that were and still are asking, seeking, and knocking for the real truth and not the garbage Hagee is spewing. Far beyond the things mention in the article quoted above, Hagee is a militant so-called Christian-Zionist. He is a dangerous person. He's antichrist, obviously. He's for major war. He's looking forward to it. He's promoting it. That's Satanic. Anyone who doesn't know that is no Christian.

Originally from Blogging Faith on February 28, 2008, 11:34am


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 – present, website developer and writer. 2015 – present, insurance broker.

    Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration.

    Volunteerism: 2007 – present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.

    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.