Comments are welcome via MCI E-MAIL 419-8594. America-Online Compuserve, and other on-line

Comments are welcome via MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594. America-Online Compuserve, and other on-line servies have Internet e-mail capability, so you can send e-mail to MCI. Bruce Daniel Kettler. fp 1 Subj: What The? Date: -02-28 00:36:09 EST From: Free Writer Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away Gee there are no messages in this section of Cyberspace, so I'll start one. If you're interested in the Religious Right's CURRENT attempts to take control of government by gaining entry to state and local political offices, download... [deleted, since the text is in posts to follow] fp 2 Subj: My Observances Date: -02-29 05:45:23 EST From: Lawyer type Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away My personal observances with the fundamentalist right corroborate your post, Free Writer. My question is, does fundamentalism really preach a gospel of salvation for men? Or does it use the gospel as a weapon in an ideological conquest of man? My experience teaches that the thrust of the movement is not merely one of public persuasion but one of control. The fundamentalist right does not want to influence beliefs and opinions by means of reason and argument. Its leaders want to rule by indirection and in the process convert the larger society to a mind-set beyond reason. The framework is ramshackle to begin with yet gaining momentum in times of political unrest. I found cause several years ago to leave behind the fragmented doctrines we maintained with unbending rigidity. Still, I am concerned about their present practice of using time honored loyalties of nationalism, spirituality, etc to instill overpowering fear into the minds of private citizens, causing them to join in a campaign of Holy Terror. Thank you for your post. In this recessionary climate, it is a much needed one as the lure of fundamentalist ultraconservatism rears its ugly head. Would anyone care to examine the history, they would find casual dismissal of your thesis difficult at best. fp 3 Subj: More Info Please Date: -02-29 20:05:34 EST From: So-called skeptic number 4 Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away I haven'at been successful in downloading your info, so why not summarize it on this forum. I get nervous listening to Pat Buchanan's arrogant campaign to shut freedom down in this country in favor of Catholic dogma and authoritarianism. The know-nothing fun-dementalists will never stop until us sinners are put in our place, and their mythical Kingdom has come. Is their bark worse that the bite? fp 4 Subj: Freedom Writer pt.1 Date: -03-01 02:31:28 EST From: Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594) Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away #1 In the April/May 1990 'Freedom Writer', we reported on several practices occurring at the Duncanville Independent School District (Duncanville, TX) that violated church/state separation. 'The Freedom Writer' requested that the school district discontinue its practices of teacher-led prayers during 7th and 8th grade girls' gym classes; the distribution of Gideon Bibles in its elementary school hallways; public prayers before football games; and coach/teacher-led prayers before girls' basketball games. These offenses were reported to us by a 'Freedom Writer' member. Shortly after lodging our complaint with school officials, a story about these unconstitutional practices appeared in 'The Dallas Morning News'. After the story appeared, the prayers in the 7th and 8th grade girls' gym classes ceased. This cessation did not satisfy our 'Freedom Writer' member. If they voluntarily stopped, in a few eeks or months, they might voluntarily continue. Additionally, the other practices continued. Brings Suit With the assistance of the American Civil Liberties Union, our local hero, whom we'll refer to as John Doe, brought suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, against the Duncanville Independent School District, requesting the issuance of a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining the school district from (1) permitting the school istrict employees to lead or participate in prayers with students in curricular or extracurricular activities; and (2) permitting prayers to be recited by teachers with students in the classroom. John Doe also asked the court to require the school district to advise students as to their constitutional rights under the First Amendment with respect to prayer. Doe won his motion for a preliminary injunction on November 18, 1991. The court enjoined the Duncanville Independent School District from permitting its employees "to lead, encourage, promote, or participate in prayer with or among students during curricular or extracurricular activities, including before, during or after school related sporting events." The school district was also required to "advise the students of the Duncanville Independent School District, in writing, that under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, prayer and religious activities initiated and promoted by school officials are unconstitutional, and that students have a constitutional right not to participate in such activities." Although Doe has enjoyed a major court victory, the students continue to have their own prayer circles before basketball games in front of the sports spectators. In addition to other students, the spectators include members of the general public. The prayer circles are conducted on the basketball court. Seeing athletes take center stage to pray creates "circumstances suggesting school participation or supervision." This activity appears to violate the federal district court's order. Doe is considering filing an action for contempt against the school district. Meanwhile, the Duncanville Independent School District and the Rutherford Institute (a Christian Reconstructionist legal group) are appealing the federal district court's decision, based on their perception that the Duncanville Independent School District's employees' First Amendment right to freedom of speech is infringed by such an order. Ever since the Moral Majority folde there has been no single group whose name was synonymous with the Religious Right. However, Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition is about to change that. fp 5 Subj: Freedom Writer pt.2 Date: -03-01 02:32:36 EST From: Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594) Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away #2 Founded in October, 1989, the Coalition has grown to some 140,000 members in about 40 states, with 200 chapters, mostly in the South and West. They intend to take over the Republican Party from the inside, and elect thousands of right-wing Christians to state and local office -- as well as the Congress -- through a massive and disciplined bloc of voters. At their recent "Road to Victory" national leadership conference in Virginia Beach, almost every session was devoted to instruction in the mechanics ofhow to do it. About 800 people attended. Among the conference speakers were Vice-President Dan Quayle, Sen. Jesse Helms (R-NC), Rep. Guy Vander Jagt (R-MI), Phyllis Schlafly, and Christian Reconstructionist author and activist George Grant. Gary Bauer, of the Family Research Institute (an arm of James Dobson's Focus on the Family ministry), set the tone for the conference: "Obviously, this conference is about the 19 elections," he said. The reason this and all elections are important, he said, is because "We are engaged in a social, political, and cultural civil war." The Coalition is largely a reorganized version of Robertson's presidential campaign, with many of the same people, but with a non-profit tax status and few reporting requirements. Robertson now believes there are enough votes on the Supreme Court to overturn 'Roe v. Wade', and what he calls "Supreme Court sponsored extreme anti-religion bias against public affirmation of religious faith." Therefore, he sees many church/state separation issues, as well as abortion, being turned over to state and local governments. "This means that coalitions of Christians must target the legislative and school board races of their states and cities," he wrote in the October/November isse of his newsletter, 'Pat Robertson's Perspective.' "This decade will not be for the faint of heart, but for the resolute," he continued. "Institutions will be plunged into wrenching change. We will be living through one of the most tumultuous periods in human history. When it is over, I am convinced God's people will emerge victorious. But no victory comes without a battle. Our prayer must be 'Thy Kingdom come, they will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.'" This kind of apocalyptic Christian triumphalism is also clear from the organization's very name. In his closing speech, Robertson said they didn't choose a name according to the current fashion, emphasizing "traditional value," or a "pro-family agenda." "I said, No!" he shouted. "I am a Christian! I am not ashamed of Jesus! And we will call this the 'Christian' Coalition. And if other people don't like it, that's just tough luck." (Contributing editor Frederick Clarkson attended the Christian Coalition conference. He will report further on their plans and activities in the January/February 'Freedom Writer') In his book, How To Elect Christians to Public Office, Dr. Robert L. Simonds states, "The separation of church and state is another 'myth' the ACLU, NEA and NOW have sold the public." Robert Simonds heads the Orange County, California based Citizens for Excellence in Education, and the National Association of Christian Educators. Apparently, Simonds is willing to put his money where his mouth is. In an audio tape obtained by The Freedom Writer, Simonds offered to pay anyone $1000 if they could produce a single document in the recorded history of the United States which mentions the phrase "separation of church and state." Simonds accepts challenge "Here it is, a thousand dollars," Simonds said, "If you can show me one single document in America -- the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Northwest Passage [sic], you name it, the Mayflower Compact, any of them. They never, ever, ever, even mentioned, or wrote down ne, in all of our history, the phrase 'separation of church and state.' Not once!" fp 6 Subj: Freedom Writer pt 3 Date: -03-01 02:33:55 EST From: Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594) Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away #3 In November, The Freedom Writer challenged Simonds, maintaining that there is a separation of church and state in the U.S., and demanded that he pay up. Simonds accepted our challenge in a letter dated November 12, 1991. There are, of course, written documents in the recorded history of the United States of America which attest to a "separation of church and state," and in which the words, "a wall of separation between church and state" appear. In 1785, a proposal was made to tax citizens in order to pay Christian teachers. Somewhat surprisingly, many religious organizations opposed the bill. Presbyterian churches petitioned the legislature to leave them "free from the intrusive hand of the civil magistrate." Rockingham County evangelicals wrote, "Any legislative body that takes upon themselves the power that never was committed to them by God, nor can be by man, [is dangerous]." Fundamentalists declared in their petition that "religion and all its duties being of divine origin and of a nature wholly distinct from the secular affairs of the public society ought not to be made the object of human legislation. For the discharge of the duties of religion every man is to account for himself as an individual in a future state and ought not to be under the direction of influence of any human laws." In essence, though not using those precise words, they all argued for a separation of church and state. As a result of these responses, Virginia enacted the precursor of the First Amendment's religion clauses in its Statute of Religious Liberty. Drafted by thomas Jefferson and promoted by James Madison (who was the Father of the Bill of Rights), the statute laid the foundation for our Constitution's separation of church and state. In 1802, Thomas Jefferson affirmed the church/state separation principle in a ltter to the Danbury Baptist Association, in Connecticut. This important historical document sheds much light on Jefferson's understanding of the First Amendment, written by his friend and close associate, James Madison. "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes no account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state." "Every serious historian traces the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the events in Virginia in 1785," according to Robert S. Peck, First Amendment attorney for the national ACLU, "which is why Jefferson's characterization of the meaning of the First Amendment as establishing 'a wall of separation between church and state' has been taken to be so authoritative." High Court affirms Wall Furthermore, in 1878, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Reynolds v. United States, incorporated Jefferson's words concerning "a wall of separation between church and state." That document states: "In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and state.' fp 7 Subj: Freedom Writer pt4 Date: -03-01 02:34:54 EST From: Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594) Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away #4 The prinicple of church/state separation was advanced in later cases. In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), Associate Justice Hugo Black, writing for the majority, wrote, "The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach." In Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971), the Court established a three-prong test to determine if a governmentl action is neutral toward religion. First, government institutions or legislation must have a secular purpose; second, the primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; and third, there must not be an excessive governmental entanglement with religion. This principle was clarified further by Associate Justic Sandra Day in Lynch v. Donnelly (1984). Justice O'Connor wrote, "What is crucial is that a governmental practice not have the effect of communicating a message of government endorsement or disapproval of religion." As Simonds listed several documents, including the "northwest Passage," [although he probably intended to say the Northwest Ordinance], and invited listeners to "name it," meaning an historical document in which the phrase "separation of church and state" is used, The Freedom Writer believes it has met Simond's challenge. Furthermore, there is virtually no difference between the phrase "separation between church and state," and the phrase "separation of church and state." The Orange County Register [11/29/91] said in a front page story, "...a lawsuit would draw widespread attention to how deeply the principle [of church/state separation] is embedded in U.S. history." Simonds' organization is often criticized by mainstream groups such as the National Education Association and People for the American Way, but right-wing groups readily praise his work. Steve Sheldon, executive director of the California-based Coalition for Traditional Values, said, "Bob is one of the good guys, he's doing important work." When asked his opinion of the Institute for First Amendment Studies [publisher of The Freedom Writer], Sheldon said, "Obviously, they're about 180 degrees from us on most issues, but, compared to People For the American Way, we find their materials quite substantive." "You could say," he continued, "People For the American Way provides the sizzle and the Institute provides the steak." Although Simonds accepted The Freedom Writer's challene to his statements, he said our claims are "spurious," and that if we did not prevail in court, he would pursue a harassment suit against us. "I wish you luck, in all sincerity," he said, "I know how hard you work at promoting this false concept [the separation of church and state]." Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz is a strong proponent of the separation of church and state. Upon learning the details of this case, he told The Freedom Writer, "You're absolutely right, and I'm completely supportive." The Freedom Writer Department C P.O. Box 589 Great Barrington, MA fp 8 Subj: As it could apply to New Agers Date: -03-01 13:29:09 EST From: Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594) Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away THE FOLLOWING IS A PARTIAL QUOTE FROM A POST IN THE "NEW AGE PLOT?" FOLDER, TITLED "Driskell - Tolerance - Witches." See also the post in that folder, "Witch Hunts." This reminds me of the proverbial pot calling the kettle black, and I'm not referring to any individual person here (though a name is quoted), only to a political climate that the person mentioned may not be aware of. ============================================ If you found disturbing evidence that there might be a "Christianity Plot" in the works to ultimately 'weed out' New Agers, wouldn't you call that *extreme* intolerance of your views? (Driskell) Yes, but what I've been saying, is that when it comes to tolerance, this thing that you're coming up with warrants somewhat of an intolerant attitude on my part. And, certainly, if you find "evidence" I would not expect you to be tolerant. I understand your fears. I expect you to investigate it, question it, carefully. ...if these people have such grave fears of being exterminated, isn't it just the next step to be sure that their fears are not realized, to do it first? Isn't that what history shows us, not necessarily about Christians, but about people in general? I see you as someone who has fears, and is not really a major party to what you're unwittingly following. However, beyond your individual life, politics plays an important part in fundamentalist circles. It's understood that you, as an individual, would not go beyond the limits of your ethics. However, there's a lot of political power gained through certain fundamentalist groups. And, if they have these fears about so-called New Age plots, I sometimes wonder what they'd do, as you say, to "weed out" New Age people. All people who are "Christians" in name, do not necessarily subscribe to the ethics attributable to Christianity. It was in the *name* of Christ that so-called Witches were hung on this continent, just hundreds of years ago. fp 9 Subj: Where are you heading? Date: -03-01 14:32:37 EST From: Fundamentalist number 2 Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away In the discussion of church and state, and the all of the literature from the "Freedom righter", I would like to ask where is the FREEDOM of the students and the teachers to pray. If the idea behind the principles of seperation of church and state, is to prevent the government from promoting a particular view of religous beliefs (as the first pilgrims came to America to escape) you are missing the boat if you extrapolate this to mean that they sought to promote total abstinence any religious activity connected with state. The founders of this country were God fearing/respecting individuals that sought to encourage the freedom to practice prayer and worship of any form. The answer to prayer at school functions is not to eliminate and thereby seperate state and church by in fact removing church altogethor. But, to promote an environment where both coexist. Encourage prayer in school, but allow the students and teachers of whatever faith to express that faith in the form desired. Consider that banning of a group of Christians from praying in a high school gym because it is PUBLIC property is one step away from praying in the street or on the roadside since it too is PUBLIC property....or continue to extrapolate to seperate church and state until worship can only be performed on private property (home, church).....whose rights are being compromised then. If you are a Christian, you know that man's rights come from first seeking his will which is disclosed in the Word of God (the Bible) and made understandable to the human mind by the power of the Holy Spirit. It is understandable that to create a society that honors God, you would want to elect those leaders who consider man's laws as an extension of God's laws...wouldn't you rather have a Christian leader over a humanist leader who wants to promote total relativism in order to promote an all rights (good or bad) society. 10 Subj: BTW, I'm confused... Date: -03-02 23:02:08 EST From: OBSERVER Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away I don't understand how Catholicism got lumped in with "the Fundamentalist agenda" a number of messages back...from what I know, the only thing the different Fundamentalist groups agree on is that they can't sand Catholics! :) 11 Subj: So-called skeptic number 4 Runs For His Life I Date: -03-07 10:31:54 EST From: So-called skeptic number 4 Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away Fundamentalist number 2: "where is the FREEDOM of the students and the teachers to pray." K: You have the freedom to pray all you want. Instead of taking the time to compose this post, you could have been praying, to your benefit and ours. Fundamentalist number 2: (Is worried about) "...total abstinence (of) any religious activity..." K: No, just religious activity under state sponsorship. The reason the "Founding Fathers" wanted it this way is they feared state sponsorship of one particular religion to the exclusion of others, so to protect everybody's interests, they set up a system which allowed all to worship any way they wanted provided it was not under State aegis. Doesn't this seem reasonable and fair to you? Fundamentalist number 2: "The founders of this country were God fearing/respecting individuals that sought to encourage the freedom to practice prayer and worship of any form." K: Yes, but not under State sponsorship. Fundamentalist number 2: (Wants to) "...allow the students and teachers of whatever faith to express that faith in the form desired." K: How will this work? Let's imagine a school day. Christians, the majority, will pray first, but since Christians are divided up into Catholics, Methodists, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, Christian Scientists, Pentacostal Holy Rollers, Amish, Mennonites, Lutherans, Southern Baptists, Moonies, Snake Handlers, and dozens more, each would have to be given time to say their individually "correct" prayers, otherwise they might risk displeasing god, and therefore diminish their chances for eternal salvation, which is a pretty important issue with most Christians, and not one to be taken lightly. The students could agree to pray together out loud as a group which would save time. Of course, other students might object to this, since hearing the other prayers might distract them from concentrating on their own prayers. Now, saying all these prayers in silene would solve the issue of there being so many denominations to accommodate at once, but some might prefer to pray out loud so god could hear them better. Others might actually be offended by silent prayer claiming that one should not be ashamed to pray out loud to such an obviously good and loving god. Praise the Lord, Hallelujah. So this would have to be decided upon, but endless debates about these views might ensue, without resolution, since we know each religion tends to rely on unchangeable and rigid dogma. If no compromise could in fact be reached, at least two prayer sessions would be needed. And the ones that like to speak in tongues might want to go into a prolonged state of babbling ecstasy which would probably distract all the others, in either group, so a third group might have to be established just for them. We certainly wouldn't want to impinge on the rights of the babblers to pray in the correct manner, since doing so in an incorrect manner might well jeopardize their chances of salvation and living forever in the company of Jesus Christ and his Father, the Jewish War God, Jehovah. Now to the Jews. Since they reject Christ as the Messiah, and have other differences with Christianity, not to mention centuries of hatred and persecution by Christians, they may well want to leave the room in disgust while all the Christian fawning is going on (ironically to the very same Jewish War God, Jehovah, the Jews themselves worship). So after the Christian praying, in all its varieties and manifestations is completed, the Jews could come back in and begin their worship. (cont....) 12 Subj: So-called skeptic number 4 Runs For His Life II Date: -03-07 10:33:33 EST From: So-called skeptic number 4 Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away Now when the Jews' prayers are completed, there might be still other religions to consider in our new atmosphere of Freedom for All Religionists for a Complete Education ("FARCE"). The Buddhists might insist on rather long periods of meditation, perhaps with some mumbling, and this would create additional problems not to mention shaking them out of their trances. Hinduism, Indian Rain Dancing, Hare Krishna, Shintoism, Norse beliefs, Jainism, Devil Worship, Voodoo, Aborigine cults and dozens of other varieties of religions, and their varieties and offshoots, might have to be accommodated in special ways. Some might require musical instruments or other props (live chickens, asps, incense, crosses). I almost forgot Islam, of which certain believers might want to dwell for hours on end reviling the Great Satan (whichever or whoever it would be at the time), and repeatedly denouncing the idea that Jesus Christ, only a prophet, was actually the Son of God. Not only would the Muslims want to pray to start the school day, but they would be obligated to interrupt classes several more times to fulfill their required 5 daily prayers. Space would be needed for prayer rugs too. And signs indicating the correct direction of Mecca would, by law, be required to be correctly displayed and legible. Muslims might want to go on interminably with all these prayers, and there would be no stopping them since, according the the idea of RNies, he apparently would want to "...allow the students and teachers of whatever faith to express that faith IN THE FORM DESIRED." (In this regard, I AM all for nude sun-worshippers in any classroom.) Finally atheists and agnostics would be highly offended at all this useless and time-wasting mumbo-jumbo, so would undoubtedly raise a big stink about it, day after day. Friction would develop between all factions, with spitball and eraser throwing, placing girls pig-tails into inkwells, trying to look up their skirts while others are addressing the Lord, name-calling (like Satanist! Heathen! Tool of the Devil! Jesus Freak!) and recriminations, causing class disruption, enmity, and probably fist-fights, undoubtedly resulting in many students spending hours in the principal's office, as punishment, meanwhile not getting an education. It's not clear under the above scenario that ANYBODY would be getting an eucation, but, I suppose Lady Luck might somedays cause it to occur. If a new student would join the class, the entire arrangement, if ever reached in the first place, might have to be redecided, to protect the new students rights. Then there might be lawsuits, bringing complaints of discrimination for or aginst any one particular religion, or favoritism, or indignation or a multitiude of other complaints of alleged offences. Rancorous PTA meetings, school board squabbling, newspaper articles and scandals would likely ensue. Teachers would quit, their own religious sensibilities offended. The already low SAT scores would go even lower. After prayer is allowed, next it would be banning of the evil of evolution teaching, expurgation of bad words and salacious literature in the school libraries, elimination of sex education, promoting the history of religion, with emphasis on fundamentalism, and then theology, strict censorship, thought control, prudish dress codes, and on and on.... RNies: Worries about elimination of "...praying in the street or on the roadside since it too is PUBLIC property.... private property (home, church).... K: Hey pal, have it your way. Apply and or all of the above scenario to government buildings, the Congress, the White House, your home, my home, my bedroom, and my bathroom. I just want another planet. Know of any close by? (cont....) 13 Subj: So-called skeptic number 4 Runs For His Life III Date: -03-07 10:34:47 EST From: So-called skeptic number 4 Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away Fundamentalist number 2: ".whose rights are being compromised then. If you are a Christian, you know that man's rights come from first seeking his will which is disclosed in the Word of God (the Bible) and made understandable to the human mind by the power of the Holy Spirit. K: Well, what if you are not a Christian? I am not a Christian, and don't know what the hell you mean by "his will," the "Word of God" and the "Holy Spirit." Why don't you precisely define these terms so everyone will have a crystal clear understanding, and maybe come to somesort of agreement. Fundamentalist number 2: "It is understandable that to create a society that honors God, you would want to elect those leaders who consider man's laws as an extension of God's laws..." K: Iran is a theocracy which honors god, so why not take a trip there and tell us how you like it? Fundamentalist number 2: "wouldn't you rather have a Christian leader over a humanist leader who wants to promote total relativism in order to promote an all rights (good or bad) society." K: Sure. We all know that Christianity is an extremely tolerant religion which at all times throughout its long and bloody history, has promoted total relativism, valiantly restraining each and every impulse to burn heretics, to massacre infidels on long crusades, and to engage in Inquisitions to destroy critics of the dear Lord, the Lamb of God. Sure, RNies, sure I would. 14 Subj: So-called skeptic number 4 -forgot the witch hunts Date: -03-07 13:21:21 EST From: Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594) Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away Fundamentalist number 2: "wouldn't you rather have a Christian leader over a humanist leader who wants to promote total relativism in order to promote an all rights (good or bad) society." So-called skeptic number 4: Sure. We all know that Christianity is an extremely tolerant religion which at all times throughout its long and bloody history, has promoted total relativism, valiantly restraining each and every impulse to burn heretics, to massacre infidels on long crusades, and to engage in Inquisitions to destroy critics of the dear Lord, the Lamb of God. Sure, RNies, sure I would. Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594): First let me qualify, that the following is not addressing Christians, but rather certain fundamentalists, the one's who are intolerant of other people, who constantly go on the radio and TV trying to "warn" people of a "New Age" so-called menace. So, let's not forget the witch hunts. Just several hundred years ago with both the sanction of law, and in the name of Christ, because people were allegedly using mind powers to overpower people, they hung "witches." If you read the "New Age" plot folder, you'l see how their present day hate literature, which says that "New Age" people are using mind powers to get more authority, more power, and how they could exterminate Christians, you'll see just what a problem excessive political power in these people's hands could mean. How tolerant are those of the fanatical wing of this group? They go into any chat room that is anything like a "New Age" such as the Wiccan/Pagan's or Urantia and they harass people till they are thrown off the system. Then some actually come back illegally, to harass again. Now, that's real fanaticism! Tell me, what would these people do if they were judges in New England a few hundred years ago? Then again, what would happen today if we had such judges? Perhaps not the hanging, but what else could happen? BTW --- Again So-called skeptic number 4, my compliments on your humor, especially that example of what it would be like to give freedom of religion to everyone in a public school. 15 Subj: REF: "New Age Plot?" folder Date: -03-07 13:34:44 EST From: Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594) Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away References here, from me, are to "New Age Plot?" folder. I seem to have made an error in my last post with the quotaion marks. 16 Subj: UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTS? Date: -03-15 06:48:30 EST From: OBSERVER Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away You don't know your Bill of Rights very well do you? The Bill of Right states that the government shall not establish religion nor interfer with the free expression thereof. I am so bloody tired of hearing about the so called 'separation of church and state' Why don't you get it right for once. Furthermore, if some one wanted to take away your freedom of speech or the press you would be screaming loud and long about that being unconstitutional. And you would be right. We're all losing enough rights everyday without stabbing each other in the back every chance that we get. 17 Subj: Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594) Date: -03-16 23:46:58 EST From: Free Writer Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away Thanks Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594), for posting the articles of The Freedom Writer on the board. I hope everyone will get a chance to see what Pat Robertson's idea of "God's New World Order" and "Christian United States" is all about. Also, in his newest book, he refers to Rios Montt, former dictator of Guatemala, as a spirit-filled christian and an "enlightened leader". Said that he visited Guatemala 3 days after Rios Montt took over (Gee, isn't THAT a coincidence!) and the people were 'dancing in the streets', fulfilling Jeremiah's prophecy that when "God's people" rule, people dance in the streets. If the people were in the streets at all (and not hiding in the jungle) it is because that is where their bodies lay in bloody graves, the victim of Rios Montt's 'scorched earth' policy (he said they didn't have a 'scorched earth' policy but rather a 'scorched communists' policy). Tragedy is that when it was all said and done, this 1982 leader had summarily executed more than 500,000 people, including women and children. That's what we want for America? Sheesh! 18 Subj: Funda.. Distortion Hate Lit. - 1 Date: -03-18 18:06:54 EST From: Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594) Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away PART 1 of 2: Do you want to elect fundamentalists? When you vote, do you want to take part in aiding people who promote this kind of distortion? ================================================================= The following is from "Cult Awareness Book" (17 people have downloaded it) placed in the RELIGION SOFTWARE LIBRARY February 26, 19, by "Boss Man on the BBS": ================================================================= Here are a couple of quotes found in a book called "Gods of the New Age" by Caryl Matrisciana. These quotes are from some people who are at the fore-front of The New Age Movement, or are indoctrinated to the teachings ascribed to them. At a seminar on childhood education in 1973, Dr. Pierce, a Professor of Education and Psychiatry at Harvard University, made this statement, which was reaffirmed in a phone conversation in March 1983: "Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill, because he comes to school with certain allegiances toward our founding fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural Being, toward the sovereignty of his nation as a separate entity. It's up to you teachers to make all of these sick children well by creating the international children of the future." New Age proponents are placing some remarkable responsibilities upon our teachers. In an article titled "A Religion for a New Age", published in The Humanist, Jan./Feb. 1983, page 26, we find these words: "...the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their roles as the proselytizers of a new faith... The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new - the rotting corpse of Christianity...and the new faith of Humanism. The goal? Divide and conquer. The parents are discredited. Their "out-of-date Judeo-Christian belief system" is ripped to shreds behind their backs. And just as covertly, the doctrines of humanism and Eastern mysticism are taught - without apology or explanation. As Christians, it is up to us to make people aware of the subtle attack that is being waged against our young people. Do you have children in public schools? Are you up on what is being taught to them? One of the main thrusts of the New Agers is to cause divisions in the family structure so that they will be able to teach them a new mind-set... ================================================================= END OF QUOTE ================================================================= The above is not a description of the "New Age" movement. It is about Atheists and Humanists. Every "New Ager" I've met or read is neither. Not all New Agers follow a faith, and certainly none follow the "faith" mentioned above, as "proselytizers." Because a person uses the words "New Age," that does not mean they fit the commonly accepted definitions of "New Age." For further clarification, see the "New Age" folder and read the posts with the word "defined" in them, as well as other posts such as those about Edgar Cayce, a devout Christian. 19 Subj: Funda.. Distortion Hate Lit. - 2 Date: -03-18 18:08:08 EST From: Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594) Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away PART 2 of 2: From the "Cult Awareness Book": ======================================================== WHAT IS A CULT? Beware of "Another Gospel" The 'Marks' of a Cult-How YOU can Know One When You See One: I. DEIFY MAN... II. HUMANIZE GOD... III. MINIMIZE SIN... IV. OSTRACIZE THE SCRIPTURES... V. A DIFFERENT JESUS... VI. A DIFFERENT SALVATION VII. DIFFERENT SPIRIT... VIII. MODERN DAY PROPHET... IX. THE ONLY TRUE CHURCH... X. SECRETS .. CLOSED TO THE OUTSIDE WORLD... XI. CANNOT LEAVE... ============================================================ The word "cult" is not significant of a group that: deifies man humanizes god minimizes sin portrays a different jesus The words that best describe what "Boss Man on the BBS" is referring to in his compilation would be: "witch" or "heretic" However "witch" or "heretic" would stir up memories of times past, during which "witches" were hung according to a fundamentalist Bible quote of "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." And "heretic" would stir up memories of the Inquisition, which I know "Boss Man on the BBS" would not have allegiance to. "Heretic," however is a *correct* word. Either that or "people who don't believe as we do." Or, one could say, "people who don't follow the literal meaning of the Bible." "New Age," or "Unity" is an unorthodoxy, but it's not a "cult." A cult is indicated by zealous behavior. By the way, Unity's Christianity is quite often self-proclaimed "New Age." Edgar Cayce was a devoted Christian and a "New Ager" also. A cult, not according to the dictionary, but the present day *connotation* it has is grown to with Charles Manson, a notorious criminal who killed people, and induced others to, as a result of his zealous fanaticism. Another example is the Jonestown massacre: the mass suicide in South America. The connotation definition can fit the number VIII, IX, X and XI above, but is not what "Unity" or "New Age" is about. By the *dictionary,* it's just a zealous devotion to a person, ideal, or thing, and by that definition just about every fundamentalist I've ever known or known of, fits that description. *Certain* fundamentalist fit the connotation description, and those are the one's who run around screaming about how the "New Agers," will probably murder Christians. This is in the "New Age Plot?" folder. Much of the use of words in the "...Awareness Book" placed in the Religion Software Library shows distorted meanings, much like that presented in the "New Age Plot?" folder. I've heard these type people on the radio and TV, those who are very fearful of these "workers of the Devil," as "New Age" people are referred to. I'm sure the witch hunters in New England had the same problem with the so-called "witch's" and actual witches "mind powers." ADDITIONAL QUOTE FROM "Cult Awareness Book": ============================================================ SIGNS OF SATANISM 3) A preoccupation with psychic phenomena like telepathy astral projection, Tarot Cards, I Ching and parapsy- chology. ============================================================= Preoccupation (as defined by who?) with Tarot Cards and astral projection are supposedly "Satanism." Many New Agers then are considered "Satanists" according to this "...Awareness" literature. Of course, the fundamentalists, both in New England when they hung Witches, and now while they are heading in that direction, seem to think that "Witch" and "Satan" are practically synonyms, which is not the fact. 20 Subj: Rios Montt Date: -03-21 07:27:08 EST From: Free Writer Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594), you are correct in assuming that the fundamentalist plot involves a stated 'war' on 'New Agers'. Lest some Tim LaHaye wannabe accuses me prematurely, I am not a New Ager and I don't wear a captial A (for Atheist) on my shirts (as the crude cartoon characters depict). I am concerned, however, that people like Pat Robertson want to take control of government and turn it into a 'Christian United States' (direct quote). Pat takes great effort in extolling the virtues of one Rios Montt whom he describes as a spirit-filled, born again, "englightened" leader. History will show that Rios Montt took control of Guatemala through a coup de etat in 1982. Pat was there 3 days after Rios Montt gained power (what a coincidence!). He said that people were dancing in the streets in fulfillment of the prophecy of Isasiah, "When the godly rule, the people will dance in the streets." If the people were in the streets at all (and not hiding for fear of their lives in the jungle), it is because that is where they lay in bloody graves, victims of Rios Montt's terrifying 'scorched earth' policy (which he defined as a 'scorched communists' policy). When it was all said and done, over 1/2 million people (men, women AND children) were summarily executed as 'enemies of democracy' by Rios Montt's direction. This is the atrocious reign of terror that Pat Robertson idealizes for America. When the godly shall rule. Pray that the 'godly' never gain such a position of power. You and I will be among the scorched, I suspect. 21 Subj: Edgar Cayce was not a Christian! Date: -03-31 00:08:07 EST From: Fundamentalist number 1 Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away I've read two posts here where some of you attacking Christians claim that Edgar Cayce was a Christian. He wasn't. He may have claimed to be at one point in his life, but he did not live according to the Bible. You can't live a lifestyle doing things Jesus said not to do and then say you're a Christian. That goes for everyone. I'm not claiming you need to be perfect to be a Christian, and I am certainly not claiming perfection for myself. All I'm saying is if you turn against what Christ taught you can't claim to be one of His followers. Just as a person visiting the US from another country can claim to like it here, he cannot claim to be a citizen. He does not have the rights of a citizen. Edgar Cayce was (in my opinion) a false prophet. In the same post (sorry I forgot who wrote it) there was a comment made about Tarot Cards and other "mystic" practices. The Bible strictly prohibits talismans, consulting with the dead, looking to the moon and stars for advice, even wearing a cross to protect you from evil is forbiden. You can wear a cross or anything else as jewelry, but anything you give mystical powers to is not allowed. We are to trust only in God, His Son Jesus Christ and have the Holy Spirit dwell in us. (If you want to check out what I've said about divination see Deuteronomy 18:10-12) If you want other verses feel free to write privately, I don't get online often, but will answer any questions that I can. God Bless, (even you who don't believe) 22 Subj: Fundamentalist number 1 -- get your facts straight Date: -03-31 04:26:41 EST From: Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594) Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away I've read two posts here where some of you attacking Christians claim that Edgar Cayce was a Christian. (Fundamentalist number 1) To begin, no-one posting here and who was of TedBeck's type thinking (ie. "New Age") attacked Christians. If you read carefully, it's fundamentalists, not Christians. That, as far as I'm concerned, has to do with fundamentalist anything, for you'll find the same intolerance in fundamentalists of any persuastion, including Atheists who make a religion of it. Then too, what was said about fundamentalists was not intended for *all* of them either. It's the fanatical and extremely intolerant segment of them. And, Edgar Cayce was *not,* you say a Christian? Come now. You have certain people *in your mind* attacking Christians, then saying Edgar Cayce is a Christian. Yes, Edgar Cayce was a Christian, a devout one. There are many Christians who find the CULT of fundamentalist so-called Christians, the fanatical element, totally disgusting. 23 Subj: Hand Raised. Date: -04-01 01:01:26 EST From: Free Writer Posted on a BBS somewhere in Cyberspace -- far, far away And I am one of them, Bruce Daniel Kettler (MCI E-MAIL: 419-8594)! Totally disgusting!