Category: politics

Rick Joyner: The Only Hope For America Is A Military Takeover

Right Wing Watch posted a video clip of Rick Joyner telling his audience that the only hope for America is a takeover of the government by the military.  Watch the clip:

This clip is taken from his 20 minute sermon titled, “Has Democracy Failed.” Curious about the context of this clip, I watched the entire talk and found that the context, while at times confusing, is consistent with the plain meaning of his words. I can’t embed it here but for those who want to see fear mongering done well, I recommend you watch it. Joyner, who leads the Oak Initiative, very calmly tells his audience that the republic is doomed because people aren’t religious anymore and because of the 17th Amendment, we elect our Senators via popular vote. Prior to the passage of the 17th Amendment, state legislatures appointed Senators.
Then he says that things are so bad that our only hope is a military takeover. To catch the context of the RWW clip, go to about 7:40 into the video. At 7:50, Joyner says:

I believe our only hope is a military takeover, martial law and that the crucial, most crucial element of that is who the marshal is going to be. I believe there are noble leaders in our military that love the republic and love everything we stand for, and they could seize the government. I’m not advocating this, I’m just telling you what could happen. They could seize it and help restore the foundations, restore the Constitution.

On one hand he says he is not advocating it, but on the other hand, he says that the takeover is our “only hope.” I think most people would get the message that he hopes it happens and thinks it should “to restore the Constitution.”
The rest of the video is a rambling explanation that a third great awakening is coming somehow and some revisionist history involving Albert Einstein, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin.
Rick Joyner is kind of a big deal in dominionist circles. Look at the members of his Oak Initiative board. You will find some influential and visible leaders of evangelical groups. A person of his stature calling for martial law and military takeover is a frightening development. I hope Christian media and his peers call him out on this irresponsible rhetoric.

Weekend Roundup – Tanks, Government Lies, Anti-Gay Pride, Christian Persecution, Government Shut Down

These are some items of interest that I either didn’t get to or need no additional noise from me.
David Barton: Tanks A Lot – David Barton told his Wallbuilders audience that private citizens should be allowed to have whatever weapons the government has – tanks, fighter jets, whatever. Just like the founders had.
How Do You Know When The Government Is Lying? – That’s the burning question Michael Peroutka asks on his IOTC website. He claims that the government and the media conspire together ” to endanger you, impoverish you or otherwise to harm you.” I also learned that the media hyped up the dangers of Swine Flu in 2009 to “provide cover” for the government to meddle in health care.
Scott Lively and Bryan Fischer Celebrate Anti-Gay Pride –  At 10:25, Lively calls his indirect influence on Russia’s anti-gay law “one of the proudest achievements of my career.” Guess it is all downhill from there.
Christians are under attack all over the world and the Church seems silent – Kirsten Powers’ thought provoking editorial provoked me. I will return to this issue next week. My initial view is that most Christians in the pew are praying but don’t know what else to do. Our evangelical leaders are consumed with Values Voting and Culture Warring and Taking The Country Back.
Oh, and the government might shut down…

Dayton Ohio DAR To Host Institute On The Constitution Course

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Dayton, OH branch of the Daughters of the American Revolution will begin the Institute on the Constitution course tonight. In the article, this blog is cited and I am quoted.
According to DAR representatives, they were unaware of the links of the IOTC to the League of the South. However, this information did not sway their support for the course. Unfortunate, because they will be getting a skewed and sometimes inaccurate view of history.
Have friends in the Dayton area? Give them a heads up…

Catholics and Protestants Together On Law: Is There A Christian Approach To Law?

Some Protestant and Catholic lawyers, professors and writers have come together to suggest a basis for a Christian approach to law. I have skimmed it and came away thinking that they didn’t really come together. But I intend to review it in more depth. Here is the link, let’s discuss…
Begin reading at page two.
Hat tip to Sarah Jones for her article on the document.

Institute on the Constitution: Notes on Session 10 – War Between the States and Women's Suffrage Dilutes the Franchise

I have been watching the Institute on the Constitution course on the National Religious Broadcasters network on Thursday nights. Last night was session 10 and covered amendments 11 through 27.  I have raised numerous issues with the course over the first nine sessions, and session 10 only added to my negative reaction.
At this point, I am just going to supply some observations about the course from memory. I may do a more detailed follow up next week.
Discussing the 13th Amendment, Peroutka disparaged the Emancipation Proclamation as a political ploy on Lincoln’s part. In his discussion of the 13th Amendment, Peroutka correctly said that the amendment freed the slaves but then added that subsequent actions made us all slaves. He compared the military draft and income tax to the enslavement of blacks. To me, this comparison crudely minimizes the awfulness of slavery.
He had little good to say about the 14th Amendment. Consistent with his status of board member of the League of the South, he make the Confederate case that the amendment was never legally ratified.
Throughout his discussion of the Reconstruction amendments (13-15), Peroutka referred to the Civil War as “The War Between the States.” When David Whitney came forward to discuss his view that the 16th Amendment did not actually authorize a federal income tax, he called the Civil War, “The War for Southern Independence.” These designations are consistent with Peroutka’s view that the wrong side won the Civil War.
Probably the oddest position taken was opposition to the 19th Amendment. Peroutka complained that a woman’s right to vote “dilutes the franchise.” He said he often gets strong reaction to his position (I wonder why) but he explained that a married female voting may cancel out the vote of her husband.  He painted a picture of the family being represented at the voting booth by the husband. If a woman has no husband then she could vote, but otherwise he believes women should be represented by their husbands at the polls.
How about that ladies?
There were other things that raised my eyebrows but I need to do a bit more research before I write about them.