The memo states: “Common threads animating this violent conduct include anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity; support for the overthrow of the United States government; extremism on migration, race, and gender; and hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality.”
FFRF, which unequivocally condemns political violence, says it appears that the president is invoking political violence in this instance as an excuse to target nonprofits and activists and stigmatize them with the false label of “domestic terrorism.”
“FFRF is deeply concerned that the president is misusing the power of his civil, secular office to brand dissent from Christian nationalism as terrorism,” warns FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor. “By naming ‘anti-Christianity’ alongside violence and insurrection, and invoking ‘family, religion and morality,’ this administration is telling millions of nonreligious Americans and religious minorities that their views are not only unpatriotic, but could be considered a national security threat.”
FFRF reminds the administration that the United States was founded on freedom of thought and conscience, not loyalty to religion. To demonize those who reject Christianity or call everyone who advocates on issues of race, gender, immigration and LGBTQ rights as “extremists” — is a chilling attack on democracy itself.
“The First Amendment guarantees the right to criticize religion, including Christianity,” adds FFRF Legal Director Patrick Elliott. “This memorandum is not about protecting the nation from violence. It is about silencing open debate over the president’s favored religion and ideology.”
FFRF urges the administration to rescind the memorandum and for Congress to investigate its unconstitutional targeting of religious dissent.
“Labeling tens of millions of peaceful Americans as potential terrorists because they don’t buy into a Christian nationalist worldview is reckless, discriminatory and profoundly un-American,” concludes Gaylor.
“Common threads animating this violent conduct include… anti-Christianity…”
I would suggest that being unconvinced that gods exist isn’t the same as anti-Christianism, or at least not in all cases. I don’t mind if people do Christianity as long as they leave me out of it, for instance.
Orange and his legion of minions may not differentiate in such a way, though, or might just not care enough to do the thinking that it would take.
I am reminded here of the chilling words of Alfried Krupp, who was not only an enthusiastic pursuer of the Nazi re-armament programme (no doubt cynically profiting from the enterprise into the bargain) but a hardcore Nazi.
In the chapter Slave Labour at Essen, in Airey Neave’s account of the Nuremberg Trials, we read the following:
We’ve already had the Orange Scrotum’s pantomime version of the Hossbach Conference, let’s see how long it takes for the MAGA rhetoric to match that of Alfried Krupp.
Over on page 286, we read:
Fortunately, one American clergyman likely to be a target for violent MAGA hatred, is now safely out of reach in the Vatican as Pope, but numerous others should be asking themselves if they’re going to face the same fate as Dietrich Bonhoeffer.
The list of “enemies” might differ in a few details from that of the Nazis, but the intent is the same - unleash lethal terror upon those who stand in the way of the Tangerine Harkkonen and his human centipede of cult followers. I am also minded to note that the so-called “traditional American views on family, religion and morality” almost certainly form a one-circle Venn diagram with those of the Klan.
I exhort everyone interested in the issues, to secure their own copy of Airey Neave’s book. ISBN 0 340 18128 1. If it’s out of print, tell Hodder & Stoughton to launch a new print run.
I heard it was initially taken down (and damaged in doing so) despite it having all the necessary permissions to be put up - and the park authorities said it had contravened some unstated rule or requirement.
It was put back up after being repaired and with the shutdown, there’s no one working to handle it.
Perhaps it may motivate Trump to negotiate with the Democrats, so he can get someone to have it illegally removed again.
