Los Angeles Times Readers Respond Viscerally to 'Evangelical Pastors Heed a Political Calling for 2012'

The original article ran last Sunday, on September 11.

And now from the letters to the editor, "Faith and politics in America..."

The evangelical pastors featured in The Times' story cannot be faulted for their political activism, which is protected under the 1st Amendment. The problem is their distortion of the Christian faith.

How can any sensitive Christian support the death penalty, the proliferation of firearms, unjust wars of choice, the dismantling of the social safety net, increased riches for the wealthy at the expense of everyone else, the rejection of medical coverage for the poor, the continual domination of American life by corporations and the rest of the Bachmann-Perry agenda?

When a significant slice of the church loses its hold on everything Jesus stood for, the problem is religious heresy, not political activism.

Charles H. Bayer

Claremont

More letters at the link, including one with the worn cliche, "what would Jesus do"?

Silicon Valley Gives Conservative Christians a Boost

At Los Angeles Times:

Silicon Valley, the politically liberal technology hub, is an unlikely incubator of conservative Christian activism.

But a group of its venture capitalists is backing an ambitious project that seeks to affect the 2012 election by registering 5 million new conservative Christians to vote.

The nonprofit organization United in Purpose is using sophisticated data-mining techniques to compile a database of every unregistered born-again and evangelical Christian and conservative Catholic in the country.

Through partnerships with Christian organizers and antiabortion groups, United in Purpose hopes to recruit 100,000 "champions" to identify unregistered Christians and get them to the polls as part of its Champion the Vote project. Profiles drawn from its database, which numbers more than 120 million people, will enable organizers to target potential voters with emails and Web videos tailored to their interests.

Well, now's the time, if there ever was one. I'm still not holding my hopes out for any political breakthroughs in California, but this sounds nice.

Mayor Bloomberg and the Soul of American Politics

Here's yesterday's interview with Mayor Bloomberg, whose decision to exclude clergy from official events is stirring controversy:

And from Matthew Franck & William Simon, Jr., at National Review:

This Sunday is the tenth anniversary of the al-Qaeda attacks on our country that left nearly 3,000 dead, the great majority of them in the ashes and rubble of the World Trade Center in New York City. As Americans pause on September 11 in mournful remembrance of that dreadful day, many of them will mark the moment with a prayer for the dead, for the loved ones from whom they were taken, and for their country. And such praying would be a normal part of any such commemoration even if the anniversary were not on a Sunday. It’s just what countless Americans do.

But there won’t be any praying at the City of New York’s official anniversary ceremonies this Sunday. At least, there won’t be any voiced at the microphones by invited speakers. Mayor Michael Bloomberg has decided to invite no clergy to be speakers at the event. It turns out that this omission of clergy participants has been a normal pattern of annual commemorations of 9/11. But on this tenth anniversary, the decision has finally been noticed, and it has become hugely controversial. According to the Wall Street Journal, the mayor said this week on his radio show, “It’s a civil ceremony. There are plenty of opportunities for people to have their religious ceremonies. . . . Some people don’t want to go to a religious ceremony with another religion. And the number of different religions in this city are [sic] really quite amazing.” He went on to deny the explanation that his own aides had been using to defend his decision — that it would just be “too difficult” to choose among so many faiths for the limited number of clergy who could be invited to speak. No, the mayor said, “It isn’t that you can’t pick and choose, you shouldn’t pick and choose. . . . If you want to have a service for your religion, you can have it in your church or in a field, or whatever.”

I understand, and I only fault Bloomberg to the extent that he personifies this country's banishment of religion from the public square. Folks no doubt would be able to grieve, commemorate and pray at an inter-denominational event. The logistics could have been worked out. Most of all, the day calls for spirituality. It's too bad we've come to this.

Continue reading, "Mayor Bloomberg and the Soul of American Politics."

9/11, Ten Years After: American Muslims Join the U.S. Mainstream?

Last year, when protests erupted in Temecula over a planned mosque there, I wrote:

Are folks in Temecula a bit intolerant? Or are we now going to prohibit the construction of mosques whenever there's local opposition?

I didn't follow up so much, but the mosque was approved by the city council in January and construction could begin in February 2012. And while I could be missing some details of the local protests, I think it's good. Conservatives must affirm freedom of religion. What gets lost in the debate over New York's Ground Zero Mosque is that opponents never denied the developer's right to build. It's way beyond that, in fact. Clearly it's been a sham development all along, with the purpose of bilking government and erecting a center for Islamist supremacy. There's never been concern among Imam Rauf and Daisy Khan for the families of the fallen. The lies have been too blatant and unending. That mosque shouldn't be built. It's a question of what is right, not who has the right.

That said, I guess I'm still ambivalent, despite my commitment to constitutional principles. Americans aren't getting the whole story. And those who speak out are branded as vicious racists. For my part I want to be firm but fair. On the one hand, I want to place my trust in people like M. Zuhdi Jasser, who I met at the Horowitz retreat earlier this year. (Recall his essential article from September 2010, "Questions for Imam Rauf From an American Muslim," and here.) On the other hand is someone like UCLA’s Hamzah Baig, the lead organizer for Students for Justice in Palestine. I interviewed him earlier this year. He might as well have been working for Hamas. So, I've personally been engaging and interacting with people from the both sides of the religion (the extreme side in the case of UCLA's quasi-terrorists). At home, in the Irvine community, the Muslims I bump into at my kids' schools or the playgrounds are mostly to themselves, even self-segregating rather than integrating. And honestly, on occasion I'll see Islamic women with the full burqa. I literally would not be able to talk to a woman in a burqa, because I read lips and I obviously need to see someone's face. So of course the burqa is physically intimidating, and it's a symbol of religious repression.



For all that, I appreciate the efforts of some Muslims to work in their communities to build ties and friendships. Yesterday's Los Angeles Times had another feature in its 9/11 series, and it's worth a look, "Thinking outside the 'Muslim bubble'":

Maria Khani was at her computer that September morning, working on an Arabic textbook. The small TV on the desk was turned to Al Jazeera. Suddenly, news came: A plane had struck the World Trade Center. Minutes later, she watched the screen as the second plane hit.



Khani sat frozen, questions racing through her mind: "Oh, my God, what do I do right now? Is everything that I built … gone?"



For five years, she had been planting the seeds of goodwill with Americans of other faiths. What if it was all for naught?



Unlike many Muslims who hunkered down after Sept. 11 and let national religious organizations defend their rights and make their case in the public square, Khani resolved not to retreat into the safety of silence, but to press on with her efforts over the years to become a part of her community, one neighbor at a time.



When Khani walked out of her house that day in a well-to-do Huntington Beach neighborhood, on a block of large houses and palm-shaded driveways, neighbors approached with no hint of rancor or suspicion. Their message: "We know who you are, we know about your faith, and we support you and we will take care of your kids."



This was not the experience of every Muslim American. Many recall the first months and years after Sept. 11 with dread: the detentions, the airport searches, the suspicious stares, racist epithets and worse. In response, some sought safety in a low profile.



The decade since the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon has seen a shift in the way many American Muslims negotiate their delicate position as a minority group associated, fairly or unfairly, with the perpetrators of the deadliest acts of terrorism in the nation's history.



As the years wore on and the hostility continued, even intensified, a number of American Muslims became disenchanted with the official campaigns for acceptance. They began to see that a voice — their voice — was missing from the conversation about Muslims' place in America.



They took matters into their own hands. Their efforts have been as idiosyncratic as the individuals involved. They have been as simple as inviting a non-Muslim neighbor to an iftar, the sunset meal that breaks the fast during the monthlong observance of Ramadan. They have been as life-changing as making a commitment to educate one's children in a religiously diverse public school instead of a Muslim private school.



Khani and others involved in such outreach attempts believe — and this is supported by opinion surveys — that Americans are less likely to harbor anti-Muslim feelings if they get to know even one Muslim.



When they do, they find that American Muslims, many of them immigrants or the children of immigrants, share with them many of the same values, including a rejection of extremist violence, appreciation of hard work and support for women taking an active role in society, according to polls.

RTWT.



I could quibble with a couple of the characterizations (President Bush went out of his way to remind Americans that we're not at war with Islam). But overall that sound about right to me, and I hope especially that we see more and more examples that Americans Muslims are indeed rejecting extremist violence. For example, at ABC News, "Cousin of Fort Hood Shooter Speaks Out Against Violent Extremism." And at the San Bernardino Sun, "Poll: American Muslims reject extremism." That's good news.



I'll have more on this in upcoming posts.

Ten Commandments Still the Only Solution to the World's Problems

This is nothing short of an astonishing essay, at National Review, "The Decalogue is as relevant today as it was 3,000 years ago." The 9th Commandment is particularly relevant, considering what's been going on around here this past few months:

9. Do not bear false witness.



Lying is the root of nearly all major evils. All totalitarian states are based on lies. Had the Nazis not lied about Jews, there would not have been a Holocaust. Only people who believed that all Jews, including babies, were vermin, could, for example, lock hundreds of Jews into a synagogue and burn them alive. That similar lies are told about Jews today by Arab governments and by the Iranian state should awaken people to the Nazi-like threat that Islamic anti-Semitism poses.

Painting Credit: "Moses with the Ten Commandments," Rembrandt (1659), via Wikimedia Commmons.

Michael Coren Interviews Robert Spencer

Via Blazing Cat Fur:

Pat Condell: 'Violence Is Not the Answer'

Via Blazing Cat Fur, "Pat Condell on Anders Behring Breivik."

New York Times Reader Kills Dozens in Norway

A classic piece from Ann Coulter, at FrontPage Magazine.

And speaking of New York Times, see Timothy Egan's desperation, "A Madman and His Manifesto."

RELATED: Anders Breivik is explained — indeed, he's all boxed up and ready to go — at Los Angeles Times, "Norway attacks: The Breivik-McVeigh connection," by Andrew Gumbel.

Bill O'Reilly Rejects Media's 'Christian Extremist' Description of Norway Killer

At The Blog Prof and Nice Deb, "Video: Someone In The MSM Finally Gets The Oslo Killer Story Right."

RELATED: At Eye Crazy, "Why are socialist moral relativists silent in the wake of the Norwegian terrorist attack?." Well, they're not silent, actually. They're cheering the attacks as a hammer against conservatives. See also Blazing Cat Fur, "Khaled Mouammar, Darling of the Canadian Left, Blames The JOOOS for Norway."

How The New York Times Spins the Norway Horror

From Ron Radosh, at Pajamas Media (via Glenn Reynolds):

Leave it to today’s New York Times to run a front- page story about the murders perpetrated by the crazed right-wing fanatic, Anders Behring Breivik, that is more accurately described as a not-so veiled editorial. Written by Scott Shane, the article begins by proclaiming that Breivik “was deeply influenced by a small group of American bloggers and writers who have warned for years about the threat from Islam, lacing his 1,500-page manifesto with quotations from them, as well as copying multiple passages from the tract of the Unabomber.”

The implication that he develops is that Breivik’s actions can be attributed to those who for years have been trying to educate the public in the West bout the threat posted to our values and way of life by the forces of radical Islam. In particular, Shane singles out- by virtue of Breivik having cited his writing 64 times in his manifesto- the writings of Robert Spencer at the website Jihad Watch, part of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, as well, he writes, of “other Western writers who shared his view that Muslim immigrants pose a grave danger to Western culture.”

That sentence says it all: those who correctly point out that dangers of sectarian enclaves of unassimilated Muslim immigrants in Europe, of people who do not accept the laws and standards of the nations to which they have immigrated, and who consider themselves proponents of both jihad and sharia law, are not a danger. Instead, the danger comes from those who point out the uncomfortable truths that many dare not face.

Continue reading.

That's a phenomenal, and brutally honest, essay.

A Boost for the Islamists

From Israel Matzav, just read the whole thing.

PREVIOUSLY: "Progressives Attack Pamela Geller and Counter-Jihad"; "'The Left hasn't been this giddy since Rep. Giffords was shot'"; and "Just Awful: Progressives Ecstatic Over Anders Behring Breivik Alleged Ties to Right-Wing Extremism."

Norway Mourns Its Dead as Harsh Rhetoric Spreads

At Wall Street Journal:

OSLO — A Norwegian man confessed to killing nearly 100 people in a pair of attacks on Friday, calling his rampage "atrocious" but "necessary."

The confession by Anders Behring Breivik, made via his lawyer and preceded by a 1,500-page, xenophobic screed he published online before the massacre, has shocked this small Scandinavian country and unnerved governments across Europe, where far-right parties espousing anti-Muslim views, if not violence, have recently been on the rise ...

Norway, a relatively wealthy, sparsely populated country, has little recent history of political extremism, much less terrorism. That it was the site of such an attack, even if by an isolated gunman, has unleashed concern across Europe that the anti-immigrant underswell that has swept much of the Continent in recent years could metastasize suddenly and unexpectedly into violence.

As flags across the city hung at half-staff, hundreds of people flocked in the rain Sunday to Oslo Cathedral, where Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, King Harald of Norway and other leaders attended a memorial service. Outside, many onlookers openly wept and milled about for hours as they contributed to a growing carpet of flowers and candles.

Continue reading.

Norway Police Warned of Rising Far-Right Extremism

A report at Wall Street Journal.

Also, at Astute Bloggers, "NORWEGIAN SECURITY AGENCIES BLEW IT: "Breivik came to attention of intelligence services in March."

Added: At Daily Mail, "Anders Breivik 'was on Norwegian secret service watchlist' after buying chemical haul from Polish retailer."

Lawyer's Statement From Anders Behring Breivik

At Reuters:

In his first comment via a lawyer since his arrest, Anders Behring Breivik, 32, said he wanted to explain himself at a court hearing on Monday about extending his custody.

"He has said that he believed the actions were atrocious, but that in his head they were necessary," Geir Lippestad said.

The lawyer said Breivik had admitted to Friday's shootings at a Labour party youth camp and the bombing that killed seven people in Oslo's government district a few hours earlier.

However, "he feels that what he has done does not deserve punishment," Lippestad told NRK public television.

"What he has said is that he wants a change in society and in his understanding, in his head, there must be a revolution."

Added: From New York Times, "Police Say Oslo Suspect Admits ‘Facts’ in Massacre" (via Memeorandum).

Anders Behring Breivik — No Clear Ideological Program

I linked previously to the New York Times's report: "Right-Wing Extremist Charged in Norway." The Times altered the headline at the newspaper's website, "Christian Extremist Charged in Norway" (and Memeorandum, at 7:50pm, had "Death Toll Rises to 92 in Norway Attacks"). And now it's altered it again, "Oslo Suspect Wrote of Fear of Islam and Plan for War." The Old Gray Lady is notorious for altering its news reporting, without citing changes, in furtherance of its progressive political agenda, so that's a glimpse on the witch hunt reporting that we're already seeing. FWIW, here's this from the introduction at the report:

OSLO, Norway — The Norwegian man charged Saturday with a pair of attacks in Oslo that killed at least 92 people left behind a detailed manifesto outlining his preparations and calling for a Christian civil war to defend Europe against the threat of Muslim domination, according to Norwegian and American officials familiar with the investigation.

Also, the Wall Street Journal has this, "Suspect Identified With Far Right." After a boilerplate lede, the report indicates:

While Oslo police have remained largely silent about Mr. Breivik's possible motives and background, the 32-year-old described himself on a now-shut down Facebook page as a Christian conservative with hobbies in hunting and body-building. He also had at one time been a member of the youth movement of the Norwegian Progress Party, which is widely considered as a right-wing populist party.

Populist parties are generally oriented toward elite opposition and economic injustice. Outright racist appeals are generally secondary or a function of economic dislocation. And in the European context "far-right" parties conjure images of the Nazis or the French National Front under Jean-Marie Le Pen. And for that matter, Norway's Progress Party has been shifting toward a moderate neo-liberal economic program for over a decade, attempting to downplay party schisms over immigration. So for all the media reporting, it's not definitely accurate to cite Behring Breivik as a "right wing extremist." He doesn't evince a coherent or systemic ideological program. I've read through portions of his Internet postings, translated from Norwegian. See: "This is a complete list of comments Anders Behring Breivik has left at Document.no." Positions that would normally be considered extreme right wing, especially in the traditional European context, aren't in evidence:

Anyway, we are not in a position where we can pick and choose our partners. That's why we have to ensure that we influence other culturally conservatives to take our anti-racist pro-homosexual, pro-Israeli line of thought. When this direction has been taken we can take it to the next level.

That's interesting, especially the anti-racist and pro-gay statements, and of course historic European right-wing ideologies were implacably anti-Semitic. And get this, at Telegraph UK:

Eyewitness reports from the island of Utoya, where the shootings took place, have also described a tall, blond haired, blue-eyed Norwegian man dressed as a police officer.

On the Facebook page attributed to him, Mr Breivik describes himself as a Christian and a conservative. It listed his interests as hunting, body building and freemasonry. His profile also listed him as single. The page has since been taken down.

The odd point is Behring Breivik's identification with freemasonry, which would contradict the media claims of him being at Christian zealot. New York Daily News also stresses freemasonry, "Who is Anders Behring Breivik? Norway shooting suspect's profile emerges."

All in all, most media reporting is lazy and incoherent. And to top it off, James Alan Fox, a criminology professor at Northeastern University, identifies Behring Breivik as a clinical mass murderer rather than an ideological terrorist. See, "Norway massacre fits the mold":

As details surface in the days and weeks ahead about Friday's massacre in Norway and about Anders Behring Breivik, the man believed to have perpetrated the bloodbath, we will hopefully be able to make some sense of what now seems so unfathomable. However, even with the sketchy information uncovered in the immediate aftermath of the shooting/bombing, the crime and the accused fit the mass murder mold in many respects. ...

Mass murderers do not typically see themselves as criminal, but instead as the victim of injustice. They often consider themselves as a heroic champion for right over wrong and their crimes as absolutely justified.

RTWT.

In sum, while no doubt Anders Behring Breivik dabbled in conservative politics and social movements, it's not the case that he had a clear cut ideological agenda. He identified as culturally conservative, but he did not attach his beliefs to classic racial supremacy theories or historic anti-Jewish movements of genocidal purity ("right-wing" by definition). He combined a frustration with the growth of Norway's multiculturalism with what would normally be seen as tolerance toward social and religious minorities. The latter points are tendencies that are championed by progressives. For Behring Breivik to exhibit these things, along with expressions of freemason beliefs, and a "hatred" of the modern institutional church, indicates a more complex pyschological profile than MSM outlets have portrayed. We saw a similar pattern of conclusion-jumping almost immediately upon the Jared Loughner shooting in Tuscon early this year.

RELATED: See the interesting discussion from Dana Loesch, at Big Journalism, "A Quick Lesson for Media on the Definition of “Right Wing”."

Also, from Mike McNally at Pajamas Media, "Can the Left Resist the Temptation to Exploit the Norway Attacks?"

Muslim Prayer Service at Valley Park Middle School in Toronto

The Calgary Herald has a nice background report, "Turning school into a mosque victimizes minorities."

And here's Ezra Levant with Kathy Shaidle, via Blazing Cat Fur, "Ezra Levant & Kathy Shaidle On The Marxist Racists At The Toronto District School Board":

Also a great report from Mark Steyn, "HOW UNCLEAN WAS MY VALLEY."

And at National Post, "Spreading Islamist misogyny -with your tax dollars":

It's rare that I see a photograph that makes my blood roil in anger. Or that leads me to share the opinions of Toronto Star columnist Heather Mallick. But a picture published in Saturday's Star managed to do both in one afternoon.

The photo depicts a row of girls sitting in the cafeteria of Valley Park Middle School in Toronto. The row is segregated behind a mass of students who are participating in an Islamic prayer service. The reason the girls in the back are not praying is because -wait for it -they have their periods.

One is tempted to say: Is this the Middle Ages? Have I stumbled into a time warp, where "unclean" women must be prevented from "defiling" other persons? It's bad enough that the girls at Valley Park have to enter the cafeteria from the back, while the boys enter from the front, but does the entire school have the right to know they are menstruating?

These aren't college kids, who are adults or on the verge of adulthood, and can make up their own minds about whether they are comfortable with religious practices that relegate women to the back of the bus. These are impressionable young women, Grade 8 students, who are being sent a very clear message: You are second-class citizens compared to the boys in your school, and third-class at certain times of the month.

And yet more, from Bruce Bawer, at Pajamas Media, "Sharia in Toronto: the Muslim Girls on Their Period Have to Sit in the Back."

South Carolina Couple Sees Face of Jesus in Walmart Receipt

It's a miracle.

At WYFF-TV Greenville, SC, "Couple Sees Jesus In Walmart Receipt."

Also at Daily Mail, "He is coming.... to Walmart: Eerie image of 'Jesus' appears receipt after church service."

Herman Cain Says U.S. Communities 'Have the Right' to Ban Mosques

At Fox News:

Presidential candidate Herman Cain on Sunday defended his opposition to a new mosque in Tennessee, expressing concern about Shariah law and declaring Americans "have the right" to ban mosques in their communities.

Cain, who stirred controversy this year by saying he would be uncomfortable appointing a Muslim to his Cabinet if elected, first expressed concern Thursday about the controversial mosque in Murfreesboro, Tenn. That mosque has been the subject of demonstrations and legal challenges in the wake of the controversy over the so-called "Ground Zero mosque" in New York City.

Speaking on "Fox News Sunday," Cain said he came out against the Tennessee mosque after talking to members of that community. He said the site is "hallowed ground" to Murfreesboro residents and that they're concerned about "the intentions of trying to get Shariah law" -- the code governing conduct in Islamic societies.
"It's not just a mosque for religious purposes. This is what the people are objecting to," he said.

See also Robert Stacy McCain's exclusive report, "VIDEO: Herman Cain Talks Mosques, Sharia and the Muslim Brotherhood."

And at Atlas Shrugs, "Herman Cain gets it. He will be slammed by the leftist/Islamic machine as they continue to enforce Islamic blasphemy laws, bulldoze the American people and bulldoze individual rights."

Crystal Cathedral Denies Robert Schuller Ousted From Board of Directors

The initial report was in yesterday's Los Angeles Times, "Crystal Cathedral board ousts the Rev. Robert H. Schuller." But I saw a conflicting report at the Orange County Register, "Schuller will be a non-voting board member." And then this update at the Times, "Crystal Cathedral denies reports of Schuller's ouster from board":

A Crystal Cathedral spokesman on Monday denied reports that the church's founder, Robert H. Schuller, was voted off the board of directors in a meeting more than a week ago.

“He [Robert H. Schuller] was not voted off the board,” said John Charles, the Garden Grove church spokesman. “He is still board chairman emeritus.”

The church released its statement a day after Schuller’s son, Robert Anthony Schuller, said his 84-year-old father had been ousted because he had proposed adding new members to the board.

“Recently, the board of directors of Crystal Cathedral Ministries voted to change Dr. Schuller's position from that of a voting board member to the honorary Chairman of the Board Emeritus, a non-voting position,” the statement read.

The Times reported Schuller's new non-voting position June 19.

In Monday’s statement, Charles said the move will free up Schuller's time for more speaking engagements and a writing project: “He will also continue to speak in the pulpit of the Crystal Cathedral and on the 'Hour of Power' and meet with staff in creative and vision-casting meetings.”

PREVIOUSLY: "As Crystal Cathedral Fights to Survive Bankruptcy, Spanish-Language Ministry Comes of Age."

Jewish Conservatives and the New Media

From Benyamin Korn, at Jewish Telegraphic Agency, "Jews becoming commonplace in conservative ‘new media’."

The piece mentions just about everyone. Andrew Breitbart is Jewish, and so is Tammy Bruce, which I didn't know.

Interesting.

Hat Tip: Israel Matzav.