Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
If you're a fan of religious wingnuttery as I am, Christian Newswire is a virtual goldmine, an endless supply of stupidity rivaled only by the Worldnutdaily. Someone emailed me this press release about a "Christian Revolution" taking place on Monday on the steps of the Supreme Court. I'll paste the whole thing below the fold. It's deliriously loopy:
WASHINGTON, May 18 /Christian Newswire/ -- On Monday, May 18th, 11:00 AM, Christian leaders from across the nation will come to our nation's capital to stand for Jesus and oppose Senate "Hate Crimes" bill (S.909) at the U.S. Supreme Court."America will learn the hard way that you cannot make straight what God has called crooked, or tolerate what God deems intolerable, or turn moral wrongs into civil rights, and thrive as a people." Rev. Rusty Thomas, Director, Elijah Ministries
"This bill seeks to shut down the message of hope and deliverance from the chains of homosexuality through Jesus Christ. It criminalizes Christians who reach out in the love of God to save those trapped in sexual perversion." Michael Marcavage, Director, Repent America
"S.909 will make illegal every word in the Bible describing homosexual sodomy. It will legitimize sin and prepare the way for censorship of the Gospel of Christ. Our children will pay a horrible price if we do not fight now." Rev. Flip Benham, Director, Operation Save America.
A call to Christian Revolution will be made at the steps of the Supreme Court. The Declaration of Independence was unanimously signed and proclaimed by our Founding Fathers on July 4, 1776. It was a call to obey God rather than men. When our Founding Fathers declared their independence from England's King George III, they were really declaring their dependence upon Almighty God -- the God of the Bible. They pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to proclaim-God is true.
On Monday, May18, 2009, 11:00 AM, we will ask American Christians to consider and pledge their allegiance to Almighty God, His Law, and His Son. We will offer a new Declaration of Dependence to be read from the steps of the Supreme Court of the United States of America. We will join that "Great cloud of witnesses," our Pilgrim Forefathers, and our Founding fathers, as we declare -- "No King but King Jesus! It is now our turn to declare our dependence upon the only One who can truly save America and our posterity -- Jesus Christ!" -- Rev. Flip Benham
Our nation has drifted far from God. It is our privilege, our duty, and our command to proclaim this truth. "Those who forsake the law praise the wicked but those who keep the law resist them." Proverbs 28:4
What: Press Conference
When: 11:00 AM, Monday, May 18
Where: Steps of the United States Supreme Court
Okay, so they've got Flip Benham and Michael Marcavage there. What, Randall Terry was busy? Oh, that's right. He and Alan Keyes are at Notre Dame trying to get arrested. Maybe they could sit in the same cell and talk about how much they hate their gay children.
Politics
Comments
In before "Liars for Jesus."
Posted by: Brandon | May 20, 2009 9:37 AM
"The Chains of Homosexuality" - bit too long for a band name. Pity.
Posted by: Spidergrackle | May 20, 2009 9:43 AM
"America will learn the hard way that you cannot make straight what God has called crooked, or tolerate what God deems intolerable, or turn moral wrongs into civil rights, and thrive as a people."
So God was cool on the whole slavery thing? It's either that or America didn't thrive before 1865.
But anyway, my question is, will the Christian Revolution be televised? Oh drat, it was two days ago. Anyone catch the actual revolution on TV or in person? I'm sadistically interested in seeing this Declaration of Dependence read aloud.
Posted by: Imrryr | May 20, 2009 9:54 AM
So, it's Wednesday 19th, what happened? Anyone know? Did anyone at all show up or just the clouds of [ghostly] witnesses of dead Deists and Puritans?
Was there a run-in with demonstrators from the Anti-Shellfish League? Did the Poly-Cotton Leisure Suit Wearers of America crash the protest? Did the Anti-Picking-up-Sticks-on-a-Saturday crowd start a 'illegal Mexican immigrant wave'? Inquiring minds need to know :D -DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | May 20, 2009 9:56 AM
spidergrackle: Too long for a band, but it would make a great brand name for a line of S&M equipment.
Posted by: kehrsam | May 20, 2009 10:09 AM
S.909 applies additional criminal penalties to someone who "...willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability of any person."
It has nothing to do with free speech, and these nutjobs really, really need to stop pretending otherwise. They can go on preaching their hate all they want and still have First Amendment protections.
Posted by: Raven | May 20, 2009 10:19 AM
ROFLMAO. Talk about twisting history.
Posted by: NoAstronomer | May 20, 2009 10:22 AM
@spidergrackle: I don't know about that, it could make a serviceable name for a doom metal band, like My Dying Bride or Teeth of Lions Rule the Divine. If you're not familiar with that style of music consider yourself lucky ;)
Posted by: Imrryr | May 20, 2009 10:23 AM
Orson "If The Gays Can Marry I'll Declare Civil War" Scott Card isn't in on this? Damn, he must be slipping.
Posted by: Finch | May 20, 2009 10:25 AM
How about a compressed version as the name of franchise of supermarkets that sell 'gay themed' merchandise -
"Come down to 'HomoChain' for all your homo needs". ;) - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | May 20, 2009 10:25 AM
S.909 applies additional criminal penalties to someone who "...willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability of any person."
It has nothing to do with free speech, and these nutjobs really, really need to stop pretending otherwise. They can go on preaching their hate all they want and still have First Amendment protections.
Posted by: Raven | May 20, 2009 10:26 AM
Thanks for posting this, Ed. I will absolutely be there with a pad and pen (and something to record with if I remember) to get some fodder for my blog. Can't wait!
Posted by: barry21 | May 20, 2009 10:54 AM
You have to give them credit for one thing - at least they didn't use the phrase "Pedophile Protection Act" in the press release like everyone else is doing.
Posted by: yoshi | May 20, 2009 11:21 AM
Raven,
How about speech that threatens or heavily implies that "something unfortunate" will happen to gay (or perceived to be gay) people?
No, I don't think "gays will go to hell", "gays are vile/icky", or "we need to pray and reach out to those sinners" constitute threats in the least, but would something like "we must rid our communities of these vile sinners, and we encourage God's soldiers to do their part in eradicating this perversion" be considered as incitement to violence/harm (which is not protected by free speech)?
Posted by: Monimonika | May 20, 2009 11:21 AM
...would something like "we must rid our communities of these vile sinners, and we encourage God's soldiers to do their part in eradicating this perversion" be considered as incitement to violence/harm (which is not protected by free speech)?
If actual violence followed such an admonition, than yes, the admonishers could be tried for inciting violence, or maybe conspiracy. The state may not get a conviction, but the trial itself could be used to shine a light on the pattern of hateful speech that may be connected to incidents of violence.
Posted by: Raging Bee | May 20, 2009 11:29 AM
It drives me nuts that these people can't get it through their thick skulls that they will still be able to hate gay people! They can hate gay people and say whatever they want about it, they just can't kill people for being gay.
Posted by: catgirl | May 20, 2009 11:51 AM
Ed: You should have posted that quoted rant in Comic Sans a la PZ.
Posted by: MarkW | May 20, 2009 11:53 AM
I find these types revolting every day.
Posted by: Rob Jase | May 20, 2009 11:55 AM
You are all perfectly correct.
The language in the bill does what we say it does, not what the Xianists claim.
So go stop somebody in the supermarket and ask 'em if they've heard of the Hate-Crimes Bill.
If they answer in the affirmative, ask 'em if they think it will make it a crime for Xian ministers to preach against homosexuality.
If they answer "No," I'll eat a hat...
Posted by: Woody | May 20, 2009 1:02 PM
For any of you interested in what's in this Declaration of Christian Dependence, here's a section outlining the charges against our government. It's not something that should suprise anyone, but it is surprising that they pretty much included all the talking points of the RR.
Behold the Charges:
• The government of the United States of America has stripped away the knowledge and fear of God from our children (Engle v.
Vitale, 1962; Abbington v. Schemp, 1963; Stone v. Graham, 1980.)
• It has removed the unalienable “Right to Life” given by God himself to the most vulnerable of us—the unborn child. (Roe v.
Wade, 1973)
• It has removed the transcendent, objective standard of truth - Jesus Christ - and declared that every man can do as he sees fit.
(Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 1994)
• It has cast God’s Word to the ground codifying homosexual sodomy into a constitutional right. (Lawrence v. Texas, 2003)
• It has prostrated Christianity to the level of every other religion, denying the God who made this nation great.
• It has systematically criminalized the Christian faith.
• It has repeatedly imposed taxes without representation or consent.
• It has unjustly imposed property taxes upon God’s land. The earth belongs to the Lord, not to our Federal Government.
• It has become an enemy to the God-ordained institution of marriage.
• It has become an enemy to the God-ordained institution of the family.
• It has become an enemy to children and the aged. The weak have become its prey.
• It has stolen the inheritances of families to feed its unbridled lust for power.
• It has plunged our nation into debt that cannot be repaid.
The document in it's glorious steaming pile of totality can be found at (get ready) Randall Terry's operationsaveamerica.org.
Have fun.
Posted by: Dave Thom | May 20, 2009 1:22 PM
A "Past 24 hours" Google search uncovered exactly four (4) items about this historic event, with this post at the top.
The only one describing the actual event quotes a Texas tv news report, which sayeth:
The same search going back a week finds several more announcements before the event, nothing else during or after. Obviously this proves the MainStream Media™ hates baby Jesus!
Co-organizer Rusty Thomas's email newsletter sayeth only:
It was not mentioned whether or not he wore a flightsuit as he wrote. (Note: clicking that last link will take you to a profoundly cheesy page.)
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | May 20, 2009 1:48 PM
@spidergrackle: I don't know about that, it could make a serviceable name for a doom metal band, like My Dying Bride or Teeth of Lions Rule the Divine. If you're not familiar with that style of music consider yourself lucky ;)
May you be DOOMED, DOOMED I TELL YOU, to an eternity of ABBA songs and lite country!
Posted by: BrianM | May 20, 2009 1:48 PM
"It has prostrated Christianity to the level of every other religion"
Well, that part is true.
Posted by: eric | May 20, 2009 1:50 PM
I'm sure they're every bit as creative at reinterpreting criminal law as they are the Declaration of Independence. Also just as batshit insane.
Posted by: DaveL | May 20, 2009 1:56 PM
@BrianM: NOES!!! Although, I would respectfully argue that Christian Pop/Rock is worse than either of those two.
Posted by: Imrryr | May 20, 2009 1:57 PM
It has prostrated Christianity to the level of every other religion, denying the God who made this nation great.
"You're denying my religious freedom to treat fags as
secondthird class citizens (atheists get fourth class status!). Wah! Wah! Everybody's religious freedoms should be protected....What? You're claiming there are so-called religious people who do not see anything wrong with homosexuality? That they believe gay people should be treated like everyone else? Those people aren't religious! My rights to worship Jesus, Son of God, trumps those of them facist, commie, secularists!
... What's that about other religions, such as Judaism, Buddhism, or *ew!*Islam? Those silly little superstitions aren't recognized nor given rights within the original Constitution!"
Posted by: Monimonika | May 20, 2009 2:24 PM
(3) Yes, God is cool with the slavery thing. Does He not command the slave to obey his master? You can easily find Christians who argue today that there is nothing inherently wrong with slavery.
Posted by: j a higginbotham | May 20, 2009 2:25 PM
With this bunch, Mormons may only be slightly more welcome than Muslims.
Posted by: natural cynic | May 20, 2009 3:43 PM
An earlier attempted post with too many links is cooling its heels in moderation limbo, so here's a short excerpt:
A "Past 24 hours" Google search uncovered exactly four (4) items about this historic event, with this post at the top.
A Texas tv news report sayeth:
The same search going back a week finds several more announcements before the event, nothing else during or after.
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | May 20, 2009 4:13 PM
Does this mean heterosexual sodomy is okay?
Posted by: khan | May 20, 2009 4:19 PM
Behold the puerile Philippic! Perhaps it was a mistake to declare independence from God's own chosen king. Or was "president" just slang for one branch of the Trinity?
Posted by: mark | May 20, 2009 4:31 PM
The Christianist masters of the False Dilemma strike again.
Posted by: SharonB | May 20, 2009 4:40 PM
"S.909 will make illegal every word in the Bible describing homosexual sodomy. It will legitimize sin and prepare the way for censorship of the Gospel of Christ. Our children will pay a horrible price if we do not fight now." - Rev. Flip Benham.
I'm not sure why, but my heart does a happy little dance ever time I hear someone named "Flip" say something nuts.
Posted by: Captain Mike | May 20, 2009 4:54 PM
Posted by: CW | May 20, 2009 5:28 PM
You can use "the Chains of Homosexuality" to accessorize almost any outfit. They with everything.
Posted by: wrpd | May 20, 2009 6:03 PM
s/b they go with everything. My fingers got all caught up in my Chains of Homosexuality.
Posted by: wrpd | May 20, 2009 6:10 PM
Good thing that's only about 50 words, then.
Posted by: konrad_arflane | May 20, 2009 6:14 PM
khan asked:
Only within the institution of the family.
Posted by: kehrsam | May 20, 2009 7:03 PM
Of course, the Constitution already made illegal all the words in the Bible saying idolatry is wrong, but they don't make a peep about that.
Posted by: KeithB | May 20, 2009 7:21 PM
They can be dependent on whatever the fuck they want, but that certainly misses the point of the Declaration of dependence, eh?
But then the original Declaration has all that "liberty and pursuit of happiness" crap in it. Fundamentalists certainly can't allow any of that to go on--why, gay people might think it applies to them!
Posted by: James Hanley | May 20, 2009 7:36 PM
When our Founding Fathers declared their independence from England's King George III
Heh! That moron Paul Revere: when he should have been yelling 'The English are coming, the English are coming' he fluffed it and raved about some 'British' dudes - whoever the hell they are.
Posted by: Eamon | May 20, 2009 8:24 PM
To be pedantic the Declaration of Independence wasn't actually signed until August 2nd.
I suppose it would be too ask for these people to read a history book.
I am of course assuming that they can read.
Posted by: Patrick Gray | May 20, 2009 9:55 PM
khan @ # 30:
I certainly don't intend to reread the damn thing just to make sure, but I doubt the Babble says anything about heterosodomy...
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | May 20, 2009 10:45 PM
Never heard of Rev Rusty Thomas before. From his site:
Posted by: Dr X | May 20, 2009 11:13 PM
"Rev. Thomas has a father’s mantle and spreads a patriarchal vision to reclaim the masculine identity that has been neutered by the feminization of America. He and his wife, Kendra Thomas, home school thirteen children in the Thomas Nation’s University of Righteousness."
Contrast that statement with "witches are stealing our pee pees!!!!1111one!!!
Keep in mind, however, one is primitive superstition. And one is fine, upstanding religious morality, not at all crazy. And must be respected.
Posted by: Rick R | May 20, 2009 11:37 PM
"S.909 will make illegal every word in the Bible describing homosexual sodomy."
There's descriptions?? Awesome!! I've been looking for a marriage manual!!
Ba-doom psh!
Posted by: Rick R | May 21, 2009 12:02 AM
spidergrackle wrote:
No no, it can be done. That's what acronyms are for. TSoL did it.
CoH. It even looks a little like a chemical formula, which makes it extra evil. It's all gay and scienc-y, terrifying!
...
Also, I'm having a hard time thinking of a graceful way to crack an anal bead joke. It's harder than it seems like it should be!
Posted by: Leni | May 21, 2009 2:21 AM
Yes, you need a good crack for that to work, Leni. Younger ones tend to be more graceful, though.
Posted by: kehrsam | May 21, 2009 2:37 AM
Leni - Or, as us chemistry nuts call it, cobalt (I) hydride! (not to be confused with
COH3-, COH- or CoH-). Ah, chemistry how I miss you. :) - DJ
PS Are the fitst two carbon hydroxides or carbonyl hyrides? I'll leave that up to you.
Posted by: DingoJack | May 21, 2009 3:19 AM
"He and his wife, Kendra Thomas, home school thirteen children in the Thomas Nation’s University of Righteousness."
Fuck. They breed like lemmings and are at least as stupid. Come to think of it, lemmings don't have free will; excuse me for denigrating them.
Dingojack:
Could they be carbo hayrides?
Posted by: democommie | May 21, 2009 7:25 AM
Only for the purpose of procreating babies.
Posted by: Amadán | May 21, 2009 8:46 AM
khan:
"Does this mean heterosexual sodomy is okay?"
kersham
"Only within the institution of the family."
...or the Catholic church! =P
Oh wait, that would be homosexual and peadophiliic (sp?) sodomy....curses.
Posted by: FastLane | May 21, 2009 9:13 AM
...And this, my friends, is how we got Dick "Fistula Baby" Cheney.
Posted by: DaveL | May 21, 2009 9:33 AM
@ #43: It's only gay if the balls touch.
So yes, heterosexual sodomy is just a natural part of bonding under the love of Jesus.
As it were.
Posted by: Captain Obvious | May 21, 2009 10:05 AM
Ah! So when John says he was the disciple Jesus was 'loving' at the last supper ... ;)
Posted by: DingoJack | May 21, 2009 10:15 AM
""The Chains of Homosexuality" - bit too long for a band name. Pity."
Make it "Dorothy In Chains", a campy drag grunge cover band.
Posted by: Jon H | May 21, 2009 12:48 PM
Don't make fun of Rev. Rusty's 13 kids. You don't even know if they were from one litter, or two.
Posted by: mark | May 21, 2009 1:01 PM
@democommie: why are you denigrating the intelligence of lemmings? Contrary to popular belief, lemmings do NOT jump off cliffs into the sea. Whereas we could probably get a whole bunch of funnymentalists to do that if we could just convince them that the Bible says they're supposed to.
Posted by: Dave | May 21, 2009 8:18 PM
I count a grand total of 88 in the group pic of this momentous occasion (including a couple of dozen rug rats).
Revolutions just ain't what they useta be...
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | May 21, 2009 8:39 PM