Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
From Congressman John Fleming (R-Louisiana):
"We have two competing world views here and there is no way that we can reach across the aisle -- one is going to have to win," Fleming said. "We are either going to go down the socialist road and become like western Europe and create, I guess really a godless society, an atheist society. Or we're going to continue down the other pathway where we believe in freedom of speech, individual liberties and that we remain a Christian nation. So we're going to have to win that battle, we're going to have to solve that argument before we can once again reach across and work together on things."
Oh yes, because the world supplies so many examples of officially Christian nations with freedom of speech and individual liberties.
Politics
Comments
Shorter John Fleming:
Shortest John Fleming:
Posted by: Modusoperandi | August 31, 2010 9:40 AM
Speaking as someone in Western Europe, I'd like to hit this guy with a Church of England pamphlet - our state religion.
Atheist society my arse. I only wish!
Posted by: Aegis | August 31, 2010 9:43 AM
Oh yes, because the world supplies so many examples of officially Christian nations with freedom of speech and individual liberties.
Or freedom loving socialist ones, looks like you're damned one way or another.
I'm going to pick the one with the free beer.
Posted by: Mu | August 31, 2010 9:44 AM
I never understood the common association with socialism = atheist and rights-based governance = Christian. I suppose it's just an unfortunate relic of McCarthyism, but I have never heard a any defense, even a bad one, of this strange association.
Posted by: Rob | August 31, 2010 9:46 AM
Theocracies like the one Fleming seems to want here are the most repressive, freedom hating societies on the globe. Christian nation my ass.
Posted by: MikeMa | August 31, 2010 9:47 AM
How can he not notice the obvious contradiction? Because he follows the thinking of his god, who operates on the principle "You can have free will, but if you don't do what I say, you will be punished."
Posted by: Phillip IV | August 31, 2010 9:56 AM
I for one don't want to live with the oppressive socialist boot of the government on my throat like in Finland instead I want to be free in a Christian nation like Uganda.
Seems the only freedoms that Christians don't like are the ones that let people deviate from someones particular interpretation of Christianity.
Posted by: Mr Ed | August 31, 2010 10:00 AM
Fleming's mindset, unfortunately, is all too common on the right these days. It's a belief that we should have freedom of religion and freedom of speech, but only for those that agree with his views. In other words, we can have the freedom to be rightwing Christians and nothing else.
Posted by: greatbear | August 31, 2010 10:00 AM
The thing I can never understand about these people is their absolute refusal to believe that the "freedom of speech," and "individual liberties" that these people profess to love, sprang not from Christianity (which mercilessly suppresseed these things everywhere for at least 1,500 years and still does in many places), but from secular Enlightenment values.
To my mind, they are either 1) ignorant or 2) lying when they say they cherish invdividual liberties. My gut tells me it is mostly 1, as they are oh, so ignorant in so many areas, but 2 makes sense because although they talk alot about loving individual liberty, they so rarely demonstrate a love for in practice, (save when it involves the right to own guns, the right to property or the right to speech and religious freedom they believe it.)
Posted by: Woody Tanaka | August 31, 2010 10:01 AM
Fleming knows that that our freedom comes by way of a godless non-Christian document, the Constitution. He knows damn well.
So he is deliberately talking knee-jerk nonsense. I wouldn't be surprised if the source of his speeches is the same as Glenn Beck's.
Posted by: Reverend Rodney | August 31, 2010 10:06 AM
Still, it's nice to have someone who openly declares war rather than pretending that his side can be bargained with.
Of course, this is after the last two years which were all about the refusal of the Democratic majority to work with the Republicans in the legislature. Now that it looks like the whip will be in the Right hands there's no need for all that lily-livered talk of "bipartisanship."
In particular, they're already openly scheduling the hearings investigating high crimes and misdemeanors in the Administration. IMHO this is going to be payback for the previous two years of witch hunts against the Bush Administration over inconsequentialities like torture, illegal search, kidnapping, and corruption.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | August 31, 2010 10:07 AM
We need a sovereign nation for the folks who think like me,
Where each citizen is guaranteed the freedom to agree--
Where the right to be a Christian (though God-given) is protected
By the humble Christian servants whom the people have elected.
Where the benefits of living in God's Glory, time will tell,
And where unbelievers all can go to hell.
Posted by: Cuttlefish | August 31, 2010 10:08 AM
"We believe in freedom of speech ..."
Yeah, because I totally remember when all of you fRight wingers fell all over yourselves defending the Dixie Chicks after one of them criticized Dumbya.
"individual liberties"
Like the right for two people to form a lasting, legally recognized relationship! Oh, wait, no.
"and that we remain a Christian nation."
Just no. Fuck no. You idiots want Texas to infest with your Bronze Age crazy? Fine. Good luck with your Retardlic of Dumbfuckistan.
Posted by: Fifth Dentist | August 31, 2010 10:08 AM
Also, would it really hurt the US if it became more like Europe? It's really not such an awful place to live, you know.
Posted by: Deen | August 31, 2010 10:12 AM
Somebody should tell this guy that most nations of Western Europe are officially Christian.
Posted by: lukas | August 31, 2010 10:15 AM
Those weren't Christians, they were papists. Once we've dealt with the Muslims, socialists, and atheists it'll be their turn to pay for all that they did.
Posted by: Yagotta B. Kidding | August 31, 2010 10:16 AM
Rob @ 4:
Woody Tanaka @ 9:
Rev. Rodney @ 10:
Rep. Fleming's quote and its resonance is the utility of the Christian Nation myth in practice. Fleming probably believes the source of his freedom comes from God, not the Constitution, which is merely a document emanating from biblical law a la
JudgeRoy Moore, Alan Keyes, David Barton, et al.This goes back well before McCarthyism and is rooted in the typical conservative defect of history denialism. They can't confront the fact that enlightenment thinking is the primary source of our progress and yearn to instead falsely reconcile it back to their religion. Especially since their religious dogma provides ammunition to vilify 'the other' which is much needed in these days given the rawness of recently going from the majority ruling party to the minority party.
Posted by: Michael Heath | August 31, 2010 10:18 AM
Freedom of religion is conspicuous by its absence ....
And, Deen, yes it would hurt. They's foreign over there. Need I say more?
Posted by: Scott Hanley | August 31, 2010 10:19 AM
we believe in freedom of speech, individual liberties and that we remain a Christian nation.
The last drivel automatically invalidates the rest.
What a dumbass.
Posted by: Aquaria | August 31, 2010 10:19 AM
Is that anatomically possible?
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | August 31, 2010 10:21 AM
[rhetorical]Does this dumbfuck not realize that your 'religious tithe' in Germany is taken directly from your salary by your company as a federal tax? How much closer to state sponsored religion can you get?
You need to get a form authorizing your non-alignment to the church to avoid the tax (which used to be subject to excruciatingly tough audits!).
[/rhetorical]
ARGGHHH!
Posted by: TonyC | August 31, 2010 10:24 AM
That is the worst example of argument by dire consequences I have ever heard. He might as well have said, "Vote for me, or else your trains will run on time."
Posted by: Holytape | August 31, 2010 10:32 AM
lukas @ 15:
True but even most ignorant 'ugly American' type Congress-members know that that the population of many European countries is increasingly non-religious to the point where this demographic dominates some of countries. This observation is amplified by a degree of magnitude given that we are encountering the best social results from the most atheistic/irreligious nations such as Denmark and Sweden. Sweden has an official church and some rituals remain popular, however the population is dominated by those with little to no belief.
These facts threaten if not falsify the rhetoric repeated ad nauseum in the pulpits of U.S. churches that a people's collective devoutness to God is the primary barrier to utter catastrophe. This latter point was the primary theme at Glen Beck's so-called Restoring Honor rally in D.C. this past weekend.
For an excellent summary of Denmark and Sweden's religiousity I highly recommend the book Society without God. It spends little time reporting the stats and instead focuses mostly on illuminating what it means to this generation to grow-up with little to no religious beliefs (usually 2nd or 3rd generation) though with some remnants in place. I do think the book's author over-extends the argument that a society can be good without God given that most of his interview subjects still perceive good vs. evil in terms at least partly from lessons coming from the Bible. Secularism still remains too novel for western societies as a whole to test that we don't need religion to be good; which I speculate is true but again, an untested argument.
Posted by: Michael Heath | August 31, 2010 10:35 AM
Does Louisiana have a coast? Seen from a European perspective, it would make sense to let the states around the periphery of USA secede if they are so infested by Malign Meme Disease that reclaiming them will take as much time as reclaiming Gruinard from the anthrax spores spread there during germ warfare experiments.
Utah will be more problematic, since the place is land-locked. But then again, so is San Marino, and it has been around for a thousand years. The indians in the state might object, though.
Posted by: Birger Johansson | August 31, 2010 10:35 AM
Thats because they love the idea of liberty. Actually, Im not even sure about that. I think they may just love the word liberty, it has really been reduced to a shibboleth for many. They have to love liberty, because it says so right on the label, "that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
But actual liberty, thats messy: My liberty can interfere with your liberty. Its even worse when your liberty interferes with my pursuit of happiness. Its best not to worry about the whole thing. We are for Liberty! Liberty, Rah Rah Rah!
Posted by: Dave | August 31, 2010 10:42 AM
I hope Mr Fleming is one of a very small group of people in America who believe we do not have freedom of speech and individual liberties.
Posted by: Liberal Atheist | August 31, 2010 10:43 AM
Only Arizona stands between it and the international border.
'Nuff said.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | August 31, 2010 10:47 AM
Atheism is a basic non-belief in deities. It does not inform you on how each atheist conducts his personal life unless you stick to a generalized view of all atheists and it certainly doesn't imply certain political positions. I've met atheists that are hard-core liberals, but I've also met conservative atheists that support many right-wing positions on numerous social and economic matters, save for a revisionist historical outlook that would undermine liberties in the United States under the feel-good banner of Christianity.
Posted by: SwedishSkinJer | August 31, 2010 11:00 AM
I also hope that Republicans are aware of how they are isolating fence-sitters that are more concerned about matters such as the economy instead of being warned about an imaginary war with the terrifying atheists. By promoting a cartoonishly simplistic "Us vs. Them" mentality, right-wing Republicans are implying an unbalance in their representation.
Posted by: swedishskinjer | August 31, 2010 11:04 AM
It's worth remembering that many conservatives, and dominionists in particular, don't dare admit what they really believe, maybe not even to themselves. They believe in liberty for themselves, but they do not believe in universal liberty. However, saying so would put them too far outside the American tradition*. To resolve the dilemma, they pledge allegiance to the words, but then try to redefine them more to their liking.
When it's done subtly, it can be very powerful. Over the past generation, I've seen "the American dream" being redefined from moderate wealth and economic security to becoming a multimillionaire. In the process, they average working person has been redefined to be someone who has not pursued the American dream and doesn't deserve much consideration in public policy. This happened without much notice, but not without powerful effect.
When it's done clumsily, you get the sort of obvious drivel that Fleming is offering. And when someone doesn't even make an attempt to claim the tradition, you get the mosque protesters saying "It's not about freedom of religion!" and just looking like asses.
This isn't something that only conservatives do. My favorite historical example is the rise of women's clubs and settlement houses during the Progressive Era. By emphasizing education, cultural improvement, sanitation, and wise economy**, the ladies could work on public issues, while at the same time remaining true (in a way) to the cultural norms of domesticity - "domestic" previously having been defined strictly as within the home, but now broadened to include any 'homelike' issues.
A more famous leftist example would be FDR's Four Freedoms, which included "Freedom from want" - something that most conservatives and libertarians would consider the antithesis of liberty.
________________________________
* Stated tradition, that is - not necessarily all American practice
** Gifford Pinchot found some of his earliest support for professional forestry and conservation among women's clubs.
Posted by: Scott Hanley | August 31, 2010 11:30 AM
Someone mentioned Finland, the Best Country to Live In.
http://www.prosperity.com/rankings.aspx
Note how many godless socialist countries from Western Europe are at the bottom of the list.
Posted by: Lassi Hippeläinen | August 31, 2010 11:43 AM
"... freedom of speech, individual liberties and that we remain a Christian nation"
One of these things is not like the others.
Posted by: NoAstronomer | August 31, 2010 12:12 PM
And how does the Land of Opportunity stand on the list in terms of upward social mobility? Rising or falling?
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | August 31, 2010 12:14 PM
Fifth Dentist, that was a lucky typo in #13. It led me to:
Right-wingers are fright-bringers.
Posted by: Chris Winter | August 31, 2010 12:21 PM
There are so many contradictions and straw man fallacies in Fleming's quote that I don't know where to start ...
Posted by: Ahab | August 31, 2010 12:30 PM
[rhetorical]Does this dumbfuck not realize that your 'religious tithe' in Germany is taken directly from your salary by your company as a federal tax? How much closer to state sponsored religion can you get?
You need to get a form authorizing your non-alignment to the church to avoid the tax (which used to be subject to excruciatingly tough audits!).
[/rhetorical]
No you don't! I have lived and worked in Germany for thirty years and worked for numerous employers. All I have ever needed to do is to tell the people in the wages department that I am not a member of any church and I have never paid any 'church tax'.
Posted by: Thony C. | August 31, 2010 12:46 PM
The world is not black and white. Religion teaches people that it is. For us or against us. There is only one best way to be.
Would it kill these delusional morons to consider what is actually proposed by the other side? Yes; yes it would. Because their way is obviously the best and to hell with everyone else.
Posted by: DougH | August 31, 2010 12:50 PM
Re: Mr. Hipplainen'a list:
Finland @ Overall Rank of # #1, Nigeria @ Overall Rank of #98.
The reason for this is quite obvious. Nigeria has only just recently embarked on its pogro--er, program of purification of the bewitched by fire, beatings, shootings, stabbings and sundry methods. It may take them a few centuries to catch up. I was a bit surprised to see that Rwanda (not even listed) and Cambodia @93 are not higher up in the ranks as they both had enough "cleansing" done to eliminate most, if not all, heretics, apostates, witches and the like.
Posted by: democommie | August 31, 2010 2:46 PM
Ed, I am offended. Not because I support John Flemming, but because I am a dumbass :o]
Posted by: Chuck Beretz | August 31, 2010 3:08 PM
*sob*
Posted by: andrew | August 31, 2010 3:18 PM
I doubt that either Flemming or his followers can even find
Western Europe on the map.
Posted by: Paen | August 31, 2010 5:19 PM
I actually agree with Fleming. We are dealing with two different world views at war with each other. I just hope we go the European way. As an immigrant many aspects of American culture are beyond me. I do not understand the hatred many Americans have for all things European. I do not like saying it, but the European way is better and far superior than the American way. I would love it if America became like Europe. We would live longer, we would be healthier, we would be much better looking, we would be happier, thinner, and more aware of the rest of the world. I do not see anything wrong with that. So I hope our road to "socialism" continues.
Posted by: Walter | August 31, 2010 5:58 PM
Right wing politicians and right wing pundits are really this massive ideological human caterpillar, aren't they?
Posted by: William George | August 31, 2010 6:19 PM
#31 makes me want to burst into song.
Posted by: Douglas McClean | August 31, 2010 9:55 PM
"Freedom" whether of religion or speech does not mean "without consequence”, it simply means free from government tyranny. Demographic surveys reveal that adherence to regular religious practice is on average much lower in more socialist states, as more government control also means less individual liberty, socialist states like China and North Korea being prime examples. American’s tend to view most European governments as more socialist (more centralized government control of the economy), than our own. Whether to rely on more government control or on individual initiative for future prosperity are contrasting political ideologies. So Mr. Fleming’s statement is not so “dumbass” as most of the commentators here seem to think.
Posted by: Mac | September 1, 2010 12:48 PM
Mac asserts:
An independently validated empirical citation requested for: a) your correlative claim, b) that's a causal relationship exists, and c) the supposed non-religiosity of China's population. I'm skeptical on all three assertions. Given your argument rests solely on these assertions it won't resonate unless you can back up your claims.
Posted by: Michael Heath | September 1, 2010 1:52 PM
Mac, #46: American’s tend to view most European governments as more socialist (more centralized government control of the economy), than our own.
Well, even if we accept that "socialism" refers to the degree to which privately own corporations are regulated, it would appear that Western Europe does provides evidence against the notion of "socialism" correlating with personal freedom. There are certainly more regulations governing the economies of Western European nations than in the US, but, as far as I know, the difference in the degree of personal freedom is negligible.
-
Demographic surveys reveal that adherence to regular religious practice is on average much lower in more socialist states, as more government control also means less individual liberty, socialist states like China and North Korea being prime examples.
Again, since you brought up the example of Western Europe (which is actually counter example), as far as I know there are very little restrictions on religious liberty in Western Europe. So whatever accounts for the lower levels of adherence to religious practices in Western Europe, it's hard to link it to the degree of personal liberty.
Now China and North Korea are odd examples to use. The Chinese have never been a particularly religious people even before communism. The dominant ideology there has traditional been Confucianism, and any stretching of the meaning of religion to include Confucianism will probably include Communism as well.
North Korea can't really be described as anything but a highly religious society where the cult-like worship of the Leader and the State have made North Korean communism a de facto state religion.
In other words, most attempts to correlate "socialism" with adherence to "religion" involve very careless (or maybe deliberate) uses of the words to prove the point. If one is going to really make an intelligent statement about such a correlation, then one is going to have to very precisely define one's terms before one looks at specific countries, and then I suspect the results won't be what one would naively suspect.
Posted by: Chiroptera | September 1, 2010 3:12 PM
OK - perhaps I was unclear - YOU the person needed to tell your PAYROLL DEPT that YOU were not aligned with a Church, so that THEY could file the correct paperwork that excused you from the State Collected Tithe. The payroll dept has acted as your proxy in completing the government paperwork for 'opting out of the tithe', but they'll use the form you use to tell them as evidence in any audit.
Your government assumes you have a tithe, unless you provide evidence otherwise (and if you are audited, you must be able to provide that evidence - it's like making any other claim). Note also that this has expanded to include tithes to any recognized church - your affiliation determines the distribution, and you need to make a positive 'no affiliation' statement on your annual tax form (netto?) to completely avoid the tax.
(FYI - I've built a number of HR & Payroll systems for German corporations over the past 20 years - I know whereof I speak. You are lucky that your employers have acted sensibly and have made it easy for you)
But this is all an aside - the point is that this douche is railing against 'godless Europe' when 'godless Europe' has states (like Germany) who collect tithes on behalf of the church(es)
Posted by: TonyC | September 2, 2010 10:31 AM