It is not exactly news that the Religious Right often demonizes secularism and atheism. Happens all the time. Less well known are the Religious Right attacks on religious progressives. In recent days, major Religious Right agencies launched published attacks against two of my blogger friends. Both are pioneering bloggers, one is a Buddhist from New York and one is a Baptist from Oklahoma. Both believe strongly in the right of individual conscience, religious pluralism and separation of church and state. Both are articulate progressives.
There is no time like the present to let them know we have got their backs. I invited both to post their responses at Talk to Action (it is handy to have a blog for moments like this).
As the Religious Right, in its many manifestations (including in the Democratic Party) continues to consolidate its power in public life, it is likely that as religious progressives reorganize -- as they usually do in time of economic and social crisis -- we are likely to see more, and more virulent such attacks.
Barbara O'Brien, who blogs about politics and about religion and politics, found herself attacked by a staffer at the Family Research Council, over her writing about Brit Hume and his proselytization of Tiger Woods on Fox News.
Here is part of her response from The Family Research Council Slanders Buddhism.
When Brit Hume told Fox News Sunday viewers that Tiger Woods should convert to Christianity to know forgiveness, I published a response to Hume's snub of Buddhism on my Buddhist website -- "Let's Forgive Brit Hume."
But then the Family Research Council quoted me, out of context, to argue that even Buddhists agree Brit Hume was right. Um, no.
<div class="entry">Arguing for the superior forgiveness/redemptive powers of Christianity over Buddhism, Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council wrote,
Has Brit Hume slandered Buddhists by mischaracterizing their theology? Not really. Barbara O'Brien, author of "Barbara's Buddhism Blog," admits, "Mr. Hume is right, in a sense, that Buddhism doesn't offer redemption and forgiveness in the same way Christianity does. Buddhism has no concept of sin; therefore, redemption and forgiveness in the Christian sense are meaningless in Buddhism."
From here, Mr. Sprigg proceeds to slander Buddhism by mischaracterizing our "theology."
The other attack was aimed at Dr. Bruce Prescott whose Mainstream Baptist blog was a pioneer in the progressive religious/political blogosphere. Here is his succinct response:
Joseph Farah, editor-in-chief at WorldNetDaily, writes a column entitled "Between the Lines." On at least one occasion he has filled the blank space between lines of dialogue with his own prejudice against this Mainstream Baptist. He does that in a diatribe today against me and the documentary about Baptists and Muslims entitled "Different Books, Common Word" that is currently airing on ABC-TV affiliate stations.
Twisting the facts, while insinuating that I am a "moral relativist," he published a column that portrays me as exclaiming that "Christians are terrorists, too." For the record, I did not say that and Farah knows it -- or, at least, he ought to know it. He goes on to accurately quote me as saying, "We have extremists in both our faiths."
The documentary is about Baptists and Muslims and not about McVeigh, who was a Catholic. Farah focuses on McVeigh to deflect attention from the kind of fundamentalist Christian extremists -- clearly named in the documentary -- who insist on deliberately stoking embers that could promote violent conflict between Christianity and Islam.
I have never corresponded or spoken with Farah. If he had asked me to identify extremists within my own faith -– something which he did not do, though his writing leaves the impression that he did -- I would have quickly identified some Baptists for him -- as I did for the producers of the documentary.
Sincere Christians can ill afford to tolerate journalism and commentary that takes such a cavalier attitude toward the truth. Too many lives are at stake and the credibility of our witness is on the line.
Religious progressives support religious pluralism and separation of church and state and stand against the theocratic creep of the Religious Right.
It will be important going forward, that make sure we have got each other's backs. The more effective we become, the more our opponents will notice.