Tuesday, October 2, 2018

David Lane claims that God will cause San Francisco to implode

The aim of American Renewal Project is to effect a Christian theocracy in America.
Image via American Renewal Project/Vimeo
David Lane, founder of American Renewal Project, is a selective moralist. in 2015 the creepy Republican operative engaged in a conspiracy to evade tax laws. Tuesday he writes: This City Is on the Verge of Implosion Following Its Spiritual Departure From the Faith of Its Founders.

Lane is referring to San Francisco. As you will eventually see, Lane's real interest is electoral politics. He goes on to write:
San Francisco is on the verge of implosion following its spiritual departure from the faith of its founders.
That is followed by a quote from a conservative Christian YouTube video (Lane does not provide a link):
The law is basically ignored, the homeless are encouraged to camp out, convicted felons are given jobs over honest citizens, our military is hated and disrespected and droves of gay activists walk the streets stark naked. Public decency laws, federal immigration laws and plain common decency has been replaced by a city that no longer respects itself or others.
Later on:
The battle in California rages between two great faiths, two religions, Christianity versus secularism. Jesus Christ, the Son of God and Lord of life, established true Christianity. Secularism, on the other hand, is not born from God.

Under the sway of pietism, Christians abandoned the public square over the last 75 years. Pietism rightly stresses the importance of an individual's relationship to God, but wrongly reduces "the scope of the Christian's concern to his or her personal life, family life and the affairs of the church as an ecclesiastical organization."
Lane is a Christian Supremacist; an adherent of dominion theology and a believer of Christian Nation™ mythology. In this case he fails to recognize the religious diversity of San Francisco. According to Lane's long division non-Christians and Christians he does not approve of are also secularists. Moreover, the suggestion that secularism exists as a competing religion is ridiculous.

We are a secular nation which does not mean that we are a nation of non-believers. It means that, constitutionally, public policy is based on secular principles.

We do not know who Lane is quoting in the second paragraph (above) but it is an exercise in hypocrisy. The scope of Lane's concern is limited to his political agenda which is to turn America into a Christian theocracy. That is not what our founders had in mind. Not at all.
Because of this, the foundation of a godly nation has not been maintained.

"Indeed, it was permitted to be well-nigh destroyed. So the Constitution and its Christian principles [are] increasingly ignored in practice. Hence, the size and scope of civil government [has] increased; power [has] centralized in the national government; and the rule of law was abandoned in favor of the arbitrary rule of men," Dr. Archie P. Jones writes in Foreword to The Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States.
I do not happen to be a believer but if there is a god I would think that his or her primary concern would be how we treat one another.

As a nation we have engaged in the ethnic cleansing of Native Americans, then their impoverishment. We have been slavers followed by the system of segregation. We have been indifferent to the the needy; the poor, the sick and the homeless. The same Calvinists are largely responsible for the Civil War which claimed 766,000 lives. Just this past weekend, Lane's own party placed about 1,200 kids (who have done nothing wrong) in what is effectively a concentration camp.

Yet, now Lane's god is pissed off?

Lane mentions the Constitution yet he works in direct contradiction to the Establishment Clause within the First Amendment. Archie P. Jones, whom Lane quotes, also wrote a book about President Obama titled “Born to Lie: From the Birth Certificate to Health Care.” Does Lane also subscribe to the Birther conspiracy theory?

Lane gets to his favorite subject: LGBT people
Which brings us to Gavin Newsom. In March 2000, 4.6 million California citizens voted to ban same-sex marriage (Proposition 22 - 61 percent - 39 percent). The Act added Section 308.5 of the Family Code, which read "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

In February 2004, newly elected San Francisco Mayor Newsom elevated himself above the law and God by "turn[ing] City Hall into [a] wedding chapel for 4,000 couples by authorizing same-sex marriage against state law."
Lane's criticism of Mayor Newsom for defying California law is insufficient. Lane takes it upon himself to claim that Newsom defied Lane's god. In the long run it turns out that Newsom was correct with respect to the civil rights of gay citizens and the notion that those constitutional protections are not subject to the whims of the electorate — or Christian blowhards.

Lane's point (shocking I know) is political:
A single San Francisco politician thus bestowed upon himself the right to override the vote of 4.6 million Californians. His tenure as San Francisco Mayor presents clues as to how he will lead the state if elected governor in November.
Lane is invoking his god to affect a political outcome. Forget what I think. True believers should find that profoundly sleazy.

Lane indulges in a rant about health care:
Universal health care is yet another of California Lt. Governor Newsom's pet projects. Newsom's boisterous endorsement of universal health care for the Golden State might just evoke another gold rush, this time of medical tourists and residents from other states swarming in to take advantage of the medical freebies. It goes without saying that California doesn't have the way or means of becoming a hatchery welfare state for the world's 7.4 billion population ... regardless of what spin Mr. Newsom puts on it.
First of all, the good Christian that Lane claims to be, he should also be a proponent of universal health care. Don't all of God's children deserve good care? Or just those who can afford it? Beyond that, universal care can be crafted for an economic benefit by keeping people out of the ER and ensuring that people get preventive care. Lane is not interested. He wants people to vote against something. WWJD? Indeed, WWJD?

In conclusion:
Californian evangelical and pro-life Catholic Christians have come to their providential kairos moment for decision and action.

Pink says in well in Exposition of the Gospel of John: "The one who has found mercy with the Lord is now put to the proof: his faith, his loyalty, his courage must be tested. The profession of our lips amounts to nothing at all if it be not confirmed by the character of our lives."

California's Gideons or Rahabs must begin to stand.
Kairos, by the way, is based on the Greek god of the same name who was the god of opportunity. Kairos means the opportune time and place to do something. Note how Lane shifts from public policy (health care) to religious dogma to suggest that people have a religious duty to vote Republican.

There is nothing new in that. Other religious blowhards like Tony Perkins, Tim Wildmon and Mat Staver (to name a few) have been saying the same thing for years. The GOP means “God's Own Party.” Who is more godly I wonder. President Obama or Trump? Lane says: “God wants you to vote Republican” and people believe him.

A.W. Pink, whom Lane quotes, was a noted Calvinist writer and in some ways he birthed renewed evangelicalism. Pink is often criticized for his lack of fellowship which sounds a great deal like David Lane.

If there is a god, Mr. Lane is going to have much to answer for.

Related content:



No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.