Separating Rightists With Religion From “The Religious Right”

From The Wall Street Journal, a comment on the dangerous rise of the “Religious Right”:

Conservative Christians who had despaired of the country’s direction under President Barack Obama—and of developments such as the legalization of same-sex marriage—now expect to wield influence in an administration that they helped bring to power.

They are pressing for a ban on late-term abortions; expanded accommodation for religion in the workplace, at hospitals and elsewhere; and, above all, the appointment of conservative judges.

…In the long term, many evangelicals are hoping that conservative judges will overturn rulings on social issues including gay marriage and Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court case that established a nationwide right to abortion access.

This post is not a rant against religion or religious conservatives, but it is a warning about “the religious Right,” who are a single-issue special interest group that has a tendency to hijack the greater Rightist agenda toward realism and replace it with a highly symbolic agenda. This is also not to say they are wrong on issues like abortion and gay marriage; in fact they are correct. However, they have put the details which will emerge from the bigger picture before achieving that bigger picture, and thus they are defeat monkeys who will (as they did in the 1980s) parasitize and deprecate the Right.

One of the great illusions of our time is that religion is impractical when the opposite is true. The practice of spirituality has intense real-world value and is necessary for making sense of the parts of our world that are not physical, including the condition of our own minds and the self-discipline required to rise about the default bog-normal Simian state of humanity. Religion, like history and literature, compiles human knowledge of what worked best and worst over the years, giving us directions instead of static rules.

For this reason, any realistic movement will discover a need for spirituality in time, and more importantly, will end the insanity of the society around it so that it can nurture a spiritual or religious movement without it getting obliterated by the chaos around it. This allows for a boostrapping process of civilization renewal: a feedback loop is established between power and culture, with the former protecting the latter so that it can grow and inform and expand the former.

Trying the opposite approach — hoping for a religious revival that somehow fixes everything else — ends in tears because religion is part of but not equal to the process of civilizational restoration. The religious fanatics will either retreat into their own bubbles, or campaign for power, and by pursuing symbolic goals rather than realistic ones, fail to achieve long-term popularity and thus quickly be dispensed with as they were in the 1990s. No one is sorry to see the PMRC or moralistic groups — including non-religious ones like MADD — pass on.

Right now, the last thing we need is a religious crusade; we need hard practical change for survival, including the removal of the triad of demographic genocide laws — affirmative action, anti-discrimination and civil rights — that ensure our people are last in line for jobs, housing, benefits and as a result are effectively being driven out of society. We need to protect ourselves so that in the future, with greater health, we can then create a healthy society, including but not limited to religion.

What we need then is a rise in “Rightists with religion,” or people who want realism plus transcendentalism including religion, instead of “the religious Right.” This seems counter-intuitive but it provides us with the basis for civilization renewal, and within that, the rebirth of religion that is as realistic as the civilization, without all of the symbolism and emotion that might make us put the cart before the horse.

Tags: , , ,

7 Responses to “Separating Rightists With Religion From “The Religious Right””

  1. AntiDem says:

    “Right now, the last thing we need is a religious crusade; we need hard practical change for survival”

    After every single fucking election, without fail, the left tries to gaslight the right into thinking that it needs to throw Christianity and social conservatism under the bus. We should never even consider the thought, because here’s the truth: Without a religious crusade, there is no survival for the West, and without social conservatism, what you have is not the “right” in any real sense.

    • I agree that we need social conservatism, very strongly, and also like the idea of having religion involved. However, I think those things come from realism, and not the other way around, so we cannot have a religious crusade, but need a crusade that includes religion. It seems like a spurious distinction until you draw out an outline of what the philosophies contain.

      It is entirely unrelated to this election, as is the fact that the left is trying to get us to throw social conservatism under the bus, because they are trying that 24-7-365 anyway.

      • Avraham Rosenblum says:

        The way I understood it the Virginia Constitution had some kind of clause that everyone was supposed to be part of some church. And I think it was based on John Locke. That is the idea of separation of church and state did not mean no church. This had an origin in the Middle Ages when there was a kind of balance between Kings and the church. The only people John Locke made an exception for was Muslims. He thought they were such a bad element that he put into his Two Treaties of Government that they ought to be excluded.

        • He had a point. Their main fear was of the State Church as had happened in England, and had basically driven people out of England so they could pursue their own sects of Christianity. Having everyone join a church would not be terrible as among other things, it would keep the pressure high on churches to be realistic.

  2. D says:

    I completely agree.

    Putting issues like gay marriage as your wedge issue is putting the cart before the horse. You didn’t see the liberals pushing for gay marriage in the 1950s. They first tore down a mostly functional culture, asserted their religion of liberal universalism on everyone, and then proposed gay marriage40 years later.

  3. George says:

    “The right” is modernist though if it doesn’t accept a united culture/religion as primary or first to action, no?

    (Quotes from Burke, Raymond Leo Cardinal; d’Alançon Guillaume (2016-07-23). Hope for the World: To Unite All Things in Christ)

    America’s culture is part of a tradition with Europe, with Christianity as a pillar.

    “We are the children of Europe, and the culture of the United States is European.”

    “As an American, I received a lot from European culture, because during my youth the civilization and heritage of most Americans came from Europe and consequently from Christianity.”

    We must have a united culture and faith, a basis from which to reason and make decisions.

    “Everyone—the family, the school, the pastor, and the faithful involved in the life of the parish—must have a uniform approach to life, which springs from the unity of the faith.”

    Attacking destroying our religion and cultural basis came *before* the rest of the decay. If we all had a proper, traditional catechism with traditional beliefs this wouldn’t be possible:

    “Yes, I agree and say, with Pope Benedict XVI, that relativism—the loss of a sound metaphysics and, consequently, of a sense of an objective reality—is the greatest danger in our days.”

    It is the deception and lie of the Left (and Satan, of evil) that beliefs don’t matter, just action. They continually tell Christians that beliefs are irrelevant, we just need to concern ourself with the material realm. “Throw away your religion, just give to the poor” nonsense.

    They have always urged the same error – we just need to “accept” non-Christianity, to accept relativism, to enable a claimed utilitarian goal, and *then* somehow things will be better – but it is a deception, error and lies.

  4. William N. Spencer says:

    Yes, I voted for D.J.Trump….I am not in any way a “member” of the “Religious Right”…..But I am most definitely a member of the Anti-Religion, godless and atheistic pro-Islam, anti-American radical left, as espoused by Obama and most all current democrats.