George Halstead, American Renaissance, October 2002
The religious right had its glory days in the 1970s and ’80s, and is driven by personalities rather than institutions. Given the questionable things Pat Robertson does, it seems to be sputtering out, and has largely been co-opted by the Republican Party anyway. Also, voters on the religious right can be fickle. Although they may be aligned with the CP or the Republicans, they may decide on a whim not to vote, or that they shouldn’t be engaged in politics at all. As Samuel Francis explains in Revolution from the Middle:
“The real problem with the religious right is that, in the long run, its religious vehicle won’t carry it home. If it ever ended abortion, restored school prayer, outlawed sodomy and banned pornography, I suspect, most of its followers would simply declare victory and retire. But having accomplished all of that, the Christian right would have done absolutely nothing to strip the federal government of the power it has seized throughout this century, . . . prevent the inundation of the country by anti-Western immigrants, stop the cultural and racial dispossession of the historic people, or resist the absorption of the American nation into a multicultural and multiracial globalist regime. Indeed, the Christian Right for the most part doesn’t care about these issues or even perceive them as issues, and in so far as it does, it not infrequently lines up on the wrong side of them.” For all its faults, the religious right does offer great opportunities to the movement in terms of coalition building. It has also set an example of dedication to its causes that nationalists would do well to emulate. The religious right is constantly ostracized and publicly ridiculed for its beliefs yet doggedly pursues its goals. Its members have dramatically changed the shape of the Republican Party. They have gotten their own candidates elected to high office, and Republicans now have to take their views into consideration.
In the matter of coalition building, millions of conservative and religious whites could be drawn to the nationalist movement if offered a more compelling political viewpoint. For example, one group, which provides Biblical answers to Christians on the need for immigration reform, is Jim Robb’s organization, Evangelicals for Immigration Reform. Many more members of the religious right could be receptive to a nationalist message if approached in the right way.
While racialist and nationalist Christians need to find a better framework and vocabulary for their views, agnostic and atheistic racialists could find much to learn from the example of the religious right. When encouraged not to lead a hermit-like existence, the religious right has a strong ability to confront tough social issues in a very public and brazen way. Its people are always willing to talk about their issues anywhere and at any time, when others would be embarrassed. In so doing, they are continually finding converts. They have been the “shock troops” of the conservative movement for a long time. There are few other groups on the right that devote as much time as they do to advancing a cause they believe in. Whites need to understand that their racial cause is morally justified, and if the religious right grasps that idea it will be a tenacious advocate.
As a practical matter, people from the religious right show up at campaign headquarters to do the grunt work others disdain. They are good, hard-working, cheerful people, and are greatly appreciated on campaigns (even if some of them love to talk at length about religion while stuffing envelopes). You don’t have to beg them to volunteer. I wish an equal number of, say, immigration reform activists showed up to volunteer, but they do not. Christian activists help candidates get elected through volunteer work and donations, and that in turn gets repaid with staff appointments, and advancement of their political issues. It is through its own efforts that the religious right has gained influence.
Another lesson for racialists to learn from religious activists is that they persisted despite tremendous opposition from the media and even from the Republican Party itself. When the movement became more active in the late ’70s and ’80s, it began a strategy of slowly taking over Republican positions. Its people ran for school board, for county Republican officers, for RNC delegate, and so forth. They encountered heavy resistance from establishment Republicans, but prevailed due to their tenacity.
This approach increased greatly after Pat Robertson ran for President in the Republican primary in 1988. While he did not get the nomination, he ended up using his run as a vehicle to create the Christian Coalition (CC). This group in its heyday consisted of volunteers around the country who would distribute flyers and leaflets “rating” candidates. While the Christian Coalition was a bit crude and unsophisticated at first, it grew into a very savvy operation when Pat Robertson replaced himself with the slick operator Ralph Reed. The CC is now only a shell of what it once was, but it should serve as an example of what a committed group can do in the face of fierce, hostile opposition. It has not achieved all its goals, but it has accomplished far more through politics than it ever would have if its members had just stayed home.
Even though the CC is virtually gone, there are still millions of white Christian Americans who are waiting to hear the good news about white nationalism and why it is morally compatible with their faith. Whites do not have to jettison religion to accommodate racialism. All we lack is a kind of “American Renaissance” of the faith to lead us out of the spiritual quagmire. Religion and race can, and should be, mutually reinforcing. We are stronger together than we can ever be separately.
Original article
(Posted on December 11, 2009)
Comments
I agree that much can be learned from the Christian Right about organizing for power. However, I personally am not interested in joining up with a group that places religion as its number one issue. I am not a born-again Christian and don’t want to be. I think the racialist message will find MANY people who are receptive to the message among those who are horrified at the marxist trend of our current government. If this isn’t enough to unify folks, I say that nothing will be; the potential loss of our own country should be all we need to be open and receptive to the racialist ideas. Sure, not all will be open to it, but not all the Christians would be open to it either. Please, let’s leave religion out of it and go for preserving our nation itself.
I mostly support the goals of the Christian conservative movement, but with some exceptions. However, much of the success of the CCM came from the media, because the media used the CCM as a distraction to keep native born white Americans away from explicitly nationalist and racialist leaders and orgs. In other words, the media were pied-piper like leading people to the CCM, portraying it as the way to be right wing.
Another problem with the CCM is that it’s a movement, not an actual organization. Therefore, there is a gray area between R/R and not R/R. There are some people who are obviously and identifiably R/R, and some people who are obviously not R/R. But there are a lot of people in the gray area who espouse some R/R sensibilities but oppose other R/R agenda items.
Please … these are the people who flock to movies such as “The Blind Side” and “Christmas in Canaan.”
They come out with teary eyes.
Enough said.
Poster # 3……I got a good laugh at what you said! I needed that today…I am a Christian but in no way, shape or form of the mainstream Christianity of today. They wring their hands whenever they find another NONwhite cause, so as to make themselves “acceptable” to God and the watching public…I am afraid they have it all wrong in that kind of thinking and will one day be in for a rude awakening.
I remember Sam Francis’s essay in Chronicles (AFAIK, I first read it in the above mentioned Rev. from the Middle, autographed copy). One of the other important things he said in that essay is that what drives the Christian Right isn’t necessarily religion, but politics, and more specifically, reacting to leftist cultural and political efforts. Of course, he also made the implication in other essays that the same kind of people at the same time they were trying to de-Christianize the country were also for racial civil rights, interracial marriage, diversity, and so on, yet the CR is on the wrong side of those issues.
Maybe pro-white activists should specialize and form many different organizations independent of each other. Maybe you shouldn’t fight for the white people in general, because that will get you a lot of negative publicity. Instead fight for the specific issues. Form, for example, an organization which wants to end the affirmative action. This kind of organization cannot even be considered a “white” organization. Form an alliance with Asians and everybody else who is against AA. Once you get enough members, the president of the organization should run in the elections and urge all members to vote for him. By getting a good result he will prove there are many people who consider AA the most important issue. Once politicians see how many votes it’s possible to gain by ending the AA they’ll include this in their program. They might even come to your organization in order to make a deal. Whoever gives the best offer that’s the one members of the organization will vote for. But even if you’d one day be able to achieve your goal, this doesn’t mean the organization should stop working. If it did, the AA would come back immediately.
The problem with the American system is that you only have 2 parties. Republicans know that even if they don’t try to end AA people will still vote for them. But you have to make them see that people in your organization are different. They will NOT vote for Republicans who are pro-AA even if that means that Democrats will get into power. Republicans need to see the specific number of the votes they’re losing by ignoring your organization.
Christians are not the only ones entranced with egalitarian views . In fact liberal secularist wrote the book on it and on selling out their own people in favor of other cultures and ethnicities . How many die-hard liberals are unapologetic Christians ? Very few I would say . The liberals have not only declared war on the America most of us here on this site love but also on Christianity . Many Christian leaders work hard to preserve conservative ideals and are castigated by the left for doing so . The late James Kennedy was branded “the most dangerous man in America,” by the ACLU . Same with Hal Lindsey and John Hagee . All three have gone out their way to expose the danger presented by Islam and by the ACLU . Hagee continually reminds his congregation that America is an Anglo-European culture . The decline of the America we once knew can be traced to the decline of Christianity in our nation . And the decline of Christianity in America can be traced to the attacks by the liberal , secularist , leftist movement .
As someone who considers himself a race realist,i want nothing to do with these right wing Christians.I’ve been in many situations defending the “Amren position”only to be stabbed in the back and called a RACIST by these white christian zealots. I’ve tried discussing the MEXICAN problem with them,only to be told how were all god’s children and all this other self defeating nonsense.The mess we are in is not going to be solved by turning the other cheek and telling are enemies how much we love them,this mindset help get us in this position .
I find this article a little on the mechanical side. As well I think the middle road is where life thrives. In any event on the subject of religion/Christianity… I’m currently re-reading one of several books I’d read a decade ago from the (Sovereign Press), this on the subject of Thomas Jeffersons opinion of Christianity. I may be ridiculed for bringing this odd type book up here but I try to read a wide variety of perspectives regardless of origin. Eric Holden , pen name or not wrote a book “AN AMERICAN CHRISTIAN BIBLE” in 1982. The basic Idea in this authors view is that Jefferson did not believe in supernatural miracles he felt were inserted in the so called “new testament” by later “priest craft”, but Jefferson greatly admired the teachings of Jesus and incorporated these ideas in the US constitution. This book is not a conventional type but I think has some very pertinent insights concerning mass manipulations and how they are created. Melvin Gorahm author of “The Pagan Bible” was sort of the grandfather of the group Eric Holden was part of.
DixieProud,
Everyone has a belief system; it is the basis of all ones assumptions and actions. It is absolutely impossible to ignore that.
8 Homo Among You:
Your post is instructive because you have your priorities straight. I would rather live in a city that’s 100% white and where I’m the only heterosexual and serious Christian than live in a city where it’s all black but me and all the blacks are (nominally) Christians. I’m against most gun control, but I would rather live in an all white city where guns were banned than in an otherwise all black city where guns were not.
Race comes first. Everything else, including religion, is ultimately negotiable.
As an aside, I think modern Christianity’s aecedance to racial equality is new. The Catholic schools in St. Louis were segregated right up until the late 1940s. Archbishop John Glennon, the last St. Louis Archbishop that presided over segregated schools, was an active seggy, a supporter of Theodore Bilbo. It was only when he passed and the Pope sent Joseph Ritter to STL from Indianapolis that things changed — Ritter desegged the Catholic schools in STL as one of his first acts, and he desegged Indy, too. So I think Christianity pandered to the changing mores.
This article brings up the important and generally correct point that the Christian Right is one potential source of allies. But as a political model, I don’t think they’re a good one because they didn’t form enough of their own alliances to be effective.
AmRen will not win with just the white male demographic, as long as everyone else is voting together against that demographic. When “affirmative action” spread beyond the original meaning of guaranteeing opportunity to guaranteeing results, they added women to minorities as the protected groups to have a majority of votes. What advocates of the AmRen philosophy need to do is point out how the different liberal voting blocks (Blacks, Hispanics, feminists and limousine liberals) don’t actually have that much in common other than wanting white male’s money. If we can break that up as a unifying philosophy, blacks will support us on immigration, educated Hispanics on the need for learning English, feminists on crime and family life, and limousine liberals will realize that most of their non-demographic issues (like environmentalism, gays, and secularism) have little minority participation.
@Homo among you—
The Bible does not condemn race realism. Having separate nations for each race is actually Biblical.
As I said while commenting on another article, today’s mainstream “Christian” sounds like a hippie with all the “love love love” stuff.
God separated us by race (Shem, Ham, Japheth), by land (earth dividing into today’s continents), and by language (read the Tower of Babel account in Genesis 11). There was a reason for that.
As a Christian I am against miscegenation.
Oh, I believe in treating others with respect, don’t get me wrong…but that doesn’t mean we should all mix.
“Hello from Europe”, your suggestion better atriculates what I have been advocating. We need an individualistic approach, both in terms of organization and members. Believe me when I say I don’t want to listen to “we’re all God’s children” anymore than the next Amrener, but do not assume everyone of the Christian right is this way. There are some that want the US to be a beacon of Christianity again, but that does not mean you cannot stand next to them and fight for immigration reform. Entice them with the threat of Islam. Once the goals are achieved, you cordially say your good-byes and fight for your conflicting religious views apart, never to discuss it with one another.
An awful lot of apostate churches and denominations call themselves Christians these days. Frankly, they don’t preach the bible. They preach social “justice” cherry picking bible passages out of context to “prove” their view. That is NOT biblical. The bible, preached in context, and with old testament backing new as to the nature of God and his injunctions on us, all as a package, is the ONLY way to preach, and the only means by which to call oneself a true Christian. IF that is so, the individual WILL find that his beliefs support nationality, ethnic identity and cohesion, distrust of foreign influences, racial pride and heritage, etc. Without the necessity of becoming an Aryan Nations follower.
“Your post is instructive because you have your priorities straight. I would rather live in a city that’s 100% white and where I’m the only heterosexual and serious Christian than live in a city where it’s all black but me and all the blacks are (nominally) Christians. I’m against most gun control, but I would rather live in an all white city where guns were banned than in an otherwise all black city where guns were not.”
I doubt your a serious Christian because no real Christian would want to live in a modern day Sodom and Gommorah. No real Christian would turn their back on the word of God to join the very dark forces that seek to destroy our race. God blessed European man in so many obvious ways that set us apart from other peoples. The White race has grown corrupted and so many people have turned their backs on God and that is why we find ourselves in the situation we are in. Real Christians are not going to compromise their beliefs to form alliances because we believe God will look out for us in the end. If you want an alliance you will do it on our terms and that means turning away from evil and accepting Christ in your life. Otherwise you can go your own way and we’ll go ours and the path you go down will lead to oblivion.
Christianity carries around with it the seeds of its own destruction. Up until our relations with non-whites was based on segregation, Christianity could do itself little harm. After WW2, this changed drastically. With the penetration of our societies by various integration schemes in the workplace and education, it was only a matter of time before the ultimate destructive force of miscegenation began to work its devious mischief. It takes only a few breaches in a large extended family to shut up the racial realists within that family. It also produces terrific animosity among families. The military is a perfect breeding ground (literally) for this type of behavior, and one that Christians have merrily gone along with under the guise of “patriotism”. I blame the matriarchs in families for going along with these trends. If a member of your family marries a black or Hispanic, that family member should be banished. That’s a hard thing for a mother to do, and Christianity is currently not supporting this kind of resolve very well.
As a Christian myself, I can tell you without any qualms that simply because God loves his creation and all peoples in no way negates our need to manage same in a manner that brings desirable results. That’s the whole point and should be the focus of white nationalism. Without Christians involved, it loses its luster to most whites who want to be involved in a positive movement that yields desirable results. Most simply are not interested in pagan ritual and Nazi philosophy. I’m not and they aren’t either. Good article Amren.
It seems that over the past few years the Christian right has shifted to the left. There is too much talk of forgiveness, even for the worst elements of society such as violent criminals. There also seems to be a growing sense that redistibution of wealth by the government is Christian. When I heard many people at my megachurch say they voted for Obama I quit attending.
Liberalism has had growing influence in every element of society even the Christian right. Although I sense the tide is starting to turn in the other direction now.
Christians and liberals seem to approach life from the same perspective; that is the denial of reality and science.
They both seem to think they can save the defectives in society from themselves.
Both blame criminal,anti social, deficient behavior on some unsubstantiated force (the devil or whites oppression).
Both drain the wealth of the successful to fuel the propagation of the failed.
Both passionately indoctrinate young minds with baseless propaganda and faiths.
The christian right are neither. Avoid these fools at all cost.
As someone who attended a couple of tea parties earlier this year, I was impressed by the number of committed Christians also there. I could not say what percentage of these were previously active in the Christian Coaltion, but it seems that those I talked to saw a lot of commonality between curbing immigration, ending affirmative action, fighting multicultural lies and getting tough on black on White crime. I am sure that there are single issue Christians at these things as well, but I did not encounter any that were, say, pro-affirmative action.
By the way, the old saw about affirmative action is that White households are two earner households, and something that benefits the woman’s ability to earn dulls any criticism regarding how the White male’s ability to earn is being hurt. I don’t know how true this is as I can’t ever remember buying into this. I would agree that our interests as Whites can be derailed by a mainstream political party taking up one of our issues such as ending immigration of non-Whites.
I agree with #8. I’m not gay, but I am tired of how lots of White Christians are pandering to non-whites. These same churches were against mixing for centuries, but they changed their tune for political and social mores. The church is a reflection of the citizens, not the other way around.
Christianity is an aspect of culture, and culture largely grows out of the economic system. In the case of the United States, as we’ve moved away from nationalism towards a “The World is Flat” type of free world market, with capitalism knowing frontieers less and less, previous cultural mores in the U.S. have been done away with.
The powers that be are working as hard as they can to make the U.S. another Brazil, but what they don’t take into account is that a country like Brazil, or others in Latin America, have developed organically over centuries. U.S. culture has been hijacked since the end of W.W. II and we are now seeing exactly what those in power have in mind.
Fortunately for the European-Americans, most of whom are Christians, the day is soon coming when they will realize that their religion has been subverted as well, and that a counter-revolution within Christianity will take place at the same time that a counter-revolution in the entire society does. This is going to happen as soon as the economic situation moves to hyper-inflation, such as a country like Argentina experienced in the past. We’re close to that point.
Glad to see all the Christians reading amren. I have often felt I was one of only a very few to do so.
Personally if I had to choose to live with either 100% black Chistians or 100% white homos I think I would choose the former. Hopefully I won’t ever have to be forced to choose between those two options…
Other than getting Republicans elected, the christian right realy has not been very successful, not just for our issues, but for theirs. Abortion, moved through the trimesters and is now partial birth abortion, and sometimes infanticide. Sodomy is so well excepted as a right that, even the christian coalition does not want to ban it, and few Republicans have said anything but that we ought have unions rather then marriage for sodomites. And school prayer? Thats dead too. So, they are a failure, even given thier limited aims(IE, non-white immigration and the size of goverment dont bother them)
The only group on the right which has been successful is the gun rights folks. Theyve been so successful, in fact, that they have reduced the pinko plutacracy to arguing for states rights!
I think Libertarians, in general, need us. When asked about racial inequalities, they have to admit differences in abilities since they dont want to advocate more laws.
There is much confusion and misinformation attributed to Christians by non-Christians. For example, most Christians today follow creation models that are harmony with science (only 41% continue to hold to young earth or YEC creationism). A good example of leading scientists, researchers, and educators that are Christians is reasons.org
Unlike many of you who post on this board, the Christian Right has come to the realization that it must move beyond its pre 1960s mindset. The world is much more secular, global and holistic and indeed, more complex that it was during the years of the mid 20th century. It is imperatvie that a number of our posters need to come to grips with this reality.
The article doesn’t discuss how the big business wing of the Republican Party used and abused christian conservatives (CCs) time and time again. It’s well known that CCs are seen as “useful idiots” by the GOP’s big business bosses. I can cite countless examples of GOP leaders speaking of them this way.
With this history in mind, is it reasonable to imagine that a white nationalist wing of the republican party might ever play the same role that the CC movement did? A white nationalist faction in the GOP could only arise to the extent that the real power center of the GOP - big business - allowed it to. And would white nationalists even want to participate in such a coaltion?
Big business/Corporate America is perfectly happy with profiting off Muliticultural America. They’ve created it in large part, in fact, by importing cheap labor.
Furthermore, Corporate America knows no political allegiance. It furthers its interests by installing high-ranking surrogates in both parties and by giving money to both parties. We’ve seen this by how the white American middle class has been thoroughly fleeced by the various bailout schemes of both parties during this economic downturn.
The solution? Perhaps a populist coalition of white middle America - the GOP’s de facto base - can wrest control of the GOP from the influence of big money. This is hard to imagine. While I like this article’s emphasis on a genuine grassroots, populist uprising, I foresee a terrible fight for control of the GOP. Not an impossible fight - but one with long odds.
You people really know how to throw out the welcome mat. This forum is about making alliances with the Christian right and reading your posts your clueless. Do you seriously expect the Christian right to compromise their values and embrace homosexuality? Why not just go hog wild and invite the militant feminists, cross-dressers, abortionists, the North American Man Boy Love Association, the whole shebang; all the morally bankrupt people that live in cosmopolitan cities who can’t have fun anymore because the minorities are targeting them for persecution.
The only group on the right which has been successful is the gun rights folks. Theyve been so successful, in fact, that they have reduced the pinko plutacracy to arguing for states rights!
I agree with the NRA almost completely. But let’s face facts: The NRA is essentially nothing more than the lobbying arm of the domestic small arms industry. If you are an NRA member, then you’ll notice all the ads in their publications. That’s the way the firearm mfgrs fund the NRA. If the NRA had no dues paying members, they wouldn’t miss a beat. The industry needs the NRA to keep open the world’s third largest market for small arms, and that is the domestic American public. The largest is the American Federal government, and the 2nd largest is the Russian government.
And there’s a vulnerability. I’m surprised that no Democrat President or his handlers have picked up on this fact, but I can see the day some time soon when Obama or a future Democrat President tells the American domestic gun makers to stop funding the NRA, so the NRA doesn’t have the money to buy Republican candidates and buy pro bono TV and radio ads for Rs, or the Yankee government will buy no more guns from them for the FBI, Army, etc., i.e. they’ll buy from China. The media will cover it up, of course, b/c the media is an auxiliary of the Democrat Party. Then the gun makers will have to choose between the best market and the 3rd best market: Guess who they’ll choose. Right…
“The mess we are in is not going to be solved by turning the other cheek and telling are enemies how much we love them,this mindset help get us in this position .”
So many people just don’t get it. Christian non-violence is a tactic, not a trancendental article of faith. In case you forgot, Martin Luther King defeated white America by turning the other cheek. Non-violent resistance is often a power play rather than a sacrifice.
Christianity being an evangelical religion, early Christians were taught to seek converts by demonstrating their extraordinary self-possession rather than by physical force. Early Christians were able to maintain the moral high ground and gain converts among both Jews and Gentiles using non-violence.
The problem is it doesn’t work on non-whites. White people naturally respond to non-violence by de-escalating and attempting to be reasonable. Hence, the shocked consciences of whites watching police officers attack black protesters with fire hoses and vicious dogs. It is a huge mistake to assume that other races will respond the same way, as they have shown they will not.
Quite simply, I do not think the same rules apply to them. Not that there is every any excuse for unnecessary brutality, but non-violence is a particular tactic that often works in particular situations with particular audiences. It is not a trancendent, universal, never-ending command.
If it were, it would reduce Christianity to a ridiculous hyperbole, denying us even the right to defend our own children from harm.
John, it’s the Christians that are reproducing, not the secular progressives, not the homosexuals, not the man hating militant feminists. It’s those sick neurotic values and a lack of belief in God that are destroying the White race, not us. You expect us to embrace these same destructive forces when really in the end all that will be left will be us. The religious will inherit the world and the rest will dry up and blow away.
Good post, Sofita.
Actually Jesus, in his turn-the-other-cheek advice, was no different from the pagan Greco-Roman philosophers (see The Greco-Roman Moralists, by the Teaching Company).
C. S. Lewis is the greatest espouser of European Christianity, and would, I feel quite sure, be against miscegenation, immigration, etc., but he is surely a lone voice in the wilderness.
Or maybe those like him just get no press?
Quite possible.
I’m almost finished with a Masters of Divinity and to state that “Jesus was no different from the pagan Greco-Roman philosophers” is an outright false assertion and serves as a great example of how far off non-Christians are from understanding Christianity. My thesis is actually on the topic of pagan influence and lack of pagan influence on Christianity extending from the pre-Christian period and ending with the rise of neo-paganism in today’s modern world. I’ll be happy to debate anyone here that believes Jesus was just another Greco-Roman philosopher or should be classified as such. He certainly was not.
Wasp, you need to study some philosophy or some English grammar.
Read what I said once more.
“Jesus, in his turn-the-other-cheek advice, was no different from the pagan Greco-Roman philosophers.”
You, in your criticism of what I wrote, are leaving out the clause, “in his turn-the-other-cheek advice”.
This is a truly alarming lack of comprehension on your part.
I also maintain that Jesus, in his genetics of being a human male mammal, was no different from Hugh Hefner.
“you need to study some philosophy or some English grammar”
You’re quite right about that, Druid. I’d strongly suggest both.
33 — Druid Among You wrote at 10:05 AM on December 15
“C. S. Lewis is the greatest espouser of European Christianity, and would, I feel quite sure, be against miscegenation, immigration, etc., but he is surely a lone voice in the wilderness. “
You ought to read up on the life of CS Lewis, it might give you pause.
If more Amren posters actually read history and did it objectively, we might really start to get somewhere with the real work needed for white racial survival. White Realists might actually learn from history instead of reacting to it, or stretching reason so often to make the story fit their assumed requirements.
Whiteplight, please explain what you mean about C.S. Lewis. I can find nothing about his being for miscegenation, immigration, etc. It is true that he married a Jewish woman who became a Christian, but I would not call that miscegenation.
Wasp, I was not trying to be cutting or mean (well, maybe a little)—it is just that I find that mindset everywhere these days, and it frustrates me extremely. Good luck in your theological endeavors.
My apologies for misreading the context Druid. That’s what happens when you have fifteen windows open and ten conversations going at the same time… lol.
Anonymous wrote at 5:39 PM on December 15:
I worked in IT for almost thirty years (eighteen of them spent acquiring degrees and vendor engineering certifications at night and at my own cost after working all day), after receiving an honorable discharge from the United States Navy, before being let go from a real estate company I last worked for in the meltdown and then being afflicted with severe arthritis that deformed my hands changing my life forever.
Your last post was very arrogant lacking the courtesy and socialization I would expect from one white nationalist to another. But I’ve got too much joy, despite my personal circumstance, to spend any more time on it so consider yourself forgiven and a Merry Christmas to you sir.
“Christians and liberals seem to approach life from the same perspective; that is the denial of reality and science.
They both seem to think they can save the defectives in society from themselves.
Both blame criminal,anti social, deficient behavior on some unsubstantiated force (the devil or whites oppression).
Both drain the wealth of the successful to fuel the propagation of the failed.
Both passionately indoctrinate young minds with baseless propaganda and faiths.
The christian right are neither. Avoid these fools at all cost.”
This deserved re-posting. You stand to lose much by pandering to christians; mostly, you lose intelligent realists.
