Frank Schaeffer disproves evolution

Frank Schaeffer, the son of Francis Schaeffer has amply displayed the folly of Evolution by demonstrating how easily a brilliant man can sire an idiot. Frank Schaeffer's latest column, an attempt to excuse Obama's racist pastor while continuing the younger Schaeffer's unwarranted attack on evangelical Christians is a road map for brainless, empty thinking.

He write in the Baltimore Community Times...

Dad and I were amongst the founders of the religious right.

Completely false. No one "founded" what the MSM has dubbed the "Religious Right". Evangelical Christians have always been involved in politics to one degree or another, but as our society degraded, the need for a more aggressive involvement led many to join the battle more fiercely. Some pulled their kids from government schools only to find the system punishing them for doing so--thus grew the homeschooling movement and the political involvement needed for parents to freely do that. Some saw the emergence of radical homosexuals as a political force, and moved to prevent them from perverting our culture, society and government. In the midst of that several people stepped forth to offer guidance and suggestions, Francis Schaeffer among them, but there were no founders or leaders. It was an entirely-grassroots movement, and continues to be today.

Consider a few passages from my father’s immensely influential America-bashing book, “A Christian Manifesto.”

The book didn't bash America, it bashed the direction Liberals were taking America. These would be the same Liberals that Frank Schaeffer now defends, who also lie about Evangelical Christians in their effort to get us relegated to second class citizen status.

Here’s Dad writing in his chapter on civil disobedience:

“If there is a legitimate reason for the use of force [against the US government] ... then at a certain point force is justifiable.”

Of course he conveniently omits an earlier passage in the book that states:

When discussing force it is important to keep an axiom in mind: always before protest or force is used, we must work for reconstruction. In other words, we should attempt to correct and rebuild society before we advocate tearing it down or disrupting it.

Half-truths are still lies.

But let's look at the concept of the legitimacy of overthrowing a bad government. Isn't that more or less what the Declaration of Independence says? How is repeating ideas our Founding Father's espoused, America bashing, or as Frank Schaeffer calls it, calling "for the violent overthrow of the U.S. government".

We Republican agitators of the mid-1970s to the late 1980s were genuinely anti-American in the same spirit that later Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson (both followers of my father) were anti-American when they said God had removed his blessing from America on 9/11, because America accepted gays.

Falwell and Robertson recanted but we never did.

First he poses an imaginary "anti-Americanism" by claiming "we" were equally culpable for Falwell and Robertson's words, and "we" continue to be guilty because "we" never recanted of words "we" never uttered. What nonsense?!? Evangelicals oppose the Liberalization/Socialization of America, not America. We criticize that. We don't invent crazy conspiracies like blaming the government for 9/11, AIDS and Black crime, then call for God to damn America because of those imagined crime.

My dad’s books denouncing America and comparing the USA to Hitler are still best sellers in the “respectable” evangelical community and he’s still hailed as a prophet by many Republican leaders.

Except those books do not exist. I've read every one of Francis Schaeffer's books, and not once in any of his books did he ever denounce America or compare America to Hitler, unless it was a limited comparison of specific actions America was committing given as a warning of where we could be heading.

Today, we have a marriage of convenience between the right-wing fundamentalists who hate Obama, and the “progressive” Clintons who are playing the race card through their own smear machine.

Here we see his own hatred and blindness projected on Evangelical Christians. Evangelical Christians do not hate Obama, we simply find his ideas, philosophies and politics not the ones we want the nation governed by. The same goes for Hillary Clinton. Is Frank Schaeffer so blind he doesn't remember the antipathy expressed by Evangelical Christians for the actions of the Clinton administration? To accuse us of hating Obama is an offensive and outrageous lie. It's race baiting at it's worse.

Had Obama's pastor stuck with provable offenses, even were they from a Liberal viewpoint, he wouldn't have been criticized to the degree Wright's statements have been. Had he limited his rhetoric to the action and not extended it to the nation as a whole, it wouldn't have been seen as outrageous. We would have disagreed, as we do with the rhetoric of many left-wing pastors, but it still wouldn't have been something that would have raised the ire of most Americans.

Here's let's do a comparison.

Religious Right...

"If God doesn't soon bring judgment upon America, He'll have to go back and apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah!" --Ruth Graham (repeated often by many Evangelical pastors)

Religious Left...

"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme." -- Jeremiah Wright

The first quote warns of God's action and is phrased to acknowledge God's sovereignty. It doesn't demand anything, but warns. Wright's quote is based on idiocy (the government supplies drugs to Black people, really?) and more idiocy (more prisons is somehow a bad thing? Stricter law sentencing is somehow a bad thing?) then demands God's damnation, because of those delusional wrongs. We have no right to demand God damn anything. That's not our place, and because Wright fails to comprehend even the basics of what Christianity is (being a fake Christian) he therefore assumes he can demand of God whatever he wishes. Wright demands cruelty based on his own delusional hatred and bigotry, Graham warns of judgement based on a legitimate understanding of God's character. There is no moral equivalency, but people like Frank Schaeffer can't comprehend that.

Religious Right...

"...In other words, they acknowledge that human life is there, but it is an open question as to whether it is not right to kill that human life if it makes the mother happy.

"And basically that is no different than Stalin, Mao, or Hitler, killing who they killed for what they conceived to be the good of society. There is absolutely no line between the two statements -- no absolute line, whatsoever." -- Francis Schaeffer

Religious Left...

"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye. We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost." -- Jeremiah Wright

A moral equivalency? We bombed Hiroshima to end a war that would have cost a lot more lives. We bombed Nagasaki because when the Japanese attempted to communicate their surrender through the Soviet Union, The USSR immediately declared war against them, so they could then claim spoils. They finally found another route to acknowledge their surrender, and Japan is now a prosperous nation. And we batted several eyes. Americans still today debating the morality of killing a 100,000 people to save the lives of an estimated million that would have died on both sides had the war continued.

What state terrorism in Palestine? The Palestinians are the terrorists. They are the ones murdering innocent Israeli women and children, and Wright wants to defend them?!? What terrorism in South Africa. The problem there was Apartheid, not terrorism, and it was through the action of the US (misguided I feel) that it ended by allowing people who endorsed violence to come to power. Before the change in government Africans from all over the continent were trying to get into South Africa, because the standard of living there, for Blacks, was higher than anywhere else in Africa. Now they're just like any other third world toilet allowing their people to starve while hoarding US foreign aid.

As for Francis Schaeffer's comments, abortion is the moral equivalence of Hitler's gas chambers, Liberals just want to pretend it isn't, in the same way slave holders 150 year ago pretended slavery was moral because Black people "weren't real people." Odd which side Wright and so many other Blacks take, isn't it.

So was Francis Schaeffer saying the nation is as evil as Hitler? No, he was saying our actions in allowing the holocaust of abortion is as reprehensible as Hitler's actions in killing 6 million Jews.

Wright, on the other hand, is saying our actions in bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki were as reprehensible as the terrorists actions on 9/11, and we therefore deserved 9/11.

Liberals, including Frank Schaeffer want us to believe both statements are the same.

That logic-warping denial will not work on most people, and it's the wrong approach if these liberals want Obama to have any chance. But then, maybe that's the idea. Paint Obama to be as insane and demented and the worst, terrorist-loving, America-hating moonbats all under the guise of "helping" him.

At least Conservative are honest about their dislike of Obama's ideas.

Posted by Danny Carlton at March 22, 2008 10:08 AM