(no subject)

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

I just received the following email in my inbox. I know the OPs in this community are supposed to include commentary on any excerpted material, but I’’ll beg for some indulgence in this case. I’d really rather not share me reply to the sender until some other folks have weighed in. I’m just very interested in what everyone else has to say about this kind of campaign propaganda.

Herewith the redacted missive:

 
Hello Everyone,

I am writing on behalf of [candidate].  She is running for congress against anti-Christian 22 year incumbent [opponent] in the Xth congressional district. Before you make assumptions about the candidates, read their positions, then read them again.  What the 2 candidates have said/done may surprise you.  As believers, it is our duty to do all we can to restrain evil. I was asked by a member of a church to put together the attached fact sheet comparing [candidate] and [candidate].  Attached you will find the fact sheet in 2 formats - .doc for ease of access and email distribution, and .pub (ms publisher) for printing.  They are the same, but I don't know if everyone has MS Publisher, but just about everyone has Word, or OpenOffice and can open a .doc file.  If someone wants a plain text version of the file, have them email me at [sender’s address].

If your church has a literature table, and you could put this on it, or in the bulletin, that would be great.  If you just want to email it to people in your church or friends in other churches, and ask them to pass it on, that would also be great.  We need to spread the word about [candidate} being a candidate that can beat [opponent], and her being one that has the right beliefs.

God bless,
[sender’s name]

Does anything about this letter strike you as particularly problematic?

Comments

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

I suppose there's a question in here somewhere but it kindof eludes me.

If the question is "Do you approve of such election campaigning tactics?", then I'd say I don't see a problem with it as it's related to the right of free speech.

If the question is "Should internet spam be more regulated" I'd say not as a compulsory means, but there should be spam-filter software widely available so that people who don't want that sort of crap in their Inbox could avoid getting it. The same applies to people ranting about Glenn Beck and the likes spamming their TV screen, well you have the remote control next to your arm-chair, so you're welcome to use it, etc.

If the question is about religion and its involvement in politics ("anti-Christian"? WTF...), then I don't think it should be part of politics but the truth of the matter is, that it already is so we have to learn to cope with that without getting excessively worked up about it.

I really don't know what the question is, and maybe that's why putting some commentary in your OP has been made such a basic principle here.

Your turn now.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Well yes, the purpose of that requirement is focus.
Focus is essential.

But fine.

My take:

MS Publisher sucks. Big time. If I wanted to print something I'd still use Word.

Can't think of anything else right now. ;-)

[thies.livejournal.com]

Does abything about this letter strike you as particularly problematic?

religion in general tends to do that

[hey-its-michael.livejournal.com]

This.

[http://users.livejournal.com/aviation_/]

Well, calling this letter "problematic" would imply that I am in a position to suggest solutions for any problems I might see. My biggest problems are that I don't agree with it and it uses appeal to fear. But... so what? This isn't new to either politics or religion. Click ignore if you don't agree with it...

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I'm curious as to what you want us to find problematic. I can see a few things here that might raise your hackles, but I don't know what angle you're going on.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Hackles, are those like "haunches." That Massachusetts Bay jargon dialect throws me ;P

[devil-ad-vocate.livejournal.com]

"Does anything about this letter strike you as particularly problematic?"

Hmmm: emails have to be printed out before they can be used as toilet paper, and printer paper is way too scratchy?

[rogerdr.livejournal.com]

That's why I've invented Toilet-Pro 2100. It prints on any commercial brand toilet paper with biodegradable ink. Even in color! Perfect for the whole family. Available as soon as I get the 'quilting' problem fixed.

[mijopo.livejournal.com]

If your church has a literature table, and you could put this on it, or in the bulletin, that would be great. If you just want to email it to people in your church or friends in other churches, and ask them to pass it on, that would also be great.

I suspect the IRS might take issue with the church distributing political material on its literature table, etc., particularly if it's doing so in a partisan fashion. (That said, if a church isn't being "political" in the sense of trying to address social injustice, I think it's pretty much failing as a Christian church, so I think the IRS puts churches in a pretty difficult position.)

[a-new-machine.livejournal.com]

Well, I think they can say "This is what the Bible says. Here's where the two major candidates line up on these positions." There's a slight difference between that, which technically allows individual choice, and more explicit "Vote for X!" campaigns from the pulpit. But then I can't be certain of that, though judging by the syllabus I can say with greater certainty sometime in October.

[medea34.livejournal.com]

anti-Christian = evil.
trying to oust a 22 year incumbent because they don't have the right beliefs.

that said, without being able to read their positions and read them again - I have no idea if the incumbent is actually evil or just not in step with this person's beliefs.
however, if a church wants to encourage it's members to vote for reps that reflect their positions (rather than not voting, or blindly voting for the guy that's been there for 22 years) I has no complaint with that.

[hey-its-michael.livejournal.com]

Having churches help candidates gain votes strikes me as ridiculously problematic. Another reason to do away with tax-exempt status for religion.

[torpidai.livejournal.com]

Having churches help candidates gain votes strikes me as ridiculously problematic. Another reason to do away with tax-exempt status for religion.

Why am I reminded of the Late Great George Carlin?

Stuff doing away with the Tax exemption, Let's Prohibit religion :) (We all know prohibition works right?)

Can we at least force those who suggest they are any way religious to avoid XYZ (Dogs on bus with a Muslim driver springs to mind) that they can at least pass a real knowledge test of their own "Good Book"?

Now, where to find some hungry Lions ;)

[caerfrli.livejournal.com]

well for one thing it confuses subject with object. Then there's where did the sender get your e-mail? Was someone at church selling lists?

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

The email for my congregation is readily available -- and I serve on plenty of committees.

Where did you spot the subject/object confusion?

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

I guess the obvious question would be, is it true? Has someone with an anti-Christian bias been elected to office for the last 22 years? If that is true, then the letter is just an appeal to another interest group to defend their particular set of interests, albeit in a kind of sophomoric kind of way. If its not true, then it is really scummy and pretty twisted. I'd go as far to say it was anti-Christian.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

Yeah, what bugged me the most was characterizing someone who is "pro-choice" as being "anti-Christian." His positions may not jibe with what many Christians may consider to be morally right, but that doesn't make him "anti-Christian" -- which to me would imply something like blocking the construction of a church or publicly ridiculing the gospel.

[mendaciloquent.livejournal.com]

The first thing that struck me is that, within all probability, the candidate not favored by the author of the letter is unlikely to be "anti-Christian", in any meaningful sense of the word, nor unambiguously evil. More importantly, it is difficult to understand (although predictable to observe...) how someone ostensibly concerned with "evil" could at the same time rather nonchalantly promulgate what are probably inflammatory and inaccurate misrepresentations regarding a political candidate. Likely the candidate doesn't deserve it. Of course, I am assuming this referring to a race in New Jersey, so I could be wrong.

The second thing that came to mind is the specificity with which the author proposes to engage in political influence. I was under the impression that this was a legal (if not an ethical) no-no when it came to the use of church property (insofar as it is recognized by the state).

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

Yup. It's interesting that you used the word "inflammatory." In my reply, I asserted that the religious right is a primary threat to the preaching of the gospel. One of the folks on the distribution list chided me for using "inflammatory" rhetoric. I found it interesting that this person used that word to characterize my well-supported assertion -- but didn't find it "inflammatory" to characterize a political opponent as "anti-Christian."

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Well if a church is sponsoring this, it could violate IRS rules about that sort of thing. Calling a 22 year office holder "evil," seems rather over-the-top silly and fear mongering.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Calling a 22 year office holder "evil," seems rather over-the-top silly and fear mongering a traditional republican campaign strategy.


ftfy

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

We all know that many "believers" put their particular groups founders to shame.

Same is true of many Americans.

[dierdrae.livejournal.com]

"Evil" and "Right Beliefs."

[chessdev.livejournal.com]

The "right beliefs"? For Congress??

So now we have religious litmus tests for a candidate...?

Oh Theocracy -- he we come...

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Indeed. Next thing you know people will be advocating a legal system where someone ground sufficiently in the exegesis of the Pauline Epistles can be a perfect philosopher king, raising us from the depths of backward Ignorance into a newer and more enlightened age.

In lieu of yet another bloody religious debate:

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

If he's Baptist Church of the Lord Schism of 1915 Sub-Schism of 1963 then he should be burned as a heretic forthwith.

Re: In lieu of yet another bloody religious debate:

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Or to put a slightly different spin on it-the biggest and most glaring flaw is that it ignores that the Gods set up an Augustus to reign as the universal sovereign of the world and that in the True West we divine from the entrails of the sacred bovine the future of the known world lest Jupiter Capitolinus smite us from the Red Planet. The only legitimate ruler in the West is the singular Augustus, and any other idea of a political system is imported from those damned Easterners with their funny ideas and complete atheism.

All *true* Westerners bow to an image and offer incense. The ideas of those people of atheist religions? They'll never catch on. Why I hear some idiot rabble rouser named Yeshua in that distant province was crucified (every damned one of those Judaeans is named Yeshua it seems) preaching some funny ideas the last few years. We all know civilized upstanding citizens of the West will never embrace that Eastern godless religion worshiping its barbarian mountain-god.

[onefatmusicnerd.livejournal.com]

If your church has a literature table, and you could put this on it, or in the bulletin, that would be great

Distributing this in the bulletin would violate Section 1.501(c)(3)-1(c)(3)(ii) of the US Code?

[chron-job.livejournal.com]

I think the relevant section is...

(iii) An organization is an action organization [i.e. can't be exempt] if it participates or intervenes, directly or indirectly, in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office.

Seems to me the wiggle space here is "on behalf". If you say "One of these dudes is evil! Here's their voting record, you figure it out!" they may be able to tip toe around the problematic aspect of true advocacy.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

One of the respondents to my reply took the position that the Church has to speak out as "Moses, the prophets and the baptizer" did in their own times.

Care to hazard a guess as to how I refuted that parallelism?

[chron-job.livejournal.com]

> Does abything about this letter strike you as particularly problematic?

Totally. Why use a Doc and a Pub when they could have just sent a PDF?

;)

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

Adobe is anti-Christian. Duh!

[mylaptopisevil.livejournal.com]

Does anything about this letter strike you as particularly problematic?

They should have just included a high resolution PDF for either one. Everyone has access to Adobe Acrobat.

I'd talk about the rest but really at this point it's hard to be shocked that so-and-so is claiming that candidate X is bad because they're the wrong/no religion, not to mention the pseudo-inference that they're properly participating in some kind of holy war by voting against the person.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

I was asked by a member of a church to put together the attached fact sheet comparing [candidate] and [candidate]

I assume the second "candidate" was supposed to be "opponent".

The only thing I see problematic is suggesting to put it in the bulletin or on the literature table.

[reflaxion.livejournal.com]

What about this letter isn't problematic?

[ghoststrider.livejournal.com]

Does anything about this letter strike you as particularly problematic?

Oh, I dunno, the overly blatant references to God and the overly blatant theological aim of this missive? Nah, that couldn't be it, right?

[prog-expat.livejournal.com]

"They are the same, but I don't know if everyone has MS Publisher, but just about everyone has Word, or OpenOffice and can open a .doc file."

*Mac Sys Admin mode* .RTF FFS! */Mac Sys Admin mode*

Does anything about this letter strike you as particularly problematic?

Yes, the whole thing, but it can all be summarized in this bit:

"If your church has a literature table, and you could put this on it, or in the bulletin, that would be great. If you just want to email it to people in your church or friends in other churches, and ask them to pass it on, that would also be great."

This is against the letter of the law, at least if your church wants to remain exempt from taxes. It's also in grotesque violation of the spirit of the law, including the US Constitution (Article VI, Paragraph 3):

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

A common mistake

[russj.livejournal.com]

You are making a common mistake. The constitution does not prevent an individual from opposing a candidate or campaigning for another because of their religion.

Article six prevents religion from being a Qualification for office. The voters may choose to vote for anyone they wish--and for any reason whatever.

That said, my own church (Mormon) will not allow any campaigning to be conducted there--nor will it endorse political candidates. I think we learned our lesson about mixing religion and politics after being driven out of New York, Ohio, Missouri and Illinois. (It's a little-known fact that Joseph Smith was a candidate for president of the U.S.A. in 1844, when he was murdured.)

The spirit of the U.S. Constitution is to allow people to worship or not worship, according to their own conscience, and to treat all beliefs equally before the law--neither favoring some, nor penalizing others.

[yamamanama.livejournal.com]

Nothing in particular, just the entire thing in general.