let it all collapse, the icon for the www.punkerslut.com website
Home Articles Critiques Books Video
About Graphics CopyLeft Links Music

Politics Based on
Religion, or What
is Generally Called
Religious Tyranny

An Open Letter By Punkerslut
to the Traditional Values Coalition (TVC)

From PeaceLibertad Blog
Image: From Peace Libertad Blog, Edited by Punkerslut

Start Date: January 21, 2011
Finish Date: January 21, 2011


     Your definition of traditional values is quite simple and direct. Your organization's purpose: "TVC believes America’s strength is in her churches. Pastors and their churches are not barred by law from being involved in the making of public policy. Traditional Values Coalition provides a multitude of information for Christians and pastors, to equip them with the information they need to be educated on issues and on the representative form of government."

     And... "The Summing Up: Traditional Values are based upon biblical foundations and upon the principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence, our Constitution, the writings of the Founding Fathers, and upon the writings of great political and religious thinkers throughout the ages." What if one of those things disagreed with the other? Like, what if one of the Founding Fathers, or all of them, didn't believe in the Bible? After all, you believe that "A moral code and behavior based upon the Old and New Testaments."

     Thomas Paine, one of America's founding fathers, didn't believe quite that at all: "What is it the Bible [Old Testament] teaches us? — rapine, cruelty, and murder. What is it the [New] Testament teaches us? —to believe that the Almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married; and the belief of this debauchery is called faith." (From the book "The Age of Reason.")

     From Benjamin Franklin to Thomas Jefferson to Ethan Allen, you're going to find very skeptical voices concerning the validity of the Bible. From questioning the value of any organized religious group, as in Ethan Allen, to doubting the value of Christ entirely, as in Benjamin Franklin. It seems like an unusual group to bring together: the writings of those who openly mocked the Bible, and... the Bible.

     There are other contradictions: "Individuals may be free to pursue such behaviors as sodomy, but we will not and cannot tolerate these behaviors." So, which is it? Are we free to do what we want, or should other people refuse to tolerate others trying to be free? What I think you meant to say is, "We want to give you the impression that we are opposed to big government. In reality, we want to invite the police officer, the judge, and the governor into your bedroom to see what books you read, what you're attracted to, and what you do in your own privacy."

     "We do not believe it is loving to permit someone to kill themselves by engaging in a self-destructive behavior." You apply this to homosexuals, even though many homosexuals have lived quite long, vivid lives for the past two or three thousand years. And would you apply this universally? What about conservative Christians who do not believe in blood transfusions? What about Sunday schools that don't teach contraception? What about allowing children to be abducted, abused, and molested by the members of the clergy, and then covering it up? Yeah, it doesn't seem like you're mentioning any of that.

     Oh, there was a section on how Planned Parenthood had their "Molester Cover Up Exposed." It was quite hilarious to read what exactly that means. According to what I read, it means not reporting a thirteen year old girl getting an abortion to the state, because she violated Pedophilia laws by having sex. Not that sex ever happened in Planned Parenthood, or anyone in Planned Parenthood was involved, etc., etc., just "She's pregnant, so she obviously had sex, so they obviously know it, so they obviously are covering it up by not reported that she had sex at some point in her life."

     It's more than ironic. We hear about "child molester coverups" being exposed all the time, but wait -- oh, yeah, it's people in YOUR ORGANIZATION who are caught doing the coverup! It's the Christian churches that are abusing children, and the Catholic Church that is treating its herd of candle-bearers like an international, prostitution cartel. Again, contradictions. Perhaps the word needs defining: it means holding belief in two ideas, with the truth of one idea proving the falsehood of the other, or vice versa.

     On one hand, you make a bunch of false headlines about a "child molestation coverup," which turns out to be nothing of the nature. On the other hand, when it comes to many, very real cases of coverup of child rape, you're very quiet and shy. There's no "international child rape ring exposed behind the doors of all our catholic churches!" No, I don't see that headline anywhere on your website. Instead, because some health clinic isn't reporting one of its patients' histories to the state so she can be arrested, that counts as a "child molestation coverup."

     Please, correct me if I am wrong, or if I have some defect in reasoning.... but it seems like you don't really care about what happens to those children at at all, and you're just propping them up to revitalize your cause, like some barbaric hoard hoisting the dead bodies of their fallen soldiers, and carrying them to the battlefield like an oriflamme. Absolute, guaranteed proof of widespread coverups of child rape within the mass of churches across the globe? Not so important. Planned Parenthood not reporting patient histories to the state? Coverup of child rape, of course.

     But if you believe the Bible, it may make some sense. In chapter 31 of Numbers, god ordered the kidnapping of 32,000 children, to be taken as sex slaves of Mosses' invading armies. If this is acceptable, then lying about your opponents and calling them child rapists isn't much worse by any means. The contradictions don't end, though...

     "Love And Hate: The Bible teaches us that we are to love our enemies and do good to those who persecute us. We believe it is a loving response to oppose behaviors that destroy individuals and families. It is not loving to allow someone to kill themselves or other individuals." Oh, so we're going to abolish the military and all forms of armed forces in the United States? No? You're talking about "pornography, drugs, abortion, and sodomy."

     I don't think pornography has killed anyone, and as for drugs, it is their criminal status that makes them dangerous. Abortion was the exact same way, and with its legalization, it actually can save the mother's life when complications occur. Finally, sodomy... Or, what is a religious codeword to vilify gays. The fact that you can't even use appropriate language in the public sphere to describe it shows how much you're interested in truth. Oh, and what compassion you show for gays, by describing them as "killing themselves or other individuals" by completely safe behavior.

     You sound like a British Imperialist having concern for "those poor Indians, who live like savages in the jungle, raping and murdering each other all how they like -- if only we take over and genocide the worst of them, things will be better for all of them!" First, you don't know a thing about the "savages" who you describe as yourselves as being "moved by compassion" to act for. And second, no matter what you may have said about it, you have not yet made any genuine concerned effort to defend the interests of those that you "care" about so much. It is like you have joined a gathering of slaveholders, and upon finding an unclaimed slave, you shout, "But I will love it the most, so quick, help me put my chains on it, before it goes wild and tries to kill itself, other slaves, or us!"

     A love that has a thousand words, but not an ounce of weight in its action -- ten thousand keystrokes behind your monitor, at your home, living off of lobbying donations and campaign funding, without a single moment where you try to "do good to those who persecute us." It is the other way around, from what I can see. You are the persecutor, who make up a vast majority of society, and the common people are the persecuted. You accuse them of persecuting you, because they love in a way that you don't approve. And from this, we can make one accusation of you: not wholeheartedly believing in contradictions, because you can't figure it out. But, encouraging believe in contradictions, because it benefits you, and it's easier than genuinely thinking and feeling for those who people who make up society.

     Thank you, I patiently await a response. I have read through many of your pages, I think this letter and response won't be too much. Thank you, again.

Andrew Carloff

join the punkerslut.com
mailing list!

copyleft notice and
responsibility disclaimer