Scarborough Lies About Christian Persecution

Rick Scarborough has been spouting some truly crazy things on his weekly Tea Party Unity call. The latest is to claim that if the Supreme Court votes for marriage equality in the two cases it recently heard, Christians will be rounded up and thrown in prison.

The very first thing Obama did when he got elected president was pass hate crimes legislation inclusive of sexual orientation. The laws are now on the books to prosecute preachers who have the audacity to say in public what I just said from their pulpits.

How many lies do you cound in those two sentences? First of all, the president can’t pass legislation; that’s reserved for the legislature — the word might be a clue. And a federal hate crime law had existed since 1969. The only thing the amendments to that law did was provide more funding and give the FBI more latitude to work with state and local law enforcement on the prosecution of hate crimes. And that law has nothing to do with prosecuting preachers or anyone else if they don’t actually commit a violent crime. Has Scarborough notice that since that law passed three and a half years ago, not one person has actually been charged, much less convicted, for making anti-gay speech, or any other type of speech? That’s because the law does not and cannot be used for that purpose.

You will find them armed with this Supreme Court ruling, if its adverse, then rounding up anyone who says otherwise and prosecuting, perhaps with fines at first but finally with jail and imprisonment. And the laws are now, at least the foundation of laws through hate crimes legislation is in place to bring fill-scale persecution on those of us who stand for truth.

Under what law, exactly, are they going to round up Christians? Does he really think that Congress, which is about 90% Christian, is going to allow that? Or that the courts would? Of course not. But he has a spook story to tell and he’s going to tell it. That’s how you get people to send money, by lying your ass off to make them scared of things that simply cannot happen.

"I'm not aware that I judged the quality of her education . My comment(s) were ..."

Trump Awkwardly Tries to Walk Back ..."
"Yeah... which is why my working theory has been a more direct deal between Putin ..."

Is Trump Being Blackmailed?
"I didn't vote for him because that was exactly what I knew.I'd been aware of ..."

Trump’s Absurd Attempt to Blame Obama ..."
"And you know that if Obama had come out strongly with information that the Russians ..."

Trump’s Absurd Attempt to Blame Obama ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • thisisaturingtest

    It’s that solipsistic “I’m a victim!” psychology at work again. With gun owners, any gun control law, such as one requiring background checks for everybody, is aimed squarely at them as individuals. And with folks like Scarbourough, any law that doesn’t extend institutional Christian privilege is aimed at taking away their individual rights.

    I think a lot of these folks just really don’t understand that whole “freedom of religion” thing in the Constitution; they think “free exercise thereof” means by the institution of religion, giving the church a right to impose its strictures. They can’t seem to grasp that it’s an individual freedom to apply those strictures to themselves only, if that’s what they want.

  • Ulysses

    I’d like Christians to decide whether they’re the super-majority in the US and therefor the country is a Christian Nation&tm; or they’re a persecuted group huddling in fear while waiting to be dragged off to the camps. They should pick one or the other and stick with it.

  • neike

    He was quoted on Christiane Amanpour’s documentary series “God’s Warriors” on CNN as saying, “I’m not a Republican, I’m not a Democrat. I’m a Christocrat”

  • frankb

    The laws are now on the books to prosecute preachers who have the audacity to say in public what I just said from their pulpits.

    So Scarborough speaks from a lot of other people’s pulpits? He certainly gets around. More lying for Jesus.

  • At one time, I thought he was a relatively benign Rethuglican. He’s gotten worse over the past few years, as the dire predictions of an Obama dystopia have not born any fruit.

    He’s just another person on my list of “don’t watch, don’t listen to, don’t care what they say.”

    He’s kind of second-tier anyway. Really, he’s a yawner. “Who cares” is probably the most indignant I can get over him.

  • Nemo

    The trick to seeing Christians as a persecutable minority is to redefine “Christian” so that it only applies to whatever stupid tiny subset of Christians he deems acceptable. The rest might call themselves Christians, but since their theology is in error, they’re really Satanists, by his definition.

  • busterggi

    Candida Moss was generous.

  • dingojack

    Kevin (#6) – You know who else was a Yawner –

    That’s right Crazy Horse!!

    [/obscure American history joke]


  • Didaktylos

    No way are they going to chuck Christians in prison – that would constitute cruel and unusual punishment of the existing prison population

  • D. C. Sessions

    And another opportunity to ask, “and how’s that going for you?” opens. Not that it will actually be exploited, but still … such a rich supply of opportunities!

  • Sastra

    Apparently Scarborough thinks human rights are a kind of blasphemy law.

  • grumpyoldfart

    Christians will be rounded up and thrown in prison.

    Christians have been selling that idea for thousands of years and they will do so for centuries to come. Preachers love it because it creates an “us and them” atmosphere that keeps the faithful plonking money onto the collection plate.

  • mvemjsun

    It would be nice if some of those who listen to him will believe it and shut up.

  • Matt G

    How narcissistic of him to take this so personally.

    “Conventional people are roused to fury by departure from convention, largely because they regard such departure as a criticism of themselves.” -Bertrand Russell

  • Sigh!

    It’s like trying to reason with a two year-old.

    In 2002, as you recall, in Lawrence v Texas the Supreme Court struck down the prohibitions in the state of Texas and applied it across the land that no longer could the citizenry declare that sodomy was a sin.

    Umm … no it didn’t. You and your audience might just have noticed that because you have continued to vociferously proclaim it a sin with no more consequences than that other people criticize you. What the Supreme Court said was that the citizenry could not declare that sexual relations between consenting adults was a crime. The truly perverse part of their “reasoning” is that they cite the fact that our legal system (aspires) to give its citizenry freedom to do what they want as long as they don’t hurt others as evidence that the same legal system will take away their freedom to say what they like about others.

  • organon

    If I remember correctly, more than half of christians in the US support the separation of church and state. It seems it is these American Taliban Party (GoP) Theocrats who are pushing this type of irrationality. Not christians in general. Valid inductive reasoning is important too.

  • Pingback: Scarborough Lies About <b>Christian Persecution</b> – Freethought Blogs | Christian News()

  • Pingback: » Scarborough Lies About <b>Christian Persecution</b> – Freethought Blogs()

  • longstreet63

    To me, this is funny, because the moment that this came to pass; that fines for making anti-gay sermons would miraculously appear, all of these would-be martyrs would proclaim their complete acceptance of gay marriage. In fact, they always have been for it. Gayness is praised in the Bible, so how could they be against it?

    It’s what Christ would have wanted (for them not to be required to relinquish any money.)