Another Fact-Impaired Worldnetdaily Columnist

Craige McMillan’s only qualification, apparently, is that he’s a “longtime commentator” for the Worldnetdaily. That’s the only thing in the “about the author” section of his columns. The latest one, headlined “Leftists and Islamists Both Want You to Die For Their Cause,” is a textbook example.

It’s hard not to notice that Christianity – and to a lesser extent Judaism – are the only religions under attack in the United States and Western culture (inasmuch as the latter can be called a culture anymore). Islam, Hinduism, Satanism, Atheism, Humanism and even Kawanzaaism, although that group meets only once a year at Christmas, are all allowed to flourish without political or legal molestation.

Indeed, the law’s scales of blind justice are now being used to diminish Christianity and Judaism even while those same scales are encouraging Islam and other faiths. Courts and prosecutors hasten to require that mosques be built in communities vehemently opposed to their construction, while every roadblock is set up for new Christian churches.

We all know these things. But the question is, why are they happening?

Ah yes, another example of what “we all know” (and “we” here means people who read the Worldnetdaily) is happening that is wildly inaccurate. Not a word of this is even close to being true. Let me list the errors:

No, Christianity is not under attack, you’re just losing some of the privileges and influence you’ve come to covet.

There is no such thing as “Kawanzaaism,” even if you managed to spell “Kwanzaa” correctly.

The fact that other religions other than Christianity are allowed to flourish “without political or legal molestation” is a good thing. In fact, it’s required by that Constitution you claim to revere but know nothing about.

The fact that mosques can be built “in communities vehemently opposed to their construction” is also a good thing. Guess what? That’s true of churches too. We don’t put religious freedom up for a vote. Muslims have exactly the same right to build mosques as Christians have to build churches and that right is built into the Constitution and multiple state and federal statues too. And the notion that mosques are being built while churches are not is monumentally absurd.

But my favorite nugget of stupid in that the claim that “Courts and prosecutors” hasten to require that. This dumbass thinks that prosecutors have something to do with who gets to build mosques and churches. Hint: Prosecutors deal with crime and crime alone. They have absolutely nothing to do with anything McMillan is writing about. But he’s too ignorant to know that. That makes him pretty much the archetype of a Worldnetdaily columnist.

POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • raven

    Actually, the fundie-ism version of xianity isn’t under attack and never has been.

    They have been attacking the USA in general and normal people in particular for decades. We are just defending ourselves from toxic religion and christofascists who hate democracy and anyone who thinks.

    The fundies created the New Atheists. And are the reason that started me on the way out of xianity.

  • raven

    Courts and prosecutors hasten to require that mosques be built in communities vehemently opposed to their construction, while every roadblock is set up for new Christian churches.

    This isn’t true at all. I’m not aware of any extraordinary roadblocks set up for new Xian churches. In fact, new churches are built often in the USA.

    It’s hard not to notice that Christianity…</blockquote.

    It's hard not to notice that Craige McMillan is simply lying.

  • DaveL

    You’ll notice that when Muslims have to go to court to overcome roadblocks set up by local government, or Satanists have to do the same to exercise the same privileges extended to Christians as a matter of course, they do not count these as instances of political or legal molestation.

  • eric

    But the question is, why are they happening?

    Because you’ve decided to interpret your religion’s doctrine in a way that makes following it illegal. See Employment Division vs. Smith,* 1990, for who wins that fight. Here’s a spoiler: it isn’t the religion.

    *A case where, ironically, Scalia wrote the majority opinion.

  • howardhershey

    Prosecutors only get involved when the idiots you encourage to burn down mosques attempt to do so.

  • John Pieret

    Raven:

    I’m not aware of any extraordinary roadblocks set up for new Xian churches.

    There are occasional clashes over zoning laws but the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act keeps municipalities from using zoning to keep churches from being built within the municipality unless there is a compelling governmental reason. A typical case might be where some megachurch wants to move into a residential area and have various meetings/services every night of the week, greatly increasing noise and traffic in the area.

  • gshelley

    New churches seem to be going up all the time. I wonder if he knows of any specific examples of churches being denied planning permission, or if he is just making things up.

  • dingojack

    So let me get this right, you actually expect that, somehow, Whirled-Nuts Daily isn’t going for ‘fact-impaired‘ as their default position?!? Really?!?

    @@ Dingo

  • CR Jackels

    They city I live in has had 5 new churches built in the last 10 years, on top of the 5 or 6 we already had. Our population is only 18,000. Christians definitely have had no trouble finding places to build in Sartell, mn.

  • cswella

    Based on the number of christian churches I can count on my way to work, I’d say they’re having no trouble building anywhere they like. My parent’s Lutheran church just built it’s own senior living center.

    Yet, I know of only one Islamic Center, and maybe a couple more an hour away.

  • theguy

    “hasten to require that mosques be built in communities vehemently opposed to their construction”

    I notice the language here implies that the community themselves must build the mosque, as if it was a taxpayer-funded building. The phrase should be “hasten to require that mosques be allowed to be built in communities” etc. etc.

    Apparently, for Wingnut Daily dumbass #322, if Christians can’t block the construction of mosques, their religious liberty is being “molested” (seriously, WTH with that word choice?)

  • Kevin Kehres

    Religious liberty: The right to tell others how to behave in the name of a god that those people do not believe in.

  • Pumako

    You’ll notice that when Muslims have to go to court to overcome roadblocks set up by local government, or Satanists have to do the same to exercise the same privileges extended to Christians as a matter of course, they do not count these as instances of political or legal molestation.

    I’d go so far as to claim that Craige McMillan would consider such instances to be examples of “special privilege.”

  • anandine

    I just hope I live long enough to see an open Christian elected to public office.