Fischer: Christians Won’t Be Allowed to Hold Public Office

The wingnuts are inventing every imaginable ridiculous prediction about the coming persecution of Christians, all because gay people can now get married. Bryan Fischer says that soon Christians won’t even be allowed to run for office. And he assures you that he is not exaggerating at all.

“You may think that I am exaggerating, that I am hyperbolizing,” Fischer declared, “I assure you, ladies and gentlemen, that I am not, that this is the direction that we are headed … It is, before long, going to become illegal for Christians to hold public office.”

“The day is coming when it will be against the law for Christians to hold public office,” he continued. “It will be against the law for Christians to even run for public office [and Christians] will not be allowed to serve in any kind of appointed capacity in government.”

“Now why do I say that?” Fischer asked. “I say that because of what the Supreme Court did on Friday” by legalizing gay marriage.

Oh, of course he’s not exaggerating, not one bit. Who would dare accuse him of such a thing? I’ve noticed that none of these hyperbolic predictions are ever actually explained. There’s never an attempt to make an actual causal connection. It is enough merely to declare it to be true. That is how desperately the Christian right clings to their dreams of martyrdom and persecution, that the mere whispering of the words automatically makes them true, no matter how often — and the answer is always — the predicted horrible outcome never happens.

"'Round these parts we say, "Errnnjeh", accent on the "Errnn". We say the same thing ..."

Palin’s Pointless Appeal
""L'enfer, ça sont les autres (cons)"J.P Satyr"

Davis May Face Gay Man She ..."
"Oooh! Dare we hope they'll keep the deduction for churches, but not for synagogues, mosques, ..."

Republican Tax Bill Will Reduce Charitable ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • pocketnerd

    Listen and remember well, my lovelies, because in ten years the reactionaries will be insisting No True Republican™ ever opposed same-sex marriage. In twenty they’ll be claiming marriage equality was their idea in the first place.

  • scienceavenger

    Wake me when less than 99% of our elected officials claim to be Christians. Until then STFU.

  • Synfandel

    Exaggerating? Hyperbolizing? No, that’s pure fantasizing.

  • abb3w

    Run for public office? No. He might be some manner of technically correct about for Christians to hold public office; it’s long been generally unlawful for the loser of an election to assume office.

  • colnago80

    AFAIK, all the candidates for president in both parties, with the exception of Bernie Sanders, are Christians.

  • colnago80

    Re abb3w @ #4

    What do you mean? How about :

    Rutherford B. Hayes who lost to Samuel Tilden in 1876 and George W. Bush who lost to Al Gore in 2000.

  • dingojack

    ‘hyperbolizing’?!? See what dire affects Same-Sex Marriage are already having!!

    Forget destroying the very foundation of the whole universe — ‘hyperbolizing’!!!

    Dingo

    ———

    OBTW Fischsticks – banning someone of a particular religion (say Christianity, for example) would require a 2/3 majority of both houses passing a Constitutional amendment. Bearing in mind 70% of Americans identify as Christian, and that Christians are way, way over-represented in American politics — how’d you like to make a little wager on your prediction coming to pass. Say, you pay $1,000,000 to MSF if Christians are banned from public offices generally within 5 years, with an equal amount payable by me to MSF if they are not banned. Deal?

    Dingo

  • Glenn E Ross

    These fascist theocrats see that they are losing the stranglehold they have held on the laws and the institutions for centuries. They are losing their special privilege and equate that with persecution.

  • John Pieret

    There’s never an attempt to make an actual causal connection.

    Well, one possibility is that every elected and appointed officer of government has to swear an oath to defend and uphold the Constitution and laws of the US. Since people like Fischer think the Bible nullifies the Constitution and laws of the US when ever they don’t like them, an honest Christian wouldn’t run for or accept such a position knowing they could not fulfill the oath.

    Fortunately for them, honest Christians are few and far between.

  • http://howlandbolton.com richardelguru

    ” Christians Won’t Be Allowed to Hold Public Office”

    He says that like it was a bad thing.

  • mostlyharmless

    Actually, he is probably right, IF you accept his definition of “Christian” as someone who puts their interpretation of the Bible above the laws they swore on said Bible to uphold. Everyone else who calls themselves a Christian is not true Christian (in his view). It is (or if not, it should be) illegal for someone to hold office who has publicly stated that they won’t do the job the were elected/appointed to do.

  • justsomeguy

    I dunno…. there’s a history in America of laws being passed that would prohibit certain persons from serving in public office due to their unpopular religious beliefs.

    Never mind that those laws are unenforceable for being unconstitutional.

    And especially never mind that those laws were written and passed by christians, for the sake of prohibiting non-christians.

  • justsomeguy

    I dunno…. there’s a history in America of laws being passed that would prohibit certain persons from serving in public office due to their unpopular religious beliefs.

    Never mind that those laws are unenforceable for being unconstitutional.

    And especially never mind that those laws were written and passed by christians, for the sake of prohibiting non-christians.

  • D. C. Sessions

    how’d you like to make a little wager on your prediction coming to pass. Say, you pay $1,000,000 to MSF if Christians are banned from public offices generally within 5 years, with an equal amount payable by me to MSF if they are not banned.

    Didn’t realize you were that well-off, Dingo — and generous, too, to take that side of the bet.

  • D. C. Sessions

    how’d you like to make a little wager on your prediction coming to pass. Say, you pay $1,000,000 to MSF if Christians are banned from public offices generally within 5 years, with an equal amount payable by me to MSF if they are not banned.

    Didn’t realize you were that well-off, Dingo — and generous, too, to take that side of the bet.

  • Chiroptera

    Well, I do hope that people will stop voting for candidates that believe in stupid things or propose harmful policies. That would have the effect of denying US conservative Christians from public office.

  • Chiroptera

    Well, I do hope that people will stop voting for candidates that believe in stupid things or propose harmful policies. That would have the effect of denying US conservative Christians from public office.

  • http://www.facebook.com/den.wilson d.c.wilson

    Here’s a fun game to play with any of Fischer’s predictions: Replace “Christian” with “gay” or “atheist” and suddenly it becomes his fondest wish.

    It’s all projection. He’s just assuming liberals will do to his kind what he wants to do to them.

  • http://www.facebook.com/den.wilson d.c.wilson

    Here’s a fun game to play with any of Fischer’s predictions: Replace “Christian” with “gay” or “atheist” and suddenly it becomes his fondest wish.

    It’s all projection. He’s just assuming liberals will do to his kind what he wants to do to them.

  • dingojack

    [I’ll let you in on a little secret. I could have donned my best pale-blue Nehru-jacket, stuck my right-hand pinky into the corner of my mouth and demanded ‘a million, billion, bajillion zillion dollars’ with minimal risk. It’s kinda like betting the sun will rise in the west tomorrow.

    This is for two reasons:

    a) no-one is being harmed. Despite the fulmination of the right about bakers and florists being martyrs for the cause, even the most die-hard are realising that narrative is so silly it doesn’t bear even the most cursory scrutiny. Media outlets, of even the most conservative bent, are publishing articles that are extended examples of either devastating sarcasm or eye-rolling incredulity that anyone could believe such tall tales. The counter-narrative of discrimination is the favoured expression and that feeds into the wider marriage equality picture.

    b) the right couldn’t manage to get even a thousand to march on Washington on a much more saleable cause. It seems unlikely that two-thirds of the House and the Senate, 95+% of whose members identify themselves as Christians, are going to willingly give up the comfortable salary, the perks, the chauffer-driven vehicles, the mortgage on the nice holiday house in the Hamptons, the tuition for the kids at the premium schools and so on, to satisfy the lazy narratives of a shrinking section of the voter base, especially now they want to reach out by looking like ‘a man/woman of the people’ to the swing voters. Plus the two groups that really dislike the idea of marriage equality – Traditional Black Protestant Churches and Evangelicals are divided by the very issue that (probably) concerns the former far more acutely than who can marry whom – race. What with morons burning down their churches over the Confederate flag and unarmed Blacks being gunned-down with seeming impunity even inside those very churches, that’s probably more forward in their minds. The problem is that those doing the burning and shooting – most likely to be the kind of cracker that favours the latter’s brand of church. The connection of Loving and Obergefell in the narrative of anti-discrimination, civil-rights and freedom is also somewhat muting the anti-reality forces].

    Just between you and me, on the QT and definitely hush-hush.

    Dingo

  • dingojack

    [I’ll let you in on a little secret. I could have donned my best pale-blue Nehru-jacket, stuck my right-hand pinky into the corner of my mouth and demanded ‘a million, billion, bajillion zillion dollars’ with minimal risk. It’s kinda like betting the sun will rise in the west tomorrow.

    This is for two reasons:

    a) no-one is being harmed. Despite the fulmination of the right about bakers and florists being martyrs for the cause, even the most die-hard are realising that narrative is so silly it doesn’t bear even the most cursory scrutiny. Media outlets, of even the most conservative bent, are publishing articles that are extended examples of either devastating sarcasm or eye-rolling incredulity that anyone could believe such tall tales. The counter-narrative of discrimination is the favoured expression and that feeds into the wider marriage equality picture.

    b) the right couldn’t manage to get even a thousand to march on Washington on a much more saleable cause. It seems unlikely that two-thirds of the House and the Senate, 95+% of whose members identify themselves as Christians, are going to willingly give up the comfortable salary, the perks, the chauffer-driven vehicles, the mortgage on the nice holiday house in the Hamptons, the tuition for the kids at the premium schools and so on, to satisfy the lazy narratives of a shrinking section of the voter base, especially now they want to reach out by looking like ‘a man/woman of the people’ to the swing voters. Plus the two groups that really dislike the idea of marriage equality – Traditional Black Protestant Churches and Evangelicals are divided by the very issue that (probably) concerns the former far more acutely than who can marry whom – race. What with morons burning down their churches over the Confederate flag and unarmed Blacks being gunned-down with seeming impunity even inside those very churches, that’s probably more forward in their minds. The problem is that those doing the burning and shooting – most likely to be the kind of cracker that favours the latter’s brand of church. The connection of Loving and Obergefell in the narrative of anti-discrimination, civil-rights and freedom is also somewhat muting the anti-reality forces].

    Just between you and me, on the QT and definitely hush-hush.

    Dingo

  • D. C. Sessions

    Dingo — please read the part I quoted carefully. Perhaps even diagram it out.

  • dingojack

    D.C. – nope, I’m either incredibly tired or incredibly stoopid.

    Dingo

  • dingojack

    D.C. – nope, I’m either incredibly tired or incredibly stoopid.

    Dingo

  • http://Www.metalmischief.com YOB – Ye Olde Blacksmith (Social Justice Jaegerkin)

    D.C. – I’m not getting it, either. Please elaborate.

  • http://Www.metalmischief.com YOB – Ye Olde Blacksmith (Social Justice Jaegerkin)

    D.C. – I’m not getting it, either. Please elaborate.

  • whheydt

    Ban Christians from holding office? No. Ban anyone who holds an official religious position (priest, minister, rabbi, bishop, etc., etc.)? Sure. Why not? Separation of church and state. I do realize that this would wind up with having nearly every elected office in Utah occupied by a woman (not a bad thing in itself) because the LDS considers every adult male member to have a religious office, but them’s the breaks.

  • whheydt

    Ban Christians from holding office? No. Ban anyone who holds an official religious position (priest, minister, rabbi, bishop, etc., etc.)? Sure. Why not? Separation of church and state. I do realize that this would wind up with having nearly every elected office in Utah occupied by a woman (not a bad thing in itself) because the LDS considers every adult male member to have a religious office, but them’s the breaks.

  • http://www.pandasthumb.org Area Man

    That is how desperately the Christian right clings to their dreams of martyrdom and persecution…

    It’s a bullying tactic. Fischer and his ilk don’t actually want to experience oppression (something they’ve never experienced), they just want to accuse others of persecuting them to force them on the defensive. It’s possibly the purest form of hypocrisy — bully others by pretending to be bullied by them.

  • http://www.pandasthumb.org Area Man

    That is how desperately the Christian right clings to their dreams of martyrdom and persecution…

    It’s a bullying tactic. Fischer and his ilk don’t actually want to experience oppression (something they’ve never experienced), they just want to accuse others of persecuting them to force them on the defensive. It’s possibly the purest form of hypocrisy — bully others by pretending to be bullied by them.

  • John Pieret

    @18 & 19:

    Um … Dingo promised to pay $1 million if Christians aren’t banned from office …

  • D. C. Sessions

    D.C. – nope, I’m either incredibly tired or incredibly stoopid.

    As you wrote it, he pays if he’s right and you pay if you’re right. Odd terms for a bet.

  • D. C. Sessions

    D.C. – nope, I’m either incredibly tired or incredibly stoopid.

    As you wrote it, he pays if he’s right and you pay if you’re right. Odd terms for a bet.

  • thebookofdave

    I think he is correct about this. There’s even a Constitutional basis for his prediction. The original document contains a smudge in the body of text in Article VI was discovered to be punctuation. Paragraph 3 should actually be interpreted as:

    noreligious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States

    Now all we have to do to implement the No-Religious Test and transform Fischer’s hyperbole into reality is have the majority of Supreme Court justices rule themselves ineligible to occupy their own seats on the bench. Easy-peasy!

  • thebookofdave

    I think he is correct about this. There’s even a Constitutional basis for his prediction. The original document contains a smudge in the body of text in Article VI was discovered to be punctuation. Paragraph 3 should actually be interpreted as:

    noreligious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States

    Now all we have to do to implement the No-Religious Test and transform Fischer’s hyperbole into reality is have the majority of Supreme Court justices rule themselves ineligible to occupy their own seats on the bench. Easy-peasy!