Franklin Graham goes the Full Olasky

Bruce Watson of AOL asks “What Would the Rapture Do to Real Estate Prices?

In New York City, for example, a 49% drop would reduce the city’s population to 1910 levels. In the short run, this would cause property values to plummet in the city, but the effects would quickly spread beyond mortgages and rents. …

This is assuming a post-Rapture world in which the political and economic systems would remain relatively stable — admittedly, a somewhat unrealistic expectation. … However, even if everything else stays the same, one thing is clear: The Rapture would have an apocalyptic effect on real estate.

And in one loosely written column, Watson has already spent more time on post-Rapture world-building than Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins spent in the whole of a 16-volume series.

Speaking of the Rapture …

The photo here looks like it might have been taken immediately following some mass vanishing event, but actually it’s from a huge tea party rally planned for South Carolina last week. Well, it was planned to be huge. They expected 2,000 people and wound up with 30. That’s not a rally. That’s barely enough for a soccer game.

Speaking of disappointing and woefully inadequate numbers …

Robert Parham says “‘Let the Churches Do It’ Is a Deceptive Myth.” He quotes Franklin Graham, among others, as a promoter of this deceptive myth. Graham said:

A hundred years ago, the safety net, the social safety net, in the country, was provided by the church. If you didn’t have a job, you’d go to your local church and ask the pastor if he knew somebody that could hire him. If you were hungry, you went to the local church and told them, ‘I can’t feed my family.’ And the church would help you. That’s not being done. The government took that. And took it away from the church.

That’s got all the hallmarks of Marvin Olasky’s bogus mythmaking:

  • Laughably false and easily disproved claims about the Golden Age of the past? Check.
  • Attempt to spin the church’s abandoning its responsibility as a case of government usurpation? Check.
  • Ridiculously inflated claims about the scale, capacity and expertise of faith-based assistance? Check.
  • Deliberate exclusion of the opinions of those actually providing that assistance, both today and “a hundred years ago”? Check.
  • Fundamental confusion that imagines all duties and obligations as mutually exclusive? Check.

Yep. Graham is five for five. That’s the Full Olasky right there.

Parham then turns to Wayne Flynt to explain what this would mean, for example, for Alabama:

When Flynt started making speeches about a just tax system in Alabama, he was accused of wanting government to solve all the problems.

“When people insisted that I was a socialist, that I wanted government to solve all the problems, I would offer this alternative,” said Flynt. “OK, I accept your argument. There are 10,000 communities of faith – Muslim, Jewish, Baptist, Baha’i, Buddhist, Shintoist – in Alabama… Let’s divide 10,000 communities of faith into the 740,000 [poor] people.”

He asked, “How many does your church get?”

The retired Auburn history professor pointed out that most of those faith communities had about 100 members. That meant that each faith community would get between 50 and 100 poor people to look after.

The “deceptive myth” Parham is addressing was most influentially promoted in a deceptive, mythmaking book by Olasky called The Tragedy of American Compassion. It’s a profoundly misled and misleading work that follows the basic outline above, portraying America before the Roosevelts as a paradise in which generous churches sufficiently cared for the poor with generosity and tough love and no one ever went hungry except lazy people who deserved it. For a useful counterpoint, see Norris Magnuson’s Salvation in the Slums: Evangelical Social Work 1865-1920. Magnuson covers the very same ground, but he provides an honest assessment of the actual scope of the poverty and deprivation of the time — most of which remained beyond the reach of the laudable, but vastly inadequate work being done by the churches.

More importantly, Magnuson cites the same primary sources as Olasky, but he does so in full and in context. That illuminates how selective and misleading Olasky’s use of those sources is. The devout believers Olasky cites to support his claim that the government has no role in helping the poor are nearly all revealed, in Magnuson’s book, to have been advocating and pleading for the larger government role that Olasky is arguing against.

Olasky is a partisan ideologue, but that’s precisely why I don’t think his mendacious book is evidence that he is lying. I think it’s a sad case study in what happens if one is, primarily, a partisan ideologue and the way that can blind one to anything one doesn’t wish to see. The tragedy of The Tragedy of American Compassion isn’t that Marvin Olasky is telling lies, it’s that he’s repeating lies he sincerely believes. (Call them “deceptive myths” if you’d prefer to be more euphemistically polite.) That and he’s trapped in an either-or framework of mutually exclusive responsibilities which prevents him from imagining that both the state and the church are responsible for those in need and that these mutual responsibilities are complementary, not competitive.

Anyway, speaking of Marvin Olasky …

The Randian Calvinist editor of World magazine belatedly weighs in on the controversy surrounding Rob Bell’s Love Wins, dubbing Bell an example of the “self-hating evangelical“:

Among the self-haters are those who display virulent opposition to the existence of churches that are not emergent, or don’t meet in a house, or are not radically redistributionist, or are not something other than standard.

Yes, “radically redistributionist.” He really talks like that. He really thinks like that.

And that’s what keeps him from realizing that what he describes here as “self-hatred” is actually pity and sadness for what people like him have become and the shame they’ve thereby brought to our evangelical family. I don’t hate myself, or my evangelical faith or heritage. What I hate is the selfish stupidity that people like Olasky foster in themselves and in their followers by using slogans like “radically redistributionist” as though they were quoting Jesus. I’ve seen how this weird devotion of theirs to an ideology of unbridled greed is a choice that makes smart people dumb, kind people cruel, good people bad.

And to paraphrase Dean Wormer, stupid and cruel is no way to go through life, son.

To be embarrassed by the enthusiastically stupid and cruel members of our evangelical family who have become our most vocal representatives doesn’t make me a “self-hating evangelical.” If Stephen Prothero is right, it puts me in the same camp as the Rev. Billy Graham. The iconic preacher and longtime friend of Jesus and Johnny Cash is now 92 and, Prothero notes, is suffering the indignity of having his eldest son going on TV and dragging the family name through the mud by spouting off the Full Olasky. “Franklin Graham is embarrassing his father“:

If you want to see how American evangelicalism has lost its way, you need look no farther than Billy Graham and his son Franklin. Billy Graham was a powerful preacher of the gospel. Franklin Graham is a political hack.

"Buchanan tartan!http://www.scotlandshop.com..."

A February fundraiser
"That's probably a good assessment of their opinion of themselves.I was dealing with something similar. ..."

A February fundraiser
"Upvoting for pointed accuracy..."

A February fundraiser
"And a human skeleton. NOVA did a special on it. Very cool."

A February fundraiser

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Michael P

    Like anyone in New York would actually get Raptured.

  • Anonymous

    Well as a christian this always hurt to read how people are selling out their faith.

    Which brings me to doctor who:

    I had to think about how in the future the church is protecting human colonies and how badly they got slaughtered by the weeping angels or being erased by a crack in the universe.
    That was a fictional example of the church and yet they despite incredible odds they were trying to do the right thing.

    I mean when something as weird as the millitant space church in the future is somehow more inspiring than the real thing there is something terrible wrong.

  • Anonymous

    That’s not a rally. That’s barely enough for a soccer game.

    Hey Fred that are the numbers for the public when they are playing american football in the rest of the world.

  • In other Franklin Graham news, Former Aid Worker Flavia Wagner Sues Samaritan’s Purse After Being Kidnapped In Darfur.

    Wagner has brought formal charges against the U.S. evangelical charity
    Samaritan’s Purse for allegedly ignoring warnings that the Abu Ajura
    area was unsafe for aid workers, Reuters reports. (…) The lawsuit also accuses Samaritan’s Purse leader Franklin Graham of
    refusing to use an insurance policy to pay the ransom to free Wagner
    from her captors.

  • LL

    I’m still kind of amazed (doesn’t happen often anymore) how many evangelicals/fundamentalists/whatever can’t see how deeply compromised they are by their slavish devotion to the Republican party (and it is mostly Republicans, though I am aware there are a lot of Democrats who try to sound as Republican as possible for the sake of their reelection campaigns).

    And I do mean “slavish devotion.” Many of these people are voting in direct contradiction to their own well-being, because they’ve been told how evil “socialist” government programs are and they want to be sure to toe the party line, lest they be scorned by their fellow adherents. It gives me a very low opinion of either their intelligence or their morality.

  • Well, all the children would…which would certainly piss off a lot of New Yorkers. That’s never a good idea.

    Here’s an idea for a rapture novel. After the Rapture, a group of pissed-off atheists team up to strike back at God for taking their children.

  • Lori

    Among the self-haters are those who display virulent opposition to the existence of churches that are not emergent, or don’t meet in a house, or are not radically redistributionist, or are not something other than standard.  

    So I guess that according to Word magazine “self-hating evangelical” is a synonym for “1st century Christian”. Good to know. 

    Also, you know what’s radically redistributionist? A system in which the top 1% have 24% of the income. That giant sucking sound you hear is the modern American economy vacuuming up money from the poor and middle class to shower it on the richest of the rich. The level of income inequality that we have is not some God-created natural state. It’s the result of decisions. Bad, bad decisions that need to be corrected.  

  • I’m always amused that the RTCs always assume that *they* will be among the Elect.  Seems to me that making that assumption would take a person right out of the running.  Pride, much?

    Also, effect of the Rapture on real estate prices in NYC?   Zilch.  Everybody knows that RTCs (and Real Americans, for that matter) don’t live in big cities (*especially* not NYC) — they’re all out in Flyover Country.

  • Anonymous

    The Republican party is a strange mix of Big Business and the Religious Right.  BB wants to funnel money into their pockets, and the RR basically just wants to restrict abortion as much as possible.  So they have struck a strange deal, where BB will pretend to care about “Family Values” in exchange for the votes of the RR which are needed to keep them in power.  And part of this deal is that when the RR suffers financially, they agree to blame it on other poor groups rather than the actual people who screwed them over in the first place.  This is where racism comes in, although it’s certainly not the only tactic.  The RR gets angry about alleged welfare queens taking government money, because the RR wants that government money for themselves.  They have agreed to never advocate increasing taxes for BB, so they feel like it’s a zero-sum game because they refuse to ask their corporate overlords to pay their fair share.

  • Rikalous

    According to this video by the Young Turks, polls show that most Americans consider themselves conservative, but are very much in favor of progressive policies. I think Hanlon’s razor applies here.

  • Ken

    And in one loosely written column, Watson has already spent more time on post-Rapture world-building than Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins spent in the whole of a 16-volume series.

    While still managing to miss the point.  Sure, he mentions the likelihood of societal breakdown, but what the Rapture really means is that the world is coming to an end.  It really won’t matter at the point how much you paid for a two-bedroom condo in the East Village.

    Hum, there’s a possible twist on the apocalypse story.  What if after the Rapture everyone took Matthew 19:21 seriously?   The entire world would be trying to sell everything, but no one would want to buy lest they be encumbered by possessions at the end.  It could be a bit like “The Bottle Imp” by Robert Louis Stevenson.

  • Anonymous

    When they write the book on American Christianity a key point will be trying to find the exact moment Christ was kicked out of it. Because seriously, a proto-socialist radical as the figurehead of untrammeled greed? Wow.

    And churches can look after the poor, but churches can also decided that if you’re gay, brown, a woman, or any number of unacceptable qualifiers they don’t have to and so long as they are wholly privately funded they don’t have to. That is one of the biggest reasons you need a federal social safety net. So that if the soup kitchen that believes it’s more important to hate gay people than follow Jesus’ teachings turns you away you won’t starve to death.

  • Lori

     According to this video by the Young Turks, polls show that most Americans consider themselves conservative, but are very much in favor of progressive policies. I think Hanlon’s razor applies here.  

    In fairness, there has been a vigorous 3 decade long campaign to redefine Liberal as “slightly to the left of Ho Chi Minh” and also, inexplicably, “Hitler”. If you believed that you’d describe yourself as Conservative too. 

    Yes, people who believe that are stupid, but when practically the entire political and media establishment is marinating the country in dumbass sauce all day every day it’s more difficult to be smart than it should be.  

  • Here’s an idea for a rapture novel. After the Rapture, a group of pissed-off atheists team up to strike back at God for taking their children.

    Technically, I suppose, at that point they would not longer be atheists, but I can certainly see there being some…fallout.

    BTW, what is the age cut-off for the Rapture? At what point do you no longer automatically get taken up?

    (Also, do all Rapture believers believe all children get taken? My father, a devout Catholic, nearly had an aneurysm watching some guy on TV talking about how he didn’t know if his three-year-old was ‘right with God’.)

  • Anonymous

    If I’m remembering right it’s under 12, I think the LB kids series spin-off has a 12 year old or two. And more horrifyingly has a character whose parents got killed in one of the Rapture day accidents, and naturally, they gloss over the fact this poor kid’s folks got a one way ticket to Hell.

  • Anonymous

    I think Olasky is using “radically redistributionist” to refer to the church in Acts, i.e. proto-socialist, not merely a left-leaning position on income inequality. It’s part of a larger group of people who wish their evangelical churches were more liberal and less like a rock concert, which he calls “self-hating evangelicals.”

  • “dumbass sauce”
    Monitor cleaning bill on the way…
    ;)

  • Matri

    In New York City, for example, a 49% drop woul-/blockquote>
    BWAHAHAHAHAHAAA!! 49 percent! Bwahahaaa!!
    Oh man, I can’t even continue this thought, I’m laughing too hard. Wahahahaaaa!

  • Amaryllis

    From what I’ve seen, it’s a matter of dispute among the pre-millennial Rapture-Ready. Some believe that all children below an “age of accountability” will be raptured. Anyone above that age will be judged individually. That age might be expected to be around twelve-ish or pre-puberty, or around seven when most kids have begun to develop their ideas about right and wrong, or even, in the case of this poor man and his even more unfortunate toddler, as soon as they’re out of early infancy and capable of any independent action at all.

    Others believe that children below whatever age it is, will only be raptured if their parents are. That is, children too young to be accountable for themselves are included in their parents’ worthiness or lack thereof: judgment goes by household.

    And I’ve googled it, but I still can’t quite figure out what an “emergent” church is, or why it’s a bad thing.

  • Meh, Billy Graham’s name didn’t have too far to go before it got to the mud as far as I’m concerned. Google “Billy Graham and Nixon”.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t think ‘atheist’ and ‘post-Rapture world’ belong in the same sentence. Soon’s we figured out it had been the Rapture, we’d all convert to antitheism.

  • It’s only anecdotal, but having served as a Pastor in a modern American city, I can tell you that the church was easily overwhelmed by the needs of the needy. Whatever we tried to do, whatever I tried to do, for individuals down on their luck, was both inept and mostly un-helpful. The most frequent help was a request for money, and I was taken as often as I actually helped. I was taken because I didn’t have the resources to do background checks and because, as most clergy are, I was and am a people pleaser. 

    At the same time, my research into one social group making it through hard times with the church convinces me that the church prior to the Roosevelts only helped the “deserving poor.” One leader of the Swedish church commented, following the Chicago Fire of 1871, that the only Swedes who were lost in the fire were the ones who ought to have been lost – and the only poor who didn’t get help following the fire were the poor who didn’t deserve help.

    That kind of judgmentalism – which still prevails in some quarters of relief work – excludes anyone who has mental, psychological, sociological problems. Any woman who bears a child out of wedlock. And of course, anyone infected with the gay.

  • Anonymous

    Franklin Graham seems to have not noticed the difference betweens someone who offers spiritual advise to the rich and powerful and someone who is a rich and powerful person’s spiritual advisor. The former is a preacher, pastor, and prophet while the latter is a courtier.

  • It should be pointed out that America’s NUMBER ONE ENEMY OMG WTF BBQ are groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Islamic Brotherhood. How do those groups stay popular in the Middle East? Simple, they do charitable services for the poor over there. In other words, the conservative utopia where religious organizations help out the poor is exactly what we most fear happening in Egypt and already hate about Gaza and Lebanon… 

  • Matri

    You know, these people are going to go into conniptions on Halloween.

    The rapture didn’t occur, the world didn’t end, and now the world is mocking them with a holiday that celebrates demons & monsters.

    They’d be in conniptions if they didn’t go catatonic.

  • And I’ve googled it, but I still can’t quite figure out what an “emergent” church is, or why it’s a bad thing

    I think maybe it means they just show up, kinda spontaneous-like, without letters of  marque or caveats from the scribes, as if people could talk to God all by themselves and then talk to their neighbors about it. What could be more dangerous than that? Think The Creature from the Black Lagoon

  • And I’ve googled it, but I still can’t quite figure out what an “emergent” church is, or why it’s a bad thing

    I think maybe it means they just show up, kinda spontaneous-like, without letters of  marque or caveats from the scribes, as if people could talk to God all by themselves and then talk to their neighbors about it. What could be more dangerous than that? Think The Creature from the Black Lagoon

  • Consumer Unit 5012

    When they write the book on American Christianity a key point will be trying to find the exact moment Christ was kicked out of it. Because seriously, a proto-socialist radical as the figurehead of untrammeled greed? Wow. 

    Around 1964, according to Brad Hicks. 

  • Anonymous

    This is also one of the reasons the Black Panthers were popular back in the Days of Aquarius; they set up daycare centers, food kitchens, and medical aid stations.  Often all we hear about is the violence, but they did a lot of community good, too.

    Greg Mortensen has been controversial lately, but something he said in “Stones into Schools” is very apt.  He noted, as you did, that when the Islamic Brotherhood is the only group to come into your poor village and offer to feed and educate your sons for free, you’re going to shrug off the indoctrination that goes with it, because there are no alternatives.  We need to provide alternatives, not bombs.

  • If you were hungry, you went to the local church and told them, ‘I can’t feed my family.’ And the church would help you. That’s not being done. The government took that. And took it away from the church.

    This attitude seems to be oddly common among the sort of people who would try to turn our govenrment into a church, who claim the US is a “Christian nation”.

  • Cossacksare

    Not much to say about this issue, but this article from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution seems appropriate for this website: http://blogs.ajc.com/uga-sports-blog/2011/05/25/mark-richt-says-decision-to-sell-lake-hartwell-property-was-christian-motivated/

    It’s nice to see someone actually putting their money where their mouth is. 

  • Jenny Islander

    When I hear people say that charity should go back to the churches, I think of the answer I gave to that one guy who was insisting that us horrible rich plutocratic moneygrubbing organizations should be taxed to redistribute our piles of ill-gotten, stagnating wealth:

    When we get the costumes for our annual Christmas pageant out of the church attic, the first thing we do is brush off the snow.

    We collect food and toiletries for the local women’s and children’s shelter and make sandwiches for the men’s shelter.  If they had to depend on us for more than that, they would go under.

  • In December of 1986, we – my parents, and I, who were the only ones living there at the time – had a house fire. While the house remained structurally sound, it was completely gutted on the inside, and what the fire and smoke didn’t destroy, water damage from putting the fire out took care of destroying. (Including my kick-ass Wolverine poster. I still miss that thing.)

    Our local (Lutheran) church began accepting donations, and pleged to donate the collection from the Christmas Eve service to us. Further, the ELCA pledged to provide matching funds up to $5,000.

    (Randomly, my mom just called, and I asked her how much we ended up getting.  It was about $3,500 all together.)

    (There were also some other efforts in the wider community to help us out with things like donated food, clothing, and so forth.)

    Despite the fact that some of the donated clothing was truly hideous, even by 1986 standards, this generosity was both helpful and deeply appreciated.

    After all, it took several months for the insurance money to come through, and in the meantime we needed to find a place to live, which involved taking on the new-to-us burden of paying rent, and we had to replace all of our furniture, cookware, and so forth.

    But the thing is, while the loss of our home and belongings was rather life-altering, and the support of the church helped us regain our footing, the fire didn’t exactly leave us destitute. My dad was employed, and our insurance premiums were up-to-date, and in the worst case, as we did for about a week or so, we could have stayed with my sister. Without the support of the church and community, we would have struggled for a time, but, eventually, we would have gotten back on solid ground.

    But if conditions had been different – if the insurance money had been delayed further, or hadn’t come at all, or if my dad had also been unemployed – and we didn’t have any means of support beyond what we got from the church, that support wouldn’t have gotten us very far.

    Further, the fact of the matter is that we were members in good standing of the congregation; I know of other people in the community who were not members of the congregation of that or any church who, when in similar – or even worse – dire straits, received no church assistance at all.

    I suppose that not being members of the church marked them as the “undeserving poor,” but the fact remains taht while I would in no way fault or dispute the generous and charitable spirit of churches – having experienced it firsthand – it’s clear that they church simply cannot provide an adequate safety net.

  • It sounds like a bit of internet fiction called “The Salvation War“.  It is more or less an apocolpytic Rapture scenerio, but humanity decides to Not Go Gentle with it and a war between the mortal realm and the forces of heaven and hell breaks out. 

    Remeber that one episode in the second season of Buffy when the big-bads of that season raise a horrible demon who could not be harmed by “any weapon forged” and was only “contained” by the loss of an entire army many centuries ago?  The one Buffy handily gibbed with a shoulder-mounted anti-tank missile?  Imagine that kind of scenerio on the scale of a modern world-war. 

  • Matri

    Oh yeah, I read the first book. If there’s one thing we humans know how to do, it’s gib stuff. Into teeny tiny pieces.

    Then set it on fire.

    Then gib it some more.

    And then if you really piss us off, we’ll use our other hand. We might even bring in the nukes.

  • Michael P

    “We dump toxins into our air and water to weed out the weak! We detonate nuclear weapons in our only biosphere! We nailed our god to a tree! We are the Human Race; don’t **** with us!”

  • Anonymous

    One of the reasons I started on the path away from my church is that my church and all the religious people I knew used charity only as a way to exert control over the people who needed help.  I loved doing volunteer work, but any time I tried to do it with my youth group, my school’s Christian club, or any other religious group, there was a very heavy emphasis on using it as a platform to convert people.  They were always one-time events, and I think that if they offered anything long-term, they would not be willing to continue helping people who didn’t convert within a certain amount of time.

    I volunteered weekly at a soup kitchen.  There were some other regular volunteers, and occasionally groups would come in to help out.  By far, the church groups were the most selfish.  They would always serve the smallest scoops of food, and then afterward would decide how to divvy up the leftovers between themselves.  Any time that a group wasn’t there, we would give away any extra food for the needy people to take home.  It was clear that the church groups cared less about helping people and more about their image.

    I was also extremely outraged when my very own church kicked out a homeless man who had been sleeping in our lobby, but then went on to spend tens of thousands of dollars to add a fancy new addition to our building.  The only excuse that I got was that the fancy new rooms might lure people in who might then be converted.  But honestly, when people think that conversion or “being saved” is the only thing that matters, and that it matters more than actual life, then we should be wary of relying on these people to provide what people need.  I’ve heard to many lazy selfish people say that no amount of food, shelter, or clothing has any meaning if your soul isn’t saved.

    Religious-based help is nearly always conditional, and that’s why we shouldn’t rely on it as a society.  Nobody should be forced to convert to a religion just to get enough food to eat.  Nobody should be coerced out of or into a relationship just to get shelter.  Nobody should have to dress a certain way or read certain books or use certain language just to get help they need to live.  Maybe I’m just cynical, but I haven’t seen many religious-based charities that don’t try to use their position to influence or outright bully others.

  • Lawguy1946

    So if the elder Graham was so good, when did he come out against segragation loudly and continuously?

  • Matri

    Remind me of this.

  • Lunch Meat

    “Emergent Church” is a very popular topic at my alma mater. It generally (as far as my understanding goes) refers to a church plant that forms out of the visions and needs of the community and the members, instead of being tightly controlled by the expectations of what the leadership thinks a church, and its members, programs, classes, building and ministry, “should” look like.

  • Sgt. Pepper’s Bleeding Heart

    @banancat, what you describe is no good; no arguments here. But for what it’s worth it’s not universal. Far, far too common but not universal.

    I am a proud member of one of the largest charities in the country. It was founded by religious people and has a religious ethos, but no formal ties to a church, and we explicitly don’t proselytise. The only requirement to get help is that you have need. Interestingly, a bunch of people have no idea that we have a religious basis at all, even though “Saint” is in the name!

    I volunteer with the arm that goes out on the streets to help homeless people. There was a recently a survey of people who attend the service, asking what they liked and didn’t like. Overwhelmingly, the top two ‘likes’ were that they feel that someone cares about them, and that we don’t talk about God.  We’ve lost quite a few potential volunteers over the years, who want to use the service to evangelise, or who can’t handle the fact that the same people come back night after night, for years on end, and we don’t tell them that they need to stop taking drugs or get off the grog to continue to get services.

  • Patricksauncy

    “they’re all out in flyover country”

    It’s called Real America, and, if you say that one more time, you aren’t invited to my Alaskan tea party.

  • Patricksauncy

    “they’re all out in flyover country”

    It’s called Real America, and, if you say that one more time, you aren’t invited to my Alaskan tea party.

  • Patricksauncy

    Thank you for screwing up the markup tag. I now know how to block quote!

  • Patricksauncy

    See also Nation of Islam in 1960s US. Conservatives love that faith-based organisation.

  • Matri

    Thank you for screwing up the markup tag. I now know how to block quote!

    You’re welcome.

  • I think the LB kids series spin-off has a 12 year old or two. And more horrifyingly has a character whose parents got killed in one of the Rapture day accidents, and naturally, they gloss over the fact this poor kid’s folks got a one way ticket to Hell.

    Um, that finally penetrated my brain.

    There’s a…kids series spin off?

  • Sgt. Pepper’s Bleeding Heart

    I enjoy the fact that Real, True Christians don’t live anywhere outside the US.

  • Daughter

    I blogged about the topic, “But what about charity”–and why it’s no substitute for a robust social safety net, in three parts: Part 1Part 2, and <a href=http://tacomagreenmama.blogspot.com/2011/04/but-what-about-charity-part-3.html.

  • Daughter

    I blogged about the topic, “But what about charity”–and why it’s no substitute for a robust social safety net, in three parts: Part 1Part 2, and <a href=http://tacomagreenmama.blogspot.com/2011/04/but-what-about-charity-part-3.html.