Defining dominionism down: Good’s Kristin Rawls reports on a nice, attractive young couple who are helping to give dominionism a nicer, more attractive face.
They’d prefer we don’t say “dominionism,” though, because in their ideal of a Christian America governed by biblical laws privileging Christianity, no one would be forced to convert:
The Mitchells practice a form of politicized conservative Christianity that most observers would call dominionism. Libertarian-leaning supporters of state’s rights, they would like to see government reconstructed from the ground up under “Christian laws” such as the abolition of abortion. But they are reluctant to call themselves dominionists, noting that they do not support “compulsory conversion” to Christianity.
Coffee With Jesus: The Top Ten News Stories of the Year
Ed Brayton: “Bill Donohue Has Momentary Lapse of Insanity”
Grace at Are Women Human?: “Mark Driscoll Apologism Bingo”
This is why I didn’t want to be seen reading that Bob Larson book: “Bolivian police say brother and sister killed sibling in attempted exorcism”
Dave Bazan and David Dark: “Unsettled Questions”
Coleman Glenn: “The Seventh Blind Man of Indostan”
American Buddhist: Defining our terms.
James F. McGrath: “Answers in Racketeering (Does Ken Ham Think Noah Was a Millionaire?)”
Note to David Barton: Some people can pull off the black T-shirt-and-leather-jacket look. You are not one of those people. This is partly due to your haircut and mostly due to your constantly lying about everything.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In