Stocking stuffers

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.

"*looks to North Korea where KJU's uncle was killed by a "firing squad" of AA ..."

LBCF, No. 190: ‘Something happens’
"She's a public person in a position of power and responsibility. If you truly can't ..."

LBCF, No. 190: ‘Something happens’
"Your addendum is an argument that non powerful people can't stand up for what's right ..."

LBCF, No. 190: ‘Something happens’
"A few legislators have called her out on doing so, it seems to be a ..."

LBCF, No. 190: ‘Something happens’

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Anonymous

    I had an email exchange with Molotov Mitchell on his Facebook page — that is, until he banned me for pointing out some lies (er, I mean discrepancies) in his account of the Uganda bill.  He’s a twisted thinker, as I recount here:

    Also, he’s on record as loving his gay friends.  Add that to his support for executing gays, and you’ve got a man whose love for his gay friends is so great he wants to see them dead and in Hell. 

    (Hope you don’t mind me shilling my blog in the comments section!)

  • Rikalous

    You know, we do not tolerate bullying of our children on the school
    yard. Why do we tolerate it among adults? Why is there no legal
    authority to appeal to that can force bullies to behave whether they are
    inclined to obey or not?

    Because there isn’t any easily identifiable class of people as far above bullying adults as adults are above bullying children. So we make do as best we can with things like laws about harassment which hopefully stay on the tightrope of powerful enough to solve the problem without being so powerful they get turned into the new problem by the unscrupulous.

  • Anonymous

    Rob! :D  I’ve enjoyed your blog! (Didn’t expect you to comment here, though I suppose a lot of progressive bloggers pass through here at some time or another.)

  • Sgt. Pepper’s Bleeding Heart

    If people are going to be converting to Christianity, how about the Mitchells do it first?

  • I have a pretty terrible memory, but I seem to recall a gay panic
    defense working in my hometown of super-liberal Honolulu within my


    *rubs forehead, observes desk still shaking from the contact*


  • If you don’t mind smaller communities, Vancouver Island has mild winters by Canadian standards, and is more affordable than Vancouver and environs.

  • Kat Walker

    “She describes her politics as “Ron Paul-Christian [..]”

    In other words, not actually Christian.  Seriously Paulbots, just break off and form your own country already, WE DON’T WANT YOU.

    “I’m sick of white liberals trying to dictate the way that black people live in other countries.”

    But it’s apparently the job of white conservatives to encourage the murder of black people in other countries?  Oh, okay.

    That couple reminds me of a younger version of Vox Day and his wife Spacebunny.  He even works at WND and has a douchey nickname, too. 

    The only difference is Vox is content with being a grumpy, ineffectual armchair bigot with a small legion of online crazies to stroke his ego, while Molotov actually has charisma and seems like he wants to make a career out of being a cult leader.  Also, his wife seems to be able to semi-function in decent society whereas Spacebunny regurgitates such insipid, foul word vomit on a regular basis that I honestly think she’s also mentally ill. 

    Maybe she used to be a feminist and God is punishing her? 

  • Anonymous

    Tempting, but I’ve already got kin in Ontario.  They can’t say no to a refugee, right? :P

  • Anonymous

    For those of who are not from the US – is there a difference between dominionism, and reconstructionism ?

    (There used to be a site with plenty of links to what people like Rushdoony *et al.* said (their version of ?) dominionism involved: said links are now unfortunately dead.)

    Rushdoony’s Dominionism was strongly Calvinist; the intention, AFAI understand it, is to revive the Law of Moses in modified form & to abolish the Constitution. Think Calvinist Sharia law. The Mitchells do not seem to be intending anything like as drastic – they sound as if they are social conservatives who would like something resembling a modernised US Protestant form of mediaeval society.   

  • I always thought that Reconstructionism was a very liberal form of Judaism, while Dominionism is close to Christianity (the Christian equivalent of the Islamic Courts movement, or something like Wahhabism). I don’t think it’s possible to set up a medieval society operating under the Law of Moses that doesn’t involve abolishing the Constitution.

  • Anonymous

    Thanks for the quick reply :) The abolition of the Constitution by this group is intended.

    This page on the Constitution:

    is from a site that includes a page with excerpts from Rushdoony:

    Rather interestingly, the notion that the US is meant is to be a Christian country is affirmed, but is *not* based on the supposed intentions of the Founding Fathers. This is worlds away from the Mormon belief that the Constitution is Divinely inspired.

  • Consumer Unit 5012

    So it’s really just theocracy with all the good parts taken out?

    Pretty much, yeah.  I get the impression the only reason people like that are so hysterical about the ‘imminent threat’ of Shari’a Law in the USA is because they desperately want to establish THEIR brand’s theocracy _first_.