7 Things @ 11 O’clock (7.17)

1. It’s a Bad Thing that Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is lying about his longstanding opposition to the Violence Against Women Act. But it is a Good Thing that Sen. Mitch McConnell feels it is necessary to lie about his opposition to the Violence Against Women Act.

2. Brian Ervin of Urban Tulsa weekly uses the allegations against the heirs of Oral Roberts as a hook for a long look at the finances of more typical Christian pastors and local churches. “Lifestyles of the Rich Evangelists” is the attention-grabbing headline, but the subhed tells the real story, “an inventory of the way some churches handle fiduciary responsibility.” It’s a story of checks and balances, accountability structures, and used Honda Accords. A good reminder that (alleged) swindlers like Robert Roberts or the prosperity hucksters of Preachers of L.A. are the exception, not the rule.

3. As a Pennsylvanian, I am represented in the U.S. Senate by Bob Casey and Pat Toomey. That’s kind of depressing. But as an American wage-earner, I’m also represented in the U.S. Senate by Elizabeth Warren — and I’m very pleased by that. One of Sen. Warren’s current battles is an attempt to reinstate the Glass-Steagall banking regulations originally passed as part of the New Deal. I’d summarize what that entails for you, except that I couldn’t do as good a job of it as Sen. Warren does herself in the CNBC video posted yesterday by Talking Points Memo.

After being forced to surrender the argument that this re-regulation of the big banks was unnecessary, the hosts took a different tack, arguing that Warren’s bill was politically impossible. Her response to that is pretty terrific, so go watch the video, but what struck me here was the host’s attempt to compare Warren’s proposal to the 37+ meaningless votes in the House of Representatives to “repeal” Obamacare. That’s apples and oranges. There’s a big difference between the tea party’s posturing through hollow symbolic gestures that aren’t expected or intended to result in actual policy and Sen. Warren’s long-shot, uphill proposal that she is committed to seeing enacted (re-enacted) as law. She’s not pushing this bill to provide a slogan for her next 30-second TV ad. She’s pushing this bill because she thinks it’s good policy.

4. Speaking of long-shot, uphill, worthwhile efforts against entrenched powerful interests … here’s the latest news from my one-time employer, the Evangelical Environmental Network: “Evangelical Scientists Issue Faith-Based Call for Congress to Address Climate Change.”

Last week, 200 self-identified evangelical scientists from secular and religious universities sent a letter to the U.S. Congress calling for legislation to reduce carbon emissions and protect the environment. The signatories, all of whom hold master’s or doctorate degrees in scientific fields, cited the Biblical teachings of charity and compassion for the poor and the scientific evidence of increased extreme weather events to make the case for climate legislation.

The scientific case they make is overwhelming. The biblical case they make is unassailable. I’m not sure that will matter, because insufficient scientific evidence and insufficient biblical understanding are not the basis for Congress’ inaction on climate change any more than they are the basis for the climate-change denialism embraced by millions of non-scientist white evangelicals. The climate denialists in Congress and in the church are not motivated by ignorance or by a lack of compelling argument, so supplying more information and better arguments isn’t likely to change their position. As Garrison and Douglass both often said, “it is not light that is needed.” Ignorance of the scientific consensus or of the biblical teaching is not the problem.

EEN’s Jim Ball seems to recognize this, realizing that the substance of the letter is less likely to matter than the institutional authority wielded by its signatories. “To have evangelical scientists, people of faith, saying to the evangelical community that you can trust this science is quite important,” Ball said. “It’s all a matter of trust.”

This is the gatekeeper epistemology of the evangelical subculture, which is less concerned with the question of what we are able to know than with the question of what we are allowed to know. Reason, evidence and sound exegesis don’t matter nearly as much as appeals to authority. And I’m afraid that for both Congress and for “mainstream” white evangelicals, the authority of John Boehner, James Inhofe and Mitch McConnell trumps the authority of Wheaton, Calvin, Messiah, Eastern, Gordon and all the other respectable evangelical colleges and universities represented by the signatories of EEN’s letter. The effect, I’m afraid, will not be to make climate science more credible, but to further erode the tribal legitimacy of these pointy-headed intellectual academic institutions.

Very Much Related: The flabbergasted, profane frustration expressed in this Louis CK routine captures a big part of why I no longer work for the Evangelical Environmental Network (although I wish them every success, however unlikely).

5. And speaking of ideological blindness leading to a rejection of science … “Generally at odds with solid medical evidence.” Ouch.

North Dakota already has spent more than $52,000 defending the 2011 state law, according to records obtained by the Associated Press. Records show that Dr. Donna Harrison, the president the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, has billed the state more than $49,000 to act as an expert witness.

In his ruling Monday, [East Central Judge Wickham] Corwin was highly critical of Harrison, saying her “opinions lack scientific support, tend to be based on unsubstantiated concerns and are generally at odds with solid medical evidence.”

But who needs science or evidence when you can bill taxpayers $49,000 because Republican Jesus?

6. Darrell Dow shares video of the debut of a new song at a fundamentalist church. It’s got a good beat and you can dance to it — or, rather, you could if dancing were allowed at this church. “I salute their three-chord musicality and cringe at their theology,” Dow writes. “At least they seem like they’re having fun.”

The song also serves as an excellent illustration of how Rapture-mania serves the tribe’s need to draw lines separating itself from the world around them — from people who may otherwise be morally and ethically indistinguishable from real, true Christians: