There are two buttons that I proudly wear on my backpack as I travel around campus. One, which features a peace symbol and a fleur-de-lis, reads, “Make levees, not war.” The other simply reads, “The religious right is neither.” Earlier this week the religious right showed its true colors and proved the truth value of my catchy slogan. On Tuesday the president-elect of the Christian Coalition-a Washington-based lobbying group that seeks to impose conservative Christian morals through public policy-announced that he was stepping down. The Rev. Joel C. Hunter said the decision was made because of a “philosophical difference” concerning issues he thought the coalition should address. Hunter sought to focus on environmental and anti-poverty issues rather than just “moral issues” such as the anti-homosexuality and anti-abortion campaigns. It seems slightly ironic to me-to put it nicely-that Hunter is being ousted for wanting to focus on helping the poor and taking care of our environment. I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that one of the few positive aspects of Christianity was that it inspired people to help and show compassion for others, especially those most in need. However, it seems that for the time being the Christian Coalition will continue to promote bigotry and restrict the liberty and civil rights of others under the guise of a “pro-family” agenda. It is this very attitude that has left many Christians feeling disenchanted with the organization that has struggled in recent years to retain membership. This year chapters in Alabama, Iowa and Ohio left the coalition. Like their Republican counterparts, the problems of the religious right have been exacerbated by a culture of corruption. Recent scandals involving prominent Christians have led to further distrust among the population over the hypocrisy of the religious right. Evangelical leader Ted Haggard was exposed for-and later admitted to-having purchased illegal narcotics and also for engaging in a long-term sexual affair with a male prostitute. As a result Haggard resigned as president of the National Association of Evangelicals, which includes 45,000 churches and represents 30 million people. Haggard, who is believed to have had weekly meetings with President Bush, was a vocal critic of homosexuality. Of course despite being a homosexual himself, he still continues to hold prejudiced attitudes towards those who share his sexual orientation. This self-hatred has led Haggard to seek “treatment” from a three-person “restoration” panel. This is absurd. Perhaps this panel should focus on “curing” African-Americans of their “blackness” or women of their “femaleness” since these things also seem to warrant discrimination. Another recent but less publicized scandal involved Kent Hovind, the founder of Creation Science Evangelism. On Nov. 2, Hovind was found guilty on 55 counts of tax fraud and faces up to 288 years in prison. Hovind is famous for his efforts to “debunk” evolution and promote creationism. He argued in his defense that he and his employees were workers for God and therefore did not have to pay taxes. This recent event highlights another problem that faces the religious right. Last November the creationist-excuse me, intelligent design-movement came upon a major road block in their effort to bring religion into public science classrooms. U.S. District Judge John E. Jones, a conservative Republican and Christian, ruled in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District that the teaching of intelligent design was unconstitutional. After considering the evidence presented in the trial, Jones described intelligent design as “a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism and not a scientific theory.” Recently I had the privilege of meeting Barbara Forrest, philosophy professor at Southeastern Louisiana University and author of “Creationism’s Trojan Horse.” According to Forrest, who was a key witness in the Dover trial, her role as a witness was to present the history of the intelligent design movement and how it grew out of earlier creationism. The most damning evidence she presented was that after the 1987 Supreme Court ruling of Edwards v. Aguillard, which made the teaching of creationism in public schools unconstitutional, the popular anti-evolution textbook “Of Pandas and People” was edited to change every mention of “creationism,” “creation science” and other cognates to “intelligent design.” Her testimony essentially established that intelligent design was simply a new name for creationism. Forrest said that as far as politics is concerned, the intelligent design movement will now have a more difficult time achieving its agenda. “[Jones’] opinion was so strong and such an unambiguous ruling that other judges will pay attention to it when handling intelligent design cases,” Forrest said. However, Forrest warned that they are continuing the fight and are now attempting to export creationism to the international community. What does all of this mean for the future of the religious right movement? With the Democratic takeover of Congress and the aforementioned problems facing the religious right, we have found ourselves in a great time of change. Americans are fed up with the way things have been going. If the religious right do not make an effort to follow suit and change their focus to important issues such as poverty and environmentalism, they will continue to lose power and favor with the American public.
—–Contact Erik Browne at ebrowne@lsureveille.com