"Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem"

The Roundhead Watch
January 15, 2001

The following article was scheduled for release the middle part of November 2000. Due to matters linked to the Presidential Election of 2000, and subsequent voting problems in New Mexico, Florida, and elsewhere in the United States, this article is being published late.

The Radical Right
and the Christian Reform Movement
Part 1: Understanding the Motivation Behind the Movement

I. THE OWNERS MANUAL

"The 'Owner's Manual' for the Constitution is the Bible"
Tony Nassif, National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, California Christian Coalition

There is a very subtle, yet ominous overtone in this statement, which was made by Tony Nassif of the California Christian Coalition, to the annual meeting of the Christian Coalition in Washington, DC, October of 1998. The statement which Nassif made to the Coalition, is noteworthy, because the remark is a direct reflection and statement, about the primary driving philosophies and main agenda of the ongoing Christian reform movement, which is being orchestrated by elitist proponents of the Christian radical religious right.

One of the driving beliefs and philosophies propelling this Christian radical religious right movement, is the firm belief that the United States Constitution has been totally misconstructed and improperly written, and that Christianity has been unfairly excluded from the direct running of government in the United States, for long enough. Footnote: [1]

This on-going feeling by extremist Christians, that they have been excluded from the running of the government and Nation is nothing new. At the time the US Constitution was being drafted there was a great deal of debate going on throughout the young Nation, and on the Constitutional Convention floor, about how much of a role religion should have in the government, and in the running of the Nation. The overall sentiments of the general masses of people at the time, was that religion had played a harsh and bitter role in the running of government's and Nations for long enough, and that religion was one more form of tyranny which needed to be kept out of the new US government. In the end, this bitter debate over the involvement of religion in government, was won by the overwhelming will and sentiments of the general masses of people, and the US Constitution and the US government were created in such a manner as to erect an absolute Wall of Separation between Church and State [government]. Footnote: [2]

Christian religious extremists who had been lobbying those in the Constitutional Convention, for a place in the running of the government and the Nation, immediately felt excluded from government by this Wall of Separation, created by both ARTICLE VI and the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. These bitter feelings of being excluded from the running of US government, because of religion, continue today, by both extremist Christians and other religious zealots.

Why do these religious extremists feel like this and what drives them?

This radical right wing 'Orthodox' Christian based nationalist social-movement, strongly believes in and fully supports, and pursues their orthodox Christian goals anytime they are given the opportunity to exploit them. At first glance, this type of attitude sounds like the typical attitude of any other movement, but a closer look at the subject reveals quite another issue and attitude entirely. To those ends, and for other reasons which are related to the Christian right wing agenda, the Christian radical religious right sincerely believes that it is totally necessary for the Christian Bible to become the "Owner's Manual" to the US Constitution, and how the US Constitution is to be defined and interpreted. The attitude with this orthodox Christian reform movement, is that God and "His Lordship's" Biblical Law's, are the first to be obeyed, and that Biblical law's are supreme and first in order of importance and priority to that of the US Constitution. And, that the Constitution and the US government are to be treated as being under the power and authority of "His Lordship's" earthly stewards as put forth in the Bible, and by mandate of the Church.

The central and main objective of the Christian radical religious right, is to make their God and Bible the dominant influence on the whole of the United States, and the rest of the World.

"The church has a mandate from the Creator to be a dominant influence on the whole culture"
John Whitehead, Rutherford Institute, Council For National Policy

So, how does one set about accomplishing the task of making one's God and beliefs the "dominant influence on the whole culture" [society]?

The Christian reform movement has been going on for a long time prior to 1982, but in 1982, John Whitehead addressed this very question of how to accomplish the task, and gave the following answer; "Getting involved in local politics will eventually mean Christians running for office. This will include attending and eventually taking control of party conventions where grass-roots decisions are made." The concept is simple; get religion into the running and everyday business of government, and the running of the Nation, by having Christians take control of politics at the local level first and then spread their influence throughout the rest of the Nation, and to establish and build a network with which to accomplish this task. Footnote: [3]

So, the Christian radical religious right set about the task in the early 1980's, of putting together a better, stronger ,and more formidable network to build their power base on, and to carry out their Christian religious agenda of making the Bible, "The 'Owner's Manual' for the Constitution...." Out of this religious agenda and goal, has been born such groups and organization's as the Rutherford Institute, Chalcedon, Inc. and Chalcedon.edu, the Leadership Institute, the Leadership Training Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Council for National Policy [meetings closed to both the media and the general public], CNP Action, Inc., the American Center for Law and Justice, the National Religious Broadcasters, the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family Ministries, National Coalition for Life, the Gun Owners of America, Inc.[heavily pro-gun], National Right to Life Committee, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, the American Freedom Coalition, Christian Voice, The Bob Grant Talk Show WOR, Stratford Capital Group, the US Taxpayers Party, America: A Call to Greatness, Citizens for Honest Government, Free Congress Foundation, Christian Legal Society, Annenberg Public Policy Center, Christian Activist Network, Citizens' Intelligence Digest, Eagle Forum, National Right to Work Committee, Citizens for a Sound Economy, American Enterprise Institute, Conservative Caucus, Project Reality, America's Voice, America's Survival, Inc., Institute for Media Education, Western Journalism Center, Landmark Legal Foundation, Life Issues Institute, Inc., Accuracy in Media, Tax Freedom Institute, Pepperdine University, Salem Communications Corp., Christian Film and TV Commission, Accuracy in Academia, Robertson School of Government, Free Republic, Judicial Watch [Larry Klayman], Concerned Women of America, USA Network, Pacific Justice Institute, Center for Military Readiness, Southeastern Legal Foundation, High Adventure Ministries, International Right to Life Federation, The Christian Alert Network, The Committee to Restore the Constitution, Freedom Foundation, Inc., American Renewal, The Federalist Society, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Christian Coalition, Christian Broadcasting Network, Trinity Broadcasting Network, Liberty University, People of Faith, Listen America, the American Family Association, Amway, and many other groups, universities, other educational institutions, textbook publishers, and other types of organizations and businesses who are dedicated to, "...nothing less than [Christians] reclaiming the whole system." [Note: The Leadership Institute; Morton C. Blackwell is founder and president of the Leadership Institute, the Leadership Training Institute, and is the executive director for the radical religious right's extremely important Council for National Policy(CNP), and he has been actively pursuing the Christian right agenda for at least the last four decades. Morton C. Blackwell, during the 1960's, began the active process of looking for, identifying, training, and then placing young Christian "extremist" conservatives into the political arena at all levels. Since the 1960's, Blackwell's sophisticated recruiting and training machine, has produced over 18,000 highly trained and strictly educated religious-political activists, who in turn have helped to build the larger and more complex religious right network which exists today.]

Knowing that education and the legal system could be a barrier to Christians "reclaiming the whole system," John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute, made this statement about education, and the reason and need for Christians to have control of the public educational system; "The public education system, which includes the entire educational structure up through the university level, must be reinstilled with Christian theism... If there is little hope of revamping public education--and this is more than a probability--then Christians must remove their financial support from the system."

Education is a very important issue to the Christian reform movement, because for the reform movement to succeed and work, is has to survive over the long run, and the only way to achieve that long term goal is to start educating individual's from the earliest age onward. These children and adult students, must be instilled with "Christian theism," and an extreme sense of duty and pride to nationalism, under the Biblical rule of law. Remember, for this religious movement and many others, it is the Bible or their religion first, and the US Constitution second. Christian extremists believe that one of the main obligations and duties of the Christian movement, in order for the movement to succeed, is the advancement of Christian teaching and education, in all forms, both in the public and private sectors.

II. THE RULE OF LAW

Whitehead had this to say about the legal system; "The challenge of the Christian attorney is to be a vocal, dynamic spokesman for the true legal profession--the one with Christ at its center--and to stop at nothing less than reclaiming the whole system." Currently, several law schools in the United States, such as the one at Pepperdine University, are under the direct control and supervision of extremist elements of the Christian radical religious right. Many of the Christian radical religious right Republican members of Congress come from this Christian right legal system, such as US Representative Bob Barr from Georgia, who before entering Congress was a US Attorney. Also, several past and some current State and Federal Judges, like Judge Bork, are under the direct control and sway of the Christian right.

The rule of law, which was so proudly put forth by many Congressman with admitted and proud ties to the Christian radical religious right, during the House of Representatives "kangaroo-court-inquisition" impeachment of President Clinton, was not the rule of law we have come to love and know under the US Constitution, it was really the rule of law under the Bible. Anyone that does not understand this fact or disagrees with it, only need's to read the following remark made by former President Ronald Reagan, to the Annual Convention of the National Association of Evangelicals, in 1983, to better grasp the reality of which rule of law the Christian right is practicing and following: "Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged." These Christian radical religious right Congressman, like US Rep Bob Barr, US Rep Tom DeLay, and US Senator Trent Lott, want the Nation to believe that it was the constitutional rule of law which they were following in the impeachment of Clinton, but it was really the Biblical rule of law being applied as the operating guide to the US Constitution, which the Christian radical religious right Congressman were applying to the Clinton impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives.

The application of the rule of law under the Bible, and the Bible being used as the "Owner's Manual" and definitive guide to the US Constitution, has happened not only with the impeachment of Clinton, but also in the creation of thousands of Congressional Bill's in both Houses of Congress. This misapplication of religious beliefs onto the constitutional rule of law, continues to be used today by numerous Christian radical religious right members in Congress, and at all levels of government; local, state, and National. Footnote: [4]

The US Constitution is supposed to be the Supreme Law of the Land--not the Christian Bible. If this is the case, then why does the Christian radical religious right's, reform movement, teach that the Bible is the supreme law of the land, even over that of the law's of the Constitution?

First, the Christian reform movement is really a Christian 'Reconstructionist' movement, based on the Calvinist and orthodox Christian fundamentalist belief, of the total and absolute sovereignty of God, or simply put; "God is God. He is the supreme ruler of the universe." The God referred to by this reference, under orthodox Christian belief, is the 'one and only' God of the Christians. Belief and acceptance of other monotheistic Gods and beliefs is not tolerated or accepted.

There are those within this Christian reform movement, who believe very strongly that this movement which they follow, is not based on the teachings and principles of orthodox Christianity, and "catholic orthodoxy." This is far from the reality of the truth. In the words of the Reverend Andrew Sandlin of Chalcedon, Inc., author of A Reconstructionist Manifesto, Nov. 1998; "Because we are confessional Calvinists, we Reconstructionists are orthodox Christians. We hold to the Apostles, Nicene and Chalcedonian Creeds. We therefore embrace catholic orthodoxy. We are committed to the historic Calvinistic doctrines as expressed in the Reformed confessions and catechisms-Westminster, Dordt, etc. We believe God saves sinners; He does not help them save themselves... It means we believe the Bible is true because God says it is true-in the Bible! The Bible is true because it is the word of God, not because we can prove it is the word of God.." Footnote: [5]

The followers and supporters of these Christian radical religious right beliefs, believe that God and the Bible are true, without any argument or exceptions, and that the authority of their Christian God and Bible extends to all of humanity, world wide. In the Manifesto, Reverend Sandlin expresses this basic concept and practice very clearly: "...Reconstructionists do not spend time arguing about whether the Bible and Christianity are true. We argue that they are true, and that therefore all humanity should repent, place faith in Christ, and submit to His Lordship." This Christian extremist belief that God is "His Lordship" over earth and all of humanity, effectively places a title of Nobility on God, and declares that God is above all, and therefore, everything else is submissive to the will of God and "His Lordship's" supreme authority, the Christian Bible, and of course, the stewards of the Church.

The Christian reform movement or Christian 'Reconstructionists' as they sometimes like to refer to themselves, put all of their faith in God and the Bible, and believe in total and absolute submission to God through Biblical authority. The law of God comes first and foremost, and those lawful requirements of God, are spelled out in 'His written word,' the Bible. According to Reverend Sandlin and the Manifesto; "We hold that to limit God's authority over all of life is to deny His sovereignty. We believe Christ is Lord over all things. We believe we are called like the first Adam and mainly in the strength of the second Adam, our Lord, to exercise dominion in His name throughout the earth... First, the law is the external regulation of society . It keeps external sin in check. The civil magistrate thus is required to enforce God's law. Second, the law is the tool that drives sinners to Christ... Third, the law is the standard for sanctification... Reconstructionists do not believe there is some "higher" (or "deeper") law than the law of the Bible." To the many followers and believers of the Christian reform movement, this clearly spells out that the law of the Bible, is of a "higher" power and authority, than that of the US Constitution.

What does all of this mean for those with the Christian reform movement? Again, in the words of the Reverend Sandlin, "...theonomists believe God's law governs all of life. It must govern society no less than it governs our individual lives, families, and churches. We resist attempts by any individual, group, or sphere to usurp God's lawful authority... We fully support lawful authority under God's rule, but oppose anybody's attempt to usurp that authority."

Therefore, the rule of law to be followed and adhered to first and foremost, by those that adhere to this Christian belief, is the rule of law under God and the Bible.

Doesn't this conflict with the constitutional Wall of Separation?

III. JEFFERSON & THE CONSTITUTIONAL "WALL OF SEPARATION"

For the Christian radical religious right, the constitutional Separation of Church and State espoused by Thomas Jefferson, and enumerated to in the US Constitution, and upheld in numerous legal decisions made by the US Supreme Court, are nothing but anti-Christian bigoted blow's aimed at Christianity and the Christian's right to Freedom of Religion. Sandlin, with Chalcedon, Inc., states; "But we do not believe in the separation of the state (or any other institution) from God. God by His law must govern the state just as He governs the individual, family, and church." Sandlin and others within the Christian radical religious right, continue to state that they support the separation of church and state, and the US Constitution, but words and actions are showing that they soundly do not fully support the Constitution, as enumerated, especially the part about the separation of church and state. These same Christian extremist individuals and groups of individuals, also believe that "modern-liberals-have-misunderstood," and therefore misinterpreted Thomas Jefferson's statements about the absolute "wall of separation" which is to exist between church and state.

Let's put the question of the "wall of separation," that is to exist between Church and State to the University of Virginia, and statements made directly by Thomas Jefferson on both religion, and the subject of church and state.

The University of Virginia has summed up the subject of religion and Jefferson's attitude on religion, like this: "Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. Religious institutions that use government power in support of themselves and force their views on persons of other faith, undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of an established religion tends to make the clergy unresponsive to their own people, and leads to corruption within religion itself. Erecting the 'wall of separation between church and state,' therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society." This appeared at the University of Virginia website on, Jefferson on Politics & Government: Freedom of Religion, which is a website with a compilation of Thomas Jefferson quotations on "Freedom of Religion."

To get a true and factual understanding [meaning & interpretation] of the statements made by Jefferson on the "wall of separation" which is to exist between church and state, one needs to understand the feelings and sentiments which Jefferson professed about religion. Jefferson, and many other early American's, felt that religion, and freedom of religion, was strictly an individual issue. That the matter of a belief or non-belief and faith in God, was strictly an individual matter, "...of liberty to worship our Creator in the way we [individually] think most agreeable to His will." Simply put, the matter of religion and belief is a personal one.

So, what do you think Thomas Jefferson's opinion and beliefs would have been, about the Christian radical religious right's belief, that; "First, the law is the external regulation of society . It keeps external sin in check. The civil magistrate thus is required to enforce God's law." ??

Simply put, Jefferson believed that it was not the place of the civil magistrate's or government's "...to enforce God's law." Thomas Jefferson clearly expresses this in his statement to Samuel Miller, 1808; "I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct its exercises, its discipline, or its doctrines." In the Statute for Religious Freedom, years earlier in 1779, Jefferson put forth the same sentiment; "To suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own." There is no power within the US Constitution, which gives any civil or governmental authority the power, or the right, "...to enforce God's law." Requiring any Judge or Jury to render a decision based on enforcing any type of God's law [Biblical law], automatically makes that government a religious run State government, no matter how small or large the religious involvement in the Laws of that country or locality.

Another of the Christian radical religious right's important goals, is to takeover the teaching and education of all children from the earliest age onward. How did Thomas Jefferson and other founding Americans feel about this? Thomas Jefferson, like many other founding Americans [including the Author's own founding family], did not want any religious reading, instruction or exercise of religion in the public educational process. Jefferson expressed this in his statements regarding the Elementary School Act, 1817; "No religious reading, instruction or exercise, shall be prescribed or practiced inconsistent with the tenents of any religious sect or denomination." Another statement made by Jefferson at the same time, in regards to the Elementary School Act, 1817, reflects the sentiments that, "Ministers of the Gospel are excluded [from serving as Visitors of the county Elementary Schools] to avoid jealousy from the other sects, were the public education committed to the ministers of a particular one; and with more reason than in the case of their exclusion from the legislative and executive functions." So, not only were Ministers and religion to stay out of education, according to Jefferson; Ministers and religion are to stay out of the legislative and executive functions of US government, as well as out of education.

What sentiments would Thomas Jefferson have expressed, about religion and the modern Christian radical religious right disturbing the peace of Nations, in order "...to exercise dominion in His name throughout the earth?" Remember, one of the primary goals and objectives of the orthodox Christian Reform Movement, of the radical religious right, is to exercise the dominion of God and the Christian Bible throughout the entire world. Jefferson offered this statement, in 1823, about the dominion of God, the Bible, and the spread of His Lordship's rule through out the earth; "I do not know that it is a duty to disturb by missionaries the religion and peace of other countries, who may think themselves bound to extinguish by fire and fagot the heresies to which we give the name of conversions, and quote our own example for it. Were the Pope, or his holy allies, to send in mission to us some thousands of Jesuit priests to convert us to their orthodoxy, I suspect that we should deem and treat it as a national aggression on our peace and faith." We know from the Christian radical religious right's own words, that the Christian Reform Movement is "catholic orthodoxy," so we can expect that Jefferson and other founding Americans would have treated this current orthodox Christian religious movement "...as a national aggression on our peace and faith."

Thomas Jefferson was not against freedom of religion, and believed in the free exercise of religion, but he also insisted that no one religion was any better than the other. Jefferson was an advocate of religious freedom,but zealous Christian religious clergy, past and present, have not given him any peace or forgiveness because of this stand on religion.

When Jefferson took office as President, the Christian religious clergy were sure that the demise of organized religion in the United States, was just around the corner. It was the following Jefferson statement to Benjamin Rush, in 1800, which gave the Christian clergy that impression, but the statement also clarifies Jefferson's feelings for the tyranny which can be created through the bonding of church and state: "The clergy...believe that any portion of power confided to me [as President] will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly: for I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion."

For Thomas Jefferson, and others of the time with sentiments similar to those of his, maintaining a free civil government was of primary importance and concern. One of the aspects of having a free civil government, meant of course, keeping religion out of politics and government. In this statement by Jefferson, in 1813, we see an example of the strong reasons which Jefferson had, for keeping religion out of government; "History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes." Why would Jefferson feel like that? The answer is best expressed in this statement made by Jefferson himself, in 1814; "In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own." Thomas Jefferson as we have all learned from History, was hostile to any form of tyranny over the mind of man, including religious tyranny, which would interfere with the liberties and freedoms of humankind. The History of Christian religious tyranny is long and complex, and spans a time period which is more than 1700 years in length [See Chronology].

There is no mistaking or misunderstanding the feelings and sentiments of Thomas Jefferson when it comes to religion, and his feelings and sentiment for the placement of an absolute "Wall of Separation" between church and state. It was the feelings and sentiments, based on sound reasoning and fact, as expressed in the above statements of Jefferson, which were the motivating and driving factors which caused Jefferson to make his famous statement about the separation of church and state, in 1802; "Believing... that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State." This same sentiment is reaffirmed by Thomas Jefferson in 1821, in Jefferson's Autobiography; "[When] the [Virginia] bill for establishing religious freedom... was finally passed... a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion." The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend within the mantle of its protection the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo and infidel of every denomination."

The "Wall of Separation," barrier provided in ARTICLE I of the US Bill of Rights, and re-enforced by Thomas Jefferson statements, is therefore, an absolute barrier of separation that is to purposely exist between Church and State, and that religious opinion, no matter what that religious opinion is, has no more weight or bearing than any other opinion which is based on non-factual and unproveable beliefs. Our civil rights are our natural rights, and those rights, liberties, and freedoms, have no dependence, whatsoever, on religious beliefs or opinions. [See the section on Natural Law's and Basic Human Rights]

Does this mean that Thomas Jefferson, and others past and present, who support the "Wall of Separation" between Church and State, are anti-Jesus and anti-Christian hate filled bigots? No, it simply means that we do not subscribe to the extremist philosophies, and warped propaganda being dished-out by radical religious right orthodox Christian's, Catholic and protestant alike. Thomas Jefferson best summed this up, in 1810; "But a short time elapsed after the death of the great reformer of the Jewish religion [Jesus], before his principles were departed from by those who professed to be his special servants, and perverted into an engine for enslaving mankind, and aggrandizing their oppressors in Church and State." Thomas Jefferson, like numerous others of us two hundred years later, believe that the words and actions of Jesus have been terribly misused and abused by those within Christianity.

The "Wall of Separation" between Church and State, is there to protect the general masses of people from the tyranny and harm, which is created when there is a working and cooperative relationship between religion and government. This "Wall of Separation" is one of the basic republican principles and protections found in the United States Constitution, and is, therefore, an "absolute" guaranteed right which Congress may not tamper with in any manner whatsoever.

Are we a Nation under attack?

IV. A CONSTITUTION AND NATION UNDER ATTACK

The opening "declaratory" and "restrictive" clause in ARTICLE I, of the US Bill of Rights, makes this basic constitutional rule of law, and republican principle, perfectly clear to Congress; "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" The part, "Congress shall make no law...," also extends to proposed constitutional amendments offered by Congress, because an amendment to a constitution, proposed or not, is still a law. The term "law" has a very broad range of common-sense legal definitions and interpretations, especially when applied to the area of constitutional law. "Congress shall make no law...," is therefore, a "declaratory" restriction placed on Congress by the US Constitution, and may not be violated by any member or group of members, of the United States Congress.

Since the Christian right members(mostly Republican's) of Congress came to power within the US Congress, they have raped and violated this provision of the US Constitution repeatedly. Ask yourself, and be fair, neutral, and objective about it; Is this continual rape and violation of the opening clause of the First Amendment, by primarily Christian right Republican Party members of Congress, really properly supporting the US Constitution and the rule of law, as is fully intended by those who authored the Constitution?

A review of the entire Congressional Record, since the Christian radical religious right gained the majority of power within the US Congress, in 1994, shows that there has been over four thousand instances where this ARTICLE I constitutional declaratory restriction, has been intentionally and purposely violated by Christian right members of Congress, despite those members constitutional duty to protect and preserve the US Constitution above all else.

The facts speak for itself.

We are a Nation and Constitution under siege by religious extremists with one agenda; the agenda of "His Lordship."

FOOTNOTES:
[1] This is a totally false claim by the right. Survey's done by different groups, including this one, within the past five years, has revealed that 96% of the membership in the US Congress is of the Christian faith, and that with little variance, this has been the case in Congress for decades. What has not been in Congress in the way of Christian members, until recent times, is the ultra-conservative orthodox Christian zealots. So, if the extremist religious right means it is them and their movement, which have been purposely excluded from a place within US government, then they are probably correct. [RETURN]

[2] The US Constitution was purposely designed to exclude from membership in the US Congress, and elsewhere in offices of public trust, those individuals whose beliefs and opinions hold that God and the Bible are of a higher power and authority than that of the United States Constitution. In the United States, because of the "declaratory" and "restrictive" clauses written into the US Constitution, pertaining to both religion and assignment of authority, there is NO HIGHER authority and power, than that which is embodied in the US Constitution itself. The US Constitution is by declaratory authority, without any question or hesitation, the Supreme Law of the Land. ARTICLE VI, second & third paragraph's:

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several state Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." [RETURN]

[3] Taking control of politics at the local level, is the main factor which has enabled the Christian radical religious right to get so many of it's people into politics, and into all levels of government, including the National Level. FACT: Contrary to what the Radical right states and claims using 'Poor Me' tactics, the Christian Radical right has been a forceful player in US politics and government for many decades, ie., (R) US Senator Joseph McCarthy, (R) US Senator Barry Goldwater, The John Birch Society. What has changed in the Radical right, is the extremist and ultra-zealous orthodox Christian make-up of those involved, like (R) US Senator Trent Lott, (R) US Rep. Bob Barr, (R) US Rep. Tom DeLay, and many others, both Republican and Democrat, although most are Republicans. [RETURN]

[4] Since the Christian radical religious right's takeover of Congress in 1994, approximately 5,000 +/- Congressional Bill's have been introduced by the extremist Christian right which pertain to religion in one manner or another. Many of these Congressional Bill's have passed, and are now law in one way or another. Some of the passed into law Congressional Bill's, have included large spending measures for Christian radical religious right projects, like the construction of a full-size and working replica of a Catholic Mission(Church) in New Mexico, complete with a Christian cross proudly displayed on top of it. This paid for with public monies Christian project [which is now complete], was proudly sponsored by Republican US Senator Pete Domenici, the US Senate Budget Chairman, from New Mexico. The city of Espanola, NM, has full control over both the building and the land it sits on, and frequently rents out the Church like building for Christian religious purposes, ie., Church weddings, Church revivals, Church meetings, etc... [RETURN]

[5] The Reverend Andrew Sandlin is part of Chalcedon Education, which is a part of Chalcedon, Inc.. Chalcedon, Inc., is a critical part of the Christian right movement. Chalcedon's key people, like Andrew Sandlin and the head of Chalcedon, the Reverend RJ Rushdoony, are responsible for setting the agenda of the Christian right movement, especially in the areas of religious and tactical policy. [RETURN]

The Radical Right and the Christian Reform Movement
Part 2: Propelling the Movement

Main Page; The Roundhead Watch

The F.A.C.T.S. Directory

For more information about F.A.C.T.S. and any of the material at this web site, please drop us an Email:

All United States and other International Copyright Laws apply to any and all material on these and all the other web pages at F.A.C.T.S.
Copyright © 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, F.A.C.T.S. & Sherwood C. Ensey