Neo-fascism and the religious right

Humanist, Jan-Feb, 1995 by John M. Swomley

It is obvious that, in the name of anti-communism, North was able to justify atrocities and violations of law. Every lie--even drug trafficking that would finance forays against actual or alleged communists--could be rationalized. Covert action was the approved way of denying access by the American people to what was happening in our foreign policy.

It is also obvious that the radical religious right cares little about family values or Christian values when it runs candidates who will ruthlessly serve radical rightist policies. Its lack of civility is evident in the use of character assassination of public officials in an effort to undermine legitimate government authority. According to Anthony Lewis in the July 15, 1994, New York Times, Pat Robertson, referring to the suicide of Vincent Foster, asked on his TV program, "Was there a murder of a White House counsel? It looks more and more like that." Lewis adds, "Jerry Falwell went further. He sells a videotape that, without evidence, calls [President Clinton] a murderer. It shows Gary Parks, the son of an Arkansas investigator who was killed, saying, 'I think Bill Clinton had my father killed to save his political career.'"

Another religious extremist, Randall Terry of Operation Rescue, told a New York Times staffer, "Bill Clinton is a tyrant; he's a monster." Terry, whose terrorism is inflicted upon women and medical personnel at abortion clinics, is not an isolated extremist. He is supported fully by James Dobson, who stated in Children at Risk, "Nor are the Operation Rescue participants in violation of any moral law...."

Anthony Lewis also noted that "Dr. Steven Hotze, a Texas Republican who won party office with the help of the Christian Coalition, wants to execute homosexuals." This is not an isolated voice, for the execution of homosexuals, adulterers, and certain others is advocated by the Coalition on Revival, a secretive inner circle whose steering committee includes many of the nation's radical religious right leaders.

A second way in which the radical religious right advances and conceals its far-right political program is by seeking state sponsorship of its religious views. It does this by attacking separation of church and state when it insists that the government sponsor specific forms of worship in public schools and allow religious displays on government property so as to demonstrate that the United States is a Christian nation rather than a pluralistic nation composed of many varieties of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, and others. It has steadily attacked the Supreme Court and government for not permitting its partisan religous prayers in public schools.

The radical religious groups encouraged the Bush administration's attack on the establishment clause of the First Amendment in the case of Lee v. Weisman. That case was argued before the Supreme Court on November 6, 1991. At issue was an appeal by Providence, Rhode Island, school officials of a lower court ruling that the inclusion of prayers in a middle-school graduation had the unconstitutional effect of advancing religion. The Bush administration and the school officials asked the Court to permit the government to sponsor expression of religious belief so long as no one is coerced into participating.