Do We Live in a Proto-Theocracy? - Worshipping the State: How Liberalism Became Our State Religion

When I attempt to point out the correlative examples between theocracy and the current dominant liberal state philosophy, I generally get raised eyebrows and laterally shaking heads. It is considered absurd to compare the obvious and unquestionable truths of secular science to the sacrosanct doctrines of religion.

From the comparable articles of faith to the holy representatives and an acute intolerance of opposing views, it cannot be denied that we now have a proto-theocracy. The parallels are disturbing in their implications and appear to be incompatible with a healthy and free society.

Going back centuries, it has proven to be better for religions to not have the responsibilities of state management. We now have a religious state and it is proving to be difficult and problematic for many of the same reasons that the church encountered and ultimately decided (or was forced) to distance itself from the administration of law.

Contrary to popular belief, it isn't just an American idea and goes back centuries, in fact, many of our states were religious states in the beginning and eventually came back around to the 'modern' view preferring separation.



Full interview:
After Words: Benjamin Wiker, "Worshipping the State: How Liberalism Became Our State Religion," hosted by Krissah Thompson, Washington Post

Worshipping the State

Christianity is being deliberately pushed out of our culture—so that secular liberalism can be established in its place. I use the term “establish” quite deliberately. One religion is being actively disestablished, while another is being (in fact, largely has been) established in its place.

Liberalism is more than a political persuasion. It’s a religion with its own doctrines about cosmology and morality. I am aware that this is a controversial claim; it will take the bulk of this book to prove it.

The religious nature of liberalism is obscured by liberals' ostensible embrace of neutrality, pluralism, and tolerance. These are the reasons given for the disestablishment of Christianity. But what actually occurs is that ‘neutrality, pluralism, and tolerance’ are inevitably used as instruments for establishing liberal doctrines and dogmas in the place of Christian ones.

But just exactly what is liberalism? Historians have difficulty pinning down a definition that clears up the many different ways the term ‘liberal’ has been applied. To help clear up this confusion, we are going to have to do a little history, and the key to understanding the historical development of liberalism is the above-noted animosity of liberalism to Christianity.

When we follow the development from contemporary liberalism to its roots, we discover that the liberals in ascendancy in America today are the intellectual heirs of a way of thinking that from the beginning has been characterized by a desire to be free from the burden of Christianity. (Liber in Latin means free.)  Anti-Christian liberalism is much older than the ACLU and the Freedom from Religion Foundation. It arose about five hundred years ago within an almost entirely Christianized culture. As a rebellion against Christianity, its negative goal defined its positive form: the desire to remove the church and replace it with the state gave liberalism its structure, beliefs, and goals.

Freedom from Christianity defines the political goal of liberalism. As the liberal state takes over the form and functions of the church, it excludes the actual Christian church from having any presence or influence in the public square. In its most virulent forms it actually persecutes Christians, as if Christianity were a kind of heresy deviating from the liberal religion.

Thanks for the info, I will watch the video a little later.
I would like to say that we see this all the time now, especially with the first amendment.
Many people have no idea what it says.
Many do but do not understand why it was wriiten.
You can tell who these people are when you hear something like........
"that goes against the constitutional Separation of Church and state".
They have no idea what they are talking about.
"Separation of Church and State" is not even in the constitution, ANYWHERE!
This quote comes from a line in a private letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802, where he mentions "a wall of separation between church and state"
The first amendment, regarding religion, is simply stating that congress can not set up, back or endorse a state run religion. It also can not elevate one religion over another.
The framers did this because of the power the Church of England had over them at the time. They wanted to make sure that sort of thing would not happen here.
I agree with your op. It is happening here. They are endorsing a religion that is camouflaged by science.
Quad

All I hear this man saying, is that he doesn't like the gradual de-Christianization of our society, and the diminishing influence of the church over government and society. The secularization of government is a worthwhile goal, in my opinion.
I would not call liberalism a religion. It is much closer to a philosophy. And one, I'm not so sure fits his personal definitions. Except in its extremes.

Our constitution guarantees personal religious freedom. Nothing more. Nothing less.

reply to post by greencmp


My Biggest Fear is that the next US President in 2016 could be a Theocrat.

reply to post by greencmp


S&F, for it was very well said, and goes in-step with what I've been saying for quite some time now.

How Science Became A New Religion

reply to post by swanne


That is his point of view. The other is, that we are free to be free from any religion. I wish he would have expanded his fantasy with what is the name Liberalism's God, where do they worship, who is their messiah, the name of their Bible, etc. That would be fun.

reply to post by MOMof3


Of course, I'd like to specify that what I said I said is as an atheist.

But good point nevertheless. Christians are not that bad (I'm friend with a preacher who is also a mathematician), it's really the Catholic system that bothers me. "God said that..." They don't realize that when Jesus came, he actually said that God's law doesn't apply anymore. But the Catholic church want to keep control over the masses. So they ignore big chunks of the NT itself!

And now Francis wants to merge with New Age to gain even more popularity.

Insane.

swanne
reply to post by MOMof3

 

Of course, I'd like to specify that what I said I said is as an atheist.

But good point nevertheless. Christians are not that bad (I'm friend with a preacher who is also a mathematician), it's really the Catholic system that bothers me. "God said that..." They don't realize that when Jesus came, he actually said that God's law doesn't apply anymore. But the Catholic church want to keep control over the masses. So they ignore big chunks of the NT itself!

And now Francis wants to merge with New Age to gain even more popularity.

Insane.

edit on 6-10-2013 by swanne because: (no reason given)

Yes, I too am not religious. Mr. Wiker is a Catholic but, his premise isn't particularly dependent upon his own faith. I believe he simply calls liberalism itself the religion. It is also worth pointing out that, as a classical liberal, I would also fall into the catch-all as would any conservatives which makes sense since we all have a certain amount of 'faith' in science and logic. That said, he is clearly assigning the predominant features of the 'left' generally as primarily responsible for the phenomenon.

I had come up with a name for the religion 'The Church of Human Secularism' which I left out of my post because it isn't original enough of a term to claim myself (also technically there does seem to actually be one) and I didn't want to derail my own topic from the get go.

Great thread btw Swanne!

reply to post by greencmp

Do We Live in a Proto-Theocracy? - Worshipping the State: How Liberalism Became Our State Religion

No we live in a Fascist Corporatracy where the conservatives worship money, business, and power over the workers.

The neocons are still in power and I offer this up as evidence.


www.usnews.com...

reply to post by greencmp


So...let me see if I'm getting this argument right; secular liberalism is a religion and should be removed from governmental policies completely. Leaving...what? Religious conservativism?

Science isn't a religion any more than liberalism is. What you're advocating here is the extinguishing of an opposing viewpoint.

links234
reply to post by greencmp

 

So...let me see if I'm getting this argument right; secular liberalism is a religion and should be removed from governmental policies completely. Leaving...what? Religious conservativism?

Science isn't a religion any more than liberalism is. What you're advocating here is the extinguishing of an opposing viewpoint.

Yes, that is my contention. Having removed all religious and secular beliefs (as well as a variety of other extraneous agendas) from public policy we would be left with only truly necessary legislation which is all that our federal government should be responsible for.

Also, religion relies entirely on faith. Science experiments with a set of facts and results. If we had physics wrong, we would not have the ability to lift off the planet.

olaru12
reply to post by greencmp

 

Do We Live in a Proto-Theocracy? - Worshipping the State: How Liberalism Became Our State Religion

No we live in a Fascist Corporatracy where the conservatives worship money, business, and power over the workers.

The neocons are still in power and I offer this up as evidence.


www.usnews.com...

edit on 6-10-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

Agreed, the Democratic party and Obama are a party of the center-right. The Republicans are on the extreme right. There is nothing even remotely liberal about either of them.

It always makes me astonished when people complain about the Democrats being leftist liberals, they're really nothing of the sort. They're fiscal corporate conservatives, just like all the rest of our bought and paid for politicians.

Painterz

olaru12
reply to post by greencmp

 

Do We Live in a Proto-Theocracy? - Worshipping the State: How Liberalism Became Our State Religion

No we live in a Fascist Corporatracy where the conservatives worship money, business, and power over the workers.

The neocons are still in power and I offer this up as evidence.


www.usnews.com...

edit on 6-10-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

Agreed, the Democratic party and Obama are a party of the center-right. The Republicans are on the extreme right. There is nothing even remotely liberal about either of them.

It always makes me astonished when people complain about the Democrats being leftist liberals, they're really nothing of the sort. They're fiscal corporate conservatives, just like all the rest of our bought and paid for politicians.

You might be interested in some of the comments on this thread:

The Fallacy of Collectivism - Ludwig von Mises

reply to post by greencmp

Yes, that is my contention. Having removed all religious and secular beliefs (as well as a variety of other extraneous agendas) from public policy we would be left with only truly necessary legislation which is all that our federal government should be responsible for.

Ahhh. Now I see a little more clearly what you're getting at. The problem is, that's a very lofty and idealistic goal. You're never going to remove secular or religious ideologies from those in public service.

As Americans, it is our responsibility to educate ourselves, and hold our public servants accountable for the duties and oaths they agreed to when they took office. If we, as a nation, will actually do this, we won't have to worry near as much about a man or womans religious or political leanings, because the extremists would never get in office to begin with.

The worst enemy of a rogue government is an educated public who is paying attention.

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." Thomas Jefferson.

Klassified
reply to post by greencmp

 

Yes, that is my contention. Having removed all religious and secular beliefs (as well as a variety of other extraneous agendas) from public policy we would be left with only truly necessary legislation which is all that our federal government should be responsible for.

Ahhh. Now I see a little more clearly what you're getting at. The problem is, that's a very lofty and idealistic goal. You're never going to remove secular or religious ideologies from those in public service.

As Americans, it is our responsibility to educate ourselves, and hold our public servants accountable for the duties and oaths they agreed to when they took office. If we, as a nation, will actually do this, we won't have to worry near as much about a man or womans religious or political leanings, because the extremists would never get in office to begin with.

The worst enemy of a rogue government is an educated public who is paying attention.

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." Thomas Jefferson.

edit on 10/7/2013 by Klassified because: add quote

Very true, my assertion is basically that by removing most official powers themselves (officials can come later) we can assure that no corruption can manifest in any form from any perspective.

Klassified
reply to post by greencmp

 

Yes, that is my contention. Having removed all religious and secular beliefs (as well as a variety of other extraneous agendas) from public policy we would be left with only truly necessary legislation which is all that our federal government should be responsible for.

The worst enemy of a rogue government is an educated public who is paying attention.

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." Thomas Jefferson.

edit on 10/7/2013 by Klassified because: add quote

Yea their not worried about the bible but the bill of rights and the constitution. This is what keeps the government from becoming a "god". It supposed to anyway along with a representative form of government and division of power ect ect.

reply to post by olaru12

No we live in a Fascist Corporatracy where the conservatives worship money, business, and power over the workers.

The neocons are still in power and I offer this up as evidence.

reply to post by Painterz

Agreed, the Democratic party and Obama are a party of the center-right. The Republicans are on the extreme right. There is nothing even remotely liberal about either of them.

It always makes me astonished when people complain about the Democrats being leftist liberals, they're really nothing of the sort. They're fiscal corporate conservatives, just like all the rest of our bought and paid for politicians.

Most of the malarkey about Democrats and Obama *not* being Left Wing is coming from Left Wing opinion steering sources.

Democrats traditionally create and support many *social* programs that support the bank/corporatist agenda.

"fiscal corporate conservatives" is a misnomer created by ultra Liberals to trigger false positives in thinking.

A "Fascist Corporatocracy" is an ultra Left Wing system.

The worldwide banking/corporatist system has many similarities based on general Marxism.

...............Just keeping the table level

reply to post by greencmp


I think you are quite right.

This history of the oligarchy could lend a lot of support for your perspective:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Certainly we can learn from the END TIMES Biblical prophecies that the

ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT

WILL INCLUDE

A

ONE WORLD RELIGION

. . . with Satan as the ultimate head of both . . . !DEMANDING! go be worshiped as God.

18. "No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation." David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations

.

19."We shall have world government whether or not you like it, by conquest or consent." Statement by Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member James Warburg to The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 17th, l950

twoday.net...


twga...


Many individuals are basically clueless that the NWO

will be UTTERLY TYRANNICAL

AND

WILL

DEMAND SLAVISH TOTAL WORSHIP of an evil world leader.

Their individual freedoms are disappearing with every advancement of the NWO.

Of course the planners have wound up rebellions and anarchy left and right in order to fracture and destroy the old culture and society of America.

That's merely an example of the ruthlessness of the globalist oligarchy. They are happy to create stooges that they later cast aside, if not exterminate quite coldly or worse.

The RELIGION of DEVOTION to the tyrannical NWO STATE and ultimately to the evil ruler at the top of that State . . . has long been planned.

It will come to pass.

Only Armageddon will put a stop to it.

xuenchen

Most of the malarkey about Democrats and Obama *not* being Left Wing is coming from Left Wing opinion steering sources.

As someone that proudly voted for Reagan twice and George H Bush (his son GW was a terrible governor and I refused to vote for him), I definitely say the Democrats are much closer to what the Reagan era Big Tent Republicans were. Moderate conservatives that valued tradition and the free market, but still pushed the country forward. People willing to make compromises when it was in the best interest of the country.

Sure the Democrats aren't like the current bunch of Republicans that hope to make their favorite translation of the Bible into law or those that believe a paradise on earth awaits if we remove all the safety nets and regulations turning the country into something you see in Central America. Frankly, that's a good thing as we need someone with some sanity in politics.