June 16, 2005

The “Christer” Controversy

Well, there seems to be a new term of derision directed at those of us who follow the Christ. That term is “Christer”, used in a sense not unlike “nigger” or “kike” by bigots. Take this example, which is the source of the current controversy.

Today’s Christer protests are targeting a different kind of subversion. Chip Berlet, senior analyst at the labor-funded Political Research Associates, has spent over 25 years studying the far right and theocratic fundamentalism. He is co-author of Right-Wing Populism in America: Too Close for Comfort. Berlet — who was one of the speakers at a conference last month co-sponsored by the N.Y. Open Center and the City University of New York Graduate Center on “Examining the Real Agenda of the Christian Right” — says that “What’s motivating these people is two things. First, an incredible dread, completely irrational, of a hodgepodge of sexual subversion and social chaos. The response to that fear is genuinely a grassroots response, and it’s motivated by fundamentalist Christian doctrines like Triumphalism and Dominionism, which order Christians to take over the secular state and secular institutions. The Christian right frames itself as an oppressed minority battling the secular-humanist liberal homofeminist hordes.”
The key to those doctrines is what fundamentalist religious primitives call the Great Commission, which is basically an injunction to convert everyone to Christianity. In the Bible (Matthew 28:19-20), it says, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you . . .” The fundamentalist interpretations of these and other texts can be found on evangelical Web sites like, and They have incredible motivating power for the religious right, and help explain the vehemence of the Christers’ intolerance of the freedom of others to think or act differently.

Says Berlet, “The re-election of Bush was a sort of tipping point for these people, who take it as a mandate from God — they see that the leadership of America is within their grasp, and when you get closer to your goal, it’s very energizing. It reaches a critical mass, in which the evangelicals feel they have permission to push their way into public and cultural policy in every walk and expression of life.” All that, says Berlet, is what is motivating the skein of Christer boycotts, protest campaigns and censorship drives bubbling from the bottom up — which get added emotional and pressure power from the fund-raising-driven crusades launched by political Christer organizations like AFA at the national level. The confluence of from-above and from-below is a powerful mix.

Of course, the point is that “Christers” take their religion so seriously that they constitute a threat to American freedom. They are aliens among us, and must be stopped before they destroy the purity of American culture (as defined by the Left). Freedom itself is at stake if they are permitted to engage in political activities that have long been the stock in trade of the American left – activities like political organizing, petitioning the government for a redress of grievances, and boycotting those who act contrary to their values. Such actions, lauded when engaged in by the forces of “progressive Leftism” (remember the Leftist boycotts of Dr. Laura and Rush Limbaugh, as well as the invention of the “Fox Blocker”), are the source of a potential theocracy when engage in by the Religious Right. It must therefore have its rights and freedoms sharply limited in the name of ensuring the greatest possible rights and freedoms – for the Left. After all, they are only “primitive Christers” (so much for toleration for cultural diversity).

Of course, there is something in all this that gives me a certain satisfaction. As a member of the group that is defamed, I am rather pleased that those who hate me and my beliefs have honored me by smearing me with the name of my Lord and Savior. And not only that, by implication they have created their own label, one which is the ultimate truth in advertising. They are “Anti-Christers” – and we all know who that means they follow.

See Also:
Bird Of Paradise -- for an excellent history of the term.
Really Right
Hard Starboard
Hugh Hewitt

» Mover Mike links with: Around the Blogroll

|| Greg, 04:12 PM || Permalink || Comments (3) || Comments

Comments on The “Christer” Controversy

It is impossible to insult me by using a name that is derived from my Lord and Savior. His will be done, and I shall follow in His footsteps as the lamb follows his Shepherd.

What I am getting tired of is the constant attacks against religion. I think I read it here, but wherever I read it, I agree - we are starting to hear more and more attacks against Christianity. Take an old Nazi propaganda film and change the word 'Jew' for 'Christian' and it won't be far off from what we're hearing today.

It occurs to me that their intent may not be to insult me, but to insult Jesus. As such, I never thought I'd do this, but if someone does refer to me as a Christer, I am going to refer to them as an Unbeliever.

Tolerance my foot. The left is the realm of division and splintering. The right accepts someone's differences, and asks them to melt in with everyone else as best they can. The left exemplifies differences and separates people into tiny little special interest groups that are each jockeying for benefit only to themselves, and not to the body politic.



|| Posted by Subjugator, June 16, 2005 07:52 PM ||

I prefer "Christofascist" myself.

I guess we have to be careful what term we use. Clearly, the "Christian" fascists in the US are a minority of Christians (and fake Christians at that), so it's hard to come up with a word that does not slander all people of faith. We really intend to target the hardcore bigots who falsely use Christ's name to practice politics. Thus, "Christer."

If that is derogative, you should know that you reap what you sow. The Christers have been persecuting homosexuals and other minorities since the 1970's (no, they are not genuine Christians, but a political invention designed to guarantee votes for conservative politicians). I see no reason to react politely, but to react in kind with direct attacks on their ideology, including humiliating language that manages to speak the truth anyway.

When you attack, expect a reaction. You are getting one right now.

|| Posted by David Howe, June 17, 2005 09:22 AM ||

According to your words, *I* am *NOT* getting a response now. You make the assumption that I am a bigot though, and that is a clear exposure of your own bigotry. I am a Christian, and I do not think homosexuality is a sin.

At most, I find some of the behaviors associated with male homosexuality to be somewhat nasty to my tastes, but that's irrelevant, because I don't have to do it, participate in it, see it, or otherwise have anything to do with it (unless people have sex in public, which is wrong whether it is homo or hetero).

I have a number of friends who are homosexuals or bisexuals, and have no problem with them. In fact, one of them had unbeknownst to him, been outed to me for several months before he knew that I knew. His response was a shocked, 'You never said anything! You never acted at all different!' My response was, 'Why should I have?'

Some have called me a bigot because specific groups of people frequently display specific behaviors that I do not like. I do not call that bigotry, but recognition of behaviors I do not like. I don't assume someone to be a person that annoys me until after I have observed them or otherwise interacted with them. I am also not rude to people I don't like very often - I generally assume that if I don't like someone, it's my problem and not theirs, and they don't need to suffer for my problems. The only time I am willing to be rude to someone is when I have an objectively good reason to dislike them (i.e. pedophiles, violent criminals, thieves, liars, or the like). Since homosexuality (or having more (or less) melanin than I, or looking different, or having more (or less) money than I, or following a different religion than I, or any one of a hundred other things) does not specifically indicate that a person is annoying, I don't make assumptions based on that.

Don't try to reduce my freedoms, don't try and take my money, don't try to take my guns (also a reduction in freedom), don't deliberately insult my religion, don't try to hurt my family or me, and don't be mean to me or mine, and I'm sure we can get along somehow.


|| Posted by Subjugator, June 18, 2005 11:20 AM ||
Post a comment

Remember personal info?



» Mover Mike links with: Around the Blogroll

Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards
Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2013 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2012 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2011 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2010 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2009 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Posts by Category

Announcements (posts: 13)
Blogging (posts: 187)
Border Issues & Immigration (posts: 421)
deferred (posts: 4)
Education (posts: 685)
Entertainment & Sports (posts: 483)
Guns & Gun Control (posts: 65)
History (posts: 329)
Humor (posts: 88)
Israel/Middle East (posts: 44)
Medical News (posts: 54)
Military (posts: 273)
News (posts: 1570)
Paid Advertising (posts: 234)
Personal (posts: 108)
Politics (posts: 5261)
Race & Racism (posts: 281)
Religion (posts: 819)
Terrorism (posts: 884)
Texas GOP Platform Reform Project (posts: 4)
The Courts (posts: 310)
Watcher's Council (posts: 482)
World Affairs (posts: 345)


January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
December 0000



Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Powered By

Powered by
Movable Type 2.64

Administrative Stuff

Email Me
Syndicate this site (XML)

Advertising Disclosure


About Me

NAME: Greg
AGE: 50-ish
SEX: Male
OCCUPATION: Social Studies Teacher
LOCATION: Seabrook, TX
DISCLAIMER: All posts reflect my views alone, and not the view of my wife, my dogs, my employer, or anyone else. All comments reflect the view of the commenter, and permitting a comment to remain on this site in no way indicates my support for the ideas expressed in the comment.

Search This Site

Support This Site

Recent Entries

Who Is Regan Theiler And Why Was She Allowed To Spend Public Funds On A Sole Source Contract For Her Part-Time Employer?
Not My Idea Of A Stimulating Evening
About Trump's Liberty University Speech
Do Not Place The Secessionist "Texas Independence" Measure On The 2016 Republican Primary Ballot
Conservatives Vs. Liberal On Those Engaged In Violent Political Activity
Tom Mechler Makes His Case Against Moving The 2016 RPT Convention
Jared Woodfill Makes His Case For Moving The 2016 RPT Convention
Questions About Moving The 2016 RPT Convention
Reject The Call To Move 2016 Republican Party Of Texas Convention
It Is Too Bad That Political Parties Cannot Reject Voters Who Seek To Join, Stop Would-Be Candidates Who Want To Run


Watchers Council
  • Ask Marion
  • Bookworm Room
  • The Colossus of Rhodey
  • The Glittering Eye
  • GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD
  • The Independent Sentinel
  • JoshuaPundit
  • Liberty's Spirit
  • New Zeal
  • Nice Deb
  • The Noisy Room
  • The Razor
  • Rhymes With Right
  • The Right Planet
  • Simply Jews
  • Virginia Right!
  • Watcher Of Weasels

  • Political & Religious Blogs