Republican candidate for governor Marty Jackley issues a “Faith and Family Initiative.” Naturally, I am annoyed by this over-Godding. So should you be, if you’re worried about true religious freedom.
Jackley’s FFI is a paean to Christianism, touting his personal religious beliefs as the proper guidance for government:
Guided by my own Christian convictions and firmly committed to the supreme law of our Constitution, I submit to the people of South Dakota the Marty Jackley Faith and Family Initiative.
Our religious faith, expressed through prayer, our relationships with one another, and our relationships with God, is the core of who we are.
…I am not a perfect person and will not be a perfect governor. However, I take heart from Deuteronomy 31:6, which tells us: “Be strong and steadfast; have no fear or dread of them, for it is the LORD, your God, who marches with you; he will never fail you or forsake you.” No matter the challenges we face in South Dakota, God is next to us. That’s never a bad place to be [Marty Jackley for Governor, “Faith and Family Initiative,” released 2018.03.26].
Imagine what would happen if a Muslim candidate made a parallel statement:
Our religious faith, expressed through prayer, our relationships with one another, and our relationships with Allah, is the core of who we are.
…I am not perfect in the eyes of Allah and will not be a perfect Governor. However I take heart from the Quran 3.160, which tells us, “If Allah assists you, then there is none that can overcome you, and if He forsakes you, who is there then that can assist you after Him? And on Allah should the believers rely.” No matter the challenges we face in South Dakota, Allah is next to us. That’s never a bad place to be.
If a candidate opened up that Muslim can on the stump, there’d be great wailing and gnashing of teeth. He’s excluding Christians! He can’t represent us! He wants Sharia law! But since Jackley is speaking to the evangelical crowd who ridiculously think Donald Trump is the salvation of their chosen Christian nation, donning this mitre is perfectly fine.
“Our religious faith… is the core of who we are,” says Marty Jackley. The core of who we are. Who’s we? Evidently, from the sentence immediately preceding that pronoun usage, the people of South Dakota. So Jackley pretends to speak to all of us.
But Our faith, singular? Which faith? The only one Jackley mentions is his faith, Christian faith. He makes no explicit mention of other faiths anywhere in his FFI. He makes no simple nod toward religious pluralism, the way firmly Christian President Barack Obama was able to when he lit the national Christmas tree in 2016 and spoke of our shared morality.
We are thus left to wonder whether, when Jackley speaks of hosting an “Annual Faith Leaders Summit,” he intends to invite rabbis, imams, atheist thinkers, and other non-Christians.
We are thus left to wonder if his determination to allow state and local governments to display the Ten Commandments will also guide him to support Muslims who want to erect symbols of their faith on public property.
We are thus left to wonder if his defense of students from being exposed to transgender people in bathrooms (yup, that’s in there) will also translate into support for Muslims who’d like their children not to be exposed to girls running around with provocatively uncovered arms and legs in school in contravention of their religious preferences.
We are thus left to wonder if his support for conscientiously objecting health care providers, insurance providers, and employers who claim their Christianity excuses them from facilitating certain medical procedures will translate into supporting employees of other faiths who demand exemptions from regular professional duties.
Jackley’s Faith and Family Initiative is one big “Come to Jesus” political pitch, and one big raspberry toward the many South Dakotans who dare to believe differently. Thanks for nothing, Marty.
Strange that Marty should quote the “Old Testament” not to mention from the Torah to push Jesus.
The old testament is probably one of the bloodiest and violent chronicles ever written.
Where does the “Love thy neighbor” fit in Marty ??
You sure do speculate a lot with no facts.
Why would an atheist attend a faith summit?
How does what he said affect non-Christians and atheists?
I will answer for you. It doesn’t.
Cory,
Do you condone Muslims practicing Sharia law in the United States?
Jason,
Do you condone the Bee Gees?
Grudgenutz
Where does the “Love thy neighbor” fit in Marty ??
That fits in right before the party of family values has to ask their lord and saviour to forgive them for straying. Unless ye be Drumpf.
No, Jason, I do not condone theocracy of any sort. The problem here is that Jackley is speaking strictly of government by Christian principles for Christians. He does not speak to the thousands of South Dakotans who don’t worship the way he does. That’s problematic in pluralistic democracy.
Faith summit—why would a Governor hold a conference that excludes people by worldview?
Because Jackley is playing South Dakotans just like NOem does with her so-called Town Hall meetings.
Sadly they fall for it
Yeah it sounds like somebody in Marty’s camp told him to swing for the fences and lock down the vote of the crazies before noem does something nearly identical to secure the hearts and minds of the (sadly) many south dakotans who will eat this crap up.
I dont know what’s more depressing, that our elected leaders admit to having imaginary friends, or that most of my neighbors can’t see through this obvious sales pitch. Cory’s name replacement game shows how nuts these people sound to the rest of us. Too bad most people are not aware enough of reality to get that analogy.
Jason, do you support political leaders selling religion for votes?
There’s a moral rot in the leadership in South Dakota, and that “Faith and Family Initiative” exemplifies it. Jackley spouts a lot of pious yammering, yet he says nothing of practical value to stop the corruption that leads to the Agnico bribe and other recent corruption in South Dakota. If, indeed, “No matter the challenges we face in South Dakota, God is next to us,” then God has been witnessing some pretty disgusting behavior from Jackley and other Republicans, and God, not to mention Jackley, is doing nothing to stop it. Maybe Jackley would like to explain how God can countenance the illegal Agnico deal. Jackley is supposed to be Attorney General with a duty to protect the state from such illegality. Well, don’t hold your breath. I’m sure Agnico will be stuffing his campaign with lots of money during the offering. And that is the true source of Jackley’s faith.
What about the Buddhist, Muslim and Jewish faiths? And what about us agnostics and atheists. Contrary to popularly held beliefs, we’re good people too. This is so South Dakota.
All those Christians in the US that have corrupted Washington, gotten addicted to opioids, alcohol and porn, committed adultery, beat their wives, abused their kids, bullied in schools, killed thousands in wars for profit. Yep, Christianity the dominant religion has made America what it is alright. But they’re all to be forgiven b/c god said so. LOL!
Consider the proposed change to the state motto: “Under GOP the People are ruled.”
Just saw the first Jackley for Gov. commercial. All he did was read a list of Republican talking points. No specifics, of course, just like Trump. Maybe he, too, will come out with some kind of cool hat. Then, again, all Kristi ever did was spout talking points and vote as she was told by GOP “leadership”. What would she be able to do as governor with no one telling her how to do the job?
grudznick will have no truck with the BeeGees or any of those doofus hipster long hair sorts.
Down with the overgodders, too.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I did not see the ever popular republican phrase “family values” in Jackley’s religious plan for us.
Is this omission by Jackley an attempt to dismiss discussion by his “family values” president Trump?
Good point, Roger! We don’t see that catch phrase. The word “value” doesn’t appear anywhere in the document. Perhaps that’s a good thing: instead of just flying a poster deeming himself the “Family Values Candidate,” can we give Jackley credit for enunciating specific policies that embody the values he upholds?
Cory writes:
The Founding Fathers dated the Constitution in the 12th year of our independence and the 1787th year of Jesus Christ, whom they identified as “our Lord”:
Faith in Christ is the core of who Americans are as a nation, and His teachings are the basis for protecting the religious liberty of Americans who reject Him.
“Buckobear” writes:
The Protestant Old Testament was the Hebrew Bible, and Christ publicly recognized the Hebrew Bible as true, even specifically referring to Adam and Eve as they’re described in the first two chapters of Genesis, which are part of the Torah.
Ryan writes:
Within a month and a half after He was publicly executed, Jesus Christ was reportedly seen healthy by more than 500 people. Most of those people were still alive when Paul wrote First Corinthians, and somehow the story was never debunked.
Native American religion places its faith and beliefs in the “Creator”, there is no mention of “God” or “Jesus Christ”.
Kurt, can you clarify – where in the Constitution does the document identify who or what is being referenced as our “Lord?” The term has more than one meaning. See e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Lord_of_the_Admiralty
Kurt, I have no faith in Christ (at least not in the way those words are used generally). Yet I am as American as anyone else in these conversation. How do we reconcile those two statements with Jackley’s statement that faith (in Christ) is the core of who we Americans (including me) are?
In other words, which of those statements is incorrect?
Evans, your last paragraph applies just as well to Elvis Presley. It’s impossible to “debunk” someone’s claim of what they saw.
Rather than ” 1787th year of Jesus Christ, whom they identified as “our Lord”, it’s just boilerplate Kurt
On the other hand, ” levying War against (the United States), or in adhering to their Enemies, giving the (Enemies) Aid and Comfort.” [US Const. art. 3, sec. 3]. As is being revealed Trump “denigrated or sought to prevent an investigation of the Russian cyber-ATTACK giving aid or comfort to an enemy of the United States, a crime that is enhanced by seeking to cover up his staff’s or his own involvement in or prior knowledge of the ATTACK.” https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/12/16/trump-raises-specter-treason/zdwgXRuJBMChEXmX5kchhP/story.html#comments
:)
“”The one that I’d like to go have a beer with would be President Trump,” says Jackley, “he’s a fascinating individual and he’s certainly, I think everybody will admit, a strong leader.”
While Trump, a non-drinker, simmers in denial, understanding addiction is neither of Trump or pal Jackley’s strong suits, throw-away vote grabs like get tough on drugs, or like get tough on crime, AGAIN, just lead to “federal and state criminal-justice initiatives [which] will only siphon funds and attention away from public-health programs, which even with the addition of $6 billion in federal money are woefully underfunded. It’ll largely be up to states to choose between joining in the administration’s harsh prosecutorial campaign, or firmly rejecting it in favor of the public-health paradigm. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/03/killing-drug-dealers-opioid-epidemic/555782/
Jackley, perhaps worse than Noem, will head the state further down evangelical road of no return. May 2017 Jackley press- https://www.yankton.net/article_e7f6a664-45b0-11e7-876f-3f95a93e1c3d.html
What’s with the Pope hat, is Jackley a Catholic, that’s even more depressing.
Gosh Marty. TRump has violated so many of those ten suggestions:
No idols — well, he worships himself.
Sabbath and keep it holy — well, at least 18, eh?
Adultery — gack ! Ask Stormy et al
Steal — what about all those stiffed contractors and investors.
Covet stuff — well, grab ’em by the …..
Hell’s Bells, we haven’t even gotten to the Jeebus books yet.
Go for it Marty; you’re an inspiration for your idols.
Give Me Strength
leslie, Here is another republican on going to the bar. Ann Navarro nails it. https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/22/opinions/two-old-white-men-beat-each-other-up-in-a-bar-navarro/index.html
Jackley with his religiosity is just like trump babbling on Access Hollywood, they both show how fraudulent they are towards women. It would not surprise me to see Marty breaking a bill out of the collection plate.
Aaaaaand evangelicalism is further trashed by the pseudo religious. They more they babble/Babel about their “faith” the less Christian America becomes.
How does one debunk a story whose only documentation is itself?
Jason, and, for that matter grudznick…:
How do you stop the sun from shining? What makes the world go round?
Roger Cornelius writes:
I’m not sure Black Elk would have agreed with that generalization, and the white buffalo calf seems like it could be a pretty good symbol of Christ even when He isn’t mentioned by name.
“bearcreekbat” writes:
Good point. Maybe it was the 1787th year of Lord Voldemort.
Cory writes:
There were many ancient Israelites who had no personal faith in the Jewish religion, but I’d say faith in the Jewish religion was still the core of who the ancient Israelites were as a nation. That isn’t a perfect analogy, but it may be the best I can do.
Kurt,
My comment wasn’t a generalization, Black Elk became a Catholic later in life much to the dismay of many Lakota traditional spiritual leaders.
Current traditional ceremonies continue to acknowledge only the Creator with no mention of God or Jesus.
Jenny, I’m not sure which church Jackley attends. The mitre is simply a symbol of the office Jackley’s FFI makes it sound like he’s running for.
Kurt, I’m not sure that answer should satisfy any non-Christian American. I acknowledge that Christianity is a significant component of American culture. I acknowledge that that cultural influence could justify calling me a “Christian atheist.” But actual faith, believing in God, is clearly not at the core of who I am, and lack of faith has not hampered my ability to promote and defend this nation’s principles of constitutional democracy.
Jackley’s statement thus still seems to convey an incorrect idea. It sounds an exclusionary note, marginalizing Americans who don’t share his Christian faith.
Roger Cornelius writes:
My understanding is that Black Elk continued to integrate traditional Native American religion into his Catholicism.
Cory writes:
Kevin Woster writes:
Cory writes:
Well, I believe faith in Christ might increase your ability to promote those principles, but that obviously doesn’t mean you can’t promote them without faith in Christ.
Speaking to Girls Staters, Jackley, who hopes to be governor after doing little of substance, oversight or council as both US Attorney appointed by Bush, and Attorney General appointed by Rounds, neither great leaders in their own right; Jackley told the girls he like to have a beer with Trump, calls him fantastic, a strong leader. But we all can see Trump for the a treasonous billionaire, serial rapist, pathological liar and con-man he is. This is Jackley’s judgement on display as he seeks the governorship. Sounds like he has stars in his eyes, like victims of Harvey Weinstein.
Jackley also spouts off about the broken immigration system he wants to fix (code word for “white supremacy”). His fantastic leader Trump took DACA protection away from 800,000 young dreamers, raised in the United States, and his holding those young lives, there very futures, hostages for $40 Bill for a southern border wall. A hostage-taker of innocent young Americans!
When Jackley says “we” by the way, it is just slippery verbiage he can always get out of, like Trump. He’ll just say, “we ” merely means Christians he knows personally, that he wasn’t trying to speak for those who do not share his core beliefs. He can say, just like Trump “it was a joke!”
He is Catholic! The Pope hat fits! Yay! <:-) Kurt's last sentence is very useful. A Christian may well believe that Christian faith helps promote certain values. However, a Christian cannot contend that democratic values cannot be promoted without Christian faith. I provide the example of the latter... and I would contend that I do more on a daily basis to promote democracy than many professing Christians, including Donald Trump.
Cory, Kurt has you pinned in a familiar corner religious folks like to use. He agrees you can be effective at promoting democracy in your current, incomplete state. However with some god in you, you could change the world! You can’t empirically prove him wrong. Ta da! Religion.
The rationale is air tight. Just look at all the great things these religious politicians are up to these da…oh…wait… Maybe… I think you should just stick to being an effective atheist who is actually a good human being instead.
Ryan,
Most politicians are religious.
Let’s cut to the chase and discuss laws based on religion in the US from the day our Constitution was signed.
Are you game for that?
Jason, you just proved my point. Religious politicians have state and federal authority, and apparently a friggin god on their side and yet they still accomplish nothing to make things better for anyone unless they get a 90% cut.
And if it is just a fact that most politicians are crooked and ineffective, regardless of religious beliefs, I’d prefer to be robbed by an atheist. Less hypocritical. Fewer guilt trips and sales pitches, too.
Ryan,
I didn’t prove your point because a politicians religious views don’t affect you. Laws do.
That’s why I asked you to discuss laws based on religion in the US.
Jason, you seem to want to have a different discussion than everyone else, like usual. I decline, like usual.
Ryan,
I like to discuss facts. Why don’t you?
Cory writes:
For the record, I’d agree.
Ryan writes:
We’re all incomplete, and to some degree we all change the world, and I’m not sure how you’d say I have Cory pinned in a corner.
Kurt,
Jason has a habit of always wanting to be right, even when he is wrong.
Roger,
Kurt was posting to Cory, not me.
Are you drunk?
I don’t feel cornered… but I can agree that if Jackley holds the same position Kurt does, that secularists can only be partial, hobbled helpers in fighting for democracy, he is shoving non-Christians into a corner where they are marginalized from civic life, and that kind of marginalization is not healthy in a pluralistic democracy, which needs all hands on deck.
Cory writes:
Wouldn’t you say my faith in Christ is, at best, a distraction that makes me less helpful in fighting for democracy?
As a Catholic, I abide by this (empahsis mine):
DECLARATION ON RELIGIOUS FREEDOM: DIGNITATIS HUMANAE
ON THE RIGHT OF THE PERSON AND OF COMMUNITIES TO SOCIAL AND CIVIL FREEDOM IN MATTERS RELIGIOUS
PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS POPE PAUL VI ON DECEMBER 7, 1965
As well as:
PASTORAL CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH IN THE MODERN WORLD: GAUDIUM ET SPES
PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS, POPE PAUL VI ON DECEMBER 7, 1965
Kurt, I would say no such thing, certainly not about religious faith in general. I see plenty of examples of Christians like my friend Joe whose faith, far from distracting, leads them to a deeper commitment to democratic principles. I also see plenty of examples of Christians like the majority of our Republican legislators whose faith distracts them into culture-war debates and keeps them from focusing on the harm they are doing to democracy through their restrictions on initiative and referendum, their gerrymandering, and their efforts to suppress voting.
Like the Constitution (and, it seems, unlike Marty), I impose no religious test on eligibility to participate in democracy.
Cory writes:
Would you say those culture-war Christians are at best partial, hobbled helpers in fighting for democracy?
Kurt,
He explicitly says they “harm” democracy, by specifically mentioning “their restrictions on initiative and referendum, their gerrymandering, and their efforts to suppress voting.”
I think you are trying to bait Cory into some sort of linguistic trap. Stop it. It is disingenuous and un-Christian. I don’t always agree with what Cory says, but I don’t try to trick him into saying something or try to setup some pseudo-straw-man to attack.
Cory works, talks, and even lives with a Christian. He does not hate Christians. He thinks they are mistaken about the fundamental reality of the universe (just as you and I probably think he is), but he does not let that stop him from working with us to promote democracy.
He is not attacking all “culture-war Christians”, he is very specifically calling out Republican legislators, who instead of promoting democratic ideals (like promoting free speech, easy and plentiful access to voting booths, and non-partisan legislative district boundaries), are rather pushing their own idea of what society should look like (combating gender ideology, etc…). As Cory points out, they only seem to focus on the culture-wars aspect.
We do not live in a theocracy. While personally a legislator may want to evangelize and convert everyone to Christianity, professionally they have a duty to represent all people. They need to respect people’s religious choices, as well as stymie all forms of (and perceptions of) religious discrimination.
Cory had written:
I’d asked:
Joe Nelson writes:
On the contrary, Joe, what you call a “linguistic trap” was a teaching tool employed by Christ Himself. Maybe some of the time you spend studying Pope Paul VI should be reallocated to studying Christ.
Ironically your suggestion that I’m trying to trick Cory and set up a straw man is itself a straw man.
I wasn’t saying he did, but I’m wondering how you claim to know.
Actually he’s calling out Christians “like” those culture-war legislators (presumably including them).
In that case, since Cory is a candidate for the legislature, it seems you should want to know whether he’d say the culture-war Christians he’s describing are at best partial, hobbled helpers in fighting for democracy.
Kurt,
Jesus never tried to trap people, or put words in their mouth.
As for studying Christ more, you will have to give me some slack; I am doing my best to follow the Church he created and handed the keys over to, and who teach and follow that pesky “true presence” in the Eucharist (Jesus did say it at least three times). Most Protestants tend to gloss over those two parts of the Gospel, but Maybe I missed the part where he took back the keys, or told the Apostles to forget about that whole I am the Pascal lamb business of eating the flesh of the lamb to avoid death.
Joe Nelson had written:
I’d written:
Joe replies:
I’m not putting words into anyone’s mouth, and your claim that Christ never used a question to trap people is flat-out wrong. Here’s an example from Mark:
Joe continues:
Christ said, “Follow Me” (at least twice in Luke’s Gospel, three times each in Mark’s and John’s, and four times in Matthew’s). He never once said, “Follow the Church I created,” or, “Follow that pesky ‘true presence’ in the Eucharist.”
I’m wondering how you claim to know what most Protestants do.
Maybe you missed who got the keys in the first place.
Would you say the “lamb” the priest distributes in the Eucharist tastes like lamb normally tastes? Or does it still taste like bread?
Kurt,
I apologize. I allowed your attacks on Cory, and then your attack on me, get to me. I shot off a flippant response, where I should have not.
May God bless you in your pursuit of truth.
Jesus plagiarized Socrates. ;-)
I do appreciate and concur with Joe’s response. I stand by what I said: the Legislative priorities of many Republican legislators have harmed democracy.
Joe Nelson had written:
I’d asked:
Joe replies:
Apology accepted. So bread then?
Cory writes:
Joe says Christ never used a question to trap people. He suggests I’m trying to trick you, set up a straw man, and put words into your mouth. He indicates that Christ gave Roman Catholicism the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and that a Catholic priest supernaturally changes bread into the flesh of a lamb during the Eucharist.
You concur?
Yes, you say their Christian faith distracts them into culture-war debates and keeps them from focusing on the harm they’re doing to democracy. Would you say those culture-war Christians are at best partial, hobbled helpers in fighting for democracy?
Does anyone here like web-comics? There is a really funny one about “sea-lioning”
http://wondermark.com/1k62/
Don’t know what “sea-lioning” is? Sea-Lioning is an Internet slang term referring to intrusive attempts at engaging an unwilling debate opponent by feigning civility and incessantly requesting evidence to back up their claims.
Joe Nelson writes:
You’re the one feigning civility here, Joe, and you attacked me in this thread before I’d even addressed you. You’re not an “unwilling” debate opponent. You’re just a defeated one.
Kurt Evans write:
False. I accused you of using linguistic traps, which you admitted to doing, and called your tactics disingenuous and unChristian. I also accused you of using a fallacy. Criticizing a person’s debate/questioning tactics is not attacking the person. Therefore, I did not attack you.
Kurt Evans write:
False. You cannot know my will, outside of me telling you it. Therefore, I am unwilling.
Kurt Evans write:
False. No parameters were established or agreed upon for “winning” or “losing” the debate. Therefore their are no winners or losers.
Outside of your quotation of me, everything you said was false.
Cory wrote:
I stand by what I said: the Legislative priorities of many Republican legislators have harmed democracy.
Are you talking bout how Dodd-Frank was written so that the CFPB had hardly, if not any oversight by Congress?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/04/mulvaney-responds-to-warren.php
To repeat, I concur with what Joe said. I do not concur with what Kurt suggests Joe said.
I also don’t think communion bread turns into the actual flesh of Jesus or any other mammal, no matter who puts what whammy on it.
Furthermore, I reject Jason’s effort to derail the conversation to the blog post he wishes he had written but lacks the ambition to execute. But I will argue that CFPB supports democracy by protecting people from the financial rape committed by unscrupulous lenders who put people in such deep, inescapable debt that they cannot participate effectively in democratic community institutions. Efforts to shut down or declaw the CFPB hurt democracy.
Many Republicans in South Dakota get so distracted by culture-war issues that they miss the real harm other, more important policies do to democracy. Such distracted/distracting legislators are harming democracy; they are also possibly harming their own religion by giving it a bad name and misinterpreting and misrepresenting the teachings of Jesus.
Cory had written:
I’d asked:
Joe Nelson wrote:
Now Joe writes:
You refer to the straightforward yes-or-no question I asked Cory as “attacks” (plural), but after leveling an avalanche of direct accusations against me, you say you haven’t attacked me.
You seem to be applying a double standard, Joe, much like the double standard Cory is applying when he suggests his own statements about culture-war Christians are somehow less “exclusionary” than Marty Jackley’s statements about Christian faith in general.
I’d written to Joe:
Joe replies:
I can know you’re willing to debate me because you’re debating me.
Both of those claims are absurd.
Joe had written:
I’d cited an example from Mark’s Gospel:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=NASB&search=Mark+11:27-33
Cory writes:
You obviously don’t regard Mark as a reliable historian, Cory, but even so, how do you claim to know Christ never used a question to trap people?
Joe had written:
Cory writes:
Then your assertion that you concur with what Joe said apparently isn’t true.
My concurrence applies to Joe’s 4/1 05:10 which is more relevant to the topic at hand, not his 4/2 03:48, which is less relevant (and jeepers, Joe, remind me what time zone you’re in!).
Cory,
I am in the Hawaii Standard Time, so the time is currently 4:24ish AM HST (I am “up and at’em” earlier than usually today though).
Cory had written:
I’d asked:
Joe Nelson had written:
Cory writes:
Do you concur with Joe’s accusation that asking my straightforward yes-or-no question is disingenuous and un-Christian? Do you concur with his accusation that I’m using a straw-man fallacy? Do you concur with his assertion that legislators need to “stymie all forms of (and perceptions of) religious discrimination”?