Tuesday, August 25, 2009

March Hares And April Fools

Since the April 22 Election in which it got its chronometers soundly cleaned, the right wing Christian Democratic Alliance has been quiet - dare I say "silent as a tomb"? No press statements since April. No more boisterous squawking in nauseating radio ads about gay people being "enemies of Christianity" and a "threat to the family" or rabid press releases aimed at the government for the folly of including human rights of gay people in the Constitution and "dethroning almighty God" in favor of the rule of mere human law. In fact, short of one or two blog posts by one of its fearless leaders, Colin Fibiger - obviously on the inseparable issues of religion and politics, and suggestions on training the youth to "know better” next time, there has been no visible activity on their part. I'm thinking they ran out of a lot more than cash at the end of the elections - they ran out of supporters, interest and credibility as well.

It seems most of its supporters have skittered back to the ACDC, - I mean, P - or cast their votes elsewhere, since even that slightly larger party had its conservative voter support decimated by half.

Since having its nose rubbed in its’ own misogyny and anti-diversity utterances, the ACDP has over the past week or so been (very surprisingly) commenting favorably on Caster Semenya’s gender test ordeal, presumably only because every other political party has been doing so as well - and it has realized that agreeing with everybody else tends to make them less bad. It's called PR, I believe - aka brown-nosing. I wonder what they would have to say should her tests, due out soon, show her to be a transgender or transsexual person? Considering the things their reps have had to say about gay and trans people in the past, I should expect one of them to drop a political clanger over it.

Back to the larger party’s smaller relation – the CDA. Despite the silence, it seems the defiant support for fundy politics is not quite dead yet. Last week there was the following post on the CDA Facebook group, presumably from one of the brighter bulbs on the tree: "If the older generation are showing they wish to be disobedient to God and not vote for Biblical governance why do we allow them to still lead the way - maybe they do not understand the dynamics - maybe we should have more youth in leadership to take us forward."

Why? Hmm. Where should I start?

Because voting for a party with a cross stuck on it doesn’t mean it reflects true Christianity (at least not how Christ intended it) nor does "biblical governance" guarantee Christian governance. And I would expect having a few years more on the clock would provide the youth the wisdom to know the difference.

Aside from that I have to wonder what this smart girl meant by "allowing" the older generation to lead the way? What is she suggesting anyway - a coup to supplant older party leaders with vibrant and violently fanatical youth? This is revealing of the fundy respect for democratic process! This sort of talk reminds me of the part in “Keeping Mum” where the prospect of a coup in the church’s Flower Arranging Committee rears its ugly head. Equally ridiculous, many CDA and ACDP supporters were champing at the bit to start placing laws to outlaw homosexuality, divorce and freedom of religion as soon as they swept that annoying little line separating church and state out of Parliament. I can imagine their disappointment. After all, these fanatics are clearly intent on using democracy to come to power - in effect using democracy as a means to end itself - a pawn to replace democracy with theonomy. What is to come? Will we see friend Colin and his ageing colleagues supplanted by younger, more enthusiastic (and more militant) fundamentalist leaders? What's a little bloodless coup between friends? Then again, what's a bloody coup between adversaries? Nothing, as long as you get to be the one to rewrite the history books afterwards. Hmm. Perhaps nice uncle Colin should be watching his back.

As I have noted recently with the release of (yet another) new bible version in the USA, http://amconmag.com/article/2009/sep/01/00040/ accuracy is not really of prime concern, is it - just so long as the authors get people to believe and do whatever it is they or their masters want them to.

Isn't it interesting how malleable the "word of God" can be? I wonder if the nice folks at FPI or CAN will be producing a copy of it for SA? Why not, they copy everything the US religious right wing-nuts do. In 2001 they copied the 1987 "Homosexual Agenda" and produced a venom-soaked compendium of lies and propaganda called "The Pink Agenda" to inspire home-grown bigots here. Hmm. Most original. I am pretty sure that had there been a fundy victory at the polls this April, the new government would have followed suit and released a similar South African Patriot Bible, intended to re-educate the youth that South Africa was (like the USA version tells it) founded on Christian reconstructionist principles – just as the ANC bragged about its own “deeply religious” origins recently, despite its very hefty (and obvious) connections with its political backbone - the SA Communist Party.

Perhaps she just doesn't understand the dynamics of propaganda and censorship - or politics - and their relation to indoctrination. People generally don’t like to be told by a bunch of snot-nosed brats how they should live. For that matter, people don't like to be told by a bunch of rigid old fossils how to go about their lives either, (just which category I fit into is unclear at this point) but that is pretty much the same thing if the younger generation has their heads stuck so far up the ass of ancient ritual and obsolete doctrine that they can see the light. And for another thing, it is clear by now that people are far too gullible and will believe any old thing if it is wrapped in religious scripture, announced with "it is written..." or rolled up and used to beat them over the brainpan.

Ok, so it is written that you are to stop lying, spreading hate, pointing fingers and bad-mouthing gay and trans people. Clear? Whack! Now scram and don’t do it again!

As for me, I need more assurance than "Vote for our party, because we have a pretty cross in our logo and because God says so" to choose which party I will support. Do they address my concerns? How do they do so? Do they make good on their promises? And do they make sense? Or do they sound like a bunch of stale recycled old religious fascists who frown on diversity, spit on gaiety and stomp on opposition? For real-world problems, they need to offer me real-world solutions - and they had better put their money where their pie-holes are - and if it happens to be pink - or at least rainbow colored, then so much the better.

No comments:

Post a Comment