Michael Weinstein Known by the Company He Keeps
Michael Weinstein claims to be an advocate of religious freedom, willing to give his “last drop of blood” even for beliefs with which he disagrees.
Weinstein was recently proud to point out he had Penn Jillette, of Penn and Tiller, as a visitor at an MRFF rally. Penn had this to say:
Fair enough. More interesting, however, is what Jillette had to say about Christians, the very next day:
Of course, one can certainly advocate religious freedom while disagreeing with the tenets of another theology. In fact, to be theologically and intellectually consistent, one pretty much must. It’s also true that the words of one’s friends are not necessarily one’s own words (and Twitter hardly the source of philosophical depth). A key issue here is the trend of Weinstein (and his allies) not only disagreeing with Christians, but also openly attacking Christians and their beliefs.
How can you support the freedom to hold beliefs, while simultaneously calling those beliefs dangerous and an aid to the enemy? Simple. You can’t. It’s intellectually inconsistent. Weinstein says he believes in religious freedom, but even he admitted the reason he created his group was to “battle…fundamentalists,” not support religious freedom.
Case in point: He just held a rally for his “religious freedom” group. Penn Jillette walked away saying he saw a lecture on “xtian bullies in the armed services” — he didn’t say word one about “religious freedom.” Those words also aren’t the mission of the MRFF. They exist in its name only, and they are a nothing but a farce to Weinstein.
They claim Christians want to take over the World and yet media, entertainment, arts and culture, judicial system and government are getting full of anti-Christian collectivists…go figure.
I notice that one of their main propaganda techniques is that we beleive that by starting thermocuclear armageddon Jesus will return…lol…
PS – I was under the impression Penn Jillete was “libertarian”, but i notice many of them camouflage themselfs behind this ideology.
Pete … It’s actually the dominionist Christians themselves who say they want to take over the world. They call it the “7 mountains” strategy, and are very open and public about their agenda. It is these dominionist Christians, not all Christians, that MRFF is fighting. 96 percent of MRFF’s clients ARE CHRISTIANS! They just aren’t Christian enough or the right kind of Christians for the fundamentalists and dominionists who are trying to force their beliefs on everybody else.
I know what is going on, you dont have to explain anything to me. What you “forget” to say is that the Dominionists are just fighting back against the corporate-socialist One World Government George Orwell was warning about…that is what you and Weinstein “forget” to say. The Dominionists call this evil tyrannical power structure “Pantheon”.
Sarah Palin close friend, Thomas Muthee, saying that its time for the International Bankers to go really scared the hell out of the power structure (the power structure MRFF serves by the way).
And stop that patronizing/public relation thing towards Christians will you? Its silly. Just be honest and do those “Flying Spaghetti Monster” type of lame jokes.
1984/Brave New World is going DOWN just get used to it.
As for Jillette, he is part of one of the most corrupt institutions on Earth, the entertainment industry. Just search youtube for Dave Chappelle interviews on Oprah and Inside Actors Studio (funny how everyone in show business pretended those interviews never happened).
@Chris…name 3 “dominionist Christians” in the armed forces and provide the proof. Inquiring minds want to know. Just who is controlling this vast dominionist Christian conspiracy.
Ah, but she fails to say that it is Weinstein who decides who is and is not a “dominionist.” Or maybe Rick Baker. Either way, it has nothing to do with the person’s actual theology — just Weinstein’s attempt to tell people what they believe.
See, for example, MRFF board member Leah Burton’s description of USMC Lt (Ret) Clebe McClary as a ‘dominionist,’ or the recent claims by Weinstein that the approval for Rock the Fort was some sort of ‘Christian conspiracy.’ Anybody else curious how Weinstein knows what Col Sicinski’s theological beliefs are?
Funny thing, too, is when Weinstein criticized Fort Bragg, he didn’t use the word “dominionist,” he said “fundamentalist Christian.”
Seems he didn’t get Rodda’s script…or he realizes that most people don’t know or care about “dominionism,” but they recognize the words “fundamentalist Christian.”
So which is it: dominionist or fundamentalist? Apparently, either, both, or neither: Since Weinstein assigns the labels at his whim, it really has nothing to do with the actual theological beliefs of those involved.
It is Weinstein and his crew who decide who is and is not the “right kind” of Christian.
@Lt Frank
According to a member of their staff, this conspiracy is led by a “shadow government” in the hands of Dick Cheney and James Dobson. Seriously.
When someone is willing to be an advocate for beliefs with which they disagree, can you really judge them by the company they keep? And by ‘company’ I mean a whole one person, who, as exemplified in his tv show, hears more what he wants to hear rather than what was said.
Just to clarify my previous comment. There is no such thing as “Dominionist” its just another propaganda word they use. Its a “ohhh they want to DOMINATE ZE World” kind-of-thing. This movement, made of various denominations, is nothing but Christians (finally!) fighting back.
And here are the Dave Chappelle videos i mentioned:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OniNubupbQ4&feature=related (Inside Actors Studio)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb1WUVAtseU (Oprah)
If you pay attention to news concerning the entertainment industry, you start to notice that the whole thing is a very corrupt freak show. Isnt it interesting how all this show business people are always preaching to us but they never talk about what is going on in show business? Dave Chappelle turns down 50 million dollars, literally runs away to Africa, comes back and does those interviews…and everyone in show business pretends nothing happened. If the Jillette´s of the World want to preach to us first let them clean their own house…
“With God and the industry, it’s really dark. The dark side is having to get in, there’s a certain submission you need to have. Just like a gang [initiation], so to speak. You might have to do something against your moral code.” – Omarion
From here: http://necolebitchie.com/2009/10/29/omarion-speaks-on-rihanna-the-dark-side-of-the-industry/
Hey, JD … why are you making my last comment on this post wait so long for “moderation”? Do you not want your readers to see it? The other comments I’ve posted here this morning were posted right away with no “awaiting moderation” delay. Why not this one?
http://americanvision.org/2515/to-do-list-for-dominion/
Chris,
You act like you are the only person to get moderated. Maybe it has to do with the amount and rapid fire nature of these replies. I’ve been ‘moderated,’ you’re not that special. You didn’t answer my post about your recommendation to Fort Bragg. Stop saying ‘no, you can’t’ and start some: “here, try this.” RBB is a good start, just do the paperwork right the next time.
@Dealer
Actually, JD does appear to selectively moderate my comments. The other comments I posted right before and after the one I’m talking about were posted, but the one in between wasn’t. It was a comment containing the link that I posted above, responding to Pete’s assertion that we made up the term dominionist. We didn’t. It’s what they say themselves. One well-known dominionist organization even has a “To-Do List for Dominion,” which is what the link is to.
@Chris Rodda
Your comments are treated no differently than anyone else’s. However, you are the only one to see a conspiracy, as you did the last time you had issues with this site.
Not everything is a plot, you know. Just like last time, sometimes you just need to realize the limitations of the technology and the internet.
@JD
Wow … really, JD? A post from a year and a half ago that I thought you had changed but then realized was a browser problem? Just the fact that you even remember that shows how obsessed you are with my comments. But, don’t worry, I took a screen grab of this page showing that both times I tried to post my comment it said “awaiting moderation” because I thought you might delete them — in case I want to put it in the piece I’m writing about you and your blog. (If I’m going to write about you, I need to stoop to your twisted level of obsession.)
By the way, JD, since your post is about the company that Mikey keeps, how about the company that you keep, like that Officers’ Christian Fellowship that you belong to — an organization that has a “mission of reclaiming territory for Christ in the military,” wants “a spiritually transformed military, with ambassadors for Christ in uniform,” and states that its purpose is “to raise up a godly military.” Sounds kind of like your organization wants to turn the U.S. military into a Christian military, doesn’t it?
Chris,
You take screenshots of your posts to make sure they aren’t getting deleted? I think you were the only person worrying about them.
@Dealer
This is not something I typically do. I only did it this time because I thought JD might delete this particular comment when I saw that it was “awaiting moderation” hours after I posted it even though other comments I posted at nearly the same time had come right up. I wouldn’t have done it at all except that I’m planning on writing about his blog in the near future, so I’ve been paying more attention to it than I usually would. And JD does moderate and edit my comments. Just go back through some recent posts and see how many of my comments have parts removed and replaced by brackets and say “edited by admin.”
@Chris Rodda
This is a pretty strong challenge to JD. I wonder why there is no response? Curious… seems like a person of integrity would explain or defend these statements.
“a spiritually transformed military, with ambassadors for Christ in uniform” … Really???
@WWRID
Seems like a person of integrity would, but we’re talking about JD.
Chris,
JD isn’t writing these articles and doesn’t have this website for your behalf. He has talked about OCF in the past. Just because he doesn’t answer all challenges, doesn’t mean he lacks integrity. You often ignore questions I post to you. I’m assuming it’s because you’d rather spend time on bigger issues than that particular question.
Here’s my question to you then: can a servicemember be a legal ambassador for Christ or not?
@Dealer
How come you’re only asking about the one part of one of the OCF quotes I posted that has to do with the individual, and not the ones about converting the whole military — like OCF’s “mission of reclaiming territory for Christ in the military,” or OCF wanting “a spiritually transformed military,” or OCF’s purpose“to raise up a godly military”? As I asked in my previous comment, it sounds kind of like JD’s organization wants to turn the U.S. military into a Christian military, doesn’t it?
Chris,
How come you can’t answer a direct question?
By the way, they are just exercising their collective right to free exercise: “No member of the military may be compelled to curtail – except in the most limited of military circumstances and when it directly impacts military discipline, morale and the successful completion of a specific military goal – the free exercise of their religious practices or beliefs” [pop quiz: where did I get this quote]
@Dealer
Your direct question is a straw man. You asked only about the one part of one of the OCF quotes I posted — the one that is about free exercise. You then quote part of MRFF’s mission statement that supports free exercise. But your direct question avoids the OCF quotes showing that this organization of 15,000 military officers, including JD, states that it’s purpose is “to raise up a godly military,” that its goal is “a spiritually transformed military,” and that it has a “mission of reclaiming territory for Christ in the military.” What do you think these statements from OCF mean? They certainly aren’t just referring to the free exercise of their religion.
Chris,
Ok, maybe you’ll want to answer this one: prove that OCF’s stated mission goals of “godly military,” “spiritually transformed” and “reclaiming territory” are illegal goals. No where in there does it say members should abuse their positions of authority to force people to Christ. My experience with OCF the desire is that members exercise their freedom to express their religion, with the idea that the more invitations (it is still legal to invite people to a small group right?) will mean more people will come.
The burden of proof is on you to prove they are illegally promoting their organizational goals. Can you prove the entire organization is doing so? If not, then you are guilty of violating your own mission statement. If the organization is not illegal, then you should support free exercise (isn’t that in your organization’s name?).