Slouching Towards Oblivion

Showing posts with label religion in politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label religion in politics. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 17, 2024

Today's Wingnut

No one speaks for a god that doesn't exist, so anyone can speak for that "god".

These jagoffs get wealthy simply by developing a good pitch, and growing their mailing list.

And one of the best gimmicks is to feign outrage when somebody points out their failings, because then the congregation can sit there and think, "Well, he's not talking about me - I'm a good little believer. He's mad at all those others - those heathens ..." blah blah blah.

And BTW, when this guy conflates "stolen 2020 election" with his  little spiel about "faith" and "prophesy", we know a coupla things:
  • Religion is politics - it's the original politics (IMO)
  • It's not just a matter of using god to back up your political stance, it's using a political structure to enforce a religious doctrine
  • Lots of people can be very susceptible to a God-Anointed King set up because they feel the need to be told what to do, which they think absolves them from a certain level of responsibility
  • And that's why the founders told us to keep that shit separate


Friday, April 12, 2024

Today I Learned


The Seven Mountain Mandate

The Seven Mountain Mandate is part of dominionism.

The biblical base for the movement is derived from Revelation 17:1–18, wherein verse 9 reads, "And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains". The seven areas that the movement believe influence society and that they seek to influence are family, religion, education, media, entertainment, business, and government. They believe that their mission to influence the world through these seven spheres is justified by Isaiah 2:2 "Now it shall come to pass in the latter days that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established on the top of the mountains."

Followers believe that by fulfilling the Seven Mountain Mandate they can bring about the end times.

Prominent followers:
  • Michele Bachmann, former US House member (R-MN06) 2007 - 2015.
  • Lauren Boebert, US House member
  • Rafael Cruz, pastor and father of Senator Ted Cruz
  • Mike Johnson (R-LA04) Speaker of the House
  • Tom Parker, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court
  • Paula White, spiritual advisor to Donald Trump
  • Andrew Wommack, evangelical leader
Now try not to think about the kind of nutty rhetoric coming from guys like Mike Flynn or Mike Pence or Mike Pompeo or Mike Johnson. What the fuck is it with these Mikes?

Shit - I may have to change my name now.

Tuesday, April 09, 2024

A Thought

The Jesus myth is very appealing to the current batch of wingnuts - evangelical and otherwise.

Jesus was horribly wronged, and persecuted, and crucified. And in the upside down and backwards MAGA world, he was victimized by a Mid-Classical Period version of the Deep State - a combination of the globalist Romans and the bureaucratic Pharisees, aligned to rig the system against him.

They've been taught their whole lives to be like Jesus - and like the early Christians who stood up for their new religion in the face of official suppression and blah blah blah - and even though most of those jokers haven't seen the inside of a real church since about the 4th grade, they've adopted (ie: co-opted) the persona of the long-suffering martyr.


Add to that a couple of convenient accoutrements, and we've got us a brand new gospel.
  1. Jesus returns and rules with an iron rod - Alpha Jesus does not hold with all this woke DEI shit.
  2. Y'mean I can be as big a shit-heel as I wanna be the whole week as long as I take a minute to ask forgiveness while I'm warming up on the first tee on Sunday? Shit - I'm in.
So eventually it becomes a matter of needing to make a show of your borrowed victimhood in order to claim and maintain your rightful place in MAGAdom.

Saturday, March 02, 2024

Today's TweeXt


Flynn is still an advocate for Trump, and a likely candidate for a cabinet-level position. And it has to be obvious what the plan is for Trump 2.0

Wednesday, February 21, 2024

The Politics Of Stoopid


The decision is said to have been tailored to fit within the narrow parameters of this particular case.

 It's Alabama.

I can't wait for the stories to start pouring in.
  • Some joker's gonna try to beat a ticket for driving in the HOV lane by carrying his wife's recently used tampon in the car
  • A couple going with IVF coild decide to claim an extra dozen Dependent Child deductions on their 1040
  • A mom just might submit a life insurance claim because her period was 5 days late

Shock, anger, confusion grip Alabama after court ruling on embryos

Alabama doctors are puzzled over whether they will have to make changes to in vitro fertilization procedures. Couples have crammed into online support groups wondering if they should transfer frozen embryos out of state. And attorneys are warning that divorce settlements that call for frozen embryos to be destroyed may now be void.

Throughout Alabama, there is widespread shock, anger and confusion over how to proceed after the state Supreme Court ruled Friday that frozen embryos are people, a potentially far-reaching decision that could upend women’s reproductive health care in a state that already has one of the nation’s strictest abortion laws.

“Women who actually know what happened, they feel under attack and almost powerless,” said AshLeigh Meyer Dunham, a Birmingham mother who conceived a child through in vitro fertilization and is a partner in a law firm that specializes in assisted reproductive technology cases. “First you had the Dobbs decision and now this. What does this even mean?”

The state Supreme Court decision signals a new chapter in America’s fight over reproductive rights and marks another blow to women’s rights groups that expect similar challenges in other conservative states. The ruling is limited to Alabama, but legal experts say it could embolden the “personhood movement,” which asserts that unborn children should be granted legal rights beginning at conception.

The decision was decried Tuesday by the White House.

“This is exactly the type of chaos that we expected when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and paved the way for politicians to dictate some of the most personal decisions families can make,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters traveling with President Biden.

Interviews with physicians and attorneys in Alabama, as well as advocates on both sides of the issue nationwide, paint a confusing path forward for IVF clinics trying to interpret the ramifications of the ruling. Although physicians hope the Alabama legislature will limit the impacts of the ruling, they warn that the most dire consequence of the ruling is that some Alabama IVF clinics may be forced to suspend their operations.

And even if they remain operational, physicians say patients could have to endure longer — and more costly — treatments to try to achieve a pregnancy.

“Under the current Alabama ruling, patients nor physicians nor IVF labs are going to be willing to have frozen embryos,” said Mamie McLean, a physician at one of the state’s largest fertility clinics, Alabama Fertility Specialists. “So if we are faced with two potential embryos that need to be transferred, modern practice would say transfer one and freeze one. But under this ruling, it may not be safe to freeze embryos so we will be forced to transfer two embryos … which increases the lifelong health risks to both mothers and children.”

The challenge to IVF in Alabama comes as the number of pregnancies conceived through the procedure has soared over the past decade. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 97,128 infants were born nationwide via IVF in 2021, the last year for which statistics were available. There are 453 IVF clinics nationwide, and every state except Wyoming has at least one clinic.

Jennifer Lincoln, a board certified OB/GYN who practices in Portland, Ore., said she doesn’t think people understand how “scary” the Alabama ruling is. She raised a common scenario: A patient undergoing IVF has an egg retrieval that leads to the creation of multiple embryos, with the hope that at least one turns into a live birth. If successful, the remaining embryos remain frozen for possible future use — but not all may be used.

“If someone has five embryos left and they decide not to have any more kids and want those embryos destroyed — and someone in that physician’s office hears that, could [the doctor] be criminalized for being an accomplice in a crime?” Lincoln asked.

What Alabama’s frozen embryos ruling means for IVF across the U.S.

The Alabama ruling is the first to attribute human rights to a developing organism at such an early stage following conception. The ruling states that “unborn children are ‘children,’” and that frozen embryos should be afforded the same protection as babies under the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act.


Lila Rose, president and founder of Live Action, a national antiabortion organization, heralded the court for showing “moral clarity” in ruling that the unborn deserve the same rights as children.

“You have children being created in petri dishes at will and then destroyed at will and used for experimentation,” Rose said. “It’s not acceptable to leave human beings on ice. It’s not acceptable to destroy them. These are not commodities.”

Katie O’Connor, director of federal abortion policy at the National Women’s Law Center, says the ruling will immediately disrupt reproductive care in Alabama because hospitals and doctors will be unclear about what they can and can’t do in terms of fertility treatments.

“Doctors are going to decide that these questions surrounding fertility treatments are not easily answerable and that the work is just too risky to do with the state,” said O’Connor, who predicted the Alabama decision will probably inspire antiabortion activists to push for similar protections in other states.

McLean, the Alabama doctor, cautions she is not yet ready to accept “the worst case scenario” that would result in clinics closing and patients being forced to receive treatment in other states. She expects Alabama’s medical community will be able to work with legislators and judges to carve out a middle ground that enables IVF treatments to continue.

Still, McLean blasted the ruling, saying it was not “grounded in medicine.”

“Unfortunately, this has become a political debate, but in reality this is a medical debate, and how we are able to practice medical care as physicians,” McLean said.

If no concessions to the court ruling are made, McLean said it could cost Alabama women more money because some doctors might only be willing to retrieve a limited number of eggs. In a typical IVF cycle, doctors stimulate the ovaries to produce as many mature eggs as possible. Those eggs are then fertilized in a lab and, if successful, turn into embryos. Multiple embryos are often needed to produce a single live birth.

“If we are to say, ‘Okay, I can fertilize two eggs instead of 10,’ we may not end up with any embryos or end up with an unhealthy embryo, so patients may need multiple egg retrievals to achieve the same pregnancy rate that we were trying to achieve with one retrieval,” McLean said. “Multiple attempts at retrieval will cost more money.”

McLean added she worries insurance companies could balk at those costs. She also worries that medical malpractice costs could go up and that it will become harder to attract physicians to the state.

“So, yes, there is a scenario where this closes fertility clinics in the state,” McLean said. “But we remain hopeful and absolutely expect a different path forward.”

Dunham, the Birmingham attorney, is even more pessimistic about the implications of the ruling. She noted that an online infertility support group she is a part of is already buzzing with discussion from Alabama couples about how to ship their frozen embryos out of state. It costs about $1,500 to mail the embryos to labs in Georgia or another state, but Dunham noted that many labs elsewhere are already facing strains on their storage capacities.

On Tuesday, Dunham said she was also fielding questions from divorce attorneys about whether settlement agreements that call for the destruction of a couple’s embryos can remain valid. The decision could also have implications for genetic testing of embryos, she said. Many patients rely on screening embryos to identify and prevent passing along genetic conditions.

Such testing can also identify which embryos have a normal number of chromosomes and are less likely to result in a miscarriage.

“If someone has a recurrent miscarriage, it could be due to a genetic disorder,” Dunham said. “You end up creating multiple embryos, and they usually genetically test to see which one has the best chance of making it.

“But if you say these are children, and they can’t be destroyed — we are looking at maybe not being able to test it, because it could hurt the embryo,” she said.

Even outside of Alabama, the ruling is causing an additional stress for IVF patients already undergoing an anxiety-inducing process.

Audra Stark, 40, has an 8-month-old daughter she conceived through IVF and calls it one of the most “mentally traumatic experiences” of her life. The Virginia mother went through the process three years ago after her physician told her she wasn’t able to ovulate and ended up freezing four embryos in hopes of growing her family.

When she heard about the Alabama news, Stark said she immediately wondered which state would follow.

“It’s scary because I think it’s going to be like dominoes falling,” Stark said. “I think it’s going to be like abortion restrictions where we’re going to see huge swaths of the country without access to these services.”

Without good solid Fertility Services, and great healthcare insurance to help pay for it, my three kids wouldn't exist. So fuck all you pinch-faced blue-nosed bible-thumpin' god-knobbers. Fuck you with a barrel cactus.

Sunday, December 17, 2023

Today's Wingnut

Sen Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)

I can't confirm this one
(I also can't confirm there's a banjo playing in the background)

This one -
with the White Power hand sign -
is official

I imagine Marsha's C Street Family gang is quite proud


The Fellowship (incorporated as Fellowship Foundation and doing business as the International Foundation), also known as The Family, is a U.S.-based nonprofit religious and political organization founded in April 1935 by Abraham Vereide. The stated purpose of The Fellowship is to provide a fellowship forum where decision makers can attend Bible studies, attend prayer meetings, worship God, experience spiritual affirmation and receive support.

The Fellowship has been described as one of the most politically well-connected and one of the most secretly funded ministries in the United States. It shuns publicity and its members share a vow of secrecy. The Fellowship's former leader, the late Douglas Coe, and others have justified the organization's desire for secrecy by citing biblical admonitions against public displays of good works, insisting that they would not be able to tackle diplomatically sensitive missions if they drew public attention.

The Fellowship holds one regular public event each year, the National Prayer Breakfast, which is in Washington, D.C. Every sitting United States president since Dwight D. Eisenhower has participated in at least one National Prayer Breakfast during their term.[citation needed]

The group's known participants include ranking United States government officials, corporate executives, heads of religious and humanitarian aid organizations, and ambassadors and high-ranking politicians from across the world. Many United States senators and congressmen have publicly acknowledged working with the Fellowship or are documented as having worked together to pass or influence legislation.

Doug Burleigh is a key figure in the organization and has taken over organizing the National Prayer Breakfast since the death of his father-in-law, Doug Coe.[citation needed] The current president of the organization (starting in 2017) is Katherine Crane.

In Newsweek, Lisa Miller wrote that rather than calling themselves "Christians", as they describe themselves, they are brought together by common love for the teachings of Jesus and that all approaches to "loving Jesus" are acceptable. In 2022, Netflix released a documentary called The Family which depicts the organization's influence on American politics throughout history.

History

The Fellowship Foundation traces its roots to Abraham Vereide, a Methodist clergyman and social innovator, who organized a month of prayer meetings in 1934 in San Francisco. The Fellowship was founded in 1935 in opposition to President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal. His work spread down the West Coast and eventually to Boston.[9][dead link]

The author Jeff Sharlet described the beginning of the Family as a reaction to union activities of Harry Bridges, "The Family really begins when the founder (Abraham Vereide) has this vision, which he thinks comes from God, that Harry Bridges, this Australian labour organiser who organised really the biggest strike in American history, a very successful strike, is a Satanic and Soviet agent."

- more -

Friday, December 15, 2023

Today's Grift

Somebody please explain to me how these "Christians" who get themselves all frothed up into a murderous rage are different in any substantive way from the Taliban douchenozzles who run around beating women and dynamiting Buddhist statues.


There is no ideology more violently hateful
than a religious devotee's love for his deity imaginary friend.

What a sucker this Cassidy clown is. Not that he's been suckered into zealotry, but that he's been suckered into believing a good grift is all you need to play the game, and break into the big leagues - that nobody will ever get wise to the fuckery.


Former congressional candidate charged with vandalizing Satanic Temple display at Iowa Capitol

A former congressional candidate from Mississippi has been charged with allegedly vandalizing the Satanic Temple of Iowa's statue depicting the pagan idol Baphomet at the Iowa State Capitol.


Michael Cassidy, 35, of Lauderdale, Mississippi, was charged with fourth-degree criminal mischief on Thursday, according to the Iowa Department of Public Safety. The charge could carry one year in prison and a $2,560 fine.

The Satanic Temple of Iowa had announced on Facebook its display had been "destroyed beyond repair."

The installation, permitted under state rules governing religious displays in the building, has been debated and criticized by Iowa and national politicians. Presidential hopeful Ron DeSantis on Tuesday joined a chorus of Republicans calling for its removal while others in the GOP said that, though it is offensive, it is a protected form of free speech. Gov. Kim Reynolds called the display "objectionable" and called for Iowans to pray in response.

"In a free society, the best response to objectionable speech is more speech, and I encourage all those of faith to join me today in praying over the Capitol and recognizing the Nativity scene that will be on display ― the true reason for the season," she said.

Crowdfunding campaign for man charged in vandalism reportedly raises $20,000
Newsweek reported a crowdfunding campaign was launched for Cassidy's legal fund, which raised its target of $20,000. Some donors included conservative campaign group Turning Point USA, which gave $10,000.

Cassidy posted on X, the social media site formerly known as Twitter, thanking people for their support. He said the campaign raised enough money "in just a couple hours." DeSantis said on X he would contribute to the campaign.

He defended the attack and criticized those who, while saying they found the display offensive, took the position that it was permitted as an exercise of free speech.

"To Christians who defend Satanic altars when they speak with their church, family, friends, coworkers, or on @X: Would you use the same argument if you were speaking with God? Think on that," he wrote.
  • First, the fact that he assumes there's a god for anyone to be "speaking with" is at the core of the problem
  • Second, I could see this vandalism as an act of civil disobedience, but while the guy admits to it, he's not willing to pay the penalty for it, which is absolutely the bare minimum requirement if your action is to be considered legit protest
  • As it stands - IMHO - this is a standard issue political stunt, meant to grift a few bucks from the rubes and gain some notoriety  
Cassidy ran for the Mississippi 3rd Congressional District in 2022, losing against incumbent Republican Michael Guest. On his LinkedIn page, he lists himself as a former active duty Navy pilot, now a Naval reservist, and a civilian test pilot. A native of Virginia, he says he has a bachelor's degree in history from Virginia Tech and a master's in liberal arts from Harvard University's extension service, with a focus on government.

"I'm a Christian conservative who loves our nation and is committed to preserving the blessings of liberty bestowed upon us by the Founding generation," he said on his campaign website.

In an interview with the Marion County, Mississippi, Columbian-Progress during his congressional campaign, he said he grew up in the Baptist and Episcopal churches.

"Jesus Christ is the anchor of my life," the Columbian-Progress quoted him as saying "I am serene because of my faith. The United States is going downhill since the removal of Jesus Christ. The country needs to return to God or it will continue on this bad path."

He ran on a platform that, according to Mississippi Today, included providing newlyweds with a $20,000 wedding gift, "paid back if the couple divorces." He also endorsed allowing all citizens to enroll in Medicare, regardless of age ― a position similar to U.S. Sen Bernie Sanders' "Medicare for All" He finished second in his three-candidate congressional race and forced incumbent U.S Rep. Michael Guest, R-Mississippi, into a runoff, but Guest won that vote handily.

Facebook posting says Satanic Temple plans 'closing ceremony' for display
The Satanic Temple in its Facebook posting about the attack on the display said the Baphomet idol, a robed effigy with a gilded ram's head holding a ribbon-bedecked pentangle, was the primary target. On Friday, the display seemed to be mostly disassembled, with the original candles and body of Baphomet rearranged. Christian offerings and a rosary had been placed near the display and a man sat in front of it, praying.

The Iowa Department of Administrative Services, which oversees the Capitol, allowed the display for two weeks under rules that permit religious installations. On Facebook, Mortimer Adramelech, identifying himself as minister of Satan and a council member of the Satanic Temple of Iowa, called on Iowa satanists to gather at the Capitol at 10 a.m. Saturday for "our closing ceremony."

"YOU DO NOT WANT TO MISS THIS!" he wrote, adding, "Dress in your Satanic best and get ready to hail Satan."

In a news release, Jason Benell. president of the Iowa Atheists and Freethinkers, condemned the attack.

"Not only was that display targeted, but it was also targeted specifically by Christians, for sectarian religious reasons. This targeting was encouraged by legislators and even had the Iowa Governor, Kim Reynolds, calling it 'evil.' This is unacceptable," Benell wrote. "When our leaders make it permissible to destroy religious - or non-religious - displays they find religiously objectionable, they are abdicating their responsibility to safeguard the freedom of expression of the citizens they represent."

Friday, November 03, 2023

They're Not Christians

... they're shameful phonies.



You're allowed to have as many imaginary friends as you think appropriate, and you're allowed to believe every word you think they tell you.

What you're not allowed to do is to use government to force me to obey what you think those imaginary friends are telling me to do.

Stuff that shit in your ditty bag, get on the fuckin' bus, and go home.

Wednesday, October 04, 2023

God Who?


Sow honesty
Reap trust

Opinion
America doesn’t need more God. It needs more atheists.

I like to say that my kids made me an atheist. But really what they did was make me honest.

I was raised Jewish — with Sabbath prayers and religious school, a bat mitzvah and a Jewish wedding. But I don’t remember ever truly believing that God was out there listening to me sing songs of praise.

I thought of God as a human invention: a character, a concept, a carry-over from an ancient time.

I thought of him as a fiction.

Today I realize that means I’m an atheist. It’s not complicated. My (non)belief derives naturally from a few basic observations:

1. The Greek myths are obviously stories. The Norse myths are obviously stories. L. Ron Hubbard obviously made that stuff up. Extrapolate.

2. The holy books underpinning some of the bigger theistic religions are riddled with “facts” now disproved by science and “morality” now disavowed by modern adherents. Extrapolate.

3. Life is confusing and death is scary. Naturally, humans want to believe that someone capable is in charge and that we continue to live after we die. But wanting doesn’t make it so.

4. Child rape. War. Etc.

And yet, when I was younger, I would never have called myself an atheist — not on a survey, not to my family, not even to myself.

Being an “atheist,” at least according to popular culture, seems to require so much work. You have to complain to the school board about the Pledge of Allegiance, stamp over “In God We Trust” on all your paper money and convince Grandma not to go to church. You have to be PhD-from-Oxford smart, irritated by Christmas and shruggingly unmoved by Michelangelo’s “Pietà.” That isn’t me — but those are the stereotypes.

And then there are the data. Studies have shown that many, many Americans don’t trust atheists. They don’t want to vote for atheists, and they don’t want their children to marry atheists. Researchers have found that even atheists presume serial killers are more likely to be atheist than not.

Given all this, it’s not hard to see why atheists often prefer to keep quiet about it. Why I kept quiet. I wanted to be liked!

But when I had children — when it hit me that I was responsible for teaching my children everything — I wanted, above all, to tell them the truth.

Their first atheist lesson was completely impromptu. Noah was 5, Jesse was 3, and we were sitting on the couch before bed reading from “D’Aulaires’ Book of Greek Myths,” a holdover from my childhood bookshelf. One of the boys asked what a “myth” was, and I told them it was a story about how the world works. People used to believe that these gods were in charge of what happened on Earth, and these stories helped explain things they didn’t understand, like winter or stars or thunder. “See” — I flipped ahead and found a picture — “Zeus has a thunderbolt.”

“They don’t believe them anymore?” No, I said. That’s why they call it “myth.” When people still believe it, they call it “religion.” Like the stories about God and Moses that we read at Passover or the ones about Jesus and Christmas.

The little pajama-clad bodies nodded, and on we read.

That was it — the big moment. It was probably also the easiest moment.

Before one son became preoccupied with death. Before the other son had to decide whether to be bar mitzvahed. Before my daughter looked up from her math homework one day to ask, “How do we know there’s no God?”

Religion offers ready-made answers to our most difficult questions. It gives people ways to mark time, celebrate and mourn. Once I vowed not to teach my children anything I did not personally believe, I had to come up with new answers. But I discovered as I went what most parents discover: You can figure it out as you go.

Establishing a habit of honesty did not sap the delight from my children’s lives or destroy their moral compass. I suspect it made my family closer than we would have been had my husband and I pretended to our children that we believed in things we did not. We sowed honesty and reaped trust — along with intellectual challenge, emotional sustenance and joy.

Those are all personal rewards. But there are political rewards as well.

My children know how to distinguish fact from fiction — which is harder for children raised religious. They don’t assume conventional wisdom is true and they do expect arguments to be based on evidence. Which means they have the skills to be engaged, informed and savvy citizens.

We need citizens like that.


Lies, lying and disinformation suffuse mainstream politics as never before. A recent Washington Post-ABC News poll found that 29 percent of Americans believe that President Biden was not legitimately elected, a total composed of those who think there is solid evidence of fraud (22 percent) and those who think there isn’t (7 percent). I don’t know which is worse: believing there to be evidence of fraud when even the Trump campaign can’t find any or asserting the election was stolen even though you know there’s no proof.

Meanwhile, we are just beginning to grasp that artificial intelligence could develop an almost limitless power to deceive — threatening the ability of even the most alert citizen to discern what’s real.

We need Americans who demand — as atheists do — that truth claims be tethered to fact. We need Americans who understand — as atheists do — that the future of the world is in our hands. And in this particular political moment, we need Americans to stand up to Christian nationalists who are using their growing political and judicial power to take away our rights. Atheists can do that.

Fortunately, there are a lot of atheists in the United States — probably far more than you think.

Some people say they believe in God, but not the kind favored by monotheistic religions — a conscious supreme being with powers of intercession or creation. When they say “God” they mean cosmic oneness or astonishing coincidences. They mean that sense of smallness-within-largeness they’ve felt while standing on the shore of the ocean or holding a newborn baby or hearing the final measures of Chopin’s “Fantaisie-Impromptu.”

So, why do those people use the word “God” at all? The philosopher Daniel C. Dennett argues in “Breaking the Spell” that since we know we’re supposed to believe in God, when we don’t believe in a supernatural being we give the name instead to things we do believe in, such as transcendent moments of human connection.

Whatever the case, in 2022, Gallup found that 81 percent of Americans believe in God, the lowest percentage yet recorded. This year, when it gave respondents the option of saying they’re not sure, it found that only 74 percent believe in God, 14 percent weren’t sure, and 12 percent did not believe.

Not believing in God — that’s the very definition of atheism. But when people go around counting atheists, the number they come up with is far lower than that. The most recent number from Pew Research Center is 4 percent.

What’s with the gap? That’s anti-atheist stigma (and pro-belief bias) at work. Everybody’s keeping quiet, because everybody wants to be liked. Some researchers, recognizing this problem, developed a workaround.

In 2017, psychologists Will Gervais and Maxine Najle tried to estimate the prevalence of atheism in the United States using a technique called “unmatched count”: They asked two groups of 1,000 respondents each, how many statements were true among a list of statements. The lists were identical except that one of them included the statement “I believe in God.” By comparing the numbers, the researchers could then estimate the percentage of atheists without ever asking a direct question. They came up with around 26 percent.

If that’s true or even close, there are more atheists in the United States than Catholics.

Do you know what some of those atheists call themselves? Catholics. And Protestants, Jews, Muslims and Buddhists. General Social Survey data back this up: Among religious Americans, only 64 percent are certain about the existence of God. Hidden atheists can be found not just among the “nones,” as they’re called — the religiously unaffiliated — but also in America’s churches, mosques and synagogues.

“If you added up all the nominal Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. — those who are religious in name only,” Harvard humanist chaplain Greg M. Epstein writes in “Good Without God,” “you really might get the largest denomination in the world.”

Atheists are everywhere. And we are unusually disposed to getting stuff done.

Iused to say, when people asked me what atheists do believe, that it was simple: Atheists believe that God is a human invention.

But now, I think it’s more than that.

If you are an atheist — if you do not believe in a Supreme Being — you can be moral or not, mindful or not, clever or not, hopeful or not. Clearly, you can keep going to church. But, by definition, you cannot believe that God is in charge. You must give up the notion of God’s will, God’s purpose, God’s mysterious ways.

In some ways, this makes life easier. You don’t have to work out why God might cause or ignore suffering, what parts of this broken world are God’s plan, or what work is his to do and what is yours.

But you also don’t get to leave things up to God. Atheists must accept that people are allowing — we are allowing — women to die in childbirth, children to go hungry, men to buy guns that can slaughter dozens of people in minutes. Atheists believe people organized the world as it is now, and only people can make it better.

No wonder we are “the most politically active group in American politics today,” according to political scientist Ryan Burge, interpreting data from the Cooperative Election Study.

That’s right: Atheists take more political action — donating to campaigns, protesting, attending meetings, working for politicians — than any other “religious” group. And we vote. In his study on this data, sociologist Evan Stewart noted that atheists were about 30 percent more likely to vote than religiously affiliated respondents.

We also vote far more than most religiously unaffiliated people. That’s what distinguishes atheists from the “nones” — and what I didn’t realize at first.

Atheists haven’t just checked out of organized religion. (Indeed, we may not have.) We haven’t just rejected belief in God. (Though, obviously, that’s the starting point.) Where atheism becomes a definite stance rather than a lack of direction, a positive belief and not just a negative one, is in our understanding that, without a higher power, we need human power to change the world.

I want to be clear: There are clergy members and congregations all across this country working to do good, not waiting for God to answer their prayers or assuming that God meant for the globe to get hotter. You don’t have to be an atheist to conduct yourself as if people are responsible for the world they live in — you just have to act like an atheist, by taking matters into your own hands.

Countless good people of faith do just that. But one thing they can’t do as well as atheists is push back against the outsize cultural and political power of religion itself.

That power is crushing some of our most vulnerable citizens. And I don’t mean my fellow atheists. Atheists, it’s true, are subject to discrimination and scapegoating; somehow we’re to blame for moral chaos, mass shootings and whatever the “trans cult” is. Yes, we are technically barred from serving as jurors in the state of Maryland or joining a Boy Scout troop anywhere, but we do not, as a group, suffer anything like the prejudice that, say, LGBTQ+ people face. It’s not even close.

Peel back the layers of discrimination against LGBTQ+ people, though, and you find religion. Peel back the layers of control over women’s bodies — from dress codes that punish girls for male desire all the way to the Supreme Court striking down Roe v. Wade — and you find religion. Often, there isn’t much peeling to do. According to the bill itself, Missouri’s total abortion ban was created “in recognition that Almighty God is the author of life.” Say what, now?

Peel back the layers of abstinence-only or marriage-centered or anti-homosexual sex education and you find religion. “Don’t say gay” laws, laws denying trans kids medical care, school-library book bans and even efforts to suppress the teaching of inconvenient historical facts — motivated by religion.

And when religion loses a fight and progress wins instead? Religion then claims it’s not subject to the resulting laws. “Religious belief” is — more and more, at the state and federal levels — a way to sidestep advances the country makes in civil rights, human rights and public health.

In 45 states and D.C., parents can get religious exemptions from laws that require schoolchildren to be vaccinated. Seven states allow pharmacists to refuse to fill contraceptive prescriptions because of their religious beliefs. Every business with a federal contract has to comply with federal nondiscrimination rules — unless it’s a religious organization. Every employer that provides health insurance has to comply with the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate — unless it’s, say, a craft supply store with Christian owners.

Case by case, law by law, our country’s commitment to the first right enumerated in our Bill of Rights — “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” — is faltering. The Supreme Court has ruled that the citizens of Maine have to pay for parochial school, that a high school football coach should be free to lead a prayer on the 50-yard line, that a potential wedding website designer can reject potential same-sex clients. This past summer, Oklahoma approved the nation’s first publicly funded religious school. This fall, Texas began allowing schools to employ clergy members in place of guidance counselors.

You don’t have to be an atheist to worry about the structural integrity of Thomas Jefferson’s “wall of separation between Church & State.” You don’t have to be an atheist to think that religion should not shape public policy or that believers should have to follow the laws that everyone else does. You don’t have to be an atheist to see that Christian nationalists are using “religious liberty” to perpetuate much of the discrimination Americans suffer today.

But atheists can do one thing about the country’s drift into theocracy that our religious neighbors won’t: We can tell people we don’t believe in God. The more people who do that, the more we normalize atheism in America, the easier it will be — for both politicians and the general public — to usher religion back out of our laws.

Okay, but should you say you’re an atheist even if you believe in “God” as the power of nature or something like that?

Yes. It does no one any favors — not the country, not your neighbors — to say you believe in God metaphorically when there are plenty of people out there who literally believe that God is looking down from heaven deciding which of us to cast into hell.

In fact, when certain believers wield enough political power to turn their God’s presumed preferences into law, I would say it’s dangerous to claim you believe in “God” when what you actually believe in is awe or wonder. (Your “God is love” only lends validity and power to their “God hates gays.”)

So ask yourself: Do I think a supernatural being is in charge of the universe?

If you answer “no,” you’re an atheist. That’s it — you’re done.

But if you go further: You’ll be doing something good for your country.

When I started raising my kids as atheists, I wasn’t particularly honest with the rest of the world. I wasn’t everybody’s mom, right? Plus, I had to get along with other people. Young parents need community, and I was afraid to risk alienating new parent friends by being honest about being — looks both ways, lowers voice — an atheist.

But, in addition to making me be honest inside our home, my children pushed me to start being honest on the outside. In part, I wanted to set an example for them, and in part, I wanted to help change the world they would face.

It shouldn’t be hard to say you don’t believe in God. It shouldn’t be shocking or shameful. I know that I’m moral and respectful and friendly. And the more I say to people that I’m an atheist — me, the mom who taught the kindergarten class about baking with yeast and brought the killer cupcakes to the bake sale — the more people will stop assuming that being an atheist means being … a serial killer.

And then? The more I say I’m an atheist, the more other people will feel comfortable calling themselves atheists. And the stigma will gradually dissolve.

Can you imagine? If we all knew how many of us there are?

It would give everyone permission to be honest with their kids and their friends, to grapple with big questions without having to hold on to beliefs they never embraced.

And it would take away permission, too. Permission to pass laws (or grant exemptions to laws) based on the presumed desires of a fictional creation. Permission to be cruel to fellow human beings based on Bible verses. Permission to eschew political action in favor of “thoughts and prayers.”

I understand that, to many people, this might sound difficult or risky. It took me years to declare myself an atheist, and I was raised Reform Jewish, I live in the Northeast, I’m White, I work at home, and my family and friends are a liberal bunch. The stakes were low for me. For some, I fully concede, the stakes are too high.

If you think you’d lose your job or put your children at risk of harassment for declaring your atheism, you get a pass. If you would be risking physical harm, don’t speak out. If you’re an atheist running for school board somewhere that book bans are on the agenda, then feel free to keep it quiet, and God bless.

But for everyone else who doesn’t believe in God and hasn’t said so? Consider that your honesty will allow others to be honest, and that your reticence encourages others to keep quiet. Consider that the longer everyone keeps quiet, the longer religion has political and cultural license to hurt people. Consider that the United States — to survive as a secular democracy — needs you now more than ever.

And the next time you find yourself tempted to pretend that you believe in God? Tell the truth instead.

Sunday, September 17, 2023

The Church

Religion has been a main component of politics ever since the first less-than-terribly honorable shaman figured out he could get his fellow cave dwellers to do things he wanted done if he could spin out a really good ghost story about something his imaginary friend told him in a dream a coupla nights ago after eating those funny tasting mushrooms he found.

So it never comes as a big surprise when I learn a little more about what a giant shit-bird-failure the Catholic church has been at some very important moments - moments when people really needed a little moral authority in the face of some very bad actors doing some very bad things.

And the more we learn about some of that shit-birdery, the less reason we have to be surprised by any of it.

At least Pope Francis has the balls to come out with it. So good on you, Frank - maybe you could persuade some of the other theocrats to own up to their shit.



Letter shows Pope Pius XII probably knew about Holocaust early on

Wartime Pope Pius XII knew details about the Nazi attempt to exterminate Jews in the Holocaust as early as 1942, according to a letter found in the Vatican archives that conflicts with the Holy See's official position at the time that the information it had was vague and unverified.

The yellowed, typewritten letter, reproduced in Italy's Corriere della Sera on Sunday, is highly significant because it was discovered by an in-house Vatican archivist and made public with the encouragement of Holy See officials.

The letter, dated Dec. 14, 1942, was written by Father Lother Koenig, a Jesuit who was in the anti-Nazi resistance in Germany, and addressed to the pope's personal secretary at the Vatican, Father Robert Leiber, also a German.

Vatican archivist Giovanni Coco told the Corriere that the importance of the letter was "enormous, a unique case" because it showed the Vatican had information that labour camps were actually death factories.

In the letter, Koenig tells Leiber that sources had confirmed that about 6,000 Poles and Jews a day were being killed in "SS-furnaces" at the Belzec camp near Rava-Ruska, which was then part of German-occupied Poland and is now in western Ukraine.

"The newness and importance of this document derives from a fact: now we have the certainty that the Catholic Church in Germany sent Pius XII exact and detailed news about the crimes that were being perpetrated against the Jews," Coco told the newspaper, whose article was headlined: "Pius XII Knew".

Asked by the Corriere interviewer if the letter showed that Pius knew, Coco said: "Yes, and not only from then."

The letter made reference to two other Nazi camps - Auschwitz and Dachau - and suggested that there were other missives between Koenig and Leiber that either have gone missing or have not yet been found.

Supporters of Pius say he worked behind the scenes to help Jews and did not speak out in order to prevent worsening the situation for Catholics in Nazi-occupied Europe. His detractors say he lacked the courage to speak out on information he had despite pleas from Allied powers fighting Germany.

The letter was among documents Coco said were kept in haphazard ways in the Vatican's Secretariat of State and only recently handed over to the central archives where he works.

Suzanne Brown-Fleming, director of International Academic Programs at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington DC, told Reuters in an email that the release showed that the Vatican was taking seriously Pope Francis' statement that "the Church is not afraid of history" when he ordered the wartime archives opened in 2019.

"There is both a desire for and support for a careful assessment of the documents from a scientific perspective - whether favourable or unfavourable in what the documents reveal," she said.

In an email to Reuters, David Kertzer, Pulitzer Prize-winning author of "The Pope at War", a 2022 book about the Pius years, said Coco was a "top notch, serious scholar", centrally placed in the Vatican to unearth the truth.

Brown-Fleming, Coco and Kertzer will be part of a major conference on Pius and the Holocaust next month at the Pontifical Gregorian sponsored by Catholic and Jewish organisations, the U.S. State Department and Israeli and American Holocaust research groups, among others.

Wednesday, May 24, 2023

Faith

It ain't what it used to be.


Over their individual lifespans, 24% of Americans have changed religious affiliation, with the biggest chunk moving into the 'None' category.

56% simply no longer believe in The Great And Powerful Pixie In The Sky.

30% have left their churches because of negative pronouncements against QueerFolk.

17% say it's because their church became too political.

Guess why the MAGA gang is always screaming, "This is a Christian nation!!"

It's probably got something to do with the fact that the numbers are heading south in a big hurry.

The percentage of Americans identifying with any Christian religion is off by more than 30 points since the early 70s - and it's headed for 'Minority Christian' status way sooner than anybody ever thought possible. Which, of course, scares the fuck out of the God-Knobbers because they're about to lose a big reason they've been able to wield the outsized political power they've spent 50 years nurturing and exploiting, so they have to pretend even harder that they still are - and will remain forever - top dog.

White Christian Supremacy is fast becoming a relic of glories past. And instead of understanding that maybe that's as it should be, since their dominance was based on lies and magical thinking, they're concentrating on their own bad feelings of being perceived as the failed generation - the people who lost the empire.

Fuck 'em.


Losing their religion: why US churches are on the decline

As the US adjusts to an increasingly non-religious population, thousands of churches are closing each year – probably accelerated by Covid


Churches are closing at rapid numbers in the US, researchers say, as congregations dwindle across the country and a younger generation of Americans abandon Christianity altogether – even as faith continues to dominate American politics.

As the US adjusts to an increasingly non-religious population, thousands of churches are closing each year in the country – a figure that experts believe may have accelerated since the Covid-19 pandemic.


The situation means some hard decisions for pastors, who have to decide when a dwindling congregation is no longer sustainable. But it has also created a boom market for those wanting to buy churches, with former houses of worship now finding new life.

About 4,500 Protestant churches closed in 2019, the last year data is available, with about 3,000 new churches opening, according to Lifeway Research. It was the first time the number of churches in the US hadn’t grown since the evangelical firm started studying the topic. With the pandemic speeding up a broader trend of Americans turning away from Christianity, researchers say the closures will only have accelerated.

“The closures, even for a temporary period of time, impacted a lot of churches. People breaking that habit of attending church means a lot of churches had to work hard to get people back to attending again,” said Scott McConnell, executive director at Lifeway Research.

“In the last three years, all signs are pointing to a continued pace of closures probably similar to 2019 or possibly higher, as there’s been a really rapid rise in American individuals who say they’re not religious.”

Protestant pastors reported that typical church attendance is only 85% of pre-pandemic levels, McConnell said, while research by the Survey Center on American Life and the University of Chicago found that in spring 2022 67% of Americans reported attending church at least once a year, compared with 75% before the pandemic.

But while Covid-19 may have accelerated the decline, there is a broader, long-running trend of people moving away from religion. In 2017 Lifeway surveyed young adults aged between 18 and 22 who had attended church regularly, for at least a year during high school. The firm found that seven out of 10 had stopped attending church regularly.

The younger generation just doesn’t feel like they’re being accepted in a church environment or some of their choices aren’t being accepted
Scott McConnell, Lifeway Research

Some of the reasons were “logistical”, McConnell said, as people moved away for college or started jobs which made it difficult to attend church.

“But some of the other answers are not so much logistics. One of the top answers was church members seem to be judgmental or hypocritical,” McConnell said.

“And so the younger generation just doesn’t feel like they’re being accepted in a church environment or some of their choices aren’t being accepted by those at church.”

About a quarter of the young adults who dropped out of church said they disagreed with their church’s stance on political and social issues, McConnell said.

A study by Pew Research found that the number of Americans who identified as Christian was 64% in 2020, with 30% of the US population being classed as “religiously unaffiliated”. About 6% of Americans identified with Judaism, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism.

“Since the 1990s, large numbers of Americans have left Christianity to join the growing ranks of US adults who describe their religious identity as atheist, agnostic or ‘nothing in particular’,” Pew wrote.

“This accelerating trend is reshaping the US religious landscape.”

In 1972 92% of Americans said they were Christian, Pew reported, but by 2070 that number will drop to below 50% – and the number of “religiously unaffiliated” Americans – or ‘nones’ will probably outnumber those adhering to Christianity.

Stephen Bullivant, author of Nonverts: The Making of Ex-Christian America and professor of theology and the sociology of religion at St Mary’s University, said in the Christian world it had been a generational change.

While grandparents might have been regular churchgoers, their children would say they believe in God, but not go to church regularly. By the time millennials came round, they had little experience or relationship with churchgoing or religion.

In the Catholic church, in particular, the sexual abuse scandal may have driven away people who had only a tenuous connection to the faith.

“The other thing is the pandemic,” Bullivant said.

“A lot of people who were weakly attached, to suddenly have months of not going, they’re then thinking: ‘Well we don’t really need to go,’ or ‘We’ve found something else to do,’ or thinking: ‘It was hard enough dragging the kids along then, we really ought to start going again … next week.’”

Bullivant said most other countries saw a move away from religion earlier than the US, but the US had particular circumstances that slowed things down.

“Canada, Britain, France, Australia, New Zealand, the nones rise much earlier, the wake of the 1960s the baby boom generation, this kind of big, growing separation of kind of traditional Christian moral morality,” Bullivant said.

“What happens in America that I think dampens down the rise of the nones is the cold war. Because in America, unlike in Britain, there’s a very explicit kind of ‘Christian America’ versus godless communism framing, and to be non-religious is to be un-American.

“I think that dampens it down until you get the millennial generation for whom the cold war is just a vague memory from their early childhood.”

When people leave, congregations dwindle. And when that gets to a critical point, churches close. That has led to a flood of churches available for sale, and a range of opportunities for the once holy buildings.

Brian Dolehide, managing director of AD Advisors, a real estate company that specializes in church sales, said the last 10 years had seen a spike in sales. Frequently churches become housing or care homes, while some of the churches are bought by other churches wanting to expand.

But selling a church isn’t like selling a house or a business. Frequently the sellers want a buyer who plans to use the church for a good cause: Dolehide said he had recently sold a church in El Paso which is now used as housing for recent immigrants, and a convent in Pittsburgh which will be used as affordable housing.

“The faith-based transaction is so different in so many ways from the for-profit transaction. We’re not looking to profit from our transactions, we’re looking for the best use that reflects the last 50 years or 100 years use if possible.”

The closures aren’t spread evenly through the country.

In Texas, John Muzyka of Church Realty, a company that specializes in church sales, said there were fewer churches for sale than at any point in the last 15 years. He believes that is partly down to Texas’s response to the pandemic, where the governor allowed churches to open in May 2020, even when the number of new Covid cases was extremely high.

“I would say if a church stayed closed for more than a year, it was really hard to get those people to come back. When you were closed for three months, you were able to get over it,” Muzyka said.

That aside, closures are often due to a failure of churches to adapt.

“A church will go through a life cycle. At some point, maybe the congregation ages out, maybe they stop reaching young families.

“If the church ages and doesn’t reach young people, or the demographics change and they don’t figure out how to reach the new demographic, that church ends up closing.

“Yes, there’s financial pressures that will close a church, but oftentimes, it’s more that they didn’t figure out how to change when the community changed, or they didn’t have enough young people to continue the congregation for the next generation.”

Thursday, May 04, 2023

It's A Contagion

James Madison

The purpose of separation
of church and state
is to keep forever from these shores
the ceaseless strife
that has soaked the soil of Europe
in blood for centuries.

Theocratic shit keeps breaking out all over the damned place, but this too shall pass. Not before we see more damage done - but it'll start to fade as more people wake up and realize maybe politics is something they can't afford to ignore.

We should be able to expect better from people, but "better" is a very subjective term. So if we want good government - and no, that's not an oxymoron - we'd best be paying attention to the shit some of these good Christian folk are trying to pull.

You have the right to worship your god - or some oil spot on the garage floor that you think looks just like the Virgin Mary's tits - or anything else - or nothing.

But you don't have the right to impose any of your weird beliefs on me - because I have the right to expect you to keep your imaginary friends to yourself, and out of my fucking government.


One Family Has Spearheaded Montana’s Unflinching Conservatism

Three members of the Regier family now hold leadership positions in the Montana Legislature as the state’s conservative shift has left even some Republicans wary.


During a legislative hearing in 2011 that was a prelude to Montana’s debates on abortion, State Representative Keith Regier displayed an image of a cow and made the argument that cattle were more valuable when pregnant.

The comparison drew a prompt rebuke from some women in the room, but Mr. Regier, a Republican, declined to apologize. Over the years, the former schoolteacher and sod farmer has seldom demurred from his growing brand of combative Christian-oriented politics, in which the Ten Commandments are the foundation of good law and some of the biggest battles have been with moderates in his own party.

Mr. Regier has now emerged as the patriarch of a new family political dynasty that has injected fresh conservative intensity into debates over abortion, diversity training and, this spring, transgender rights. Mr. Regier chairs the Senate’s powerful judiciary committee, while his daughter, Amy, leads its counterpart in the House. Mr. Regier’s son, Matt, has risen to speaker of the House. The trio of legislators, each wielding a similar brand of unflinching conservatism, were among the most powerful proponents of a set of bills that took particular aim at the rights of transgender people.

It was Matt Regier who led the move to bar one of the legislature’s only transgender representatives, Zooey Zephyr, who had spoken out vociferously on the House floor last month against a measure banning hormone treatments and surgical care for transgender minors. The proposal was one of several new laws that passed recently, including one prohibiting adult-oriented drag shows on public property and another creating a strict definition of a person’s sex.

At the close of the legislative session on Tuesday night, fellow lawmakers gave Mr. Regier a standing ovation. “There were many times of sunlight, and there were also times of shade, but overall it’s been an incredible ride,” the speaker said.

The Regier family hails from the Flathead Valley of northwest Montana, a majestic region of glaciers and fir forests around Kalispell that has become a destination for conservatives looking to flee urban life and liberal politics in other states. Militia groups and far-right religious leaders have also found a home in the valley, some of them drawn to the notion of establishing what is often called a “redoubt” in the American Northwest.

Keith Regier and his wife settled there in 1975 after he obtained a degree in physical education from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. At the time, Democrats dominated much of state politics, in part because of strong labor organizing in the state’s expansive mining and timber industries.

Keith Regier taught sixth grade in Kalispell for nearly three decades. Matt was a quarterback for the high school football team, taking it into the state playoffs. Amy earned a degree in nursing and began working at the hospital.

Keith Regier said he had not seriously considered running for office until he retired from teaching, telling The Daily Inter Lake news outlet in 2005 that he planned to focus on sod farming with his son and perhaps do some writing. But by 2008 he had won a seat in the State House, promising to lower taxes, protect the death penalty and undermine labor unions by converting Montana into a “right to work” state.

“This country was founded on Judeo-Christian values,” he said. “Just read the Declaration of Independence. It’s very obvious.”

His unyielding approach gained traction in the state capital of Helena — including his beliefs on abortion — and he rose up to become majority leader in 2015.

That was a surprise to Bob Brown, a longtime former Republican lawmaker from the Flathead area who once ran for governor. At his home where he displays artwork featuring former Republican presidents and a plaque thanking him for contributions to the party, Mr. Brown said he had noticed a shift since his days at the State Capitol: Republican lawmakers no longer wanted leaders who were looking for compromise, he said.

“They just want to implement their own concept of what is right,” he said. “I think Keith Regier is a pretty good example of that.”

The Regiers’ views appealed to the growing movement of extreme conservatives who were gaining traction in the region, said Frank Garner, a former police chief in Kalispell who later represented the area as a moderate Republican in the Legislature. That included not only militia groups but also people like Chuck Baldwin, a pastor with apocalyptic views and a Constitution Party candidate in the 2008 presidential election who had moved his family to the state seeking refuge from what he predicted would be escalating conflict elsewhere in the country. Mr. Baldwin used his pulpit to celebrate the Regiers’ brand of conservatism in Helena.

“They were philosophically the right people in the right place at the right time,” Mr. Garner said.

In 2016, Matt Regier joined his father in running for office, saying he was motivated to do so after the local school board added gender identity to its anti-discrimination policy. He said he feared that the rise of transgender advocacy was threatening traditional values.

Amy Regier ran in 2020, sharing her perspective as a nurse about the societal dangers of coronavirus pandemic restrictions and vowing to cut taxes. In the primary, she defeated a veteran Republican lawmaker, Bruce Tutvedt, who characterized the new Republican stance as “very authoritarian politics, top-down — no tolerance for a Republican like me.”

While the Democrats had held onto the governor’s office for 16 years, that ended in 2021 as Republicans steadily gained ground.

The Regiers turned their attention not just to defeating Democrats but to ousting Republicans who did not fall into line.

In one race, the Regiers joined with anti-abortion activists to create a political action committee called Doctors for a Healthy Montana. Matt Regier was the treasurer, according to campaign finance records. Keith and Matt Regier accounted for two of the group’s five donors.

Among the committee’s targets was Representative Joel Krautter, a Republican from the eastern Montana community of Sidney who had voted to expand Medicaid. The committee leased a large billboard that showed a picture of a baby with the message: “Joel Krautter voted for taxpayer funded abortions.” Mr. Krautter, who opposes abortion, objected to the characterization.

“I thought it was bogus, but these people don’t care too much,” Mr. Krautter said. He lost in the 2020 Republican primary to a more conservative candidate.

Then last fall, in a private caucus vote, Matt Regier narrowly emerged as House speaker. It was a result that shocked some Republican lawmakers. Some were queasy about the direction that the party was set to take.

It did not take long: A text message went out inviting Republican women to a meeting in Mr. Regier’s office, according to two people who were in attendance.

Mr. Regier wanted to talk about Ms. Zephyr, who had been newly elected from Missoula. He asked the women what steps the House should take to manage the chamber’s bathrooms in Ms. Zephyr’s presence.

Mallerie Stromswold, who was among the Republicans at the meeting, said she was surprised that such an issue was one of Mr. Regier’s first orders of business. But some of the women in the room expressed concerns about sharing private quarters with Ms. Zephyr, she said, and a decision was made to add locks to the bathroom so that one person could use the whole facility, with several stalls, in private.

“I was the only one who openly had a problem with the conversation,” said Ms. Stromswold, who has since left the Legislature.

Once the session began in January, Keith Regier caused a national stir when he submitted a draft resolution calling for Congress to investigate alternatives to reservations for Native Americans; the resolution said the current system had caused “confusion, acrimony and animosity.” He later withdrew it.

Republicans also began advancing the bills on transgender issues, moving many of them through the Regier-led judiciary committees. As the bill prohibiting gender-affirming care for minors moved toward passage, Ms. Zephyr warned that the measure would be “tantamount to torture.”

“I hope the next time there’s an invocation, when you bow your heads in prayer, you see the blood on your hands,” she said. Matt Regier responded by refusing to recognize her in floor discussions. Later, a crowd began shouting, “Let her speak,” and Mr. Regier ordered people to clear the chamber. Ms. Zephyr raised her microphone in solidarity with the demonstrators.

Ms. Zephyr was barred from the House chamber and spent the rest of the session in a hallway. Matt Regier confronted her there last week and tried to have her moved to an office, but she remained outside near the snack bar.

Ms. Zephyr said the effort to “silence” her was an “affront to democracy” and vowed to fight it.

“The Montana State House is the people’s House, not Speaker Regier’s, and I’m determined to defend the right of the people to have their voices heard,” she said in a statement.

Keith Regier said he had long been misunderstood for his remarks all those years ago about pregnant cows, offered in support of his bill to make it a homicide to harm a pregnant woman whose fetus then dies.

“If unfinished buildings and unborn calves have a value in Montana, shouldn’t unborn children have a value?” Mr. Regier said as part of his cow analogy.

But opponents saw the 2011 legislation as a back door effort to undercut abortion, and it was vetoed by the state’s Democratic governor. His successor, also a Democrat, allowed a diluted version of the bill to become law two years later.

Republican lawmakers under the Regiers’ leadership have approved several new abortion restrictions, including a ban on the procedures after 20 weeks. The courts have ruled that the state’s constitutional right to privacy protects access to abortion, and new lawsuits are pending.

Keith Regier also defended Republican House members’ vote to bar Ms. Zephyr from the floor, saying her “blood on your hands” remark was inappropriate, and that she had taken it further by encouraging protests in the chamber.

“We need to be careful of what we say,” he said. “If we are offensive, you say sorry.”

Ms. Zephyr never apologized, but she did file a lawsuit, aided by the American Civil Liberties Union of Montana and others, to regain access to the chamber before it recessed. A judge rejected the effort.

For this round, the Regiers had won.

Keith Regier said he and his children were doing no more than what they had been elected to do. “I guess people know our family and identify with our values and want us to come and represent them.”

...for I have sworn
upon the altar of god
eternal hostility
against every form of tyranny
over the mind of man.

Thomas Jefferson