Support NeoGAF

[Incognito]

From Kos, fools -- "The Ohio Restoration Project"

www.ohiorestorationproject.com/plan.php

An article about the plan: http://www.cleveland.com/search/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1117532001135062.xml?oxlet&coll=2

A little summary:

Amember of my church gave to me a copy of the Ohio Restoration Project. This project is led by so-called Christians who have a plan for Ohio. The project will target 2,000 pastors throughout the state to become "patriot pastors." These patriot pastors will be briefed on a specific political agenda and asked to submit names of their parishioners in order to increase a database to 300,000 names. These pastors will be asked to place voter guides in their church pews.

Ken Blackwell, Ohio's secretary of state and a governor hopeful, is named throughout the document. Blackwell will be featured on 30-second radio ads promoting this group's agenda and supporting the "Ohio for Jesus" rally set for the spring of 2006. At the end of the document are the words, "America has a mission to share a living savior with a dying world."

Full-speed ahead, Ohio!! That fuck Ken Blackwell is the goddamn anti-christ. His hands are ALL over Bush's Ohio win in 2004, too.

 

[demi]

i'll do my best

 

[ToxicAdam]

Boring.

 

[Drensch]

Ken Blackwell is gonna get stomped in the gubernatorial election though. Half the republicans here don't like him.

 

[Matlock]

Hey, don't bring Ohio into this. We're just poor and ruined.

 

[Triumph]

Boring.

That's the kind of answer I'd expect out of you on this or any other issue painting conservatives in their true, nasty colors.

 

[Guileless]

Has your daily life ever been affected by the religious beliefs of your elected officials? If you don't like what they say about Jesus, vote for somebody else and spare us the melodrama.

 

[Mercury Fred]

Has your daily life ever been affected by the religious beliefs of your elected officials? If you don't like what they say about Jesus, vote for somebody else and spare us the melodrama.

Right. It's melodramatic to be concerned that radical right wing politics are being grafted on to Christianity then sold back to people all under the name of that very religion.

 

[Incognito]

Has your daily life ever been affected by the religious beliefs of your elected officials? If you don't like what they say about Jesus, vote for somebody else and spare us the melodrama.

That's not the point, and you know it. Conservative leaders in Ohio are using the church to further their agenda and to quite literally stuff the ballot box whenever election time rolls around. I have a problem with one particular party co-opting a religion to advance their cause -- especially when that cause is nearly the opposite of what these conservative leaders claim in wanting to progress.

 

[ToxicAdam]

You're barking up the wrong tree if you think Ohio Republicans are some neo-con stronghold. We vote for moderates like Mike Dewine, Voinivich, etc on the state level.

Until recently, we were a solid Democratic state, but with the eroding industrial cities and the rise of the sprawling suburbs of Cleveland and Columbus .. things have shifted a bit.


This is just some minority wack job. It's pretty indicitive of all of Incognito's posts. He takes a small blurb from an extremist and then paints with a big broad brush. It's tedious when someone like Limbaugh does it to Dems ... it's even more annoying on a internet forum.


"stuffing the ballot box". LOL.

 

[Mandark]

Has your daily life ever been affected by the religious beliefs of your elected officials? If you don't like what they say about Jesus, vote for somebody else and spare us the melodrama.

No, my life has not been directly affected by government policies motivated or justified by religious beliefs. However...

I am a heterosexual male. If I were a gay man or a lesbian in Ohio, all I'd need to do is look at Issue 1 before I could answer an emphatic "yes."

In cases where this would have directly affected me (my public school education, for example), I was spared because a vocal majority opposed them, not because the religious right didn't want to bother me.

I care deeply about lots of things that don't affect me personally. Is there anything wrong with that? Should white people have approached the civil rights issue from the perspective of self-interest?

Your barking up the wrong tree if you think Ohio Republicans are some neo-con stronghold. We vote for moderates like Mike Dewine, Voinivich, etc on the state level.

Until recently, we were a solid Democratic state, but with the eroding industrial cities and the rise of the sprawling suburbs of Cleveland and Columbus .. things have shifted a bit.

This is just some minority wack job.

First of all, you obviously don't know what a neocon is.

Secondly, don't underestimate them. I wouldn't say that PA is a particularly rightwing state, but they do have Rick Santorum, and almost nominated Pat Toomey over Arlen Specter. In Ohio, you've got Kenneth Blackwell already elected as Secretary of State and Phil Heimlich as Jim Petro's running mate.

The trend within the GOP has been to move towards more conservative candidates, and grassroots efforts like this are usually how its done. It would be a mistake to downplay this instance, even if winds up being unsuccessful.

 

[Guileless]

It is melodramatic to call Ohio a theocracy. It's not a theocracy, and it never will be, because of the Establishment Clause in the Constitution. There may be people who vote for candidates you don't like based on reasons you don't agree with, but this is pretty much unavoidable. Sorry.

 

[Tritroid]

Florida is on the stupid list because of the numerous cases of pedophilia and homocide.

I don't see the similarity.

 

[hiryu]

I hope they nail all of these churches by getting rid of their tax breaks. Fucking bastards. Fuck Blackwell too. I've hated that fuck ever since I got phone messages from him saying vote down on Issue 1 (banning gay marriages).

 

[Outcast2004]

Hey, don't bring Ohio into this. We're just poor and ruined.

Yep, pretty much.

although I can't complain... looks like I'll be heading to Akron for a job at the Beacon Journal and be making $12,000 more than I do now. All is well.

 

[Tuvoc]

i'll do my best

I got your back.

 

[Tedesco!]

Blackwell is a douche. Always has been, always will be....

 

[DarthWoo]

Not quite as broad, and from a different state, but here's another interesting story:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/05/31/churchsentence.ap/index.html

a brief excerpt:

Judge sentences offenders to attend church
Tuesday, May 31, 2005 Posted: 10:38 AM EDT (1438 GMT)

LONDON, Kentucky (AP) -- A Kentucky judge has been offering some drug and alcohol offenders the option of attending worship services instead of going to jail or rehab -- a practice some say violates the separation of church and state.

District Judge Michael Caperton, 50, a devout Christian, said his goal is to "help people and their families."

"I don't think there's a church-state issue, because it's not mandatory and I say worship services instead of church," he said.

So theists pretty much get a get out of jail free card if they go and do what they might normally do anyway.

 

[Hitokage]

It is melodramatic to call Ohio a theocracy. It's not a theocracy, and it never will be, because of the Establishment Clause in the Constitution. There may be people who vote for candidates you don't like based on reasons you don't agree with, but this is pretty much unavoidable. Sorry.

Broken logic. That's like saying the government will never hold citizens for indefinite periods of time without charges being brought against them because the constitution forbids it.

 

[ronito]

Right. It's melodramatic to be concerned that radical right wing politics are being grafted on to Christianity then sold back to people all under the name of that very religion.

Umm...did no one else read this? Because he's right.

 

[Phoenix]

Broken logic. That's like saying the government will never hold citizens for indefinite periods of time without charges being brought against them because the constitution forbids it.

Indeed. Both situations could happen... just that neither would be legal

 

[Guileless]

Broken logic. That's like saying the government will never hold citizens for indefinite periods of time without charges being brought against them because the constitution forbids it.

The constitution does not specifically forbid holding citizens without charges indefinitely, it guarantees "due process" of law. The executive branch of the government is claiming it can hold Jose Padilla indefinitely as an enemy combatant, but a district judge in South Carolina recently ruled that that was illegal because of the Supreme Court's ruling in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld. It is currently on appeal. We don't know whether this is constitutional or not yet; the Supreme Court will tell us in the fall. If they say it's not, then the executive branch must charge or release him.

At any rate, the situation is too unsettled and complicated to serve as a useful comparison to the Establishment Clause, which clearly states in no uncertain terms that there can be no official establishment of religion. So unless the Constitution is suspended or Ohio secedes from the union, there will be no Ohio theocracy and you can all relax.

 

[demi]

I got your back.

This war is our war!

Spoiler

what are we fighting, again?

 

[Phoenix]

The constitution does not specifically forbid holding citizens without charges indefinitely, it guarantees "due process" of law.

Being held indefinitely is nearly at polar odds with having due process. You can't have due process if you're never charged with a crime.

 

[fortified_concept]

The constitution does not specifically forbid holding citizens without charges indefinitely, it guarantees "due process" of law.

what

 

[Squirrel Killer]

Conservative leaders in Ohio are using the church to further their agenda and to quite literally stuff the ballot box whenever election time rolls around.

Just a question, do you get similarly riled when liberal leaders use African-American pulpits to further their agenda and to quite literally stuff the ballot box whenever election time rolls around?

 

[Phoenix]

That's not the point, and you know it. Conservative leaders in Ohio are using the church to further their agenda and to quite literally stuff the ballot box whenever election time rolls around. I have a problem with one particular party co-opting a religion to advance their cause -- especially when that cause is nearly the opposite of what these conservative leaders claim in wanting to progress.

There is one fundamental flaw in your argument, you assume that the parishoners are not constituents of those conservative leaders.

To call it 'co-opting' a religion is exceedingly strong in this case. At best you can say they are coercing congregations.

 

[=W=]

Umm... I don't really understand what the problem is in this particular case. Churches are trying to get people to vote for a candidate they believe to be the best choice. How is this different from anything that's ever happened in any election?

You don't like it? Don't vote for him. And tell others not to vote for him. That's how voting works. The only difference I see between them and you complainers, is their ideals and that they're not lazy.

 

[Hitokage]

The constitution does not specifically forbid holding citizens without charges indefinitely, it guarantees "due process" of law.

Article I Section 9: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

...last I checked neither has happened.

 

[Azih]

Article I Section 9: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

...last I checked neither has happened.

Dude you missed the update

Article I Section 9: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless *cough cough* the public Safety may require it

And since you guys are winning the eternal war on terror The Public Safety always requires it.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Umm... I don't really understand what the problem is in this particular case. Churches are trying to get people to vote for a candidate they believe to be the best choice. How is this different from anything that's ever happened in any election?

You don't like it? Don't vote for him. And tell others not to vote for him. That's how voting works. The only difference I see between them and you complainers, is their ideals and that they're not lazy.

That's what makes the thread ridiculous. Unions have been doing it for decades. On payday, union officials hand out flyers telling members who to vote for on election day (UAW). It's absolutely no different.

It's nothing new in churches either. You hear of pastors/ministers telling thier congregation who to vote for in certain heated political years. It's not a new concept.

But, I guess when your party is beaten up, and downtrodden .. you look for anything to harp about. Republican's did the same petty shit in the late 80's, when their party had been out of power for 3 decades at that point.

 

[Triumph]

That's what makes the thread ridiculous. Unions have been doing it for decades. On payday, union officials hand out flyers telling members who to vote for on election day (UAW). It's absolutely no different.

It's nothing new in churches either. You hear of pastors/ministers telling thier congregation who to vote for in certain heated political years. It's not a new concept.

But, I guess when your party is beaten up, and downtrodden .. you look for anything to harp about. Republican's did the same petty shit in the late 80's, when their party had been out of power for 3 decades at that point.

Where's the Constitutional Amendment seperating Unions and State? Oh yeah...

Look, if churches want their hoity toity tax free status, play by the fucking rules and don't get cute. Especially after I get elected. Oh boy, that's gonna be fun.

 

[=W=]

Where's the Constitutional Amendment seperating Unions and State? Oh yeah...

Look, if churches want their hoity toity tax free status, play by the fucking rules and don't get cute. Especially after I get elected. Oh boy, that's gonna be fun.

Where is there a violation of the separation of church and state? You mean churches aren't allowed to support a candidate? You mean politicians aren't allowed to cater to religious groups for votes?

btw, I'm not for this movement at all. In fact, I'm not even close to being republican. But there is no violation of the constitution here (yet) and there is nothing that hasn't been going on for decades.

 

[xsarien]

Where is there a violation of the separation of church and state? You mean churches aren't allowed to support a candidate?

A clergy is allowed to support a candidate, however the line is blurred - and their tax status is threatened - when they actively work with a candidate, or any party representative, to push a particular agenda and actively ask their congregations to vote one way as a result.

 

[=W=]

A clergy is allowed to support a candidate, however the line is blurred - and their tax status is threatened - when they actively work with a candidate, or any party representative, to push a particular agenda and actively ask their congregations to vote one way as a result.

...really? Got any documentation on that?

Either way, it doesn't say anywhere in the article that Blackwell is "working with" them or vice versa, just that he is supporting their agenda.

 

[videogamer]

...really? Got any documentation on that?

It's pretty common knowledge, and the information is all over the internet.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf

Either way, it doesn't say anywhere in the article that Blackwell is "working with" them or vice versa, just that he is supporting their agenda.

And their agenda is what? Yeah.

 

[Guileless]

Being held indefinitely is nearly at polar odds with having due process. You can't have due process if you're never charged with a crime.

In the vast majority of cases I would agree. However, the concept of due process of law was originally conceived before dirty bombs and 9/11. The Supreme Court has to interpret what due process is today, not 1787. They could very well say that due process is different for "enemy combatants." But as I said, based on the Hamdi decision, they will probably tell the Bush Administration to charge him or release him when they hear the case again in the fall.

 

[=W=]

It's pretty common knowledge, and the information is all over the internet.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf


And their agenda is what? Yeah.

Eh, I've never been bothered to care before, I'm just bored at work.

The content of these voter guides would be the only thing really up to scrutiny, and only if they explicitly tell people to vote a certain way would there be any real violation.

 

[Mandark]

Guileless:

1) Be careful not to trip as you backtrack.

2) The constitution doesn't magically prevent things from happening. It takes actual people enforcing it, generally in the form of an independent judiciary and citizen watchdog groups. Tell the NRA that the Second Amendment can fend for itself, or the ACLU that what they're doing is redundant. Tell black people that the amendments passed in the 1860's suddenly wiped out institutionalized racism.

Right now there's a party that thinks the executive branch has the power to suspend habeus corpus arbitrarily. This same party loves to discuss having the legislative branch set aside various laws from the judicial branch's ability to review. If breaches of the constitution never happen, it's because of the people who fight against this, not because of some powerful enchantment in the ink of the document.

ToxicAdam:

There are two issues here. The first is constitutional: These people are obviously trying to chip at Jefferson's wall of separation between church and state. THis is not an issue for labor unions, chambers of commerce, etc.

The second issue is that I personally find their agenda to be extremist and destructive. You yourself call them "wacko," but you don't seem to be at all concerned with the influence they wield over the ruling party, which you support.

As annoying as Incognito's topic floods are, and as melodramatic as his choice of titles tends to be, people like him are the reason the religious right hasn't accomplished as much as it wants, not people like you. Organizing and networking to oppose a movement is a lot more effective than pretending the movement is marginalized when it's not, so you can feel better about your party affiliation.

 

[Hitokage]

In the vast majority of cases I would agree. However, the concept of due process of law was originally conceived before dirty bombs and 9/11. The Supreme Court has to interpret what due process is today, not 1787. They could very well say that due process is different for "enemy combatants." But as I said, based on the Hamdi decision, they will probably tell the Bush Administration to charge him or release him when they hear the case again in the fall.

Try around 1812 when the fucking white house got burned down.

 

[Guileless]

Look people the chance of the government abrogating something as clearly stated and deeply ingrained in jurisprudence as the Establishment Clause is small enough that y'all shouldn't worry about it happening. If you want to continue to jerk yourselves off about how the Sinister Republican Theocrats are knee-deep in a plan to transform the country into some kind of Back to the Future II/Robocop/Demolition Man nightmare then I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise anymore. Get with Raoul Duke, maybe he'll offer you sanctuary on his farm in the mountains once the shit hits the fan.

 

[Triumph]

Look people the chance of the government abrogating something as clearly stated and deeply ingrained in jurisprudence as the Establishment Clause is small enough that y'all shouldn't worry about it happening. If you want to continue to jerk yourselves off about how the Sinister Republican Theocrats are knee-deep in a plan to transform the country into some kind of Back to the Future II/Robocop/Demolition Man nightmare then I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise anymore. Get with Raoul Duke, maybe he'll offer you sanctuary on his farm in the mountains once the shit hits the fan.

Well you certainly won't be invited!

 

[Mandark]

Do you talk this way to NRA members who say the Second Amendment is under seige?

Let's put it this way: There is a political movement. It is popular and well-organized. There are many elected officials on the national and state level who are part of this movement. It has leveraged its political pressure to get several policies enacted. Someone complains about this movement, using very strident language.

If the movement is in someone else's party, you say "yeah, those guys are crazy and need to be stopped!"

If it is in your own party and you caucus with them, you say "oh come on, that's taking it too far. There's no need to worry about those guys."

JUSTICE SCALIA: And when somebody goes by that monument, I don't think they're studying each one of the commandments. It's a symbol of the fact that government comes — derives its authority from God. And that is, it seems to me, an appropriate symbol to be on State grounds.

And THAT is the judiciary that's going to always and forever protect us from religious nutjobs? The one that is so dependable we shouldn't even bother opposing fundamentalists through the political process?

I guess blind faith isn't limited just to the supernatural.

 

[The Take Out Bandit]

Just another reason to get the fuck out of Ohio - and nuke it from orbit to be safe.