What represents Christianity today is a far cry from the Jesus I learned about as a child, the one who said to turn the other cheek, to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's (pay your taxes), that if someone wants your cloak to give them your coat as well, and that what you do unto "the least of them" you also do unto me. He said to love your Lord your God with all your heart, to love your neighbor as you love yourself, and to love one another as I have loved you. I remember as a child not wanting to turn the other cheek or give up my possessions to another, and I don't think many of us do, yet we as Christians still felt like we should. However, 30 years ago the "Prosperity Doctrine" began to infiltrate our mainstream Christian churches, while at the same time, Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" made a comeback, and somehow with the later propaganda and influence of Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, and Hannity, being selfish is not only acceptable, but considered Christian and right. And the irony is that Ayn Rand, whom Paul Ryan is said to have idealized and even based his budget on her philosophy was an avowed atheist. And even though Ms. Rand claimed that social programs like SSA and Medicare were evil, she took advantage of both while she was dying from cancer, but used her husband’s name rather than her famous one because she didn’t want anyone to know.

I have had discussions with so-called Christian conservatives who don’t want their taxes raised and believe that the rich pay enough already too. I’ve pointed out that Christ said to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s (pay our taxes), and they have said that doesn’t mean that the taxes need to be designated to programs for poor people and Christ didn’t say that either. This is true, I’ve agreed with them; Christ didn’t get to say what Caesar’s tax money went for, but I can’t help but think he would approve. I’ve even made up a little scenario that I can vividly imagine if Caesar had sought Jesus’ advice about what to do with his tax money:

The scene opens with Caesar showing Jesus around his castle. Look at all my riches, says Caesar as they stroll through his opulent palace. Everywhere you look is a reflection of the powerful man I am, and everyone bows to me. My golden crown is incrusted with rare jewels, and I sit upon a throne of solid gold. My wives all wear exquisite jewelry and are draped in expensive silks. Even my servants wear the finest polished cotton. See my luxurious baths and lovely garden? The finest horses you’ve ever seen fill my stables, and the most beautiful team pull the emperor’s chariot. Where do you think I should apply my latest tax collection? So Jesus takes Caesar on a little stroll through his kingdom. They walk through the marketplace where the merchants sell their humble wares, past the blind and the beggars, visit in some humble cottages where the poor struggle to get by and the sick writhe in their misery, often dying with no hope, then past the leper colony where the most shunned suffer while begging for scraps of food. Jesus says to Caesar, do you see anywhere your money might be put to good use? Of course, Caesar, has the choice of being generous and helping “the lest of these” like Jesus has always stressed we should, or he can shrug and go off to seek another bauble for himself. Today’s Christians always side with the wealthy and seek an almost punishing attitude toward the needy who are most often that way because of the greed of the wealthy. And somehow it seems like if they were suffering more, had even less it would justify things for us, make it more acceptable. Do we really want to return to the tent cities, tar shacks and bread lines of the Great Depression before social programs were put into place? Would that make poverty more palatable to some? I often hear that the rich pay the majority of taxes, that they pay enough, but they don’t pay their percentage. The more you have, the less you pay. Paul Ryan is not nearly as wealthy as Mitt Romney, yet he pays more than Mitt in taxes, and so it goes downhill to the rest of us. Trickle down? Oh really???

There are other contradictions within the so-called “Christian Right” that really boggle my mind. For example, traditionally the “right” had despised draft dodgers, yet Ted Nugent, who has boasted about crapping in his pants for a week to avoid the draft is now okay and even a national hero to many. Why? Because he hates President Obama and loves guns. And on the subject of guns, how did gun ownership ever come to be part of the Christian culture? It just doesn’t line up with “turning the other cheek” to me. I understand that we have a gun heritage in our country, and my own household even has some. That said, I truly don’t believe that anyone is going to try to take away our hunting rifles and home protection guns. New laws may make registration restriction a bit stronger, but do we really want to make it easy for criminals to have them? Does any family really need assault weapons? I truly think this is just a lot of propaganda that has little to do with reality. Our Constitution gives us the Right to Bear Arms, and it would be no easy feat to take that away. Even if they tried, people would hide them away, and I think everyone is aware of that. You cannot really take guns away even if you try to outlaw them. It’s just not going to happen.

The other big issue, the one many people will vote based on it alone, is abortion. I agree that abortion is a terrible thing, and it is actually taking a life, and that we, as Christians, should never do it. If someone were to come to me seeking advice, I would try to talk them into other alternatives. However, if they are set on it, they will do it whether or not it is legal as they did in days gone by, even if it kills them, which it often did. Or, some will do like many who have made the news in recent years and conceal their pregnancy, give birth in secret and kill their babies. So, I’m not sure laws against it will stop much, only make it unsafe, and I have to ask if we want to punish people that way, as many seem wont to do. And if we do feel that way, why not just be against abortion and leave the parts of Planned Parenthood intact that counsel, advise, offer contraception and help with women’s medical issues. Why does it have to be an “all or nothing” solution? My issue is not so much about abortion as I understand why that is such an emotional issue, it’s about children and the poor. If we are that against abortion, wouldn’t we be FOR birth control? I’ve heard conservatives argue that they don’t want to pay for someone else’s birth control. I understand, however, wouldn’t that cost less than paying for someone else’s child? This is probably a moot point with them though, as most do not want to pay into social programs that help poor children. The other day, I read an article in which Pat Robertson, Christian Icon to the Right, say that Christians shouldn’t adopt either, that they are taking a risk with so many crack babies and children from other less than ideal situations being the ones up for adoption. So I summarize this by saying--We don’t want abortions, okay got that. We don’t want to pay for poor women’s birth control, and we don’t want to pay into social programs that would help them raise the child we didn’t want them to abort. And we don’t think adoption is a good idea either. So where does that leave us in our Christian conscience about this whole thing? Not many alternatives that I can see. . .unless we were actually willing to open up our hearts and our wallets as Jesus told us to.

The hijacking of the Christian religion by the Republican Party has been a slow, sure and insidious undertaking. There was a time when Christian women would have been shocked and appalled by Rush Limbaugh calling a young lady a slut, especially since she never mentioned her sex life or anyone else’s, only recounted stories of her friends who needed “the pill” for medical reasons, and how one of them who couldn’t afford it lost an ovary and the ability to bear children. Yet Christian women cheered Mr. Limbaugh on and declared that he was defending Catholic rights. Rush Limbaugh, married four times, an admitted user of Viagra, and the father of none, wants to control women from having easy access to the pill. A short time after his tirade against Sandra Fluke, Mr. Limbaugh called a group of nuns that dedicate their lives to helping the poor (his favorite word for women he disapproves of) “feminazis“! So much for respecting and defending Catholicism! Although somehow this man has become an icon of the Christian Right, I do not believe that Rush Limbaugh has ever said he is Christian, only conservative and on the side of the wealthy, of which he is as a spokesman, and one who got rich himself doing just that.

It saddens my heart that people will vote against their own interests and side with the evil One Percent that wants to turn us into a land of serfs. Don’t they understand that the problems we face today started 30 years ago and that the fault lies with the very corporations, the greedy wealthy that they are defending? They moved their factories overseas to hire foreigners at slave wages, while at the same time denying fellow Americans a living wage in the land they (the corporate owners) call home. That may be legal, and I’ve heard the “Right” defend it as their right, and I suppose that is true, but what does it say morally? Why would those who claim to have the heart of Christ vote for someone who values money over human beings? Now, the super-rich corporate owners are finding that their profit margins are starting to slip a little due to shipping costs, and there is talk about bringing some of their factories home. Does it seem likely that they are going to want to actually pay people a living wage to work in them? What would be the point if they are doing it to keep more of their money? There is a lot of talk about abolishing unions and union pension plans for police, firefighters, teachers, government workers, and railroad workers. There is also talk about doing away with minimum wage. Why? Because they don’t the serfs to have too much; they want to keep them desperate to do their bidding just to survive.

But wait, there is more. Why is it we no longer hear about overpopulation, when, indeed, we are actually living the predictions of those who warned against overpopulation back in the 1970s? And why are rightwing politicians are against contraception? I do not think most of them are against it due to moral values or religious beliefs, but because they want to keep populating expendable serfs to fight the wars they profit from and work for pennies in their factories. But they are smart enough to push those emotional buttons and get people to vote against their own best interests.

Then there is immigration. Lots of anger there. I have two friends who were haters that changed their minds on that. One is a gal who was totally against it until she moved to Arizona and found herself working with a lot of underprivileged Hispanic children. She has totally changed her outlook once she came to see them as people with wants, needs and dreams just like the rest of us. The other is a guy who went there to get work, and he says after working with and being around “those people” he has done a complete turn around and says “I’d do it.” We are supposed to be hospitable and not turn people away according to scripture. And “those people” do work most of us don’t want to do, and they do it for much less money than we would accept. And lest we forget, we were all immigrants and took land from the natives who already lived here

I also don't get why right-wing Christians are so pro war, when Christ said "blessed are the peacemakers.“ We, as Christians, support our troops and cry at their funerals and hold parades in our towns when someone’s child comes home in a box, yet we do not care much about our veterans when they have managed to come home alive and often leave them lacking in basic needs and homeless. Shouldn’t we ask ourselves if Jesus would care about the children we kill overseas, the innocent who have no say so in the whole matter? The politicians on the right not only do NOT want to get us out of Afghanistan, but they are eagerly speculating about going to war with Iran. It has always been old rich men sending young poor men off to war. Besides Ted Nugent, other well known and respected men who managed to avoid the draft include George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Mitt Romney. What would Jesus say?

There is so much more I have to say about this but for now, I just want to say that Christianity to me is all about a heart attitude, and I don't see how wanting to save every fetus, while at the same time wanting to cut programs that help poor children who have managed to be born shows much Christian love or charity. Many Christians I know even want to eliminate programs like free lunches, which could be the only nutrition some children get all day. I could go on and on about this, but I would leave you with the thought that maybe some things that represent Christianity today have nothing at all to do with following Christ, but tickle our ears and make us feel good about not such loving attitudes, and perhaps it is time we took a closer look at the values we embrace as Christian. Are they more Randian than Christian???