Evil wears many masks in this world, but none so dangerous as the mask of righteousness. The American Family Association (AFA) is a group of Christian Fundamentalists who have come together in a common belief that the world we live in has been corrupted by immorality. They have decided to fight back against this corruption by trying to re-instate the "proper" religious morals given to us by the Bible. These moral views are narrow minded in the extreme and are often full of hate and prejudice. They often voice their beliefs that abortion is wrong, that homosexuality is a sin, that separation of church and state is a violation of their rights, that the media isn't biased enough in favour of Christianity and much more. The more I read articles from their website (www.afa.net) the more angry and horrified I become. So why do I keep going to their site? It's like a train wreck. I don't want to see, but I can't turn away. I was thinking of ranting about them in my Rant and Roar section, but there is just far too much that I have to say. That's why I have created this section. Every so often, I will chose an article from their website and analyze it. I don't know if they store their articles on their website or if they remove them after time, so you might encounter some broken links.
<----- Back to previous AFA articles and reviews
I've decided to do things slightly differently for this review. Seeing as how today's AFA article is a letter written by Mr. Rooney in response to another letter, I figure I'd write today's review as a letter in response to Mr. Rooney letter. It seemed only fitting.
Dear Rev. Rooney,
I have just finished reading Rev. Lynn's letter and your response to it on the American Family Association's website. I notice that in your first paragraph, you claim that Lynn's letter is arrogant, misguided, and offensive. I really must tell you, that I did not find Lynn's letter to be any of those things. After reading your letter however, I think it's rather clear that YOU are the misguided, offensive and extremely arrogant one.
Rev. Lynn's letter is a concerned warning to all religious leaders so that they don't do something illegal without realizing it. This warning is to ALL religious leaders, no matter what their political views are. You seem to immediately view such a warning as a personal attack to your own ego. You claim that "It was arrogant because you apparently assumed I needed your expertise in deciphering and applying the First Amendment to the Constitution. You claim that I and all other religious leaders need your help "to guide you through this legally daunting terrain" regarding what pastors can say and do about voter guides and endorsing candidates." Now, I think it is clear in reading this that it is you who are the arrogant one. You seem to think it outrageous that someone MIGHT think you need help understand something. It's as if Rev. Lynn is insulting your intelligence by believing you don't know absolutely everything there is to know about the situation. And, even if you did, not all religious leaders do. I think it was kind of Lynn to take the time to explain things so that no mistakes are made. He is not being condescending, he is being clear. His genuine concern for your legal situation seems to be met only by insults and attacks.
The second paragraph of your letter is nothing but an attack on Lynn's beliefs. Now, someone once told me that an intelligent debater will attack the issues addressed by his competitor while a less intelligent one will instead attack his competitor and ignore the issues. This is exactly what you have done. You can't seem to get past the fact that Lynn is correct in his warning, so instead, you attack Lynn's political and religious beliefs. This is a huge act of cowardice. Your message seems to be that anyone with a different political or religious belief should not be trusted. I don't even want to KNOW what you think of non-Christians.
In your third paragraph, you seem to bring Tomas Jefferson into the argument. Concerning the separation of church and state, you claim that "Thomas Jefferson was not even in the country when the Constitution was forged. He was in France. It was not until 13 years after the Constitutional Convention that Jefferson coined the phrase in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association assuring them of their religious liberty." I think of all people, a Reverend would not bring this up as a defense for anything. After all, everything Jesus said was recorded almost FIFTY years after his death by people who had never met him. Doesn't that make those scriptures even LESS trustworthy than Jefferson's claim? The fact that Jefferson made his statement 13 years after the constitution doesn't change the fact that there IS the separation of church and state in the United States of America and that it IS a law.
Your third paragraph also attacks Lynn's motivation. You say "Do you work for the IRS? No? Then why the warning? Is it because you care about me and my churches? Or is it because you are afraid of what might happen should intelligent Christians actually go en masse to the voting booths on election day? I think we both know what the answer to that is." I wonder Mr. Rooney, do you always insult those who try to come to your aid? Lynn's letter is meant for ALL religious leaders. That means those who are liberal as well. Lynn isn't afraid of intelligent Christians voting, he's afraid of people like you getting fined or thrown in jail. For the life of me, I can't understand why he seems to care about people like you however, especially since you respond to his kindness only with hate.
You seem to end off your letter with even more bitter insults. Any reader will notice that it is only in this last paragraph that you subtly admit that Lynn is completely correct when you say "Relax, Rev. Lynn. I promise not to endorse a candidate from the pulpit." All your insults and all your attacks don't change the fact that Lynn is absolutely right in his warning. You claim that you already KNEW that a church could not legally endorse one political figure over another and that it was an outrage that people might think you didn't. All this demonstrates to me is that you had fully intended to break the law and endorse one political figure over another. THAT is why you are so angry at Rev. Lynn. Well, being mad at Lynn because now you can't get away with breaking the law doesn't help the situation. You also might want to at least TRY to give Lynn the same respect he gave you. Tell him you understand the law and that he need not worry. Don't just attack him for who he is. That's only a few steps away from being a racist.
<----- Back to previous AFA articles and reviews
<----- Back to my homepage