Tuesday, May 9, 2023

Oh, Those Gullible Christians…If Only They Knew



 Warning: This post contains triggers, offensive observations, and identifies as neutral (even tho it isn’t)


Every now and then I read the writings and postings of those with whom I share little in common so that I can observe the world through alternative lenses.  Having been raised in a family in which “truth” was curated from a myopic, willfully occluded pious religious perspective – one that selectively curates passages from the Bible as “truth” while rationalizing out all others as irrelevant to the “times” – my impulse is, in part, a calibration on my own perspective and its derivative understandings.  In point of fact, I don’t know that I’ve ever met anyone who celebrates “truth” who doesn’t conflate the term with a perspective entirely coherent to their own at the expense of all others.  Truth, after all, is a weapon derived from the tyranny of hierarchy and its wielding is merely a feeble attempt to silence perspective.  Like “laws” of physics or nature, their reification only precludes a genuine observation of the ever-unfolding evidence of infinitely orthogonal perspective limited only by dogma – both explicit and implicit.

A few days ago, I found myself reading a New York Times op-ed (“Tucker Carlson’s Dark and Malign Influence Over the Christian Right”, by David French, May 7, 2023) railing against Tucker Carlson’s influence on what are classified by the author to be conservative, evangelical Christians.  Common to the critiques of former President Trump, Bill O’Reilly, Glenn Beck and others, allegations of misogyny, bigotry, and classism were strewn about with the publicly recorded facts and rumor-based innuendo from former colleagues, leaked e-mails and the like.  To be abundantly clear, I do not endorse or ignore the public record which includes moments I find ranging from reprehensible to sophomorically crude.  Given my lack of familiarity with Mr. Carlson, I am in no position to comment on veracity of the matters of private or collegial character.  I can listen to Mr. Carlson’s content and – common to virtually everyone I’ve heard in any media – find some content interesting and some distasteful. 


But a closer examination of the op-ed was the implication of the diminution of the class of society labeled as the Christian Right.  The underlying message was one of faux consternation about the malleability and hypocrisy of the ‘religious right’ in America.  And, while I have much to say about this topic in general, it was the moral superiority subtext that drew my attention.


The article was shared (and ‘liked’) in many of the communities who actively promoted the medical countermeasures (MCM) deployed during the social sabotage marketed as COVID-19.   Setting aside that ALL of the public purveyors (media, governmental, and marketing prostitution) of the MCM have now been forced by the evidence to disavow statements regarding masking, school closures, safety and efficacy of experimental therapies, etc. (what a moral observer might classify as a “LIE”); and setting aside the March 2023 publication “Autopsy-based histopathological characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination” published in Clin Res Caridiol which clearly evidenced death from the MCM (what a moral observer might classify as statistically justifiable “MURDER”); we are invited to find Mr. Carlson’s message unacceptable while paying no attention to the degree to which religion – from Mormon to Muslim from Pope to Pastor – was used to coerce the public into taking actions that, in the fulness of time have been shown to be objectively false and deadly.


Be assured that this matter cuts closely to the bone.  I’ve lost family, relationships, and all manner of benefit for asking for accountability and transparency equivalently applied.  I have not asked for agreement – just consistency.  And to date, I’ve not met a single person prepared to rise to that standard.  While offering no evidence to refute a single statement I have made in public or private over the past 3 years, I’m merely canceled and ignored by those who once celebrated my uncommon perspective. 


I’ve lived every day of my life under the specter of dogma and its evil twins “right” and “shame”.  And it is with a bit of irony that I found myself agreeing with the author of the op-ed in a rather fundamental way.  Insofar as the critique was on the idolatry of selective hypocrisy – where stated values can be suspended for the “greater good” – I find myself in vigorous agreement.  And this is where the article – if seen for its commentary value – has a great deal to offer.  Would that we, as a society, examine the degree to which religion has served as the syringe through which the opioid of suppressing inquiry is delivered to the masses!  Would that we hold those in influence and power accountable to our highest standards rather that “locker-room” trash talk!  All fair points.


But, my dear New York Times reader…

Before we cast aspersions on the gullible religious right, how about we engage in a dialog that includes enough self-reflection such as it might inspire a bit of objectivity?  Where is the coverage on media suppression of now commonly accepted facts that were classified BY THE New York Times as mis- or disinformation just months ago?  Where is the effort to purge “Fact Checking” that was clearly false and misleading so that besmirched reputations can be cleared?  Where is the author’s consternation in the FACT that we know have a proliferation of speech suppression bills and laws that suggest that questioning the narrative of authority is “domestic terrorism” while the very institutions seeking defense have been indicted by their own evidence as having lied to the public?


As recently as a few days ago, my statement that mRNA injections were classified as “experimental gene therapy” by the FDA in April 2020 was “fact-checked” as “false”.  This, despite the fact that I am reciting the exact statements made by Moderna and BioNTech in their SEC Filings of April and June of 2020.

“Currently, mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA.  Unlike certain gene therapies that irreversibly alter cell DNA and could act as a source of side effects, mRNA-based medicines are designed not to irreversibly change cell DNA; however side effects observed in gene therapy could negatively impact the perception of mRNA medicines despite the differences in mechanisms.  The number and design of clinical trials and preclinical studies required for approval of these types of medicines have not been established…”

You think?


Apparently, the enlightened religious elite – those who celebrate Mr. French’s version of morality – take solace in the presumption that statistically estimated “lifesaving” triumphs over AUTOPSY based evidence.  After all, the Good Shepherd always plays the law of numbers, right?  He stays with the 99 while leaving the 1 lost sheep to the wolves.


If COVID-19 taught us anything it should that dogmatic belief, once again, has proven deadly.  From the early falsified models of “pandemic” to the carnage wrought by the containment and MCM, we have seen humanity sacrificed on the altar of statistics and, lo, no ram was in the thicket to save us.  The blade killed the children.  But let’s cut the crap!  Let him without a retracted statistic cast the first stone.


…and looking up, he saw no one standing there.


“Neither do I accuse thee.”