Freethought Today, June/July 1996


We Have A Winning Message

By Rob Boston


The New Jersey chapter of the Freedom From Religion Foundation held its annual spring dinner and program on Sunday, May 5, 1996 in Morristown, New Jersey.

The featured speaker for the evening was Rob Boston of Americans United for Separation of Church and State who is the author of The Most Dangerous Man in America? Pat Robertson and the Rise of the Christian Coalition.

The article that follows is an excerpt of his speech.


The organization I work for is Americans United for Separation of Church and State. We believe in democratic principles. We believe in religious and philosophical freedom for everybody whether they have Catholic faith, Jewish faith or no faith at all. I've known about the work of the Freedom From Religion Foundation for more than ten years. I salute your work, your advocacy for separation of church and state. We need people speaking for the separation of church and state from all different vantage points.

I'd like to talk about the Religious Right, a little about Ralph Reed, Pat Robertson's front man for the Christian Coalition, a little about what this movement has been doing nationally, state-based and at the local level. And then also, give you some pointers on how to respond to this movement. The Religious Right is growing in power in this country and we all need to be aware of that. I believe that most Americans are good, decent people and if they can be alerted to the dangers we face, we can begin to turn things around.

First, a little about Ralph Reed. I've had the opportunity to hear Reed speak on a number of occasions. He's a good speaker -- very polished, very smooth, very slick. If you listen to him, he can sound very reasonable. One of the places I heard Ralph Reed speak was exactly one year ago today in Washington, D.C., at a breakfast meeting sponsored by the American Jewish Committee. The AJC had been rather critical of some of the goals of the Christian Coalition. They felt that in fairness they would invite Reed to come and speak and give his version of things.

Ralph Reed mentioned that he used to teach history, saying: "I'm sure there are many people out there who wished I was still teaching history instead of making it." (It sounded just a little bit pompous.)

The balance of Reed's speech confused me. He said -- representing Pat Robertson, remember -- "The Christian Coalition believes in a nation that is not officially Christian, Jewish or Muslim. We believe in a separation of church and state that is complete and inviolable."

I had to sit there and scratch my head because I monitor the "700 Club" on a daily basis and hear what Pat Robertson has to say, and I live to tell the tale. I know that Pat Robertson, who is Ralph Reed's boss and founder of the Christian Coalition, says a different thing about separation of church and state.

Here's what Pat says about separation of church and state in a direct quote from the "700 Club": "Separation of church and state is not in the Constitution. No matter how much the liberals laugh at me for saying it, it's not in there and it never was. That line, which is from the Constitution of the former Soviet Union."

You all thought it was Jefferson and Madison who had given us separation of church and state. Interesting history this guy believes in. Just a couple of months before, Pat Robertson said the following to a public audience in Greenville, South Carolina, in front of reporters who wrote it down: "Separation of church and state is a lie of the Left. It's not in the constitution and we're not going to take it anymore."

Well, which is it? What are we supposed to believe? Ralph Reed or Pat Robertson? Reed, in the speech I mentioned a moment ago, also said that the Christian Coalition does not believe that the nation is officially Christian. Again, I'm confused. I watch Pat Robertson on the "700 Club" applaud the idea of America being officially a Christian nation.

Just last week the "700 Club" aired an hour-long videotape giving bogus, phony history designed to prove, somehow, that the United States was founded to be not just "One Nation Under God," but "One Nation Under Christianity," Christianity as Pat Robertson defines it.

I also watched Pat Robertson interview the President of the African nation of Zambia. In Zambia, the president has officially proclaimed that country a Christian nation. A couple of years ago the president of the country stood on the steps of a federal building in Zambia and officially declared the country a Christian nation. The first thing he did was close all the abortion clinics by force, drive the doctors out and beat them in the streets. Then they had a mass book-burning. Isn't that nice? That's a Christian nation. And Pat Robertson applauded this on his show. He said: "Wouldn't it be great to have a man like that as President of the United States?"

Who are we supposed to believe? That the Christian Coalition believes the separation of church and state should be complete and inviolable? Or, are we being put to shame by the Zambians, who have declared their nation a Christian nation?

I've seen Pat Robertson pine for those wonderful days of the 19th century when our Supreme Court would issue statements that the United States was founded on Christianity. I've also seen him speak favorably of the Puritan theocracy of Massachusetts--the one that burned and hanged Quakers, exiling others to live in the wilderness.

I've been to Christian Coalition meetings. I am, believe it or not, a semi-official member of the Maryland Christian Coalition where I live. I went to their conference last year. One of the speakers was David Barton. Barton lives in Texas and he makes his living selling books and videos such as, "The Myth of Separation," that attack the very concept of separation of church and state. These materials are promoted by Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition at national gatherings. I have to wonder if Robertson's Christian Coalition believes in the separation of church and state, why do they give a national platform to a man who's job it is to tear it down and to somehow assert that separation of church and state is ahistorical.

In my state, the Maryland branch of the Christian Coalition sells a video that it promises "demolishes forever the myth of separation of church and state."

The Christian Coalition is trying to pull of a good-cop, bad-cop routine on the American people. Pat Robertson says and does extreme things. He knows they're extreme. He knows they're frightening so he hires this nice, pleasant-looking young man to come out and put a nice moderate face on his extremism.

I'm going to give my new book one plug. It's called The Most Dangerous Man In America? Pat Robertson and the Rise of the Christian Coalition. I've documented time and time again when the Christian Coalition has done this, where Pat Robertson has said one thing and Ralph Reed has said the exact opposite. The aim is to prove that this is an extremist organization, and we should not believe for one minute the claims that it is moderating.

The papers this past weekend carried articles about Ralph Reed saying maybe the Republican party should moderate some of its language on abortion in the platform. Maybe it's time for the Christian Coalition to stop bashing gay people and stop bashing Bill and Hillary Clinton. Well, guess what? They're at it again. It's all a smokescreen.

Right now, in Washington, D.C., a number of Religious Right groups, including the Christian Coalition, are working on a new First Amendment. Did you know that? We have one now that's worked for more than 200 years and seems to be doing okay, but according to the Religious Right, we need a new one. They call it the "Religious Equality Amendment." Talk about Newt-speak! It sounds so benign -- religious equality. Of course we're for that, right? Well, it isn't about religious equality, it's about favoritism. It's about giving fundamentalist Christians more rights in society than everybody else.

This amendment would do three things: