Jesus Camp and the NAMBLA defense

[pat_k]

With Haggard's downfall, the hypocrisy of zealots like him is front and center. While hypocrisy is disgraceful, let's not allow it to distract us from the insidious harm being inflicted by the Haggard's of the world as they indoctrinate and maintain their hold on followers.

There are red flags associated with destructive and coercive methods of influence. If we are to expose the danger we must recognize them. Below I describe one of those red flags -- the defense invoked.

This is not an attack on religion. The content of the indoctrination is irrelevant. Many of the coercive methods of influence used by Maoist thought-reformers, cults, and at Kids on Fire summer camp are exactly the same. I would draw the same parallel if a "Progressives on Fire" summer camp was currently the object of scrutiny and a founder of that "Progressive" camp invoked the NAMBLA defense.

Jesus Camp and the NAMBLA defense

From the http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2455343&page=1">ABC report on the film "Jesus Camp" (Becky Fischer's "Kids on Fire summer camp").

. . ."I want to see them as radically laying down their lives for the gospel as they are in Palestine, Pakistan and all those different places," Fisher said. "Because, excuse me, we have the truth."

"A lot of people die for God," one camper said, "and they're not afraid."

"We're kinda being trained to be warriors," said another, "only in a funner way."

On Sept 27, Becky Fischer appeared on Scarobourgh Country (http://rss.msnbc.msn.com/id/15045587/">transcript). After a clip from the film of a little girl who approached a woman at a bowling alley to tell her what god wanted for her, Becky Fischer gave the following defense:

BECKY FISCHER, KIDS IN MINISTRY INTERNATIONAL: Well, who just sent that little girl? As far as I can tell on that clip, she walked up all on her own volition. That was her free choice. Her father never set her up. Nobody else in that room set her up. That‘s something she wanted to do . .

The NAMBLA defense (from wikepedia):

"NAMBLA defends what it asserts to be the right of minors to explore their sexuality on a much freer basis. It has resolved to 'end the oppression of men and boys who have freely chosen mutually consenting relationships'"

There is no logical difference between claiming that children whipped into an ecstatic religious frenzy in which they are prepared to do violence are "consenting participants" and claiming that sexually abused children are "consenting participants."

When Becky Fischer rationalizes that young children, which civil society recognizes are incapable of consenting for themselves, are acting as "free agents," she is invoking the same abominable rationalization that many child-abusers cling to as they seek to escape their own guilt and shame.

When they invoke this defense, both groups (the people who run Kid's on Fire and members of NAMBLA) show us that they recognize that the techniques they use to indoctrinate children are abusive.

If they were comfortable with what they were doing, they would have no need to delude themselves with the belief that their victims are free agents.

When we are proud of methods we use and the values and beliefs we instill in our children, we have no need to delude ourselves with the notion that "they hit on that themselves." We know that we, the adults, are responsible for what we teach our children.

[Senator]

1. Clear "consciousness of guilt" n/t