Posted on 07/30/2013 8:17:20 PM PDT by 11th_VA
When the Washington Free Beacon revealed that an important member of Sen. Rand Paul’s staff, Jack Hunter (aka “The Southern Avenger”), had at one time been a member of the League of the South, pressure came quickly for Paul and Hunter to distance themselves from the League’s neo-Confederate views. Eventually, Hunter resigned from Paul’s staff.
Pundits on the left and right questioned Paul’s judgment and views on race. Paul has been on the defensive and if he chooses to run for president, he likely will be asked again about his reasons for hiring a neo-Confederate sympathizer.
With the emergence of the Institute on the Constitution as an accepted organization within the Christian right, I submit the evangelical church now has a League of the South problem.
As I have pointed out on the blog, the IOTC’s director and lead teachers are leaders in the League of the South.
Founder and director Michael Peroutka is a member of the board of directors for the League and senior teacher David Whitney is the chaplain of the League’s MD branch.
Peroutka has stated to a League of the South audience that his reasons for teaching the Constitution are not to reform the current government but to prepare for Southern secession or some form of governmental collapse. He has also pledged the resources of the IOTC to the achievement of the League’s objectives.
As I noted recently, the National Religious Broadcasting network is now showing the 12-part Constitution course with Peroutka and Whitney teaching. This course is also being shown simultaneously on Liberty University’s television network. The far right Sons of Liberty of Bradlee Dean is also offering the IOTC course.
Peroutka is a regular on Steve Deace’s talk show. If not for parents’ protests, the Springboro School Board would have evaluated the course as a potential offering in their school district. The teacher of the course then moved it into a local church. Many mainstream churches, especially in Ohio, have hosted the course over the past several years.
Before the series started on the NRB network, I alerted the NRB about the connection between the League and IOTC. And yet, the series continues.
Is there a problem here? I think there is, but perhaps I am wrong.
Many in the nation are having important conversations about race and racism. Historically, the church has been divided over issues of race. The League fancies itself a Christian oriented organization with an objective to promote Southern secession to form a white, Christian nation. Will the evangelical church let these objectives enter the mainstream?
To my mind, the emergence of the IOTC raises significant questions. Is the situation I am describing here helping or hurting racial reconciliation? Can a League of the South board member simultaneously be a leader in the evangelical world?
Does the stated aims of the course and organization matter if the content of the course serves Christian right political objectives?* Association with the League in the political world is enough to cause significant alarm; should the same be true in the church? Are there important differences between the political and religious worlds that make association with the League a problem in one place but not the other?
Does the conservative Christian church have a League of the South problem?
*A related issue relates to the accuracy of the course information. There are many problems with the IOTC programs I have seen (e.g., see this post) but this is also true of Christian nationalist programs without questionable ties to neo-Confederate organizations.
re:The League fancies itself a Christian oriented organization with an objective to promote Southern secession to form a white, Christian nation.
That's not what I read on their web site:
The League of the South believes that Southern culture is distinct from, and in opposition to, the corrupt mainstream American culture. Therefore, we stand for our own sublime cultural inheritance and seek to separate ourselves from the cultural rot that is American culture. "
It's all about culture, not about color
What does “far right” mean t this author?
If he is referring to people who believe in limited government — then he has NO clue what “far right” really means.
I am thinking Michael Peroutka was not the founder of the LS as the article states.
BTW - the author of this article is a professor at Grove City College - which I thought was a fairly conservative Christian School
I am 65 years old. This is the first time I have ever heard of the “League of the South”.
Have read that the League itself is fairly young, established in 1994.
My ancestors migrated from SC to GA to AL and to TX. One of my ancestors was born in TX during the Republic.
This article is a total crock.
Let me remind you that Sam Houston would have no part of secession during the CW. He went to OK and lived with the Indians.
The solution is to throw the ComDems out of office and put those found guilty of crimes in jail.
I knew we were in trouble when this guy went with, “...Neo-Confederate...” What the hell is a neo-confederate?
The allegations in this article were very flimsy, if the writer wants to demand someone distance themselves on a sound basis.
Instead what we get is someone making noise, and demanding someone else react merely because someone is making noise.
But in today’s society, that is pretty much how it works.
Screw that. I’m sick of it.
One look at what passes for sane government in Washington, D. C. has most of the nation wondering how they opt out. So people in the South are rotten to the core because they may want to also? LOL
No sale!
The author probably believes that "far right" is whatever the SPLC says it is.
Good luck with that. We've been trying to do that at least since Bill Clinton.
That may be one solution but I'm sure Sam Houston also said, "Keep your powder dry ..."
(from their web site):
Q: Does the LS favour political secession as a legitimate option for Southern (and other) states?
A: Yes, but we realise that secession is not a practicable alternative at present. When enough people come to realise the futility of attempting to reform the present corrupt system, however, it will be
Yes and he knew when to choose his battle.
San Jacinto lasted 18 minutes. It was the birth of a Republic and eventually expanded the US by 1/4 when TX became a state.
The Republic of Texas only existed 10 years.
ROFLMAO !!!! (good one)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.