|
|
|
XI.)
BJCPA and the “Free Expression Briefing.”
1.
Writing
in the How to Win manual, David
Mendoza, the moderator of the Free Expression Briefing, states: “Public
funding for the arts…is not a matter of indulgence but of necessity.” He also concedes that: “The main battle over freedom of
expression and the arts…involves ‘public funding’ - i.e. ‘taxpayers
dollars.’” (p.
100-101) In recent years, federal funding of the National Endowment
for the Arts has been a major issue before Congress because of the multitude of
cases where highly offensive “art” has been funded with taxpayer dollars.
Thus, efforts to restrict the content of federally funded art and
ultimately to de-fund the NEA have been high profile issues, dear to the hearts
of conservatives. This was the
context of Dunn’s comments at the Free Expression Briefing: “If
the arts are censored, no dissenter is safe.
Full freedom of conscience is essential to the search for truth.
There can be no government thought control.
This is not thin theory. We
have real enemies. I’ll call
their names. The Christian
Coalition, falsely so called, organizes hate, focuses fear, plays on prejudice,
and exploits ignorance in its role as the hand maiden of divisiveness.” (Dunn’s comment, “We have real enemies,” reveals
further that the BJC views itself as a part of the organized efforts of the Left
to not only sustain and increase federal funding for the arts, but to prevent
congressional restrictions on the content of NEA funded “art.”)
For the Left, efforts to de-fund the NEA or even to restrict the content
of NEA funded art is viewed as “government thought control” and censorship
of the arts. One would think,
however, that the BJC would view forcing Christian American citizens to pay
their taxes to fund such NEA funded “art” as “Piss Christ” as an
infringement on religious liberty. The same should apply
for federally funded abortions. (See
section I.2 for Dunn’s support of federally funded abortions)
But when it comes to “tax dollars” being used for such things as
“manger scenes” during the Christmas season, the BJC is quite clear and
quite vocal about the use of “tax dollars.”
According to Dunn: “Most of us are not
ready to pay for someone else’s manger scenes with our tax dollars, to require
religious exercises in public institutions, or to use the powers of government
to foster religious values.” (Report from the Capital,
May, 1986, p. 15, James Dunn’s monthly column) According to BJC logic, “freedom” requires government to
finance the Left’s assault on traditional Christian morality by funding
depraved “art” and abortions. But the placement of a manger scene on
government property by local government represents a threat to America’s
freedom. 2.
As
mentioned above, Dunn stated in his address to the Free
Expression Briefing: “We
have real enemies.” It is most
helpful to know who the “We” actually are.
The full list of participants at the Free
Expression Briefing include: 3.
The
Free Expression Briefing included three discussion panels.
The very title of each panel reflects their support for federal funding
and no restrictions on NEA funded art. The
title of the three discussion panels are: “Censorship - suppressing free
speech”; “Public Funding Policies - that attempt to limit free
expression”; and “Limiting Access - legislation, regulations that limit
access to free expression.” It must be remembered, as mentioned above, that according to
the moderator of this meeting: “The main battle over freedom of expression and
the arts…involves ‘public funding’ - i.e. ‘taxpayers dollars.’”
Mr. Tichenor states that “Dunn was pleased for the opportunity to
appear on the program and provide an evangelical witness among the many secular
organizations.” He continues,
“James Dunn is doing the right thing when he gives a Christian witness at
conferences like the one described in this attack.”
However, these organizations exist to defend materials traditionally
viewed as morally depraved. What kind of a “Christian witness” is it when Dunn speaks
in support of the agenda of these organizations?
And why has the BJC and Dunn remained silent in regard to the bizarre
materials and productions being funded by the National Endowment for the Arts?
Dunn did not get invited as a speaker at the Free Expression Briefing because he sheds light on their sinful
activities. He is constantly
invited to participate in far-left meetings like this one because he adds an
element of Southern Baptist credibility to the agenda of the far-left. 4.
Mr.
Tichenor again points out that the BJC cannot be held accountable for the views
of other organizations and program speakers at the Briefing: “Just because
other people speak on the program or organizations participate in the program
does not mean that the BJC agrees with all of their views or supports everything
they undertake. Neither does it
mean any endorsement of their positions.”
Such sloppy logic and flimsy excuses bear witness to the BJC’s moral
bankruptcy. The BJC’s deceptive
defense is eloquent testimony to the fact that they know they are out of step
with grassroots Southern Baptists.
5.
Dunn’s
(and the BJC’s) silence in regard to the religious liberty implications of
taxing Christian citizens in order to fund the desecration of Christ is very
condemning. In the area of the
arts, the BJC calls for total unrestricted freedom, even when taxpayers are
paying the bill. But when it comes
to “parental choice in education,” the BJC argues that this represents a
violation of separation of church and state - “government aid to religion” -
an “establishment” of religion problem.
Arguing that “Choice is a buzzword for education reform,” Dunn often
quotes Thomas Jefferson: “to compel a man to furnish contributions of money
for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and
tyrannical.” (Report
from the Capital, April, 1991, p. 15) But the
BJC never applies that same quote to the arts (or federal funding for
abortions), only to parents who want to get their children out of public schools
when those schools are undermining their conservative Christian values and
convictions. 6.
The
issue we raised on this page of our BJC flyer is that while Bible-believing
Christians across the country were outraged by the NEA’s funding of “art”
depicting the desecration of Christ, the BJC was working with groups advocating
increased funding and NO content restrictions on “art” funded by the
NEA. Some of the NEA grants have even included live productions
like “Annie Sprinkle,” where she invites members of the audience to come up
on stage to examine her genital area with a flash light. While this type of material continues to be funded with
taxpayer money, the BJC has chosen to side with the organizations on the left in
support of the NEA’s practice of funding obscene “art.” To argue that “freedom of conscience” and “freedom of
expression” requires federal funding of moral and social depravity, is
certainly not a “Christian Witness.” 7.
In
1992, People for the American Way Vice President, Michael Hudson, stated that
the Southern Baptist Convention’s CLC (now the ERLC) is an important member of
the Religious Right. His basis for
this assertion was Richard Land’s appearance at the conservative National
Affairs Briefing. According to
PAW’s Hudson, “The presence of Land,
who became executive director in 1988, has made the CLC ‘an active
participant’ in the Religious Right, Hudson said.
The inclusion of a denominational agency such as the CLC ‘has given a
sense of legitimacy to the movement it didn’t have before,’ Hudson said.” James Dunn made a similar statement in a speech at the
Whitsitt Baptist Heritage Society in May of 1994:
“…the Christian Life Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention [ERLC]
must be added to the roster of religious right fellow travelers.
When one examines critically the amicus curiae briefs signed, the
non-position on parochial aid and the public statements on issues, the
Christian Life Commission has classified itself.” If
Dunn’s statement is fair, and Richard Land’s speaking at the National
Affairs Briefing makes the CLC “an active participant” of the Religious
Right, then Dunn’s multitude of ties to the far-left makes the BJC at the very
least “an active participant” in the Radical Left.
And if anyone is guilty of “non-positions” it’s the BJC.
Amazingly, every moral issue the BJC condemns the “Radical Religious
Right” (conservative Christians) for being opposed to, the BJC claims “no
position.” However, if the BJC is
going to claim “no position” regarding abortion, homosexuality, pornography
and federal funding for the arts, then it should take NO position.
And if any organization has “classified itself,” the BJC stands
proudly in the midst of America’s most radical anti-Christian organizations. 8. According to Hudson, in the above mentioned Baptist Press article: “The Religious Right’s Big Four… are Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition, Don Wildmon’s American Family Association, James Dobson’s Focus on the Family and [Lou] Sheldon’s Traditional Values Coalition.” (Baptist Press, Aug. 26, 1992, “Religious Right Probably Stronger; CLC not a member Land says”) The article also pointed out that: “In the last 12 years, PAW, which has its main office in Washington, D.C., has included support for abortion rights, homosexual rights and government funding of the arts without restrictions as part of its agenda.” PAW president, Carole Shields is a member of the BJC’s board of directors. Dunn is a former board member of PAW. (See section IX.4-6 and section XVI) |