Citizens Project

The Freemen standoff in Montana cast a glaring spotlight on the Christian Patriot movement's expansion into constitutional issues and common law courts. As television screens flashed the faces of hatred in living rooms across the country, Christian Patriot leaders mobilized like a motley Madison Avenue team to solve the public relations nightmare.

On camera, Colorado Sen. Charlie Duke fumed that the Freemen were counterfeit patriots and praised the patience of Federal Bureau of Investigation agents. On the Internet, Christian Patriot leaders cranked out position papers distinguishing the constitutionalist movement from the Freeman's Christian Identity-spun common law edicts.

The goal was to distance themselves from the Freemen; a challenge, considering that the Montana renegades began as an embryonic cell within their movement.

It's too soon to judge their success. However, the Christian Patriots appear to be maintaining momentum as a political and spiritual movement to restore Christian values and to fight the satanic forces guiding government toward a tyrannical New World Order.

The movement's common law courts, deemed necessary by its adherents to circumvent the tainted judicial system, vow allegiance to "God's law"--not man-made laws created under the influence of the Antichrist.

Salvation conferences
"Salvation" conferences and classes are taking place in fields, community centers and churches across the country. Nearly a thousand Patriots braved a chilling mist and muddy field to warmly embrace words of wisdom from speakers under a half-dozen tents at the Mid-America Constitution Conference America '96 rally east of Kansas City this past June.

The heartland speeches wove one theme: receive Jesus Christ, reaffirm America as "God's promised land" and reclaim the Christian principles of our forefathers. The reward: Salvation.
As the wind howled through tent number one, Richard Boyden, identified as the conference chaplain, presented "God's Alternative to One World Government." Boyden hosts a radio show and ministers to a small religious sect that integrates Mormon beliefs with Christianity and Native American spiritualism in Independence, Missouri. Wearing an Indian-styled bolo tie over a brown shirt, he declared that thousands of years before Native Americans inhabited this country, Jesus Christ surveyed the territory and God sprinkled ocean water on it, anointing America as the "promised land."

God in the Heartland
Citing Bible verses in Genesis and Deuteronomy that describe the size of the "promised land," Boyden noted that "200 square miles" is much larger than Israel and concluded that God was referring to the heartland. As the rapture draws near, he predicted "the Lord's presence will be established here...and will spread out to all the land."

If minority races and Jews accept Jesus Christ as their savior, Boyden said that they, too, can be spared the doom of hell in the "end times." He envisions a red ring encircling the chosen people, protecting them from worries about the Federal Reserve, the Illuminati, Council of Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, outcome-based education, Internal Revenue Service, and the New World Order.

"There's gonna be a car factory inside the ring because people are gonna need cars, yes sir!" Boyden proclaimed. "God will remove the curse from the ground and food will grow. So what if (the federal government) turns off the water, turns off our electricity. You can just pray for the lights to stay on."

The Devil wants you
If Americans fail to return the country to God's law," Boyden warned, "we'll all get nailed with the mark of the beast" or the satanic system of the "New World Order." (He was referring to Revelation 13:18, which describes the "mark of the beast" as "600, three score and six" on hearts and foreheads of those who are the devil's advocates. The movement also equates the "mark of the beast" with the federal government.)

The "devil and his angels are down here now furthering one world government," Boyden said, offering proof in a message left on his telephone answering machine. "My name is Mephistopheles. I am the sixth demon down from Satan. I've come to collect what you owe." Boyden repeats the message twice and claims it is from one of Satan's 12 apostles on a "mark of the beast" mission.

None of the thousand constitutional "scholars" feared the "mark of the beast" at this conference. All right hands were stamped with the international bar symbol for "no" over the letters "beast."

White males
Boyden's spirited words fell on mostly "Wonder Bread" Christian males, a few wearing "Missouri 51 Militia" black T-shirts emblazoned with a "Don't tread on me" striking rattler. One man wore a shirt that read "Hallelujah means Praise you, Yahweh."

The audience was sparsely populated with WASP women, two Jews, and an African American couple. Native Americans and African Americans had a higher profile at the concessions selling Indian bread and barbecue lunches, respectively.

Freedom...Freedom!
Under tent number three, Jerry Hughes, radio talk show host on People's Radio Network, held court, looking sweaty and slovenly sprawled out on a folding chair. "We are not free," he grumbled. "You have to understand that first."

The verbose talk show host asserted that the Bill of Rights has been eroded, particularly the Second Amendment concerning the right to bear arms and form citizen militias. He ticked off the worst culprits as apathetic citizens, the media, and "psychobabbling individuals in Washington" like President Bill Clinton, Republican presidential contender Bob Dole, House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Congressman Charles Schumer of New York.

"None are as powerful as God," declared Hughes. "God will empower the people to put an end to the New World Order...(because) this nation was founded on the Holy Bible."
At the core of the Christian Patriot's crusade is the belief that our Christian forefathers received divine inspiration from God and the Bible when they created the U.S. Constitution.

Those lying politicians
"People who don't understand the Constitution are dumber than dirt," spat Hughes, launching a tirade against elected officials who lay one hand on the Bible and swear an oath to uphold the state constitution or the U.S. Constitution when they haven't read either one. "They're lying sons of guns and they need to be thrown out on their ears," he bellowed over the sound of thunderous applause. "I don't know how vengeful God is, but if I were him and some sucker lied to me, I'd lop off his head. I guarantee you I'd kick that sucker between here and the toilet, and I'd zap him with a lightening bolt so big he (wouldn't) know what happened."

Violating the oath of office is a crime worthy of capital punishment, Hughes said, launching into a history lesson. "Let me tell you what they used to do back in the good old days. They hung them, they hung them until such time they passed out. Then they took them down and revived them. Then they shot them. Then they quartered their bodies and they chopped them into small pieces and they scattered them over the countryside...because they didn't want anyone to find a piece of the treasonous, traitorous son of a gun who had sworn an oath to God and the American people and had gone back on it."

This jaw-dropping description of justice echoes posse comitatus tenets that called for hanging those convicted of crimes, from murder to treason (including failure to uphold the oath of office) at a public site. The punishment has been incorporated in common law courts that are now established in more than 40 states.

Hughes said the point is not punishment, but finding "good and righteous people to run for political office" even though it is "the most sorry, lowest, most dirty occupation." In his mind, a true Christian candidate for political office is like a missionary saving wicked souls. "I don't know that the Lord went into the finest places to do good works. Seems like he was after the drunkards, the beasts, the prostitutes and such. Just kind of reminiscent of politics, isn't it?"

Eugene Schroder
Under tent number two, Eugene Schroder announced that the Colorado Legislative Executive Committee approved a summer interim panel to evaluate the "findings of fact" delivered by the state Common Law Grand Jury Assembly in August 1995. The common law assembly found state officials guilty of operating unconstitutionally and demanded they show just cause. The verdict was based on the assertion that the country has never entirely rescinded acts that expanded presidential powers to see the nation through the Great Depression. States granted mirror powers to governors.

"In Colorado, we're trying hard to set an example for our sister states," said Schroder, founder of the American Agriculture Movement and activist in United Sovereigns of America. During the Freemen negotiations in May, Schroder and Senator Duke feared negative publicity would jeopardize approval of the pending legislative interim committee. Successful, they now hope the legislative committee lends credibility to the movement and sets a precedent of petition for redress of grievances in other states.

Schroder expressed concerns about hotheaded extremists filing false liens, physically threatening officials, and declaring secession from the union, a move in Texas that recently landed a few patriots in jail. It's palatable talk for a man who once led an armed farmers revolt, was linked to the posse comitatus and, according to The Denver Post, taught a class on bomb making (a charge he adamantly denies).

"It's better to petition the government, not secede, and stay all together," said Schroder, who believes the Civil War might have been avoided if the South had worked the system rather than seceding from the Union. Asked if the country is destined for another revolution, he responded, "Nobody wins a war. Don't kid yourself. We'll all lose."

Yet, common law activists continue to file declarations of "sovereign citizenship" with county clerks, rejecting laws that demand tax payments and licenses to operate vehicles, carry weapons, and marry. They equate Social Security numbers with the "mark of the beast" and believe that birth certificates relinquish parental rights to the government.

The Christian Identity folks
The common law court avenue coalesces Christian Right and Christian Identity members. "While there are differences between the Christian Right and Christian Identity, there is not a solid wall," said Leonard Zeskind, former research director for the Center for Democratic Renewal. "It is a semi-permeable membrane."

For example, Christian Identity devotees are the self-described chosen tribe of Israel, Christian Patriots claim to be God's chosen people; both extol America as "The promised land" and condemn the evil conspiracy to create a one world government, also known as the New World Order.

The Montana Freemen's brand of common law justice intones Christian Identity, a racist and anti-Semitic religious doctrine that cites Bible scriptures to justify slaughtering homosexuals, minorities, and Jews, and to deny voting privileges to women and ethnic immigrants. Christian Patriot leaders assert that they are more compassionate, neither demanding death for homosexuals nor discriminating against Jews and ethnic citizens.

Both base their common law court systems on the Magna Carta, English common law, and the Constitution of the United States, including the Bill of Rights. Refusal to recognize subsequent amendments to the Constitution creates a first-class inherited citizenship status for white Christian males, and effectively reduces women and ethnic immigrants to second-class citizens, without voting and civil rights.

Churches and clergy
Like the Freemen, Christian Patriots demand obedience to "God's Law" and curse man-made law. The movement has courted Christians over the past four years, but the strategy to convert clergy and hold constitutionalist training seminars in churches is fairly new.
In June 1994, the Constitutionalist Networking Center kicked off a conference in the Indianapolis Baptist Temple with a home school band strumming "Dixie" while Rev. John Lewis marched on stage, yelling "yee haw!" and unfurled his ministerial robe to reveal a Revolutionary uniform. Lewis declared, "That ought to be our national anthem. Those are the values your granddaddies died for."

More than 125 Christian Patriots broke into objective pursuit teams to plot methods of reclaiming the country from the evil grip of "socialists" conspiring a global government. The "Education/Motivation of Pastors" team reported its goals were to "inform every pastor of the pitfalls of incorporation, the need for a national repentance and a return to His principles of government as secured for Americans by the Constitution, and the role pastors should play in helping to restore constitutional intent."

The report was co-authored by Greg Dixon, pastor of the Indianapolis Baptist Temple, a member of the Constitutionalist Networking Center board of directors and former secretary of the Moral Majority.

Less than two years earlier, in 1992, Dixon addressed a gathering of militia leaders and white supremacists organized by Christian Identity leader Pastor Pete Peters at a Colorado YMCA camp, said researcher Leonard Zeskind.

Nearly 150 "neo-Nazis and Christian Patriots" attended the conference to hear Dixon, Gun Owners of America leader Larry Pratt, Aryan Nations chief Richard Butler, Aryan Nations leader and former Texas Klansman Louis Beam, Militia of Montana founder John Trochmann, and white supremacist attorney Kirk Lyons.

In April 1995, the Antioch Baptist Church in Bismark, North Dakota, drew 50 people to hear Eugene Schroder and Graham County, Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack, author of From My Cold Dead Fingers. According to the Bismark Tribune, the meeting was coordinated by Pastor Todd Dennis who said, "Just like 200 years ago when our founding fathers questioned their government, so are we."

In September 1995, Montana Freemen member Frank Ellena was arrested on a fugitive warrant after concluding a seminar on common law courts at the Mesa Bible Church in Arizona. In a letter to the Arizona Republic newspaper in Ellena's defense, Cheryl K. Burgess, a Wickenburg town council member, explained, "The movement is Christian, and a lot of people do not understand that when you take God's law or the common law away, you are under man's injustice and whims called law."

In April 1996, more than 50 ministers gathered at a constitution seminar in an Ocala, Florida church to hear Schroder and attorney Larry Becraft. George Hall, co-founder of Middle Income Citizens of America, the group that organized and videotaped the seminar, said Christian Patriot study groups are meeting in independent churches, "the only free religious institutions. Conventional churches are influenced by an unseen power,...invisible government."

Like patriot peers, Hall is angry with perceived Jewish-controlled mainstream media. "If you say homosexuality is wrong," he said, "they'll brand you a homophobic. If you're not careful about what you say about Jewish people, they brand you anti-Semitic. If you're not careful about what you say about coloreds, they brand you a racist. If it's a true statement, it's not racist, not anti-Semitic."

The right-wing blur
As Zeskind noted, a fluid movement blurs lines between the right-wing movements. One example is Ross Perot's political education conference in Dallas last year. United We Stand America members, a Catholic priest-led Operation Rescue team, Christian Patriots, and the Texas Constitutional Militia networked in the civic center, as well as nearby hotels.

The mix of Bible references, invocation of Jesus Christ and fear of the new world order is tantalizing rhetoric to tap the "silent majority" awakened by Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition and Dr. James Dobson's Focus on the Family empire of millions. Dobson is listed as a resource in Patriot USA magazine, and his radio program airs on Patriot Radio Network. Can the Christian Coalition be far behind?

The Colorado Christian Coalition
At the Colorado Christian Coalition Presidential Candidates Forum in Denver this past January, the only candidate to show was Charles Collins, a Christian Patriot from Florida who usually travels with a bodyguard, who publishes a patriot newspaper, and who belongs to a New Mexico militia.

In addition to a half-dozen Christian Patriot candidates courting votes for local seats, the movement wooed recruits in the exhibit hall. Clad in a tricornered Revolutionary soldier hat and armed with a musket, Ted Gunderson's campaign aide Douglas Millar hawked "$3 Queer Reserve Notes" (lampooning the Federal Reserve System currency), patriot literature, and conspiracy videos of the Waco fiasco and the Oklahoma City bombing.

John Birch Society organizers Dennis Falk and George Sechrist sold The New American magazine and a myriad of books exposing the evil New World Order schemes. The U.S. Taxpayers Party promoted gutting government-funded "activities to encourage homosexual conduct" to dismantling the welfare system because "the message of Christian charity is fundamentally at odds with the concept of welfare rights."

Colorado Christian Coalition director Marty Nalitz, a radio talk show host formerly with USA Patriot network, is credited with forming a united conservative voting bloc of coalition members, pro-lifers, patriots, and militia troops. Nalitz has also stumped for presidential contender Pat Buchanan at Republican club meetings and hosted a live radio broadcast from Buchanan's pep and patriot rally just hours after the New Hampshire Primary victory.

Patriots and bigotry
As much as the Christian Patriot movement is trying to distance itself from bigotry, it continues a cooperative relationship with Christian Identity zealots such as Pastor Pete Peters, who promotes the separation of races to keep Aryan genes pure and demands the death penalty for homosexuals through his books, radio and satellite television shows, a world-wide web page, and Scriptures for America newsletter.

Earlier this summer, Peters invited ministers, church leaders and communicators of all faiths to a conference entitled "Israel Identity" at the YMCA camp near Estes Park, Colorado. The conference brochure promoted a mix of preacher and patriot speakers, including Martin "Red" Beckman, Montana tax resister and "grandfather" of the Fully Informed Jury Association. According to Peters, the conference was organized by leaders of Baptist, Church of Christ, Lutheran, Episcopal and Catholic faiths.

"There is a teaching spreading from church to church, silently crossing denominational lines and frequently bypassing church leaders," Peters proclaimed in the conference brochure. "It is rapidly being embraced in patriot groups and conservative movements through the land."

Leslie Jorgensen writes from Colorado Springs. This article appeared in the August 1996 Freedom Writer Magazine. It is reprinted with permission.

Unlike the $3 "Queer Reserve Note" hawked at Patriot Constitutionalist rallies, the Montana Freemen's funny money is no laughing matter in Colorado.

A dozen Constitutionalists were recently indicted by a Colorado grand jury for attempting to cash more than a million dollars in fraudulent checks and filing false liens. Ironically, the schemes are part of the anti-government Patriot movement, which has been defended by local Senators Charles Duke (R-Monument) and MaryAnne Tebedo (R-Colorado Springs).

Bad checks
The indictments stem from bogus checks issued by Freemen leaders at Montana training seminars. They also provided instructions on how to file false liens against attorneys, government agencies, judges and other public officials. These "get even" conferences were conducted on the so-called Justus Township near Jordan, Montana.

David Van Pelt, 38, of Divide and Robert J. Glaser, 51, of Colorado Springs, were arrested in mid-September for proffering Freemen-signed bogus checks in El Paso and Teller Counties.
Others indicted included Richard "Rick" Reeser, the 54-year-old husband of Jeannie Reeser (D-Thornton), who was arrested last week on charges of forgery and attempted theft. A former Thornton city council member, Reeser allegedly helped cash a $500,000 bogus check at the Platte Valley Bank in Denver.

The question of sovereignty
Van Pelt, who attended the Freemen seminars earlier this year, is a self-proclaimed "sovereign citizen" who does not abide by state or federal laws that he considers unconstitutional. He proudly uses a citizen "Travelers Affidavit" in lieu of a state-issued driver's license.

Glaser filed a declaration of "sovereign citizenship" with District Attorney John Suthers, attempting to dissolve his Colorado citizenship.

Perhaps Glaser had forgotten that when in March he was elected Republican Party precinct committeeman and a delegate to county and state GOP conventions. Both require state citizenship and party affiliated voter registration.

Dismayed GOP leaders aim to remove Glaser from his precinct post. They claim Glaser was wooed into the party by so-called "Patriots" like Duke and El Paso County Commissioner candidate Betty Beedy. The Colorado Statesman reported that Beedy has been associated with the El Paso County Militia (formerly the Calhan Militia) and the Colorado Firearms Coalition.

The common law jury
In June 1995, Glaser participated in the first national common law grand jury in Wichita, which found the government guilty of operating unconstitutionally. He also participated in the Colorado common law jury that assembled two months later in Canon City.

Common law courts operate outside the legal judicial system, and those who participate as judges and juries can be charged with impersonating public officials and panels. Such legalities didn't dissuade state Senators Tebedo and Duke from appearing before this Canon City grand jury.

When common law activists adjourned for lunch, police arrested Mark Boswell on a fugitive warrant. Boswell had allegedly used a false identity during a traffic violation incident and had purchased a Mercedes with a bogus money order.

Duke indignantly deemed Boswell a "political prisoner" and several months later sponsored a Senate bill that would require federal agents to notify county sheriffs before executing warrants. Among those who testified at his committee hearing this past spring were Van Pelt and Reeser.

The Law Club
Boswell is listed in patriot resources as contact for the American Law Club that holds chapter meetings throughout Colorado to probe common law and the U.S. Constitution. The Colorado Springs club meets in the basement of the Satellite Hotel.

One of their more devoted scholars is Linda Tebedo, "sovereign citizen" daughter of Senator Tebedo and close friend of Van Pelt.

Boswell is also a broadcaster on the Johnstown-based USA Patriot radio network (renamed the American Freedom Network after the Oklahoma City bombing). The latest personality added to the American Freedom Network's Saturday morning line-up is Senator Duke, who also spoke at the August 31 national militia rally in Washington, D.C.

Contacts in the Legislature
In April more than 200 Constitutionalists attended a subcommittee hearing orchestrated by Senator Duke. They presented a petition of grievances culled from the common law grand jury's charges against Colorado officials.

At the June Mid-America Constitution Conference America '96 in Missouri, Eugene Schroder announced that a summer interim committee of the Colorado Legislature had been approved to study the petition. Although it never materialized, Schroder and the Constitutionalists have continued discussions with House Speaker Chuck Berry and legislative legal services.

Looking ahead
Constitutionalists hope to gain credibility through the Colorado Legislature and ultimately reform government for what they believe is a nation "founded by Christ on Christian principles for Christians."

Movement leaders have denounced the Freemen's many schemes and criticized their rigid Christian-Identity rooted common law courts with their draconian death penalty for homosexuals and those who mix races.

Constitutionalists claim to be more compassionate, accepting different races and religions, and sparing the lives of homosexuals (who would still be subject to criminal punishment). Like the Freemen, Constitutionalists recognize the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution and the original Bill of Rights, which they interpret to grant citizenship status to white Christian males only.

It will be a challenge for the Constitutionalists to distinguish themselves from the Montana Freemen, when their common law court sprouted from Christian Identity seeds.

I've been an editor of Freedom Watch for the last five years, since Citizens Project started.
Last month a long-time CP supporter complimented me on the newsletter and said it ought to be larger. Then he wrote a $1,500 check so we could double the size of this month's newsletter.

If you think it looks good, don't hesitate to call me at 634-2836 and say so. I'll be glad to hear from you. But be warned: I will challenge you to make a significant donation so we can increase the size of Freedom Watch on a regular basis. More news, more articles, more timely analyses.

Here in Colorado Springs, I think that's a good cause.

Never a dull moment
The good news is that the issues we encounter from religious right groups are starting to repeat themselves. The form and timing change, but the essentials remain the same.

-Don't like gays? Well, Amendment 2 was a bust. So what's next? Maybe legislation to keep "sexually immoral role models" (read "gays") out of school classrooms. The head of the Family Friendly Libraries in Virginia is pushing that.

-Tired of intellectual freedom? Focus on the Family wants public libraries to establish "adult only" shelves. Focus wants each library--working in partnership with concerned parents, of course--to decide which books or other materials children should not have access to. That will open dramatic new opportunities to censor reading materials.

-Passive on pluralism? Keep an eye out for the Christian Patriots to come riding over the hill--gun in one hand and Bible in the other--preaching that non-Christians, women and minorities should be second-class citizens.
And then there are school vouchers, the Murphy Initiative, organized prayers in schools, creationism in science classes.... The list goes on and on.

And now the PRA
What about this Parental Right Amendment? A right-wing group in Virginia has already sent $146,000 to buy this change to our Constitution. If this amendment passes in November (and the polls indicate it should), all kinds of problems are likely.

The PRA reminds me of Amendment 2. No one is paying much attention to it now. But if it's successful, watch for a proliferation of right-wing lawyers and lawsuits in our fine state.
Just when things were quieting down after Amendment 2, here we go again!

Like I said, never a dull moment.
-Doug Triggs

Aryan Nations: A specific neo-Nazi organization that is the political arm of the Church of Jesus Christ Christian, based in Hayden Lake, Idaho. Led by Richard Butler, Aryan Nations is one of the most notorious Christian Identity groups in the country, attempting to bridge the gap between neo-Nazi ideas and more traditionally American forms of white supremacy. Aryan Nations promotes the idea of a white racial homeland in the Pacific Northwest.

Christian Identity: A racist North American theological movement. Adherents of Christian Identity believe that white northern Europeans are the true "Israelites," descended from the "Lost Tribes of Israel," that Jews are impostors and servants of Satan, and that people of color are an inferior sub-species of humans.

Christian Patriot: A generic term used to describe various extreme right organizations and individuals. It is often used interchangeably with "Patriot," "Constitutionalist" and "Freeman." Christian patriots believe in a variety of often anti-Semitic conspiracy theories; a literal and selective interpretation of the Constitution; and racist ideas about citizenship.

Leaderless Resistance: Leaderless Resistance emphasizes the formation of small, independent paramilitary cell groups, not formally connected to any leadership. These independent cells choose their own missions, participating in a larger movement by reading literature, computer bulletin boards, phone messages and so on.

Posse Comitatus: A Latin term meaning "Power of the County." It is also the name of an ultra-conservative paramilitary group started in the 1960s. Like present-day militia groups, the Posse Comitatus claims that the Second Amendment gives them the right to form private armies. Posse Comitatus members believe that the income tax and federal reserve banking system are an unconstitutional plot by "Jewish bankers" to destroy America.

Reprinted, with revisions, with permission of the Coalition for Human Dignity.

Myth #1: Millions of Americans are involved in the militia movement.
Fact: The most reliable estimate of active membership in militia groups is 25,000 to 50,000 individuals. A larger number of people contribute money and receive militia literature.

Myth #2: Militias are something new.
Fact: The Minutemen, an anti-communist paramilitary group, made this concept popular more than 30 years ago when it stockpiled weapons and explosives. Groups like the Posse Comitatus, which formed in 1969, also believed in forming militias to fight the IRS and other government agencies.

Myth #3: Militias are defenders of the U.S. Constitution.
Fact: Militia groups talk about the Constitution, but in reality they want to be the ones to pick and choose what parts will be enforced. Many militia supporters reject all Amendments after the first ten, particularly the 14th Amendment, which helped abolish discrimination against blacks.

Myth #4: Militias give people the courage to stand up to government "tyranny."
Fact: Militia leaders believe that practically every law passed by the federal government is illegal. They tell their followers that these "illegal" laws are proof that America has become a dictatorship. Militia members may think they are fighting against government tyranny and abuse, but what they are really doing is taking the law into their own hands.

Reprinted, with revisions, by permission of the Coalition for Human Dignity.

Creationism in the Springs
An Interview With Sam Milazzo

The Living Word Church sponsored a debate on evolution and creationism at Mitchell High School on August 27. The debate featured Dr. Duane Gish, head of San Diego's Institute for Creation Research, and Sam Milazzo, instructor at the Physics Department at UCCS. The debate ran for two hours.

The school's 750-seat auditorium was jammed. From its responses, a strong majority of the audience favored the views of creationist Dr. Gish.
Following the debate, Sam Milazzo consented to this interview.

FW: What did you think of the debate?
Milazzo: I enjoyed it, and it went better than I had expected. Many people I talked to beforehand advised me not to do it. But I thought it was important to confront this creationist group head-on. Their approach to science is so deficient that scientists have a special responsibility to point this out.

FW: What was your strategy in the debate?
Milazzo: I wanted to do a calm and reasoned approach to the issues. I wanted to show the scientific evidence supporting evolution. I also believed I could show two things: that Dr. Gish's religious beliefs led him into ridiculous science, and that he could provide little evidence supporting creationism. Dr. Gish well illustrated the first point by taking the position that Tyrannosaurus Rex was a vegetarian until sin came into the world. His approach to the entire debate supported my second point.

FW: What do you think Dr. Gish's strategy was?
Milazzo: At his organization, the Institute for Creation Research, they use a "two model" approach. They believe that there are only two explanations for the origin of life--sudden literal biblical creation, and evolution. They admit to no other possibilities. They believe, therefore, that any evidence against evolution is evidence for creationism.

That was Dr. Gish's debating strategy. He spent most of his time attacking evolution, but offered very little evidence for biblical creation. This sort of negativity can be effective in debates, but I don't think he helped buttress creationism, except in the either-or model I just described.

In fact, Dr. Gish's presentation of evidence for his creationist model of the sudden origin of the world was more than weak--it was intellectually bankrupt.

By the way, I don't believe in this "either biblical creationism or evolution" dichotomy. There are quite a number of creationist beliefs in the world's religions, and I don't see the biblical creation story as being inherently superior to others. And I really don't see any of the creationist beliefs as being in opposition to science. But I think Dr. Gish's strategy of making himself a defender of just the Christian creationist belief is a popular approach in heavily Christian America, and especially here in Colorado Springs.

FW: What about the audience?
Milazzo: I was surprised at the size of the audience. I was also surprised how few people in the audience appeared to be on my side. But I expected the audience would be made up of three groups of people--those who had their minds made up on one side or the other, and then people in the middle who came with reasonably open minds. The group with the more open minds was the group I was talking to.

FW: What about Dr. Gish's idea of "creation science?"
Milazzo: Creation science is a contradiction in terms. Creation science says you start from a fundamentalist Christian belief and then find bits of evidence that fit those beliefs. If the evidence doesn't fit, you throw it out. With science, you take all the evidence and from that you form your theory. You don't make the data fit your theory.

If you join Dr. Gish's group, the Institute for Creation Research, you must take an oath that you believe in the absolute inerrancy of the Bible. But no scientific organization in the world demands that people agree to the conclusion before they go out and do research. Science is about dispassionate investigation of natural phenomena. Creation science isn't dispassionate--it starts from a core religious belief and from that expects to accurately describe the physical world around us.

Dr. Gish and the Institute for Creation Research have an interesting trick--they try to make a difference between creationism and creation science. Creationism uses quotes from the Bible and talks about God in describing the origin of the world. Creation science says all the same things about the origins of the world, but leaves out the words "God" and "Bible." In this fashion, the ICR folks say that "creation science" is not a religious theory. But that's just a game they're playing to get around court rulings, and so far the courts have seen through it.

FW: What about the idea that science teachers should teach the "evidence against evolution?"
Milazzo: On the one hand, I'm OK with that. There are ongoing disputes about some aspects of evolution, and those are interesting scholarly disputes. On the other hand, some people who are pushing public schools to teach the "evidence against evolution" are trying to use that to paint evolution as a theory in crisis. It isn't. There are differences of opinion as to various elements of evolution, but evolution itself is a very strong, robust and well-documented theory, and the differences of opinion are not with evolution itself.

The scholars Dr. Gish cited in our debate who he said disputed evolution--most of them were in fact evolutionists who only disagreed on aspects of evolution.

FW: If you believe in evolution, does that mean you are anti-religious?
Milazzo: Dr. Gish tried to make that point, which I thought was particularly absurd. Evolution does not say anything about God. Evolution does not say that God does not exist. In fact, a majority of scientists believe in God. Most mainstream religions, such as Catholics and Presbyterians, have no problem with evolution. Only certain fundamentalist Protestant churches are offended. Is it anti-Christian to believe in evolution? Well, most Christians don't think so!

Many creationists, I think, see evolution as one more of the "Great Demotions" that religion has experienced at the hands of science. When science showed that the Earth was not the center of the universe, then that our sun was not the most important star in the universe, and so forth--that offended many religious groups at the time because these discoveries seemed to "demote" humanity from the pinnacle of the universe. Dr. Gish and many other creationists are walking down this same road, trying to roll back scientific discoveries in order to shore up their religious beliefs.

But I don't have a philosophical problem with evolution, and most of today's religions don't either. I think faith remains strong enough to incorporate new scientific discoveries, and religions can thrive despite the scientific evidence for evolution.

FW: Can you teach science without teaching evolution?
Milazzo:<P> No. Evolution is one of the handful of great human ideas in science. I don't think you can consider yourself educated, even at the high school level, without having a familiarity with these great scientific theories. It's important to those going on to college, and--in our technological era--even for those who do not.

FW: Do you expect that Colorado Springs will hear more from creationists?
Milazzo: I think there will be a push for Gish's brand of creationism in our local high schools. Either that, or attempts to get schools not to teach evolution in science classes. I have heard that biology teachers in the different school districts in Colorado Springs now teach evolution in quite different ways, depending on the pressure they feel from creationists.

Learn About Creationism

The Citizens Project Task Force on Science and Creationism is proud to announce its new study Public School Controversy: Creationism in Science Classes. Contents of this 30-page study include:

a description of creationist beliefs,
arguments against creationism in science classes,
important court cases,
the recent Jefferson County controversy, and
resources for further study.
The study will be available October 21. It is free to Citizens Project members by calling the CP office at Non-members should send a request and $10 to Citizens Project, Box 2085, Colorado Springs, CO 80901.

God is no candidate's campaign manager. Nor does God direct the activity of any special interest group.

You might not know this, though, because these days all manner of groups assert the "one and only" Christian position on issues and endorse specific candidates as if they were God's anointed.

Nobody expects a politician with faith to hang it up before he or she walks into the Capitol Rotunda or the Oval Office. Similarly, this nation has a long tradition of religious leaders speaking a prophetic voice to their government, a tradition that is both constitutionally permitted and ethically appropriate.

The shadow of theocracy
The shadow on the landscape in 1996 is a growing legion of religious leaders, organizations and movements (bolstered by self-interested political operatives) who would like to turn these United States into a theocracy, a government run along narrow sectarian lines where, at best, those who are not believers are merely tolerated.

They concur with Pat Buchanan's pronouncement at the 1992 Republican National Convention: "We are in a religious war for the soul of America."

They also seem to accept the challenge Buchanan laid out before a meeting of Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition last year: "The time is not far distant when we're all going to have to gird ourselves and take that long march up to Armageddon to do battle for the Lord."
Apparently, those who subscribe to this view find the need for earthly political power even greater than that of winning souls in this final epoch.

Contrary to the erroneous information communicated by some on the "Religious Right," the United States neither demonstrates an officially-sanctioned animosity toward religion nor has an absence of strong voices for values in public policy debates.

Ethical standards
It is extremely important, however, that religious groups conduct themselves in a manner consistent with principle and high ethical standards. Toward these ends, let me set out three rules about the intersection of religion in political life.

First, non-profit groups--and that includes churches--must absolutely refrain from partisan politicking and candidate endorsements. This activity violates the tax laws of the nation.
I believe in the prophetic mission of the Church--to speak out for justice and organize on issues of community, national and global consequence. It is dangerously corrosive to that mission to go the final step of having religious institutions endorse specific candidates for office. The church is about principles; it is not ultimately about politicians.

A few months ago, Americans United began a national effort called Project Fair Play. It urges Americans to report unlawful church politicking to the Internal Revenue Service.
Other non-profits abide by IRS regulations forbidding politicking. Churches should, too. I like smelling incense in a sanctuary, but I don't want to smell cigar smoke from some political operation in the church basement.

Second, we must not countenance so-called "stealth" candidates, people who will not disclose who they are or what they represent. They don't go to candidate forums or answer questionnaires from the League of Women Voters or the local newspaper.

Instead they campaign almost exclusively by having their campaign literature or Christian Coalition-produced "voter guides" left under the windshield wiper blades at selected church parking lots the Sunday before election day.

At a minimum, the democratic process requires that candidates lay their cards on the table, honestly allowing voters to know what their positions are so they can make an informed choice. When you hide your political light under a bushel, you are slapping democracy in the face.

Finally, we must recognize that no group should claim to have the "Christian" position on all political issues. It represented real arrogance when Pat Robertson named his political arm "The" Christian Coalition, not a Christian Coalition. This arrogates to one group the claim of morality for all Christians.

What about Jesus?
During the debate over health care three years ago, Coalition Director Ralph Reed noted his opposition to inclusion of drug rehabilitation and mental illness coverage with the sweeping statement that "church-going families are less prone to use these programs, services they don't want or need."

For some of us, this sounds a little inconsistent with Jesus' answer to the man who asked, "When did we see you naked and clothe you? When did we see you hungry and feed you?" and Jesus replied, "When you did this for the least among you, you did it for me."
Personally, I prefer Jesus' analysis to Ralph's.

The role of religion
The mix of religion and politics has been a fact of American life from the beginning of the nation. This is not necessarily a bad thing.

I want the church to encourage non-partisan participation in the electoral process. I want it to register people to vote. I want it to get people to the polls. I want it to invite all candidates to forums to discuss all issues.

There is just one thing I don't want it to do: become a cog in anyone's electoral machine.

Barry Lynn is Executive Director of American United for Separation of Church and State. This article is reprinted from the September 1996 Rutherford magazine, with permission.

Pew Research Center for the People and the Press recently published the results of a comprehensive survey. Among other things, the survey found that white evangelical Protestants are the most conservative and Republican religious group. The conclusion of the study: "Evangelicals have clearly become the Republican Party at prayer."

This group currently represents 24% of registered voters. Politically active evangelicals are also the fastest growing group, ahead of mainline Protestants (22% of registered voters) and Catholics (21%).

The Pew study found that white evangelical Protestants are much more conservative on policy questions ranging from homosexuality to the environment.

By a 3-1 margin, they believe society should discourage homosexuality (half of all Americans believe that society should accept gays and lesbians). They are more in favor of banning "dangerous books" from school libraries. They are less inclined to help the poor or to support civil rights legislation. They are more likely to support military solutions to international problems and oppose conscientious objection to military service. They are more critical of government regulations to save the environment.

The study found that half of evangelicals live in the South, compared to one-third of all Americans. Nearly 70% reside in small towns, small cities or rural areas. They are less likely to be college graduates (16%, compared to 21% of all Americans; 51% for Jews).
A copy of the Pew study is in the Citizens Project library.

You Bet!

The non-profit sector has gotten out of hand. In Colorado Springs, the U.S. Olympic Committee had a 1994 income of $96 million and expenses of $89 million. Focus on the Family has an income in excess of $100 million per year. Yet they refuse to pay property taxes on the land they own!

Taxes and services
It's a problem. Schools and cities struggle with increasingly tight budgets while Colorado non-profits occupy valuable real estate without paying property taxes. Yet these non-profits don't hesitate to use the very governmental services they refuse to help fund.
We only want them to pay for the services they receive from their own communities--police and fire protection and schools. It's astonishing when local non-profits raise concerns about the quality or direction of our schools, but then turn their backs when the time comes to pay for educational improvements. That forces us all to pay more.
And when non-profits have a problem--for example, when Focus on the Family had its recent hostage situation--they call the police, not the Knights of Columbus. That's your tax dollars at work, not theirs.
Tax exemption is actually a forced subsidy by the taxpayers. We simply want non-profits, large and small, to pay their fair share of property taxes and give other taxpayers a much-needed break.
Amendment 11 will reduce our taxes. That's important. But it will also let us choose which charities and non-profits we want to support, rather than being forced by law to subsidize those non-profits we may not agree with.

What it's not
Proposed Amendment 11 has been misconstrued by opponents. Here are three important points.
First, it deliberately exempts true charitable organizations from having to pay any real estate taxes. This includes schools, correctional facilities, orphanages, and housing for low-income elderly, disabled, homeless or abused persons. The duty to provide for these needy citizens was the original intent of this tax exemption.
Second, our proposed amendment would not affect the IRS tax exemption for non-profits. They would still retain their privileges of tax deductible contributions, reduced postal rates, and exemptions from other taxes: personal property taxes, income taxes (state and federal), investment income and capital-gains tax, sales, gas, car use, excise taxes, and inheritance tax.
And third, the money gained by taxing non-profits would not go to the government, but would instead reduce the burden to taxpayers. As the last sentence of the proposed amendment says, "The property tax rate will decrease proportionately to prevent a net revenue gain to any taxing entity."

Who will pay
Of the many thousands of charitable non-profits in Colorado, only 1,556 own real estate. The reminder rent space, in effect already paying property taxes through monthly rent payments to their landlords.
It isn't fair that the less affluent non-profits must pay property taxes while non-profits that own their land and buildings get a special large tax break. It isn't right that you and I are forced to pay more in taxes just because many non-profits want a free ride without paying their fair share of taxes.
Let's take this small step to make the tax system fairer for everybody. Vote "yes" on Amendment 11 when you vote November 5.

- John Patrick Michael Murphy

No Way!

Thanks to a Colorado Springs attorney, voters will get to vote this November on whether to end the venerable tradition of exempting churches and charities from property taxes in Colorado.
John Patrick Michael Murphy has put on the ballot an initiative to amend the state constitution so that organizations such as the YMCA, Boys Club, Girls Club, private zoos, fine arts centers, amateur sports organizations, veterans clubs, fraternal clubs, churches, mosques, and synagogues will find themselves with a hefty new operating cost.

It's misleading
At first superficial glance this might sound fairly reasonable. But digging just a little deeper reveals that Murphy's proposed law is not much more than a thinly disguised attack on religion from a man who has described himself as a "free thinker."
And it's misleading as well. Murphy's paid petitioners reportedly told signers that this law would reduce their taxes. That's not quite accurate. Because of the Gallagher Amendment, which created two classes of real estate taxes in the state---residential and commercial--the proportion of taxes paid by each of these classes is fixed.
If Murphy's law were to become reality, all the new taxes collected from nonprofits would go into the commercial pool. So corporate Colorado would get a tax break, but not homeowners.

Reasons for a tax break
Why has the United States, along with most other Western countries, for so many centuries given churches and nonprofit agencies tax-exempt status? Why should Colorado continue this tradition?
Another Colorado Springs attorney, L. Martin Nussbaum, who is campaigning against the Murphy initiative, has listed six reasons:
--Most nonprofits and churches provide large amounts of free and low-cost social services, such as counseling, divorce recovery, adoption services, grief workshops, drug rehabilitation, job training and more. Increasing the overhead these entities have to pay would force major cutbacks in such programs.
--When the nonprofits reduce their services, either the government will have to pick them up or they will have to be abandoned. The government would have trouble doing so because of Amendment One constraints.
--There would be reduced community involvement and public-spirited citizenship. Churches and clubs can more fervently take up various causes than can a bureaucratic, tax-collecting government.
--Nonprofits and religious groups provide a diverse laboratory for social experimentation. Murphy's law would discourage this.
--Churches, clubs, and nonprofit groups enrich our culture and teach such virtues as discipline and respect. They should be encouraged to do so, not be taxed out of existence.
Murphy's law would create a swamp of litigation, as lawyers try to sort out the confusing relationships between the law, the Gallagher Amendment and Amendment One. And think of the litigious disputes arising when the tax people try to figure out the fair market value on property that almost never is found on the market.

Lower taxes is the answer
Nussbaum also wonders why free-thinker Murphy chose to pick chiefly on churches. Why didn't he suggest we tax property owned by the federal government? Why aren't public schools taxed? These entities use tax-funded public services, too.
Instead of looking for ways to harass and possibly kill the corner church, the Olympic Committee, the Rotary club, Alcoholics Anonymous, the Salvation Army, et. al., why don't we instead look at ways to reduce the overall tax burden on everyone? We need fewer taxes, not more. We need less money flowing from the churches and nonprofits (and, of course, from the job-producing private sector) to tax collectors and government administrators.

This editorial is reprinted, with permission, from the Colorado Springs Business Journal.

Useful Information

How much real estate would be brought onto the tax rolls if Amendment 11 passes? The state property tax administrator says Colorado has about $4.3 billion worth of exempt property. Under Amendment 11, the amount that would become non-exempt and subject to taxation would be less than that, but no one is sure of the exact amount.

How much tax revenue would be created? The Rocky Mountain News cited one estimate that Amendment 11 would create $70 million to $100 million in new tax revenue, about 3% of the state's annual property tax.

How much would this save taxpayers? One analysis estimated that the average taxpayer would save about $15 per year through reduced taxes.

Who would have to pay in Colorado Springs? According to a Gazette Telegraph study, non-profits that would owe taxes under Amendment 11 would include: Penrose/St. Francis Health Care System--about $705,000 per year; Focus on the Family--about $595,000 per year; and the YMCA--about $250,000 per year