Hatewatch Tweets
Hatewatch is managed by the staff of the Intelligence Report, an investigative magazine published by the Alabama-based civil rights group Southern Poverty Law Center.
Hatewatch Headlines
[TN]
Prison Chaplains Sued By Christian Identity Inmate
Chattanooga Times Free Press
/May 3, 2009
Convicted killer Anthony Hayes brought a federal lawsuit against Department of Corrections chaplains over refusing to recognize his white supremacist Christian Identity religion.
Read full article
« back to Hatewatch Headlines
Sign up to receive a weekly update of Hatewatch Headlines.
on May 7th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Perhaps self-identified Christians should sue for defamation because their message to “love thy neighbor” is routinely distorted by racists?
I personally believe that people involved in Nazi thinking are mentally challenged and that many of them need to be in institutions and under psychiatric care. Their philosophies inevitably lead to violent acts.
They are obviously beset by delusions of persecution and also of grandeur, making them extremely dangerous.
Kate
on May 7th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
The government has no business allowing Christanic priests inside of prisons in the first place.
on May 7th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
What would be gained by keeping people in prisons without any attention paid to their griefs and fears and without visitors who could help them feel they still have hope?
Isn’t being locked up for years bad enough to suit the public. Do we really need to treat prisoners in inhumane ways too?
on May 8th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
This shows precisely why the government has no business paying the salaries of religious leaders. Once you let one religion get special benefits, then ALL religions must be treated the same way. That includes religions that the vast majority of Americans would find repugnant. How is is it the State’s business to decide which religions are “legitimate”?
Kate, of course people should be allowed to have religious leaders (or anyone) visit them in prison. But the churches can pay for that themselves, or they can send volunteers. Taxpayers should not be forced to pay for religious services. Period.
on May 8th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Sean W said, “This shows precisely why the government has no business paying the salaries of religious leaders.”
Most chaplains at government institutions, like prisons, are not paid by the government. The only institution that I know of which pays chaplains is the military. Even then, military chaplains have military duties in addition to religious duties. Chaplains at most prisons are paid by groups like local ministerial associations. The government does provide resources like offices and places to hold services.
on May 8th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
i like how Fredric L. Rice, a liberal who probably believes in many liberal ‘ends justifies the means’ principles such as affirmative action: discrimination against whites in order to have a favorable outcome for non-whites, choses to ignore any good that christianity brings to imprisoned criminals
on May 9th, 2009 at 11:03 pm
Perhaps taxpayers should not pay for the prison guards, cooks, suppliers of food either? Why don’t we just go back to the stocks so we can lock people up and torture them at the same time?
Like it or not, having a prison chaplain is a much cheaper way of attending the emotional illnesses of humans so they can continue to be treated like beasts by people who call themselves civilized. Yet that still is not saving quite enough money to suit common desires for an additional pound of flesh, it seems.
Even hospitals pay so that patients and their loved ones can be comforted on demand by the chaplains of their choice.
If our countrymen are going to lock human beings up and turn them into savages, we must all face the consequences, and pay the prices, ALL of them. Prison guards might also need counseling because of the horror of the system. Did you ever think of that?
Of course, I have heard that in some areas prisoners must pay for their services by laboring in prison (or outside, on day passes) for private businesses too. Some large computer companies have had lucrative contracts for prisoner labor.
In fact, people have actually invested in private prisons so they can make money off the misery of others.
I think I can safely assume that the brutality and degradation of inmates will inevitably increase in all cases.
on May 10th, 2009 at 9:43 am
Christian Identity isn’t an authentic religion, much less, they are not recognized by the federal government or the mainstram Christianity as a genuine and legitimate relgion worthy of being practice or even respected. And thus, has nothing to do with “Christianity”. I support the government’s attempt at rejecting this man’s plea.
on May 10th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
is it just me or does there need to be a character limit to SPLC comments?
i like reading what other people have to say when its a targeted and concise 2-3 paragraphs, but when it become a complete essay/rant then its just stupid…..
on May 11th, 2009 at 9:26 am
“What would be gained by keeping people in prisons”
Tell me you’re not for the released of Rapists(yes the ones that are extremely misogynistic), level 2 &3 pedophiles/child killers, serial killers, hardcore gangbangers and last but not least–neo-Nazis. If you’re so much against the Justice system and prison complexes that houses them. May I suggest you move to countries where law and order doesn’t exist or nearly non-existent? Besides, who really wants to pay attention to these vermins like the neo-Nazis?
on May 11th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Kate I also wanted to know that if you’re so much against “brutality” on inmates, then you should be angry at this nation’s most sadistic Sheriff:
Sheriff Joe Arpaio. I am sure that name rings a bell or perhaps you heard of him somewhere. If not, then I suggest you look it up, if you want a good exemplification of “brutality” behind bars. I can’t think of another modern day warden or a promenent law enforcement official that promote such cruel and inhumane techniques while at the same time boasting about it on the media, both locally and nationally than arpaio. And speaking of “degradation”, I can safely mention the name of arpaio on female prisoners. And what women went through during his “crime suppression sweeps”. I’m talking about mothers, wives, and daughters. You should be angry at this geriatric racist Sheriff.
on May 11th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
It might be a good idea for people who write about prisons to know something about them and how they actually function.
Perhaps we should have local lawyers and police officers give classes on the subject of law enforcement policy. Simply using one’s imagination is not enough to be able to weigh in on the subject with any credibility. People are being locked up in our name so we should be made aware of their subsequent treatment.
Shadow Wolf, you conveniently answered to only half of my sentence about proposed denial of services to inmates because it might cost money.
Isn’t it true that the punishment for crime is the imprisonment itself? Do you actually think that various other tortures, like isolation from religious figures and counselors can be added at the discretion of the wardens?
on May 12th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
“Isn’t it true that the punishment for a crime is the imprisonment itself?”
Howdy Kate,
First off, you have a bizarre logic regarding punishment and crime. I don’t even know if you are anti-law or pro-lawlessness. But judging by your comments, I can only assume you are against punishing of the most violent and dangerous of KKKriminals amongst. The logical mindset you expressed, is indeed dangerous and obtrusive for a civilized society like the U.S. If you think some form of rehabilitation works on them, then I suggest you do research on recidivism. Because, quite frankly it does not. In this case, I strongly believe this white supremacist should be put away for a long time. Only to be release on the age(say about 70-75 yrs old) where he can’t harm another human being again.
As far as “religious figures” and “councilors” is concerned. That all depends upon the type of criminals you are referring to. In this case, where the inmate is a self-described “Christian Identity” member, it should not be recognized, either by the warden or the state in general. Because, “CI” is indentified as a hategroup by *many* Americans. And I don’t see the justification to supply a tool to continue the hate preaching rhetoric. It does nothing to help him or the state, if hate is all that he is requesting. If I am wrong about “CI’s” faux beliefs, then prove me wrong otherwise. Therefore, what’s the point?
on May 12th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
It’s really amazing to read back over all these posts and find that mine have been completely misunderstood. Perhaps I was misled by the complaints, for various reasons, about allowing prisoners to see their counselors while they were in prison.
On the one hand, I was arguing that prisoners have a right to see their religious counselors, despite the complaints from a racist inmate that he should be allowed to be ‘counseled’ by a member of a hate group on the pretense that was his “religion.”
Of course that argument is ridiculous, even if he does call himself “Christian.” However, his point was to keep other prisoners from getting visits from their prison chaplains unless he could be ‘counseled’ by a member of his hate group (as though they, too, were members of a Christian religion.)
I hope y’all aren’t as confused now as I am about the chaplain issues!
Racism has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity or any other religion, period, regardless of the labels some people like to pin on themselves.
on May 12th, 2009 at 9:49 pm
Seriously, if you were that informal on the grounds of what’s “Christian” and what’s not “Christian”. I think you are gravely mistaken. You seemed to harbour no clue as what “Christian Identity” is all about in terms of race. And in case you haven’t bothered to research(or perhaps you are indeed “misled”), that religious cult(or if you choose to call it a “religion”or sorts, then so be it) implements rhetorical racial philosophies into their teachings. They tend to believed that the white race is a chosen race by *their* God, and that all the other races are somewhat evil and Satanic, simply because they are not white. Gullibly, you went on to state that “racism has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity or any other religion”. Maybe not with the mainstream faiths. But with Christian Identity, it does rightfully apply in this context as does other faux cults of the same nature.
Are we discussing Christian Identity or mainstream religion in general? If it was one or more of the mainstream religious faiths, you failed to name a single one and explained why. I read and reviewed all of your comments above, none of which gave a thoughtful insight about what you are truly trying to imply here, as a matter of fact, you tend to sway off subject for another, in which you don’t really seem to make any cohorent sense, just a bunch of ramblings about irrelevancies, to say the least and I can see why some might be confused. And if Jesus Christ came back today, seeing how this “Christian Identity” or many smaller influx of ministries and teleministries that are popping up nationally, relying on greed and gullible donations. All in the name of “Christianity”, would he call himself a “Christian” now?
Certainly not.
on May 12th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
And speaking of “ridiculous” arguments. I find it somewhat frivolous to assume that Christian Identity to be an actual “religion” worthy of the same entitlements.
on May 13th, 2009 at 8:18 am
GENO
As an elder in a connectional mainstream Christian church, I think I can truthfully state that I know what Christianity is and what it is not.
Nazism is a political identity. It has nothing to do with religion, except that Hitler famously redirected the people’s religious fervor into hatred against Jews in order to change 20th Century Germany’s entire political system into a dictatorship that threatened all of Europe.
If you have been watching politics in America for any length of time, you will be able to identify the same kinds of trends, the blaming of certain powerless groups for all that is wrong with our economy. These are manipulative techniques always in use by politicians and their hangers-on, who are all hoping to get lofted into instant power and riches.
Generally they make use of people’s fears and hopes in order to use (and abuse) them in their bid for political gain.
Recently, notable political figures have been on television promoting their divisive ideas and staying in the public eye. Listen to what they are saying and notice how unctuously they introduce prejudicial ideas about their opponents and stoke fears about strangers in their communities.
Many of them also claim to be faithful Christians. That self-applied title seems to be the favored way to inspire and gain the confidence of many voters. However, it doesn’t take long to discover what political prizes they are actually seeking. The rest of us are simply objects in their environment, to be manipulated at will.
Your Nazi Identity people are, like many others, reacting to their fears of any strangers and that could include any of us. They are also appropriating a title, Christian, they do not understand. If they did understand that Christ was advocating for peace, they would angrily reject that philosophy.
on May 13th, 2009 at 7:54 pm
The Christian Identity things are about as Christian as the Nazi movement. They are a purely racist group; not a religious group. Their primary and only reason for existing is to hate anyone who isn’t them. I’m very happy not to be a Christian of any stripe as it my belief that all Christian groups have split off from one another for minor reasons and one group simply hates the other because of their very slight differences. I’m also opposed to Muslim mullahs being permitted to enter prisons to enlist domestic terrorists. I realize that I am painting them with a wide brush, but perhaps that brush is deserved?
on May 14th, 2009 at 8:48 am
I am so sorry that you feel that way, Beverly. I do not believe that any religions are bad, and I have studied a great many of them. The problem is they are being used for political gain.
As usual, the most prevalent religions are being used as sparkly labels to clean up the images of political scoundrels. They can say that this or that religion has traditions that they do not actually have, and because most people are totally bored by religion, they will believe it instead of researching for themselves.
We should be less trusting of people who have a political agenda and who also claim to be wise and moral people. Usually that sort of approach qualifies as false advertising, even though it seems to be wildly popular among men who are running for office!
on May 14th, 2009 at 11:30 pm
well i think you two should actually atleast try to understand how they came to their conclussions before you just say the “all religions are nice and equal” BS
judiasm does have a racial element, and what they have done is somehow come to the conclussion that europeans are the original israelites. so while they have chosen to selectivly follow only certain parts of the new and old testament, and twist others around, its not entirely random. their is a method to the madness.
on May 15th, 2009 at 1:51 am
John – Thanks for clarifying the connection between chaplains and the government. It was not clear from the article that these are unpaid positions. In that case, I see no problem with letting this man, or any other prisoner, receive visits from chaplains.
I would like to remind everyone of a very important passage that you seem to have forgotten about. It goes like this: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” It’s from the Constitution. The First Amendment. Remember that?
In this case, by declaring some religions “legitimate” and others “illegitimate,” the government is attempting to establish a religion. The Supreme Court has decided over and over again that the State has no business restricting the beliefs of religions, it can only restrict the ACTIONS of religions when they are potentially harmful to society.
Additionally, by refusing to allow this prisoner to receive visits from a chaplain, the government is restricting his right to the free exercise of his religion. It simply DOES NOT MATTER what you think about his religion. It is a religion, and therefore he has the right to exercise it. Period. Same goes for the Rastafarians mentioned in the article.
I personally don’t like the fact that many Evangelical churches openly preach hatred of GLBT people. I don’t like the fact that the Catholic Church does not allow women to be full participants. I don’t like the fact that the Mormon Church did not allow Black men to join the priesthood until the 1970s. I don’t like the fact that Christian Scientists and Jehovah’s Witnesses let children die without medical care. And I sure as hell don’t like the racism and anti-Semitism of Christian Identity. But I would fight to the death to protect the right of people to continue to believe these backward and vile things. And I hope that Evangelicals, Catholics, Mormons, Christian Scientists all get to see the chaplains of their choice when in prison.
Kate – I have not misunderstood your points. I just disagree with them. The one thing I do agree with is that the prison system is racist, brutal, and dehumanizing. It should be abolished. But this case has nothing to do with prison per se, and everything to do with the Constitution.
on May 15th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Religions do not have as their primary belief that people their members do not like can and should be robbed, driven out of the society, or murdered.
It beggars belief that simply because hate groups label themselves as Christians that they should be considered members of that faith. What exactly do they follow of the Christian faith? Are they getting tax breaks for being lawbreakers?
You are asking us to believe that one can have a church without any society or morality codes whatever. If we accepted that premise we would have everyone running amok and the rest of us dead or hiding somewhere. Would that be called the church of race hatred? It is absurd. You might as well establish a church that worships destruction of all life on earth.
(Now that you mention it, that does sound exactly like what has happened in countries this nation has decided to make war on.)
Whatever they believe, it definitely doesn’t agree with the US Constitution or any other laws in this nation.
I have a question for you. What would happen if suddenly you appeared on their list of enemies?
on May 15th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
I don’t think Kate actually knows what she is talking about there, but nevertheless, for the record, I’m just glad I’m not a “Christian”. There’s a lot of distortions and deciet coming from fringed groups like the Christian Identity, generally that has nothing to do with Christianity. White folks are always creating these little sectarian groups, that (usually) has nothing to do with Jesus Christ as a whole.
on May 15th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Kate, I stand by what I said; sorry if that offends you, but Pentecostal women are subject to migraine headaches because they are not allowed to cut their hair because Paul said that a woman’s hair is her glory and based on that starting in the early 1900s Pentecostal women couldn’t cut their hair. ONE LOUSY VERSE written by a woman hater, Paul, and those poor gals have to live in agony.
Immerse, sprinkle…all reasons for hate in a religion that claims to be about love.
Truth Monger: Change your name to something else. The Jewish nation has been around for close to 4,000 years. After the Romans tossed out large number of Jews from the land of Judah (but not all…Jews have always lived in the land since Joshua brought them in) they had to go somewhere. Some went east, others west and yet others north but they NEVER gave up their way of living, they remained true to their way of life. Your absurd statement that “judiasm does have a racial element, and what they have done is somehow come to the conclussion that europeans are the original israelites. so while they have chosen to selectivly follow only certain parts of the new and old testament, and twist others around, its not entirely random. their is a method to the madness” is something I would expect out of the mouth (or keyboard) of a Jew-hater. The word for the Jewish religion is Judaism pronounced Juda Ism as we follow the ways of Judah.
Anyone can convert to Judaism regardless of gender, color, country of origin..and we do NOT have a thing to do with the “New” testament. G-d made an ETERNAL COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM and since G-d is not a man that he should like, neither then son of man that he should change his mind, (Numbers 23:19) then the covenant is still valid despite other religions attempting to supersede the word of G-d. Yes, I am a Jew and yes, my ancestors had been living in Russia and Poland, but were NEVER Russians or Poles because those countries, unlike the United States did not permit them to become citizens. There are Jews living in virtually every continent in the world and in virtually every country. Would you call a Japanese Jew an European? How about one living in South America or Australia or any of the thousands of non-European lands who NEVER LIVED IN EUROPE?
You apparently have not investigated the history of the Jews and, in my eyes, you are nothing more or less than a Jew-hater who is attempting to change history with your hate-filled misstatements.
It is my prayer and my hope that you will open your eyes and stop jumping to conclusions about things you know nothing about.
My neighbor is a Cohen (Jewish priest) and knows it because the information has been passed down from generation to generation. He is originally from Ethiopia. Israel made several flights to bring Ethiopian Jews to the State of Israel. There are people of all faiths and nationalities living in Israel, yet the world slanders them with the odious term of apartheid. I wish you shalom in the truest sense of the word.
on May 15th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
One more thing, “Truth” monger; I am a proud citizen of the United States of America; my first loyalty is to G-d, my second loyalty is to the glorious United States of America and my third is to support the State of Israel in any way that I can. I have served in the United States Air Force although as a woman I was exempt when I joined in 1958 and received an Honorable Discharge in 1964. The majority of Jewish people living in the United States feel the same way: We are Americans and may G-d bless this wonderful Republic for opening this land to all.
on May 15th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
And for the sake of argument. Kate, I’m wondering if you’re a member of Christian Identity? Based on some of your comments, it appears that you harbor some level of anti-govenment rhetoric. Such rhetorical concepts you expressed herein, is generally associated with the right-wing extremist groups.
on May 16th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
Ryan, you are a joker, aren’t you?
Definitely there are many people in the US who haven’t the foggiest notion about the actual beliefs of any religion. Of course that makes them prey for every political flim flam expert they meet.
But here is a rule of thumb for anyone trying to separate the wheat from the chaff. If it is a stand-alone church with a preacher who controls the finances and makes all the rules, then it is probably not following the morality codes of Jesus of Nazareth, who, by the way, was a faithful Jew. Most likely such a church is simply reinforcing the society’s political shibboleths.
I can see already that current beliefs are nothing more than a variation of ‘my country, (or society) whether right or wrong.’ It’s the same philosophy local gangs love.
That is the thinking of children in secondary schools and older people who want to be part of an in-group.
If you want to know where that leads, just look at how some military men have been seduced into the evils of torture and murder against their own moral standards.
on May 16th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Beverly
I have actually studied many religions, even the more obscure kinds. It is evident to me that nobody is able to be faithful and moral all the time, no matter how religious or what kind of religion. But ethics is pretty standard. If a religion isn’t teaching ethical behavior, it definitely has fallen by the wayside.
Humans are fallen from grace, even if they are teachers, rabbis, priests and ministers or mullahs. We need to expose the faulty ideas of some hopeful sinners that just joining a certain religion will relieve them of blame for bad deeds. Some people obviously believe that simply saying they are Christian can get them an instant patina of goodness and/or authority.
That definitely isn’t true in any religion.
Here’s some advice. Don’t let anyone else tell you what is right or wrong. In every major religion there is the so-called golden rule. “Do not do unto others that which you would not want done unto you.” Non-religious people adhere to that rule because it is sensible and true.
Atheists and Humanists are some of the most ethical people to know. And often people who are loudest about their religion appear to be quite immoral in their actions. You will need to observe and make your own decisions about their sincerity by watching how they treat their neighbors.
on May 16th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
Kate, I just noticed that you said, “Perhaps self-identified Christians should sue for defamation because their message to “love thy neighbor” is routinely distorted by racists?”
The correct quote is, “‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD,” Leviticus 19:18
Jesus was a JEW, and observant one at that. It sticks in my craw that people dismiss the Jewish scriptures as though they didn’t exist or were superseded. Well, guess what? Just about everything Jesus said came directly from the Jewish scriptures but Christians ignore that fact.
Paul created Christianity, not Jesus.
on May 16th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
Beverly Kurtin:
Well you are clearly someone who just goes into full attack-mode without even attempting to understand what i was saying. You have absolutely no interest in any sort of honest dialogue other than trying to ‘win’
Well turn win-mode off for a second, and just read what i actually said, and what i say now: I simply explained the process of how these aryan nations type people come to their conclusion, not that i agree with it.
Perhaps if you take the time to try to understand how certain peoples thought processes work, and how they come to their conclusions, then you will be able to better convince them that they are wrong. Instead, you chose to go into an extreme defensive mode and just all out attack repeatedly, which just completely descends into a bitter argument and defeats the entire purpose of even having a discussion other than to provide you with a satisfaction of ‘victory’
maybe if you try to be less counterproductive, and more productive rather than just jumping the gun and going into a text-assault, you may yield better results in the future.
on May 17th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
These letters seem to be veering in many different directions. I remain convinced, though, that even Christians who go to church every Sunday are still unclear on what the scriptures are actually saying. The reason for that sad state of affairs is that Christianity has so many advocates who see churches as a way to get money and power.
Their tithes are not taxed, for instance. It doesn’t take long to discover that a lot of people go to church to be seen as a moral person. That tends to give them an air of moral authority. Politicians and businessmen deliberately use that avenue of influence to increase their
influence in their communities. They will hear the pastoral message filtered through their own too-good opinions of themselves.
Many of the faithful hear the message to reason together with their brothers and to forgive, but lay that responsibility promptly at the feet of others because they do not believe they are sinners themselves. They will however recognize the sins of ‘others’ quite readily and continue to complain about them throughout their lives. Many people go to church for that thrill of feeling better than others.
The parables of Jesus tell the entire story very clearly. It is pretty hard to miss that he was simply trying to help his fellow Jews to be faithful people. He wasn’t trying to start a new religion and he didn’t actually do that at all. He was just trying to tell the truth, but the people do not like unpleasant truths about themselves.
His followers called him ‘Rabbi.’ He spoke about god as his father in heaven. Everyone made that connection of an earthly father and a heavenly one and knew the difference.
How could such a simple message get so distorted? Nothing was written until many years after the events they described and were written from memory. Then the scriptures were translated into different languages.
Don’t we all know that basically the more something is copied, the greater the numbers of errors that will appear in the copies?
That’s why many religions are based on faith, not on proven fact.
I’m sorry if I have upset anyone with these statements. They, too, are only opinion.