Powered by RND
PoddsändningarHistoriaTruce - History of the Christian Church

Truce - History of the Christian Church

Chris Staron
Truce - History of the Christian Church
Senaste avsnittet

Tillgängliga avsnitt

5 resultat 202
  • Republicans and Evangelicals | Bob Jones University v. The United States
    Give to help Chris continue to make Truce Bob Jones University v. United States (1983) was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed whether the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) could deny tax-exempt status to private religious schools that practiced racially discriminatory policies. Bob Jones University, a fundamentalist Christian institution, prohibited interracial dating and marriage among its students based on its religious beliefs. In 1970, the IRS revised its policy to deny tax-exempt status to private schools with racially discriminatory admissions policies, prompting Bob Jones University to file suit after losing its exemption. The university argued that the IRS's actions violated its First Amendment rights to free exercise of religion. The central question for the Court was whether the government's interest in eradicating racial discrimination in education outweighed the burden on religious freedom imposed by the denial of tax-exempt status. The case thus pitted two core constitutional principles against each other: religious liberty and the government's interest in promoting equality. In an 8–1 decision, the Supreme Court upheld the IRS’s position. Chief Justice Warren Burger, writing for the majority, stated that tax-exempt status is a form of government subsidy and that organizations seeking this benefit must serve a public interest. The Court held that eliminating racial discrimination in education was a "fundamental, overriding interest" that justified the burden on the university’s religious practices. It emphasized that the government is not required to subsidize discriminatory behavior, even when it is religiously motivated. The ruling had significant implications. It clarified that tax-exempt status is conditional upon compliance with fundamental public policy, including civil rights laws. The decision reinforced the principle that religious freedom, while protected, does not allow institutions to violate core public values when receiving government benefits. This case remains a key precedent in balancing religious liberty with broader societal interests in equality and nondiscrimination. Sources: The Story of Bob Jones University v. United States: Race, Religion, and Congress's Extraordinary Acquiescence by Olati Johnson. Paper Number 10-229. God's Own Party by Daniel K Williams https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/461/574/#tab-opinion-1955051 1980s Republican Party Platform In Search of Another Country by Joseph Crespino McNamar's testimony, pp.225, Hearing Before the Committee on Finance, United States Senate, Ninety-Seventh Congress, Second Session, February 1, 1982. (Thanks to the Senate Historian's Office) “The Bob Jones Decision: A Dangerous Precedent” by Kenneth S. Kantzer. September 2, 1983, issue of Christianity Today. Randall Balmer article for Politico that narrows the blame for the bonding of evangelicals to the GOP to race Before the Storm by Rick Perlstein Majority opinion in the Bob Jones case New York Times article in which Bob Jones assails the Supreme Court (page A23), May 25, 1983 “Bob Jones, in Sermon, Assails Supreme Court” Discussion Questions: Why is the tax exemption so important to this story? Why is it important to churches and religious institutions? How would revoking the tax exemption change giving to those institutions? Some evangelicals (like CT) denounced the racism of BJU, but still thought the IRS overstepped its bounds. What do you think? Which institutions in the US should be tax-exempt? Which shouldn't? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    --------  
    29:56
  • A Personal Message and Exciting News!
    Give to help Chris make Truce! Do you love Truce? I love making Truce! Together, we can continue this important show. Would you help Chris reach his goal of $40,000? You can send a check to: PO Box 3434 Jackson, WY 83001 Or give through Patreon, Paypal, Venmo, or a credit card on the website! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    --------  
    5:32
  • Republicans and Evangelicals | George Wallace
    Give to help Chris continue to make Truce George Wallace was, as historian Dan Carter put it, "the most influential loser in American history". He was the governor of Alabama and lost multiple bids for president of the United States. In the process, he spread his racist views throughout the country. Wallace is a vitally important figure in American history. His success in pulling in votes from racists attracted the attention of establishment politicians. He showed men like Richard Nixon that there was a significant voting bloc out there willing to vote based just on their fears about race. In this episode, Chris speaks with historian and author Dan T. Carter about his book The Politics of Rage. Wallace Bio (AI Generated) George Corley Wallace Jr., born on August 25, 1919, in Clio, Alabama, rose to prominence as a controversial figure in American politics. A graduate of the University of Alabama School of Law in 1942, he served in the U.S. Army Air Forces during World War II. After the war, Wallace embarked on a political career, serving in the Alabama House of Representatives from 1947 to 1953 and as a circuit court judge until 1959. His early political endeavors were marked by a moderate stance on racial issues. However, his political trajectory shifted dramatically in the early 1960s. In 1962, Wallace was elected governor of Alabama, campaigning on a platform of staunch segregationism. His infamous declaration, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever," during his inaugural address in 1963, epitomized his commitment to maintaining racial segregation. That same year, he attempted to block the enrollment of African American students, Vivian Malone and James Hood, at the University of Alabama, an event that became known as the "Stand in the Schoolhouse Door." This act of defiance against federal desegregation efforts brought national attention to Wallace and solidified his reputation as a symbol of resistance to civil rights advancements. Wallace's political influence extended beyond state politics. In 1968, he ran for president as the candidate of the American Independent Party, advocating for states' rights and appealing to disaffected white voters. He carried five Southern states and secured 13.5% of the national vote, demonstrating significant support for his segregationist views on a national scale. Despite his presidential aspirations, Wallace's influence remained strongest in Alabama, where he served multiple non-consecutive terms as governor. A pivotal moment in Wallace's life occurred in 1972 during his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. While campaigning in Laurel, Maryland, he was shot by Arthur Bremer, leaving him permanently paralyzed from the waist down. Despite this setback, Wallace returned to Alabama politics, winning the gubernatorial election in 1974. His later years in office were characterized by a shift in his political ideology, as he sought to distance himself from his earlier segregationist positions. Sources: The Politics of Rage by Dan T. Carter National Park Service article about the 16th Street Baptist Church Curtis LeMary's announcement speech History.com article about George Wallace being shot Nixon Library audio tapes collection Nixon talking about Wallace on tape Rolling Stone magazine, October 24, 1974, “The Ministry of George Wallace” by Joe Klein. Questions: Had you heard of George Wallace before? Why was Wallace important? How did Wallace's moderate successes change politics in his era? One prominent person speaking negatively about another race can significantly impact public opinion. How could his bloviating give permission to white people in the north to be openly racist? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    --------  
    1:04:06
  • Republicans and Evangelicals I Boston Against Busing
    Give to help Chris make Truce We talk about racism in the United States like it only happens in the South. But the nasty truth is that the North is also guilty of racist behavior. This is evident in the way that we behaved when schools were integrated by bus. Brown v. Board of Education called for public schools to integrate. However, it took decades for many public schools to carry out this directive. It wasn't until the 1970s that the Boston schools were forced to integrate. But how? Schools are frequently attended by children who live in a given school district. But the North had divided itself up by race, forcing black people to live only in certain areas of a city. Black children were not going to white public schools because they simply didn't live in white neighborhoods. This was de facto segregation at work. So when schools were called to integrate, they had to come up with a plan. They would bus students between schools, thus integrating them. But there were problems. In Boston, they started this program by cross-populating poor schools with poor schools. So the quality of education didn't go up. Violence broke out across the city as parents and children alike struggled to welcome people who looked different than them. In this episode, I'm joined by Dr. Zebulon Miletsky, Associate Professor, Africana Studies and History at Stony Brook University. Sources: Before Busing: A History of Boston's Long Black Freedom Struggle by Dr. Zebulon Miletsky Boston Against Busing by Ronald P Formisano Boston Globe (1960-); Sep 26, 1968; ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The Boston Globe pg. 1 and 32 Nixon's radio address about integration The Busing Battleground PBS documentary (worth a watch!) GBH's coverage of busing American Archive video collection on busing Discussion Questions: Integration was going to be difficult. How should it have been handled? Would you send your kids to a potentially unsafe school? What if it meant helping to integrate it? Was the uproar over integrated busing about more than just race? Why is it that black parents sometimes didn't want their kids going to formerly white schools? How do people like Ms. Hicks build a political career on a single issue? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    --------  
    31:30
  • Republicans and Evangelicals I Segregation Academies (part 2)
    Give to help Chris make the Truce Podcast In 2 Samuel 24 David is told that he must buy a certain piece of land in an act of repentance for his sins. The man who owns the land says that he'd like to give David the land and the animals to sacrifice. But David turns him down, insisting that he won't give to God something that cost him nothing. This story demonstrates something that may be missing from the Christian world today. Sacrifice should cost us something. Sacrifice should be a sacrifice. In the 1970s, school districts in the North and South were told that they had to integrate schools. This move was opposed by people of all sorts, including some Christians who worried that if segregation academies lost their tax-exempt status then Christian schools would too. This is the sad story of how some evangelicals with large followings came to oppose school integration. Our special guest is Daniel K. Williams, author of the excellent book God's Own Party. I also feature a clip from Angie Maxwell author of The Long Southern Strategy. Sources In Search of Another Country by Joseph Crespino Boston Against Busing by Ronald Formisano Reaganland by Rick Perlstein The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald 2 Samuel 24 Article on NPR God's Own Party by Daniel K. Williams Discussion Questions Sacrifice requires sacrifice. What are your thoughts on that statement? Do you believe in school integration? How should it have happened in the 1970s? Would you have wanted your kids to be bused to a different town if it meant a more multicultural experience? Why did some evangelicals with large followings think they needed to tie themselves to the GOP? How do we reconcile with the history of religious segregation academies? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    --------  
    46:35

Fler podcasts i Historia

Om Truce - History of the Christian Church

Truce explores the history of the evangelical church in America, from fundamentalism to pyramid schemes to political campaigns. Host Chris Staron uses journalistic tools to investigate how the church got here and how it can do better. The current season follows the rise of the Religious Right, examining the link between evangelicals and the Republican Party. Featuring special guests like Rick Perlstein, Frances Fitzgerald, Jesse Eisinger, Daniel K. Williams, and more.
Podcast-webbplats

Lyssna på Truce - History of the Christian Church, Historiepodden och många andra poddar från världens alla hörn med radio.se-appen

Hämta den kostnadsfria radio.se-appen

  • Bokmärk stationer och podcasts
  • Strömma via Wi-Fi eller Bluetooth
  • Stödjer Carplay & Android Auto
  • Många andra appfunktioner

Truce - History of the Christian Church: Poddsändningar i Familj

Sociala nätverk
v7.23.9 | © 2007-2025 radio.de GmbH
Generated: 10/16/2025 - 3:28:26 PM