In 2006, the film, Jesus Camp hit the silver screen generating controversy right and left. Filmmakers, Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady probably only meant to show a fair and balanced documentary about a significant segment of the American population which lives the mainstream culture but knows little of the evangelical one. Liberals saw the film as an expose of a malevolent and dangerous under-culture existing among us. Many Christians saw the film as a manipulative attempt to make them look bad. Some people on both sides of the divide recognized the nuanced approach that let the complexity of the charismatic culture reveal itself.
The main characters of Jesus Camp are Becky Fischer, a charismatic children’s minister who presides over a conference and then a camp and three of the children who stand out and are focused on: Levi O’Brien, a 12-year-old boy sporting a mullet, 9-year-old Rachael Elhardt and 9-year-old Tory Binger. Another child, Andrew Sommerkamp, bravely admitted he had a hard time believing in a God he never saw or knew much about. The film doesn’t show the believers giving Andrew much attention or help. Becky Fischer wrote a book called Jesus Camp my story about her experiences with the film and the complex series of events surrounding the story.
I am an atheist and I find some of the pet issues embraced by this community seriously wrong-headed. The issue most strongly focused on was abortion. I must confess I can’t 
really understand what all the fuss is about. If God created life, why can’t he create new lives to take the place of the ones who are aborted? Nature is profligate. She creates life in abundance and it is axiomatic that much of that life is snuffed out early. Every gardener knows that killing is necessary to make a garden thrive. Weeds need to be pulled or they will suffocate the plants the gardener wants to grow. Snails and other pests must be killed or otherwise discouraged from feasting on the life the gardener is nourishing. To be hands-off and to respect all life equally is to enable the jungle from taking over. Not that a jungle is a bad thing. But mankind managed to develop into the dominant species by taking control over agriculture. Why is childbirth an exception? Primitive people who don’t have the technology of abortion have their own primitive form of birth control. Some expose to the elements infants they can’t or don’t want to raise. Really poor communities have no 
choice. The “pro-lifers” are fond of the word “murder” with all its emotional connotations. Of course, “murder” is a legal term referring to the unlawful, premeditated killing of human beings who have been born. Animal rights people also misuse the word “murder,” accusing all carnivores of murder. Becky Fischer objects strenuously to the idea that her community is “political.” But ideas like “pro life” (really pro-birth) has political consequences. One of the extra scenes on the DVD shows a group of children driven to a “pregnancy crisis center” to pray for the ending of abortion. This center is right next door to a Planned Parenthood. These centers are notorious for misleading pregnant girls and women into thinking they can get abortions there only to reveal once it’s too late that they don’t do that sort of thing. It’s fair enough with both store-fronts side by side. A girl who wants an abortion can go next door to Planned Parenthood. But the Right is very serious about snuffing out all options for abortion. In ten years, will that Planned Parenthood still be there? Not if “pro-lifers” have anything to do with it.
The film began with a radio announcement that Sandra Day O’Connor retiring from the Supreme Court, clearing the way for President Bush to appoint a Justice who wants to repeal Roe vs. Wade. Becky objected to the timing of that announcement. It seems Justice O’Connor’s retirement came after the kids did an intense prayer (I would call it a working) to end abortion. Becky considered this a miracle and wished the film had depicted it as such. Another miracle that didn’t make it to the film was the stopping of a serious storm that had been heading right for the camp.
As we can see, the supernatural plays a great role in the lives of these evangelicals. As a former Wiccan, I was amazed to see some of the prayer activities the group did which very much resembled the kind of Wiccan magick we used to do. Becky assembled a large number of coffee cups. She had the kids write on the cups things they wanted to eliminate such as “corrupt government.” These cups became what Wiccans call a “poppet,” an object used to represent another thing they want to work magick on. Then they worked up a cone of power with a lot of energetic chanting and movement culminating in the shattering of the cups with a hammer. The sight of such a familiar kind of ritual warmed my heart. I saw that these Christians did the same fun rituals we used to do. Ironically, they are very much against Wicca, Witchcraft, magick, calling up spirits, or anything they would label the occult as long as it wasn’t specifically Christian.
Pentecostals and charismatics work very closely with the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit does many things pagan-invoked spirits do. The Holy Spirit enters the Christian and causes him/her to speak in tongues. No offense intended to them but it reminds me very much of Voodoo where the spirits enter and possess the mambo or hougan and speak or act through him/her. Many 
Christians are against speaking in tongues, perhaps for that reason. I find it interesting and colorful. Children Becky ministers to learn how to speak in tongues, make prophesies, hear the word of God and heal the sick. I can easily see how these empowering activities make Christianity much more compelling than sitting in the pews singing hymns. As Rachael said, the latter kind of churches are “dead churches.” Becky also mentioned that Christian churches are losing members to paganism and drug use because the hunger for the supernatural hasn’t been satisfied. The kids Becky leads are empowered in a very exciting way. They are made to see themselves as the center of a vital drama; actors, not onlookers. “Boys and girls can change the world?” she intoned. “Absolutely!”
At the Conference, a troop of kids perform something called Breathe Prophecy. I couldn’t help noticing how precise and focused every kid was during this performance. It was dramatic and musical and militant. This is presumably one of the spectacles that have liberals worried. Later, at the camp, a group of kids wearing camouflage uniforms with their faces painted like warriors chant. “V I C T O R Y! That’s the soldier’s battle cry!” Having read Howe and Strauss, I am reminded that these kids are Millennials. Levi calls his generation a “key generation.”
The scenes of the kids’ home lives and interactions with their parents show a lot of harmony between the generations. What surprised me most was the fathers. They had very gentle auras, even the one who was a marine and about to go overseas. I wouldn’t have expected such gentle men. I thought they would be very macho. But it wasn’t so. Overall, the main impression of this culture is cohesiveness. People have remarked at the passion of the kids. I would add to that, a unity. People predicted that when the kids grew to be teenagers, they would change. To our surprise, this didn’t happen.
So why didn’t I join up? I little matter of disbelief. I just can’t and down even want to believe that a God who created as as imperfect beings who can’t be good enough to deserve to go to Heaven would judge unbelievers so harshly that he would caste us into the lake of fire for all eternity. Call me a humanist but I don’t really believe anyone deserves such a fate, no, not even the worst of us. And yet they believe that even really good people go to Hell if they don’t believe in Jesus. What about people who lived before Jesus was even born? Well the 
Catholic Church came up with a pretty good answer, Limbo. Unbaptized babies, ancient Greeks and Romans and everyone else who didn’t have a chance to believe in Jesus could go there. But the Church has abandoned that doctrine. One priest explained to a friend of mine that everyone who earnestly seeks to do the good as he understands it, even if he’s wrong, is basically a good Catholic regardless of his beliefs. I’ve also heard Catholics deny that statement. And Becky’s lot would definitely deny it. Calvinists actually believe God knows who is going to be damned before he even creates them. So God creates people for a destiny of eternal damnation. That is the most evil thing I could ever imagine!
I don’t believe anyone deserves Hell. We are finite, mortal beings. What can we possibly do to deserve infinite, eternal torment? If I, with my finite understanding, can believe in forgiveness for all sinners, how can God, who is purported to be Love, be less merciful? It just doesn’t compute.
Christians point out that God made a “perfect plan that none should perish,” meaning Christ dying on the cross. But why isn’t his sacrifice for everybody, regardless of their beliefs? Of course, the people who never heard of him or who lived before him are paid an enormous injustice. Christians never seem to want to explain this enormity. They wax indignant at abortion but accept eternal torture of the undeserving with equanimity. And even those who heard about Christ and still don’t believe shouldn’t be punished for honest beliefs. How can any God be so evil. Yes, I said evil and I meant it.
Becky wrote, “You were born for God. You were born for His pleasure out of a love no human being can understand.” That’s quite right. I don’t understand such a “love.” “God 
has a plan for your life. It is completely intertwined with His desire to have a friendship with you.” Be his friend or perish?
“It’s actually not true we are ‘all God’s children.’ What is true is we are all His ‘creations.’ He indeed made all of us. But to be a legitimate son or daughter of the Most High God you must be ‘adopted’ into His family. The only way this can happen is through His Son Jesus.” My earthly parents were more flexible and forgiving than this being of so-called infinite love. People say Donald Trump is a narcissist. He is nothing next to this “god.”
Levi:
Rachael:
Atheists Watch:
Links
- 10 Years Later. The Guardian
- Where Are They Now? Hollywood.com
- Oh No, they Didn’t.
- Kids in Ministry International. Becky Fischer
- Becky Fischer Facebook.
- Jesus Camp. My Story, Becky Fischer
- Jesus Camp. IMDb
- Insanity is the New Normal. The Rise of the Christian Taliban
- The Religious Right cares about control, not morality.
- My Anthem – Rachel from ElementBismarck on Vimeo.
Psychopathy is a label originally applied to us by others. Originally, we were just ourselves. Only later, we found out that who and what we were had a name which we came to accept. There are few words that evoke so many different and varied opinions.
Psychopathy is defined as a personality disorder of people who have certain traits. Robert Hare’s PCL-R is a checklist of traits that are characteristic of psychopathy. Robert Hare is a psychologist and only trained practitioners are supposed to administer the test. 
Clinicians should
Quite a list of requirements to interpret a list of 20 qualities. Training can be quite pricey. The Hare PCL-R Training Program can run to $499 or $600. Quite an elitist program. To make matters worse, “psychopathy” does not even appear in the DSM so most psychologists won’t even use the checklist. Instead of listing “psychopathy,” the DSM has “ASPD” OR “Anti-Social Personality Disorder.” The PCL-R is never used to diagnose ASPD. 
These are the 20 criteria:
Does it really require the exalted knowledge listed above to apply these descriptions to someone and draw an intelligent inference? Not being one of the anointed, I don’t know. And why does one have to be a psychologist to “diagnose” someone with a condition that isn’t even listed in the DSM (although DSM-V admits “this pattern has also been referred to as psychopathy, sociopathy, or dyssocial personality disorder).”
More confusion is sown by the use of the words “psychopathy” and “sociopathy.” There is no consensus of the meaning of these terms and the difference between them. But most people agree that psychopathy is a neurological condition while sociopathy is psychological and created by the environment. I guess only a brain scan can tell which is which but some say that even sociopaths have distinctive brain scans.
I think psychology and psychiatry were invented as a way stigmatized behaviors could be considered sickness and less stigmatized. The fields are what is called soft science as opposed to physics or chemistry or even biology. It has always lacked the precision of the hard sciences. Although more and more of “mental illness” is being found to have a physical correspondence, most behavior grows out of the will. 
stigmatized. The most outlandish explanations have been hatched. Psychopaths have been said to be shape-shifting reptiles, for example. People question our very humanity. M. Scott Peck has tried to combine moral opprobrium with science in his book People of the Lie, subtitled The Hope of Healing Human Evil. “Evil” isn’t normally referred to as something that needs to be “healed.” Can someone be “sick” and “evil” at the same time? What is sickness? What is evil? Both are phenomena that bother others, that society would like to banish. But sickness isn’t considered the fault of a sick person. Evil is supposedly freely chosen.
On the web, groups of people have come together as self-proclaimed victims of “evil” psychopaths and narcissists. The “evil” is usually at the hands of mothers or lovers. Ironic how people can go from an intimate relationship with someone to suggesting they aren’t even human.
No matter how psychopathy is defined, it is clearly a word meant to denote pathology. Psychopath means something wrong. How are those of us who carry that label supposed to deal with the fact that society sees us as something wrong regardless of which of many opinions out there about how and why we are “wrong?” We have all had to come to terms with the awareness that we were different right from the start. It causes us to know we are alone in a way few people experience. But, as Ayn Rand put it, “every aloneness is a pedestal.”
But politics makes odd bedfellows. While I love the writer for standing up for psychopaths, I find some ideas that I either disagree with or which even make me laugh out loud. In reading the article I will be discussing here, I am entering Politically Correct Land; Nay, I am smack in the center of the storm.
This article even contains a trigger warning: “Disability-related slurs and other ableist language, mention of rape, racism, and ableism.” While I support social justice, I find a faction of left-wing movement folk to be absurd. I guess that’s a good thing in that it ameliorates my loathing and hatred for the Right. At least the Right gets some things right…er, correct. I agree with them in wanting the Nanny State off my back when it comes to saving me from myself. I’m an adult and I’ll choose what substances to imbibe. I also consider the Transgender 
Movement wrong-headed and chafe under the authoritarian insistence on everyone giving lip service to the Movement’s opinions (er…delusions). I laugh, along with everyone else at such monstrosities as first grade children being accused of sexual harassment because they gave another kid a kiss. Ditto to the charge of child abuse applied to kids who are mean to other kids. So, in immersing myself in this article, I am entering what I consider alien territory.
The article calls bullshit on the casual way people, OK, the way we casually use “ableist” terms to diss one and other. For example, “to refer to one’s political opponents as blind or deaf to progressive ideas.” While I can see calling one’s opponent “retard,” is oppressive to those who really are retarded, saying someone is “blind” because he cannot see one’s point doesn’t really strike me as oppressive to the blind. Maybe I am the one who is blind or, pardon me, deluded, ON NO! That’s ableist too. Delusion is a symptom of schizophrenic psychosis. What can we say about extremely wrongheaded people? This degree of PC dogmatism is cutting the balls off the language. Isn’t it? We can’t call them morons, idiots, fools, crazy. <shrug>
On the other hand, I am sick and tired of people calling everyone who does something really bad a “psychopath.” There is a tendency to blame psychopaths for all the ills of society. Our system is “psychopathic.” Tina Taylor of Psychopathic Times believes society’s ills can be cured if we could only prevent psychopathic politicians from taking office. Of course, that raises the question of how we identify psychopaths. Tina has an answer to that: brain scans. Brain scanning as a diagnostic tool for psychopathy is controversial. Unfortunately (or fortunately), one can’t really have a policy until we can know with a degree of certainty who we are talking about.
I have only come across one person (until now) who linked psychopathy with race. Black people are prone to it, said this person. The article by Autistic Hoya also says that people diagnosed with Anti-Social Personality Disorder (ASPD), the American Psychiatric Association’s stand-in for psychopathy, are disproportionately black. Of course, leftists tend to find rich white folk more psychopathic and they bolster their claims with studies indicating that the richer one is, the less empathy he has.
The article bemoans the fact that psychological anomalies are stigmatized. Few people look at the reason people are considered “mentally ill” in the first place. Those called mentally ill are the people who behave in ways that disturb the majority of people in a society. Therefore, “mental illness” and stigma seem inseparable. The concept of mental illness was originally created in order to fight stigma. Instead of calling someone “bad,” one said he was “ill.” But the connection between behavior society disapproves of and disapproval cannot be severed by change of terminology. Let’s face it. Outcasts will be outcasts no matter what you call us. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t keep fighting for precision in language. But the very precision takes us to the same point we have been trying to get away from. All society seeks conformity. Freud had a name for it: Civilization and it’s Discontents. Can the connection between those two things ever be severed? In the meantime, STOP CALLING ALL BAD PEOPLE PSYCHOPATHS.
Some people probably think we psychopaths are over-dramatizing the amount of oppression we face as a group. For the sake of clarity, I submit this exchange of ideas that just occurred on Quora where I answer questions from time to time. 
Most people believe that people can only be good if aversive stimuli threaten them with punishment if they transgress the norms of society. This is called the “conscience.” NTs feel guilty when they do “wrong.” They can’t imagine anyone being “good” voluntarily unless they are threatened with a conscience. They don’t understand that some people can be free of the threat of conscience and still not do “evil.”
Ironically, I personally think that we should find better ways of diagnosing and targeting sociopaths so that we can engage in the process of eliminating them from our gene pool and human population. Sociopaths are destructive and evil and are the cause of a lot of suffering in the world, globally and historically. I think at some point in the future we should have a social cleansing of psychopaths and sociopaths where we kill off all sociopaths and psychopaths and make sure they don’t reproduce in our children. That seems like the logical thing to do. It’s for the good of our species.
I don’t even hate psychopaths and sociopaths. I actually feel bad for them because they are sick in the head. But my feelings about them are irrelevant. The point is that sociopaths and psychopaths are incredibly dangerous to human society. They have been responsible for some of the most hideous and heinous crimes against humanity throughout history. People ranging from medieval ruthless lords like Vlad the Impaler all the way to the modern serial killers and rapists like Ted Bundy and Jefferey Dahmer. These people plague the population of Earth and wreak havoc unto the world with no remorse and there is no possibility for them to be cured or become good through rehabilitation. So, I’m sorry I mean no disrespect, but these people gotta go. It’s for the greater good and survival of our species.
suggesting that psychopaths “gotta go…for the greater good and survival of our species.” You are talking of genocide, Sir. The fact that you can do so without hatred is truly chilling. I suggest more “havoc” has been wrecked by NTs throughout history than psychopaths. As a professor once said, “It might not be a matter of evil dictators but whole populations of evil people…like us?” Your final solution provides ample evidence for that thesis.
I’m so bored! Broke. Nowhere to go. Waiting waiting waiting. It seems like all I ever do is wait for something. And I HATE waiting. Really hate it. I’m waiting for some good money which seems like a done deal. Everything except the actual cash. Grrrr. If I were one of those people who say there is a purpose for everything and the universe is sending a message, I would probably say the universe is teaching me to be patient. Ugh!
I’ve been thinking about transsexuals. They suffer from something called gender dysphoria. That means they “feel” like the other gender from which they had been born. It is considered proper now to enable people to “change” genders (providing they can afford the medical procedures). They are encouraging “transitioning” in people who have those feelings at alarmingly young ages. It’s hard to imagine how a three-year-old can make such a decision. I’ve been told that sex is the physical property of male and female while gender is the social construct. Since society has loosened the rigid category of what is “male” and what is “female,” I would think it would be easier for people to be themselves in the bodies they were born with. Below is a video documenting a camp specifically for transgender kids (boys to girls). The process is shown in a very positive light. These kids look like girls. Of course, they are all pre-puberty. And it’s hard to remember they all still each have a penis. They need to decide later in life whether to have the operation to have an artificial vagina designed in place of their cocks. The process is fabulously expensive. It’s amazing that so many parents are willing and able to foot the bill. These male to female trannies are really into being girly-girls. The climax of the camping experience is a “fashion show.”
The transgender movement is very powerful politically, I am told. Most of the Left embraces it but a sizeable part of the women’s movement take exception to these males insistence on invading female space which feminists won the hard way. The Right, of course, is the hard nugget. They resist but the transgender movement is a formidable force.
The bottom line is these people are unhappy in their given gender. The medical field supports their desire to change so they can be happy. Do people have the “right” to change their circumstances to be made happier? If so, why can’t I get rich. It would make me very happy. I wouldn’t have to be fabulously wealthy. Like Tevye (Fiddler on the Roof), I would be satisfied with “a small fortune.” How about girls getting female hormones to enhance their figures to make them the sexiest chicks on the block?
CLUSTER B 
Gil (if I may call you that), I have taken the liberty to copy this entire thread to my blog where it can be followed more easily. Final Solution for Psychopaths? Quora isn’t so conducive to this much back and forth. I invite you to continue the debate there.
And yes, I still maintain the assertion that this will promote a kinder, gentler society. You can’t deny that psychopaths and sociopaths are dangerous to human civilization. That would just be you being facetious.
Well, I’m glad you no longer want to kill us. After all, your main objection to psychopaths is that some of us kill so how can someone call for killing as an antidote to the problem? As you said, “in retrospect, (it) seems barbaric.” It not only seems barbaric. It is barbaric.
I suggest you read Kevin Dutton’s book, The Wisdom of Psychopaths to broaden your perspective. If my words can’t persuade you, maybe his can.
“After all, your main objection to psychopaths is that some of us kill so how can someone call for killing as an antidote to the problem?”
I already retracted that statement, now I am arguing that we should prevent sociopaths/psychopaths from recurring in our population through preventative measures, which is different and non-lethal.
“’We’ don’t ‘need to find a solution to the problem of psychopaths/sociopaths in our society.’ Psychopaths are not a problem for me. People who think like you do are a problem.”
“How would you like someone defining you as “the problem” and looking for ways to eliminate you? Why do you keep referring to “psychopaths” as if they are some group of people far away who can’t hear you. You are referring to me and my kind and I am right here. You expect me to discuss “psychopaths” as some sort of abstraction? You expect me to identify with your “we” when that “we” is trying to eliminate me?”
“Why can’t you see that your attitude is just as lethal as anything a psychopath could cook up? You blame the bad behavior of NTs on “pathological ideologies like racism, classism, nazism, Stalinism, radicalized religious doctrines like we see in ISIS, tribalism, etc.” Don’t you see how tribal you are being? You are defining us as the “other” who is the problem, who shouldn’t even exist. If that isn’t tribalism (to use the kindest word), what is it?”
“I do deny it. Far fewer psychopaths do really harmful things than NTs. You even admitted it but suggested that if NTs do bad things because of an ideology, it’s not as bad as when we do things “because they want to do those things, even though they know it’s wrong, and have no conscience or remorse about it.”
“To bring you back to my original answer again, I pointed out, “Most people believe that people can only be good if aversive stimuli threaten them with punishment if they transgress the norms of society. This is called the ‘conscience.’ NTs feel guilty when they do ‘wrong.’ They can’t imagine anyone being ‘good’ voluntarily unless they are threatened with a conscience. They don’t understand that some people can be free of the threat of conscience and still not do ‘evil.’” You keep insisting that a conscience is necessary to keep people from doing “wrong.” That’s treating people like children who don’t really have any will for good. They only behave because they fear the punishment of a guilty conscience.”
So I gather your argument is that NTs and Empaths are “good” by virtue of not only the
stick but also the carrot. I’m glad empathy feels so good to you. It can also cause a lot of suffering since you feel the pain of others and there is a lot of that. Woody Allen’s character in Annie Hall, Alvie Singer, said he couldn’t enjoy life as long as one person is suffering. I think it’s a shame since it only makes for more suffering. Empathy can lead to kind actions but it is very selective. Paul Bloom wrote, “Empathy is biased; we are more prone to feel empathy for attractive people and for those who look like us or share our ethnic or national background. And empathy is narrow; it connects us to particular individuals, real or imagined, but is insensitive to numerical differences and statistical data. As Mother Teresa put it, ‘If I look at the mass I will never act. If I look at the one, I will.’ Laboratory studies find that we really do care more about the one than about the mass, so long as we have personal information about the one.”
Don’t worry about “offending” me. I wasn’t offended. I was delighted that you could expose your “empathic” inhumanity so abjectly. Of course, you backed away from the position of “social cleansing” or “genocide,” as I called it. But it made a point anyway about the limits of empathy as a cause of good behavior.
Gilberto De La Vega (replies):
Frances Nowve:
Gilberto De La Vega (replies):
It’s funny that you say that because I totally agree that having too much empathy/compassion is a bad thing, I view it as a mental ailment as well. I think it should be classified as a mental disorder to be honest. It’s not healthy to have so much overwhelming compassion that you can’t even enjoy your life if other people are suffering. That just adds on to the suffering of the world, which defeats the purpose of compassion. And yea it’s true that empathy is biased and selective, but that still doesn’t take away from it’s usefulness and it’s enjoyability. Especially since all the downsides can be managed, as you have seen through human history. So it’s kind of a useless point to make.
Also, I guess you’re not familiar with the concept of jest and hyperbole, because you seem fixated on my initial comment about social cleansing, which was obviously not a serious proposition. Get over it.
Also, I never said all prison inmates are psychopaths nor did I “harp” on psychopaths being the only problem, once again a straw man. I just said i ALSO want to solve the problem of psychopaths on top of everything else. Seems perfectly reasonable to me. It is what it is.
Fran Nowve:
So you just don’t respect the right of anyone who is radically different from yourself to exist. So let’s eliminate everyone who isn’t a lukewarm technocrat! Oh! Am I raising a “strawman” again?
Gilberto De La Vega (replies):
Especially with the advent of artificial intelligence and intelligent robots that can do work for us in the scientific realm, all these achievement will probably be expedited. So I remain optimistic about this whole thing. Alas, the world has problems. It is what it is for the time being I guess. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Frances Nowve:
Your utopia is my worst nightmare. You are far more dangerous than I or any other psychopath.
Links