Tweet
Arkansas GOP legislative candidate Charlie Fuqua
I see we’re moving beyond “spare the rod, spoil the child” now. A batsh*t dude running to serve in the Arkansas legislature, former Monsanto research biologist Charlie Fuqua, has written a book with some interesting parental tips…of course it’s from the “Biblical perspective.” I sh*t you not:
In “God’s Law,” Fuqua’s 2012 book, the candidate wrote that while parents love their children, a process could be set up to allow for the institution of the death penalty for “rebellious children,” according to the Arkansas Times. Fuqua, who is anti-abortion, points out that the course of action involved in sentencing a child to death is described in the Bible and would involve judicial approval. While it is unlikely that many parents would seek to have their children killed by the government, Fuqua wrote, such power would serve as a way to stop rebellious children.
And, here he is, in his own words:
The maintenance of civil order in society rests on the foundation of family discipline. Therefore, a child who disrespects his parents must be permanently removed from society in a way that gives an example to all other children of the importance of respect for parents. The death penalty for rebellious children is not something to be taken lightly. The guidelines for administering the death penalty to rebellious children are given in Deut 21:18-21:
This passage does not give parents blanket authority to kill their children. They must follow the proper procedure in order to have the death penalty executed against their children.
Surely this fool will not get elected.
31 Comments
Well, it could happen. This is Arkansas, after all. And there is more: this from the NYDaily News,
The whole article is amazing. But I suppose it is not all that new. I remember wingers in my old state (Michigan) who had views like this back in the ’60′s and weren’t afraid to state them. They ran for local offices — Twp supervisor, County School board trustee, stuff like that. Often campaigned to get smut or sex education out of the curriculum or fluoride out of the water or something that already had a few people hysterical. Sometimes they actually got elected,
Seriously, WTF ?
This guy is really, really sick.
I guess he wasn’t getting any traction out of Leviticus — or is that a different chapter in his book?
Jane, Thank you for this and for your outrage.
Sad to say. It reminds me of the ideology of the 1930s that nourished eugenics and the eventual genocide. A time when Herbert Hoover apologized to the Eugenics Society for suggesting that the only difference between the children of the poor and of the rich was access to food. When poverty was blamed on poor genes, and “proven by” the science of the day. “Rebellious” children were called juvenile delinquents and parents urged to send them to mental hospitals for lifetime incarceration. (I saw some of these children after 20 yrs in mental hospitals.) And the sterilization programs forced on the poor and the black. The next step of execution of children was taken in Germany with parents persuaded to turn their children over to euthanasia. It would have been taken in this country had Hitler not had dreams of empire and attacked the wrong nations.
And these people dare call themselves “pro-life” because of their obsession with preserving their seed.
These are ideas that have never died but have been held in the dark regions of religiosity and race in the netherlands of the country for God knows how long.
http://www.charliefuqua4staterep.com/blog
Thanks Jane!
And thanks for pointing out that Fuqua worked for Monsanto. You are one thorough journalist!
I posted this on Facebook with the line: ‘What kind of person does Monsanto hire?’
If Fuqua is so into biblical law that he would have naughty children dragged outside and stoned to death he would also have other transgressors, such as adulterers, blasphemers, and people who work on Sunday punished in the same way. His chance of being elected is zero. Let’s hope.
TalkingStick: And thank you for history I didn’t know.
that Fuqua is “pro-life” yet would kill children proves to me that his agenda isn’t life but controlling women… another aspect of biblical law.
As the Duke said in “Huckleberry Finn” as he was setting up his traveling carnival sideshow, the Duke and the Dauphin, “If this don’t get ‘em, I don’t know Arkansas.”
It is almost unbelievable that this thinking can find Any support. Truly sick.
It’s the return of the ol’ Pater Familias of Ancient Rome. Or maybe even the Carthaginians Moloch
Now we’re going to take civilization back 2000 years instead of just a thousand. In for a penny, in for a pound.
Actually, by now, our species should be well past the authoritarian “disciplinary” thinking, and it would be if women weren’t excluded. We ought to be to the stage where creativity is spotted, nurtured and allowed to FLY! And we would be if women’s vision were included/fostered, paid attention to in the culture.
They sure are growing ‘em stoopid in Arkansas these days. Here’s another one running as an R for the State House of Reps:
Arkansas Republican Jon Hubbard: Slavery was ‘a blessing in disguise’ for African-Americans
Thanks to the good nuns who drilled the religion into me in grade school, and extra special thanks to the Jesuits who successfully beat that same religion back out of me in high school.
How did the Jesuits do it? by making you think?
And did they really beat you?
real beatings with a meter stick or broken piece of wooden desk drawer.
hold the chalk rail bend over and do not forget to remove the plastic comb from your back pocket.
oh yeah they made me think alright.
It’s like Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” only the guy is dead serious.
Even in 1729 such a thing was shocking.
On the other hand, Robespierre had better ideas for metting justice for those who so “richly” deserved it.
It warms my heart to see these American-Taliban yokels running for office receiving derision from all sides of the political spectrum! Except, of course, in their own private electorate hells of intellectually destitute, bankrupt states; it's probably not so great for those citizens. Remember, 50-75 years ago statements of this ilk were treated , at worst, with respectful acquiescence. Where's your god now, Fuqua?
Maybe with a government mandate.
Good point. Clearly a lunatic. He probably would want to stone “… people who work on Sunday…” because he wouldn’t even know that working on saturday was actually the crime of “working on the sabbath” for the Hebrews.
@HotFlash @ #1: “This is Arkansas, after all.” LOL! But sadly it seems to be true about Arkansas. Then again there’s the Catholic nuns who tell us that contraception will lead to the extermination of the species: Maybe we should just leave them alone and see if this form of child rearing works out the same way.
The problem of misbehaving kids starts with Big Bird.
Don’t blow this guy off. Read some history. oGod place to start. War Against the Weak by Edwin Black. There are many many people in this country who think this way.
We are already executing teen agers in many states. And some parents can be convinced to turn their children over to the state to deal with however the state deems to be proper.
There's nothing wrong with learning about our dark past; it teaches us to respect the sacrifices of our ancestors, to take solace in how far we've come culturally and understand just how far a journey we have yet to go. However, do not take people like this guy seriously! The worst thing you can do is listen to them and fear them. One of my favorite examples of this is from ol' timey radio regarding an episode of Superman:
- from Wikipedia.
The excellent book Freakanomics goes into greater detail, including how men left the organization out of just plain embarrassment, and deals with real numbers in impact on recruitment and membership. This is why having gay people go in front of Phelps and his toadies for a kiss-in is a much, much better response than government censorship of the Westboro Baptist Church message.
I'm not saying that clowning will shame evil out of the world, merely that we should take appropriate derision at the absurdity of these people. This will do much more to curb them than hiding under the bed in alarmist fear that they might reclaim any real power (back). That is where religion taps into its authoritarian vitality.
You are in denial. My point is this is not from the past. It is present reality in many many people in this country, some of whom I encounter every day.
For the zillion and ninth time, I am forced to ask, “Why does Barack Obama think he can do business with this pack of rabid jackals?”
All it indicates to me is that he’s pro-birth. The child has no purpose to his cause after it’s born.
There are an awful lot of right-wing Christians who believe that children are property of their parents, to be treated however the parents please. One of the Moral Majority’s early legislative priorities was taking child abuse statutes off the books.
Exactly.
They ascribe full rights to an unborn fetus and want to remove all rights once it’s born.
They are pro-birth; not pro-life.
Normal people, especially liberal types have difficulty understanding the structure of the frame in which these people operate.
It is about male supremacy the seed of their definition of the white race. It is seed. Not babies or children or even women. Except women must be a pure receptical for the sacred seed of white males.
The concept of human rights and civil liberties does not exist for them.
He’s not pro-life, he’s pro-post birth abortion.
http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411.full
Stick, you think any of the politicians actually believe anything they say?
I guess they might, but I’m skeptical. However,
“…women must be a pure receptical…” Now you’ve hit on something!
I’ve felt all along it’s all about keeping the kids from having too much fun. First it was about insuring the transgressing female had to “bear” the consequences of her sins. Now it’s about keeping the from finding an alternative. Still the same goal. Most of the rest of their lunacy is just logical entensions of their previously stated (ridiculous) positions.