5O SHADES OF PRAY

     We are hearing much these days about Domionism, a kind of Christian zealotry that believes that we should be ruled by Christian people whom God's has ordained as righteous leaders. How this word from God is being passed down is not well known. Some believe themselves direct conduits, but I'm not impressed. The Mango Mussilini is one of those "righteous leaders", still. Ron DeSantis is another. These Dominionist ambitions do not stop at our borders. They want a one-world Christianity. An oddity because one-world government is one of their great fears. In the Dominionist mind-set (I use mind in the broadest sense), the following areas of public life must be transformed to correspond to their world view: Education, Religion, Family, Business, Government/ Military, Arts and Entertainment, and Media. It should not be forgotten that there is no room for a countervailing opinion. This may sound despotic to some of you. Authoritarian, theocratic. It is not the secular institution, where citizens could practice whatever religion they choose or not, that our founding fathers bequeathed to us. I could be reading too much into it. Or I may need a tune-up from God. 

     In the realm of sexual lifestyles, of which I am only dimly aware, (the lifestyle, not the act) there is the dominant-submissive lifestyle. It is predicated on the assumption that one person is in charge and one is not. In the Dominionist world, it is the male in a man-woman pairing. Specifically, the woman is subservient to her man, who is subservient to God. There is no appeals court. In the Dom/Sub world there are basic agreements arrived at before the pairing to protect the Sub from an overbearing Dom.There is no safe-word for the parishioner dealing with a Dominionist preacher. There was a recent 3-book series that illustrates this delicate Dom/Sub dance for those of us outside this world. That led to three movies. Ironically, those books and movies were very popular in those bible-belt states that wish to restrict what students can read in their school or community library. The beginning volume was titled, 50 Shades of Grey.

The leading male, not what you would call a protagonist, was named Christian Grey. No inference to Christian was intended, or was it? The female lead was Anastasia Steele (I Googled it). A young and not very worldly student interviews for a job with a young entrepreneur who is handsome, dynamic, and worldly. Anastasia soon gets attracted to Christians charms. He brings her along slowly, leaving her wanting for more and more. Soon she is firmly under his control. This is not the grooming Republicans accuse their opponents of being involved in. It is however how Republicans leave their most fervent followers lusting for absolute power. It is this inability to recognize the danger of absolute power that distinguishes the Republican despot from the Dominant in a Dom/Sub relationship. Those of us not attracted to the charms of a Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis, or the long list of republicans arrogant enough to think that they should be qualified to be president, are not taken into consideration. Those who are not compliant are singled out for "owning the libs". 

     These Trumpist Republicans, those unthinking rubes who have captured a once pretty good party, are not Christian Grey. They have no idea that regulations must  guide leadership of the nation, or state. They have been taught to fear regulation. Not to question how far it can go, which is proper, but that any regulation must inexorably lead to a "slippery slope". Consequentially we Anastasias must always submit. If not to the powerful man whom God has gifted to leadership, then to God himself. They are like Ahab on the Pequod: I am God  over this ship and God is God over me.

     This world of power is not attractive to me. Not the sexual dominance, the political dominance, least of all the religious dominance. The point is that our founding fathers addressed that issue when they said, "power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. When the issue of power has a sexual element to it, there's only a safe-word between a Dom and a sadist. Once the culmination is reached, the Dom is satisfied. The sub's pleasure is not the main concern. If, as in Dominionism, the sexual element is removed by a cis-gendered mind-set, the thrill is based on a question of power, and they will stop at nothing to attain it. There is no point of satiety.  I suppose this might be why the far right has moved so far right in such a short time, and why they are so cruel in the application of their power. The left, whom they wish to humiliate for wanting us regular people to have Union jobs with benefits, affordable, if not free healthcare, and voting free from racial gerrymandering, are unworthy of being leaders because they wish to give the unworthy, us, no matter how reverent, "free stuff". Social Security, a retirement income which we pay into is called by them, "an entitlement". Because, I suppose, we are unworthy, we are not entitled.

     As I said above, none of this appeals to me, but if I must make a choice of who dominates me, I will take the one that gives me a "safe-word".