The impact of dominionist theology reaches beyond rhetoric about the Second Amendment. American Vision and WallBuilders write and distribute educational content for churches and schools. Joel McDurmon and David Barton influence media and the range of ideas to which their audiences are exposed, and Barton is a household name in Republican politics. Gun Owners of America and its leaders file briefs in landmark court decisions. The modes of impact that these leaders employ vary, but all draw from similar Christian Reconstructionist theological principles that pertain to the Second Amendment and seek to alter American government and culture. In this chapter, I argue that American Vision and David Barton influence education and government and that Gun Owners of America affects the outcomes of court decisions.
American Vision, David Barton, and the Mountains of Dominion
On his radio show in April 2011, David Barton enumerated areas of life over which Christians should attempt to take dominion, saying “there’s five areas that you have to be able to influence and control if you are going to take culture and that’s media, business, government, education, and pulpit.”76 These areas repackage the idea of Seven Mountains Dominionism, the
Reconstructionist idea of controlling seven specific areas: business, government, media, arts and
76 "Empowering Christian Filmmakers to Influence Entertainment," WallBuilders Live, April 4, 2011, https://wallbuilderslive.com/empowering-christian-film-makers-to-influence-entertainment/.
entertainment, education, family, and religion.77 Barton’s and McDurmon’s influences can be
interpreted through this framework.
Barton influences education in three ways. First and most simply, WallBuilders offers a range of homeschooling curricula. The organization’s website states that their library of books and videos “introduce the current generation of Americans to an uncensored view of America’s religious and political history” and that the materials are used by “public officials… individuals, churches, Christian educators, and various organizations.”78 This material makes Barton’s
dominionism and Christian nationalism readily accessible for parents and influential in the education of children. Second, despite the fact that many scholars have discredited and refuted him, some conservatives still see him as a knowledgeable figure in education curriculum and policy.79 For example, in March of 2009, he served on a committee charged with revising
American history textbooks for the Texas school system after the Texas Board of Education “approved new science standards that made room for creationist critiques of evolution.”80 Barton
and the other conservative members of the review board argued that “the curriculum… should clearly present Christianity as an overall force for good- and a key reason for American
exceptionalism, the notion that the country stands above and apart.”81 Despite the fact that Barton
has virtually no credibility in academia, as this example demonstrates, he still affects education on a large scale since he is called on as an expert. Third, in addition to being seen as credible, conservative audiences regard Barton as trustworthy beyond the realm of education. Karl W.
77 Kyle Mantya, "David Barton Advocates Seven Mountains Dominionism," Right Wing Watch, April 4, 2011, http://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/david-barton-advocates-seven-mountains-dominionism/.
78 WallBuilders, “About Us: Our Activities,” 2018, https://wallbuilders.com/about-us/#.
79Randall J. Stephens and Karl W Giberson, "Introduction," in The Anointed: Evangelical Truth in a Secular Age (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 2011), 12.
80 Stephanie Simon, "The Culture Wars' New Front: US History Classes in Texas," The Wall Street Journal, July 14, 2009, https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124753078523935615.
Giberson, a physicist who also studies the debate between creation and evolution, noted in reference to Barton’s role in education that “Barton’s millions of fans… are drawn to him because he speaks their language… invokes their faith, and wants to help them take back ‘their’ country from liberals and secularists.”82 Speaking to a conservative audience that tends to see
itself as embattled, Barton differentiates himself from experts who may be perceived as elitist by speaking to the issues that concern conservative audiences in frameworks that appeal to their worldview.
Just as Barton influences education by creating accessible materials imbued with certain Reconstructionist values, American Vision influences the pulpit by creating church education materials that are easily accessible. Ingersoll explained that “Christian Reconstructionism often spreads through committed small groups who promote it in their churches, which may be sympathetic to aspects of Christian Reconstruction but don’t identify with the movement. American Vision’s work is key to those efforts.”83 Through this slow dissemination of ideas,
American Vision alters how church communities view the society around them.
American Vision’s political influence is visible in the influence of its Worldview Super Conferences on growth of the Tea Party movement. At these conferences, leading
Reconstructionist and Reconstructionist affiliated figures such as Gary North, Gary DeMar, and Herb Titus came together to share ideas. The height of these conferences occurred
simultaneously with the birth of the Tea Party movement during President Barack Obama’s first term. Ingersoll provided a detailed account of a Worldview conference in Building God’s Kingdom, and her argument about their significance centers on the way in which many central ideas of the Tea Party align with Reconstructionist theology. Worldview Conferences at the time
82 Stephens and Giberson, "Introduction,” 13. 83 Ingersoll, “Building God’s Kingdom,”168.
of the birth of the Tea Party created an opportunity for what Ingersoll called “cross-fertilization” of ideas that influence political conversations and lobbying.84
McVicar also discussed the influence of Reconstructionism on the Tea Party, though he argued it is present to a lesser degree, saying, “while it would be inaccurate to characterize… the Tea Party as influenced by Reconstructionism, it would be accurate to note that they are resonant and mutually reinforcing phenomena.”85 For McVicar, the Tea Party reinforces Reconstructionist
ideas more than it is influenced by them. Even if Ingersoll and McVicar disagree over the degree of American Vision’s and Reconstructionism’s influence in the Tea Party, both noted that they reinforce each other. American Vision’s materials and content also affect the voters who elect Tea Party and other conservative leaders because they provide a Reconstructionist framework with which to process politics. Lastly, it is notable that Joel McDurmon was elected to the Georgia GOP state committee in 2013, providing him with the ability to impact the party platform and which candidates the party supports.86
Many journalists have documented David Barton’s role in Republican politics. He served as the vice chair of the Texas Republican Party from 1997-2006, a counselor to the Republican National Committee during George W Bush’s 2004 presidential race, and as a member of the RNC’s Platform Committee in 2012 when it called for bans on abortion and same-sex marriage.87
Most notably, Barton played an integral role in Ted Cruz’s 2016 run in the Republican primary. Barton managed a Super Pac that raised millions of dollars for Cruz’s campaign and effectively helped Cruz to court the evangelical vote.88
84 Ingersoll, “Building God’s Kingdom,”177. 85 McVicar, Christian Reconstruction, 226. 86 Ingersoll, Building God’s Kingdom, 170.
87 Patricia Murphy, "The Evangelical Power Broker Behind Ted Cruz," The Daily Beast, January 29, 2016, https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-evangelical-power-broker-behind-ted-cruz.
88 Tara Isabella Burton, "Understanding the Fake Historian Behind America's Religious Right," Vox, January 25, 2018, https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/1/25/16919362/understanding-the-fake-historian-behind-americas-
Most importantly, though, Barton helped Cruz make the argument that America was founded as a Christian nation and should be returned to those roots. John Fea, a conservative historian who is very critical of Barton, explained the connection between Cruz and Barton, “Cruz wants to ‘restore’ the United States to what he believes is its original identity… But before he can bring the country back to its Christian roots, Cruz needs to prove that Christian ideals were indeed important to the American founding. That’s why he has David Barton.”89 Despite
having his books recalled from publication, his academic credentials questioned on a regular basis, and his claims often refuted point by point, Barton still influences Republican politics.
This occurs partly because well-known and well-liked conservative figures praised Barton and lend him credibility. Glenn Beck, a conservative political commentator, lauded Barton as “the most important man in America” in 2010 because of his historical work; in 2011, Mike Huckabee said that Americans should be “forced at gunpoint” to hear Barton speak.90
When media figures like Beck and Huckabee who are trusted by conservatives praise Barton, they contribute to his appeal. Barton uses his Christian nationalist ideas of history and his Reconstructionist assertions about what American government should look like to influence the Republican Party.
Gun Owners of America and the United States Courts
The Gun Owners of America, particularly Larry Pratt, have a vocal and outward-facing approach to advocating for Second Amendment rights. Meanwhile, the organization also influences court proceedings and decisions related to Second Amendment rights through the religious-right.
89 John Fea, "Ted Cruz's Campaign is Fueled by a Dominionist Vision for America," The Washington Post, February 4, 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/ ted-cruzs-campaign-is-fueled-by-a- dominionist-visionforamericacommentary/2016/02/04/86373158-cb6a-11e5-b9ab-26591104bb19_story.html? noredirect=on&utm_term=.49e8714096e4.
legal work of Herb Titus and William J. Olson. Briefs filed by Gun Owners of America in high- profile cases demonstrate this influence. Additionally, the legal work of Gun Owners of America impacted the confirmation hearings of Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas spoke in oral arguments for the first time in a decade with an issue raised in a Gun Owners of America brief.
Herb Titus served as legal counsel to Gun Owners of America and has worked in the legal efforts of many Reconstructionist leaders and organizations. He also ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the US Taxpayers Party (now Constitution Party) ticket in 1992 alongside Howard Phillips, the founder of the party, who included in his platform “opposition to every gun law in the United States.”91 Reconstructionist principles appear throughout the
Constitution Party’s platform.92 Like Pratt, Titus does not identify himself as a Reconstructionist,
but he has alluded often to Reconstructionist principles in much the same manner as Pratt, with no attempt to hide his ties to Reconstructionist people and organizations. He also noted that after becoming a Christian in his 30s, Rushdoony’s The Institutes of Biblical Law shaped much of his thinking.93 A graduate of Harvard Law School (though he now disavows that affiliation because
of what he names as the school’s liberalism), Titus also founded the law schools at Oral Roberts University and Pat Robertson’s Regent University.94 He has a long and wandering history with
Reconstructionism and with lawsuits related to religious freedom, and his primary legacy is his ongoing effort “to use the legal system to return America to what he [Titus] thinks are its
91 Posner, “Gun Ownership”.
92 Julie Ingersoll, "Rand Paul and the Influence of Christian Reconstructionism," Religion Dispatches, May 25, 2010, http://religiondispatches.org/rand-paul-and-the-influence-of-christian-reconstructionism/.
93 Posner, “Gun Ownership”. 94 FitzGerald, The Evangelicals, 406.
Christian foundations.”95 William J. Olson is another lawyer associated with Gun Owners of
America who still works closely with Titus.
Gun Owners of America filed an amicus brief in the 2008 landmark Second Amendment court case District of Columbia, et al. v. Dick Anthony Heller, in which Herb Titus was the Counsel of Record and William J. Olson was cited as a writer. In the brief for DC v. Heller,
Titus’s writing traced three main Reconstructionist themes: the importance of being able to reconstitute the government, the Second Amendment as a symbol for other rights, and tyranny as a relatively eminent threat.
Titus repeatedly alluded to the reconstitution of government. He stated that “a ‘well- regulated militia’ ensures the preservation of a ‘free state’ by allowing all members of the America polity to exercise, if necessary, the sovereign right of the ‘people’ to reconstitute their government.”96 He then argued that James Madison intended in his original draft of the 1776
Virginia Constitution that “the first order of business… was to secure to the people the right to reconstitute that government by whatever means necessary.”97 Though the brief did not
specifically mention overthrowing anti-Christian government, it did reference the ability to make drastic changes, which is rooted in a dominionist view of the Second Amendment that sees arms as the primary method by which to achieve this reconstitution.
Even more prevalent in Titus’s DC v.Heller brief was the theme of Second Amendment rights representing and protecting other rights. Titus argued that prior to the Declaration of Independence, the colonists resisted the Crown first with freedoms later enshrined in the First Amendment, and only after ongoing struggle did they resort to armed resistance. From this, Titus argued that the Second Amendment “secured a right of the people to keep and bear arms to the 95 Ingersoll, Building God’s Kingdom, 181.
96 Brief for the Gun Owners of America as Amicus Curiae, District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), 3. 97 Gun Owners of America, District of Columbia v. Heller, 10.
end that the people would be free to organize themselves into a militia and safeguard their liberties.”98 In other words, the Second Amendment protects other rights by allowing citizens to
literally take up arms against a government that revokes them.
Titus also argued that the Second Amendment symbolizes other rights. In a footnote, he argued that governments that attempt to “prevent crime” by restricting access to arms become a “surveillance society with totalitarian powers.”99 Surveillance, especially in this context,
indirectly refers to the government taking away rights such as speech and press, so Titus connected absolute access to arms with access to those rights as well. By implying that restrictions on arms threaten other rights, Titus furthered the Reconstructionist argument that minimalist government ensures the autonomy of individuals.
Titus often mentioned the threat of tyranny in the DC v. Heller brief, and William J. Olson referenced it in the amicus briefs filed by Gun Owners of America in the cases New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, Inc., Et al. v. City of New York, New York and Otis McDonald, et al., v. City of Chicago, et al. In DC v. Heller, Titus argued that “America’s founders viewed armed resistance to tyranny as not only a ‘right,’ but a ‘duty” and in a footnote of the McDonald
brief Olson noted that the Second Amendment’s “ultimate purpose” is to ensure that citizens are not “disarmed, and thereby deprived of their essential means to resist a tyrannical
government.”100 Titus referenced tyranny ten times in its Heller brief, and Olson referenced it six
times in McDonald and once in NYSRPA v New York.101This constant call to the prevention of
98 Gun Owners of America, District of Columbia v. Heller, 19. 99 Gun Owners of America, District of Columbia v. Heller, 30.
100 Gun Owners of America, District of Columbia v. Heller, 18; Brief for the Gun Owners of America as Amicus Curiae, McDonald v. Chicago (2010), 28.
101 Gun Owners of America, District of Columbia v. Heller; Gun Owners of America, McDonald v. Chicago; Brief for the Gun Owners of America as Amicus Curiae, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. City of New York (2018).
tyranny alludes to the Reconstructionist principle of minimal governing structures over which the (Christian) people will one day have dominion.
Titus made two direct biblical references in the DC v. Heller brief, both in a footnote. He said that “petitioners operate on a faulty understanding of the role of government, which should be focused on the punishment of evil, not its anticipation and prevention.”102 He cited as evidence
1st Peter 2:14, “…governors, as sent by him to punish those who do wrong and praise those who
do right.”103 This mirrors Pratt’s various assertions about minimalist government and the need to
prevent a monopoly of force on the part of the government, though it differs in that Pratt goes so far as to argue that the government should not even play the role of punisher.
Titus also referenced Romans 13:4, “for the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.”104 RC Sproul is a
conservative Presbyterian pastor who provided an analysis that illuminates why Titus included this citation to corroborate his assertion that the government should punish crime but not necessarily prevent it. Sproul argued that, in the verse, “the civil magistrate has been appointed by God to execute God’s wrath on those who practice evil,” then analyzed this in relation to Just War Theory, arguing that there are acceptable times for government force, but that “if the civil magistrate uses the sword to promote evil, then the civil magistrate will be judged by God.”105
For Titus, both verses indicate that government is meant to use force only in select scenarios. Throughout the DC v. Heller amicus brief, Titus’s references to rights and tyranny demonstrate his connection to Reconstructionist theology. Though the decision of the court
102 Gun Owners of America, District of Columbia v. Heller, 29. 103 1 Peter 2:14 New Revised Standard Version.
104 Romans 13:4 New Revised Standard Version.
obviously was not made exclusively with this brief in mind, Justice Scalia’s majority opinion referred to tyranny five times and argues along the same lines as Titus and Olson that an individual, as opposed to militia members’, right to bear arms protects the people against a tyrannical government. The significance of this is not that the court made its decision solely based on Titus, but that the grounds on which Titus argued do in fact permeate court decisions that ultimately affect all aspects of gun-related legislation.
Another drastic impact of Gun Owners of America on court proceedings occurred in 2016 when Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas asked a question in oral arguments for the first time in a decade while hearing Stephen L. Voisine, et al. v. United States, a case that called to question whether those accused of misdemeanor domestic abuse retained their right to bear arms after their offense.106 Jones and Nielson’s analysis of Justice Thomas’s role on the Supreme