You can read the whole thing at the link below. I've included the key paragraph so casual visitors will know what we're talking about.
Native Americans morally disqualified themselves from the land
By Bryan Fischer
Wow. Could this piece of crap be any more bigoted? Let's rip this conservative liar, hypocrite, and asshole a new orifice by disassembling his column:
I probably could find a million examples of this kind of thinking, literally, if I had enough time. It's the default position in standard US history. God took America from the savage Indians and gave it to the civilized white men.
In case you missed it, note how Fischer doesn't capitalize the "native" in "Native American." Like other white racists, he's trying to delegitimize Indians by delegitimizing their name.
Scholars okay with invasions?
Also, this after-the-fact rationalization obscures the whole morality problem. A century after the onslaught, legal scholars and historians may downplay the moral crimes. But while the Europeans were invading, conquering, subjugating, enslaving, and murdering the Indians, they were violating most of Jesus's commandments. Their actions were pure evil by any religious standard in existence.
And how are the foreigners who crossed an ocean to invade an occupied land not nomadic? If they believed in permanent settlements, they should've stayed in their home cities and villages.
Conquerors get to keep conquests?
So "all men are created equal," with "certain unalienable rights," including "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." But some people have the right to conquer others and eliminate their lives, liberty, and pursuit of happiness? Does Fischer really think the Founding Fathers would've agreed to Great Britain's "right to conquer" them?
Does Fischer's "right of conquest" permit conquerors to enslave and kill people, or just to subjugate them? I guess he thinks the Holocaust was okay, since the Nazis had the right to conquer the Jews. And anyone else they were "superior in battle" to.
But I must've missed the part where "international legal scholars" recognized the conquests of the Axis powers, the Communist powers, et al. I look forward to Fischer's documentation on this point.
List of conflicts in Europe
"Debased forms of sexuality" = sex outside a Christian marriage between man and woman, presumably. In addition, Fischer's claim that his claims are "virtually without exception" is a flat-out lie. There were countless exceptions.
Jefferson's "merciless savages"
Moreover, Lewis and Clark visited only a fraction of the American West for two years. This was after Americans began pressing westward, which forced tribes into unwanted proximity and conflict. Anything that happened centuries after European contact is arguably not a fair measure of tribal cultures.
What Lewis and Clark didn't visit was the rest of the Western Hemisphere over its ten- or twenty-thousand-year history. From the Arctic Circle to Tierra del Fuego, they didn't have a clue what was going on. Generalizing from one small expedition to the entire history of two continents is incredibly asinine.
Where's the warfare?
Here's the only mention of warfare in the Wikipedia entry for Lewis and Clark:
Meanwhile, Fischer's holier-than-thou Christians had about 1,800 years of prostitution, adultery, pedophilia, orgies, rape, etc. under their belts at this point. Jesus probably was the first and last Christian to obey God's commandments.
Washington the "town destroyer"
So much for America's "spiritual light and advanced civilization."
Missionaries reaped what they sowed
As for Whitman, he was murdered in "his own house" in Indian territory, presumably. I wonder if he got a deed from or signed a rental agreement with his Indian landlords. Or was a he just a common trespasser who suffered the fate of other trespassers?
Let's sum it up. Fischer repeats the white supremacy claims uttered by five centuries of his ancestors. He depicts Indians as sick, depraved animals, not human beings.
Gee, I can't imagine the connection between that and broken treaties, underfunded programs, violent crime, low-self esteem, depression and suicide, etc. Indians are subhuman beasts...but they have the same rights and privileges as everyone else. It's a level playing with no barriers to Indian advancement.
If Indians aren't as successful as non-Indians, they must be lazy, good-for-nothing bums. It's not because of racism like Fischer's, because that's impossible in utopian America. We judge people on their merits, not on their race or religion.
What a goddamned crock.
For another deconstruction of this racist screed, see:
AFA’s Bryan Fischer: Native Americans Have Never Had Morals
For more on the subject, see:
Bachmann fibs about America's founding
Obama's UN "coup" is "chilling"
Racist rhetoric fuels hate crime
Conservative website calls Indians "Beringians"
Palin: Racism is a ploy
And about a thousand other postings in this blog.
Below: Fischer's ideological bedfellow: "I agree with Herr Fischer! The Aryan race is the pinnacle of civilization! The mud people and homosexuals are nothing but stains on the earth! We rule the lesser races by the right of conquest! Ja wohl!"