Continuing my theme of "nothing new under the sun" (and "nothing so obscure that it can't provide fodder for political writing") I would like to introduce, to those who do not know them, the Donatists. In the third century, the Emperor Diocletian launched what proved to be the last great persecution of Christians. (Mainly because Constantine would adopt Christianity not long afterward.) During this persecution, many Christians publicly renounced their Christianity, and became known as traditores. Many in North Africa believed, as did the medieval Hussites and Lollards, that the church hierarchy should be composed of "saints", and so, when a traditor consecrated a bishop of Carthage in 311, many rejected him and appointed their own bishop, Majorinus, who was succeeded by Donatus, for whom the heresy is named. The papacy later denounced the Donatists, but that did not stop them from being a noisy faction in north Africa for centuries to come, refusing to recognize the church hierarchy and periodically erupting in violence.

Why I mention these long gone individuals is because, in some ways, the birthers are coming to remind me of Donatists. When the issue first arose, it was a valid question. There was a question raised and, at least initially, the evidence was somewhat plausible. However, as the evidence was analyzed (see below) and more evidence uncovered, the plausibility began to wane. But that did not stop the neo-Donatists, who then had resort to new legal theories, mining supreme court dissents, overturned court  rulings, legislative intent, colonial era legal tracts and all manner of sources for new theories to support their fervent belief that SOMETHING is wrong with Obama.

Also like the Donatists, the birthers are doing nothing to help their cause, but only hurting those who share their beliefs. For centuries, the cause of rigorists was harmed in the Catholic church because of the charges of Donatism. Because of this long dead heresy, movements such as the Lollard and Hussites, and even later factions such as the Anabaptists, faced opposition, as the Donatist heresy had so tainted the belief. But more than that, in a more immediate sense, the Donatists hurt their fellow Christians in North Africa, through the constant violent eruptions and the generally violent atmosphere they created.

And the birthers are, in many ways, doing the same to those who oppose Obama. We are now faced with a difficult choice. We can side with the birthers, and be labeled (properly) lunatics by the mainstream, or we can oppose the birthers, and be shouted down by a vocal minority convinced of its own righteous cause. The left had a similar problem with Truthers, but thanks to a sympathetic media, the truthers were kept quiet in the media. Expect no such kid glove treatment for conservatives opposed to Obama. It is far too tempting for the media to continue to highlight the birther insanity just to tar the opposition.

What makes this whole issue so absurd is that I can't imagine what the birthers think they will accomplish. It is approaching the one year anniversary of the election, and not a single voice in politics or the judiciary has been raised int heir support. All claims of "impending" court cases or legislation have proven to by hoaxes or scams intended to garner contributions. There has been no movement at all. So, what do they think will come of all their noise? Other than giving the left a way to make conservatives look insane, what do they hope to bring about? Armed revolution? Far from likely. At most, they will become yet another nut cult, like JFK conspiracy theorists, the Truthers, and the rest.

No, all these modern Donatists have achieved is to once again give the media a bunch of loons they can portray as the conservative mainstream to the public at large, convincing those who share 80% of our beliefs that they aren't really conservatives at all. Along with painting every conservative as a pro-life clinic bomber, a fundamentalist book burner and a gun toting, bomb building militia member, they now can paint us all as alleging Obama was born in Kenya and infiltrated to bring sharia to the US. Yet another means to convince the mainstream they are really in the liberal camp, despite their beliefs.

In other words, the birthers have managed to do more to help Obama than most of those on the left.

POSTSCRIPT

I despair of convincing those who remain birthers at this point, but for anyone else interested, my writing on the topic can be found int he following posts:

An Interesting Question
A Small Update on the Birth Certificate Controversy
Birth Certificate Controversy Revisited
One More Post on the Birth Certificate Controversy
Really, The Last One on This Topic
Wrong is Wrong
A Few Comments on the Berg Ruling
A New Take on an Old Topic
A Brief Follow Up
Slate Imitates Me, But I Really Don't Mind
Legislative Intent
Not A Smoking Gun

All were written at a time when there was still some room to argue that perhaps the birthers had a point, and so were intended to persuade individuals the birther position was incorrect. I don't think much will do that any longer. Still, I suppose it can't hurt to try.

Also, on a similar theme, you may want to read "Think of the Impresison You Make", as it also touches upon the concept of how the excessive, vocal minorities on the right are often used to portray us all as lunatics. (Though, again, the friendly media never does the same with the many lunatic movements on the left.)