A guy using the nom de spam “Reality Check” (sent from the e-mail address [email protected]) has favored me – and doubtless many other pro-Bush sites – with a long, not-too-coherent comment headed “GEORGE W BUSH IN [sic] NOT A BORN-AGAIN CHRISTIAN!”. His screed has no connection with the content of the post, about domestic economic policy, to which it is attached, but I’ll leave it up as an example of Kerryite guerilla warfare, part of the effort to discourage Christians from voting by appealing to their supposed prejudices. It is of a piece with the Kerry-Edwards remarks about Mary Cheney.
This incident prompts a few thoughts about the differences between the much reviled Religious Right and the benignly neglected Religious Left. John Kerry highlighted the distinction yesterday when he delivered a sermon on faith and politics. The core of his message was that true Christians are impelled by their beliefs to support tax-financed social welfare programs. On the other hand, they must never support laws reflecting their belief that abortion kills innocent human life. In other words, mixing church and state is fine, so long as the church pleads for expanding the state and otherwise keeps its mouth shut.
By this line of argument, a prudential disagreement – about what policies will have the actual effect of helping the poor – is recast as a moral one: Liberals think that the poor ought to be better off, while conservatives delight in grinding them into the dust.
There are, it can’t be denied, spokesmen for the Religious Right who espouse peculiar views; Pat Robertson springs to mind. There are very few, though, who confuse prudence and morality so consistently as the Left. Religious Rightists arguing against welfare programs usually make the same points as secular-minded libertarians: Welfare leads to generations of dependency and makes its recipients worse off. They don’t pretend to be raising a religious objection to welfare programs, nor do they imply, as Senator Kerry does, that those who disagree with them are deficient as Christians.
A few issues, notably abortion, fall into a different category. There the Right and Left within the Christian community disagree on moral fundamentals. One side believes that abortion is murder, the other that it isn’t worth getting excited about: a venial sin at worst. The Christian Left isn’t “pro-choice” out of a general bias in favor of liberty, but only because abortion doesn’t offend it. By the same token, Stalinist Russia didn’t outlaw playing cards, dancing and alcohol, but that doesn’t make it an exemplar of freedom.
If one believes the elite media, George W. Bush is the religious zealot in the Presidential race and John Kerry the modern sophisticate. Yet the President rarely, if ever, asserts that a policy is meritorious because it accords with Christian teaching. Even on abortion, stem cell research and same-sex marriage, where moral issues loom large, he limits himself to principles that are widely held by believers and unbelievers alike. By his own account, his faith in God is a source of strength and solace in troubled times, not of policy prescriptions. It is his opponent who claims to find a political platform in the Gospel, which won’t disturb the “wall of separation” crowd at all, so long as it is their platform.
Update (11/25/05): “Reality Check” has now added a briefer version of his spam comment to this post. Sorry, pal, the election really is over (unless you hope to influence the Electoral College, whose members probaby don’t read this blog).
Bush — born again, or not?
Updated: Sept. 28, 2004 by Alex Johnson MSNBC Reporter
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6115719/
George Bush has not said directly that he was ever born again. He has often said he was pointed on the path to God after a discussion with evangelist Billy Graham in 1985.
“Over the course of that weekend, Reverend Graham planted a mustard seed in my soul, a seed that grew over the next year,” Bush wrote in his 1999 campaign autobiography, “A Charge to Keep.”
Graham's last crusade?
Nov. 22, 2004: NBC's Brian Williams reports from Rev. Billy Graham's 416th crusade in Pasadena, Calif.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6560118/
Friday night at the Rose Bowl, more than 2,000 people came forward to accept Rev. Graham's invitation to turn over their lives to Jesus Christ.
That's something the current president says he did during a now-famous talk with Billy Graham, at a time when drinking and carousing threatened to lead George W. Bush astray. It’s an encounter that gets an interesting reaction when Rev. Graham is asked about it now.
"I've heard others say that, and people have written it, but I cannot say that," he says. "I was with him and I used to teach the Bible at Kennebunkport to the Bush family when he was a younger man, but I never feel that I in any way turned his life around."
Posted by: RealityCheck | Thursday, November 25, 2004 at 09:56 AM
I wish people would not be so influenced by media and actually find out about Bush first hand, a lot of times people are mislead (don’t vote for him just because he’s Christian). Hopefully Bush will not run our great county into the ground. I also believe that although Bush has gone to war and killed innocent people, (I’m still against him) his work is strictly in favor of our capitalist society, in long term I’m sure what Bush is doing will eventually benefit our nation somehow. My heart goes out to all those affected by our greedy nation, I wish we could help them.
If I sound a little politically unaware, I apologize, although I'm only in high school, I have basic understanding of politics, and if I do, then so should adults who vote.
Posted by: Cyrus | Tuesday, October 26, 2004 at 02:37 PM