The most critical conclusion to be drawn from the [Schiavo] case is that with the injection of religion into our politics and our governance, it has become increasingly difficult to differentiate between the demands of "evangelism" in a Western democracy and "fundamentalism" in a Middle Eastern theocracy.
So James Taranto, Editor of the OpinionJournal, offered me some help in his “Best of the Web Today” column yesterday. In offering me that unsolicited advice, I felt that Mr. Taranto had missed the crux of my argument. I therefore e-mailed him a clarification this morning. Sure enough, Mr. Taranto published only the first part of my response in his column today. Here’s the second part, which he did not publish, and which is critical to my line of reasoning:
James, in my letter to the The New York Times, I had also said, "If we really want to promote a 'culture of life', then human life ought to be precious in every situation, and not only under political circumstances." Politicians (Congress and the President) tried to force the courts to act in a certain way (i.e., reinsert Terri Schiavo's feeding tube, in order to save her life). The courts, per their interpretation of the law, consistently refused to act in the way intended by these politicians. If we are to convince other nations, including fledgling democracies and Middle Eastern theocracies that we are a nation of laws, albeit, secular laws - then, evangelists in this country need to accept that fact as gospel! With your distinguishing remark, "If someone is demanding that a life be spared, he's probably an evangelist in a Western democracy. If he's demanding the infidels be murdered, chances are he's a fundamentalist in a Middle Eastern theocracy", you confirm my other observation in my letter to the Times - conservatives have let emotions override their better judgment on this issue!
In drawing “attention to sloppy thinking” in today's column, Mr. Taranto makes a conclusion, which I never did:
“But equating them to fundamentalist terrorists is a cheap shot, and an intellectually indefensible one.”I never inferred that evangelical Christians, trying to save the life of a woman on life support, were the equivalent of fundamentalist terrorists. My larger point was simply this - if we let our religious beliefs dictate against the established law of the land, we are not only violating our constitution but also allowing ourselves to become like them. Mr. Taranto's refers to Martin Luther King as one:
"who made no effort to separate his belief in racial equality from its roots in Christianity".But Mr. King equally drew from "The Declaration of Independence" in demanding this equality:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."It is OK to use one’s faith as a personal guide to govern, but it is unconstitutional to use one’s religion as an instrument of government – that’s what theocracies do. By honoring the principle of “separation of powers”, we should all want them to become more like us - that was my key message in my letter to the Times!
1 comment:
Well done!
http://rewiecjq.com/irny/ejfo.html | http://bihushbc.com/fmco/wbww.html
Post a Comment