Hat tip to the Blog Father.
January 7, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
The God Gulf
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Religion may preach peace and tolerance, yet it's hard to think of anything that — because of human malpractice — has been more linked to violence and malice around the world. And now as we enter a new campaign year, it's time to brace ourselves for a new round of religious warfare and hypocrisy at home.
I guess Mr. Kristof has never heard of communism or naziism. Yes, religious people have been pretty darn good at living up to Kristof's accusations but this statement is just a rehash of a common saying from the left. Come on Nico, you can do better.
America is riven today by a "God gulf" of distrust, dividing churchgoing Republicans from relatively secular Democrats. A new Great Awakening is sweeping the country, with Americans increasingly telling pollsters that they believe in prayer and miracles, while only 28 percent say they believe in evolution. All this is good news for Bush Republicans, who are in tune with heartland religious values, and bad news for Dean Democrats who don't know John from Job.
I almost agree with Kristof here but I'm not sure we are in the middle of a Great Awakening. Of course, I'd love to see a real Great Awakening of massive people coming to Christ or recommitting their lives to Christ. You don't have to be a Christian to believe in prayer or miracles and the term "Great Awakening" is usually used in terms of Christianity.
So expect Republicans to wage religious warfare by trotting out God as the new elephant in the race, and some Democrats to respond with hypocrisy, by affecting deep religious convictions. This campaign could end up as a tug of war over Jesus.
Just because a few Christian leaders are pretty good at sticking their feet in their mouth doesn't mean Republicans are going to wage religious warfare. Just because Dean has blown it with his sucking up to the South with Jesus doesn't mean that's going to be the tact taken for the rest of the campaign. It's my hope Christians don't fulfull this speculation.
Over the holidays, Vice President Dick Cheney's Christmas card symbolized all that troubles me about the way politicians treat faith — not as a source for spiritual improvement, but as a pedestal to strut upon. Mr. Cheney's card is dominated by a quotation by Benjamin Franklin: "And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?"
So, it's automatically assumed that Cheney doesn't believe this statement? Come on. This is a statement that says we need to pray for our nation and try and be obedient to God.
It's hard not to see that as a boast that the U.S. has become the global superpower because God is on our side. And "empire" suggests Iraq: is Mr. Cheney contending that in the dispute over the latest gulf war, God was pulling for the White House and fulminating at Democrats and others in Beelzebub's camp?
The only reason that it's not hard for Nico to get this very strange interpretation is because he has an extreme bias against people who take their faith seriously. He can't believe that Cheney may truly be asking for God's help. The statement is not a boast. The "empire" being Iraq? Excuse me but America is the empire Cheney is offering. We need God's help and Cheney knows it. Anything else is a stretch like Kristof has done here.
Moreover, Mr. Cheney's card wrenches Ben Franklin's quotation from its context and upends the humility that Franklin stood for. If you read the full speeches Franklin gave to the Constitutional Convention, including the one with the sparrow line, you see that Franklin is not bragging that God is behind him but rather the opposite — warning that the framers face so many difficulties they need all the help they can get, including prayer.
No, this is what Cheney is saying also. Cheney is asking for God's help for the American empire not helping to raise an Iraqi empire. Silly Kristof.
Meanwhile, Howard Dean is grasping for faith in a way that is just as tasteless as Mr. Cheney's Christmas card. Dr. Dean bragged to reporters that he knows much about the Bible — and proceeded to say that his favorite New Testament book is Job. Anyone who cites Job as a New Testament book should be scolded not just for religious phoniness but also for appalling ignorance of Western civilization — on a par with Mr. Bush's calling Greeks "Grecians."
Agreed expect that Bush was more of a stumbling statement (ESL for Bush sometimes) while Dean just clearly blew it. Any equivilence is a reach.
After talking to Mr. Bush's longtime acquaintances, I'm convinced that his religious convictions are deeply felt and fairly typical in the U.S. Mr. Bush says the jury is still out on evolution, but he has also said that he doesn't take every word in the Bible as literally true. To me, nonetheless, it seems hypocritical of Mr. Bush to claim (as he did in the last campaign) that Jesus is his favorite philosopher and then to finance tax breaks for the rich by cutting services for the poor. If Dr. Dean should read up on Job, Mr. Bush should take a look at the Sermon on the Mount.
Bush is hyprocritical in Krisfof's eyes because he probably believes Jesus is some socialist-type figure who said some cool things. Bush referrered to Jesus as his savior. BTW, where is the evidence that the tax breaks were used to finance cutting services to the poor. Instead spending went even higher. Nico, if you are going to make statements like this then please include some facts.
With Karl Rove's help, Mr. Bush has managed a careful balance, maintaining good ties with the Christian right without doing so publicly enough to terrify other voters. For example, Mr. Bush doesn't refer in his speeches to Jesus or Christ, but he sends reassuring messages to fellow evangelicals in code ("wonder-working power" in his State of the Union address last year alluded to a hymn).
Bush is president of the USA not of Christians. Bush does not hide his faith but tries to be inclusive. Let's not even talk about some on the left who invoke hymns also.
Republicans are in trouble when the debate moves to the issues because their policies often favor a wealthy elite. But they have the advantage when voters choose based on values, for here Republicans are populists and Democrats more elitist.
It's been all about issues; terrorism and taxes. That's the essence of what Bush is pushing and most of the rest of the Republicans. Letting all federal income tax payers keep more of their money is the opposite of what many Democrats want to do. Nico, please meet some conservative Republicans.
As we move into the religious wars, I wish we could recall how Abe Lincoln achieved moral clarity without moral sanctimony. Though often criticized for not being religious enough, Lincoln managed both of the key kinds of morality — in personal behavior, which conservatives care about, and in seeking social justice, which liberals focus on. To me, each seems incomplete without the other.
His definition of social justice is just different from a Republican's sense of social justice. Sorry, but the left does not have exclusive rights to social justice.
Or there's the real Ben Franklin — not the one counterfeited by Mr. Cheney — who warned each of the framers of the Constitution to "doubt a little of his own infallibility." That would be a useful text for Mr. Cheney's Christmas card next year.
Kristof's wrong assumptions about the original motives of Cheney make this last paragraph totally irrelevant.
OK, I'm not paid to write but Kristoff is. I think he needs to be a bit more careful before he writes about issues of faith or just admit his bias up front. I am biased and admit it (please see the statement in the upper left). I wish I could get paid for frothing at the mouth at things I don't like. Instead I just do it for fun but try to maintain a little integrity and humor.
Posted by Tim at January 7, 2004 10:26 PM
