Well, more evidence has emerged this afternoon that Sarah Palin is a Christian extremist who sees her role as an official in our secular Republic as in some sense related to the will of God. She actually recently petitioned the Lord in prayer to "make me an instrument of your will"! Not of the voters' will, mind you, but God's will. What kind of Christianist danger would the nation face if a politician who mixes church and state like this, and sees her public role in theocratic terms, actually got within a heartbeat of the presidency?
America on the brink of theocracy
Saturday September 6, 2008
Filed Under: Christianity, Palin
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Advertisement
Advertisement
Search This Blog
Recent Posts
About Crunchy Con
Rod Dreher is an editorial columnist for the Dallas Morning News, and author of "Crunchy Cons" (Crown Forum), a nonfiction book about conservatives, most of them religious, whose faith and political convictions sometimes put them at odds with mainstream conservatives. The views expressed in this blog are his own.
Subscribe
Archives
Blogs Worth Reading
- Front Porch Republic
- The American Conservative
- Patrick Deneen
- Conventional Folly
- The American Scene
- First Things
- Andrew Sullivan
- The Plank
- Eunomia
- Get Religion
- Postmodern Conservative
- Alex Massie
- The Corner
- Contentions
- Sharon Astyk
- Barry Ritholtz
- The Oil Drum
- Mere Comments
- First Principles (ISI)
- Brian Kaller
A man must sleep sometime. Yes, Muslim means "One who submits", as Islam is the religion of submission to the will of God. Islam itself means "submission", in this case, to the will of God.
Muslims do not consider Mohammad to be in any way divine; he was simply a human prophet. They consider this to be true of all the biblical prophets as well, including Jesus, whom they consider to be a great prophet, but to whom they ascribe no divinity.
"Mohammadinism" or "Mohammadan" is simply not the name of the faith, or it's followers. To them, it implies they worship Mohammad, which is not the case. The name of the faith is Islam, and it's adherents are Muslims.
As for Taqqiya, it is only a Shia concept, and even there accepted by a small fringe. It may only be used by a Muslim when they are being wrongfully persecuted.
To put it in very simple, and Christian terms, a Muslim threatened with martyrdom can lie about his faith in order to save his life. This is no different than the practice of crypto-Judaism, practiced by Jews persecuted by Catholics during the Spanish Inquisition, or the dissimulation practiced by English Catholics during the Elizabethan era.
It's hardly any particularly remarkable concept held by Muslims alone. The Jesuits have put forward their doctrine of mental reservation, which amounted to the same thing.
All major faiths have put forward, at some point or another, a concept that lying is sometimes acceptable if it preserves life or freedom. It is merely a concept of the lesser evil.
Alright, Rod. Deep breath here...
The meta-discussion is about justification. Was the media and Obama's political opponents justified in putting the Wright idiocy on endless loop? Is the media and her opponents justified in digging in the muck of the past to find anything to cast Palin in a bad light? At what point do we stop and say out loud: is this an example of the ends justify the means?
Is repetition the only form of logic left in American political debate?
It's out there, so oh well others are going to bash so-and-so so I may as well. In the meantime, some of us would like to stop needing to scour away the muck being raked and see actual people, saying actual things, without their needing to scramble daily because passels of lies -- from both sides, aimed at both sides -- are the first things out of people's mouths and the first things other people hear and read.
I'll concede that this particular blog topic pushed my hot button hard, and it stuck for a while. I engaged in a practice for which I routinely chastise others -- calling you out on what you aren't writing in a particular thread -- and I apologize for that.
I also insist that it is past time to examine the justification game, from both sides.
I'm cooking tonight. Stir-fried basa and fresh vegetables. See ya later.
Plan on sharing that recipe Evans?
I may start hijacking these "culture war" threads and initiate discussion about slow food recipes and the utility of a chicken coop in apartment living : P
But Rod and defenders, I still think Karen's and JPL's primary point stands without any real challenge from you: Namely, there is a big difference between a prayer to God asking that I do his will, vs. a public speech where I represent an initiative I feel strongly about as being God's will.
Obama's was the prayer of Solomon; Palin's was not a prayer, it was an assertion of knowing God's will on an extremely secular matter.
Perhaps it is a matter of temperament. I know the rationalizations that, to my shame, I used in a previous period of my life to justify behavior that I now repent, and I remember what it felt like to see that artifice come tumbling down. I've seen far too many people make the same rationalizations. And many have used God and "God's will" as a prop.
Are you not capable of seeing what harm can be done when certainty about God's will is injected into secular political issues like a gas pipeline? Are the people who might oppose the pipeline on ecological principals not doing God's will?
Do you really want to have a democracy where God and God's will is being used to justify every policy of either party? Is the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac bailout God's will? Is the war in Iraq God's will? Would you feel comfortable where every action of the USA must have been God's will because enough people went along with it?
My asserting I know God's will in a matter where you and I disagree shows no respect at all for your good will, and even less circumspection about my own limitations, blind spots and failures as a human being.
Obama's prayer reminds me of Abraham Lincoln's understanding of the President's right relationship with God: "My concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side, for God is always right."
Palin's sentiment about her son and our military doing God's will in Iraq is detrimental to our standing in the Middle East; it echoes Bush's use of the term "crusade," as well as his consultation of his "higher father" instead of his earthly former President father in making his decision to invade Iraq. There's already a feeling in parts of the Islamic world that we engaged a "holy war" on Iraq; electing McCain-Palin would reinforce those feelings and probably escalate anti-American sentiment in the MIddle East.
But, really--pulling a note out of the Wailing Wall and publishing it is one of those things that "just isn't done."
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.