Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, May 28, 2007
Star Parker :: Townhall.com Columnist
Is the Christian right really the bogeyman?
by Star Parker
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


One thing we can generally predict about human behavior is that when people are unhappy, they go on the hunt for someone to blame.

Taking a lot of heat for today's discontents is the so-called "religious right."

Just consider books, some hot sellers, of recent years: Jim Wallis' "God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It"; "How the Republicans Stole Religion: Why the Religious Right is Wrong About Faith & Politics and What We Can Do to Make It Right" by Bill Press; and, more recently, Victor Gold's "Invasion of the Party Snatchers: How the Holy-Rollers and the Neo-Cons Destroyed the GOP" and Christopher Hitchens' very subtle "god (CQ) is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything."

Take your pick. The religious right is either destroying the Republican Party, the two-party system, the country or, according to Hitchens, by even having the temerity to suggest there is a Creator, and that life has rules, religious people are a danger to life itself.

Hitchens is the least of my concerns. There is no subtlety here that might seduce the uninformed. We just have the newest of a long historical procession of those who claim there is no truth (except, of course, that laid out in Hitchens' book) and that religion and morality and decency have nothing to do with each other.

Hitchens provides his own proof of the dubiousness of the latter claim with his tasteless and impolite screed about Jerry Falwell, published the instant the reverend breathed his last breath, noting that his death had "zero significance" and calling him a "credulous idiot."

What I am concerned about, however, are the more subtle attacks on the religious right, coming from the Christian left, that can have, and may be having, appeal to those who simply don't appreciate the facts.

I am talking about a distorted portrayal of conservative Christians as a detached and fanatic lot, who care only about a couple free-floating issues, abortion and sexual behavior, and who could care less about anything else going on in the country.

"Why this obsession with abortion and sexual behavior?" they ask. "How about poverty? How about the environment?"

Regarding poverty, the Rev. Wallis says, "This is the big issue of God's heart, if we take the Bible seriously." Poverty, according to Wallis, is the "silent tsunami" and "nobody pays attention to it."

Nobody pays attention to it?

Due respects to Wallis, but you just have to wonder where he has been for the last few decades.

In our own country, in the 1960s, President Lyndon Johnson declared a "war on poverty." Since then, we have spent something on the order of $10 trillion under the premise that poverty is something that can be eliminated through government largesse. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Star Parker is the founder and president of CURE, the Coalition for Urban Renewal & Education, a 501c3 think tank which explores and promotes market based public policy to fight poverty, as well as author of White Ghetto: How Middle Class America Reflects Inner City Decay.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
In response to Roy
I wash my hands of this discussion.

You prefer supporting societies that you KNOW are abusive to women (honor killings, refusal of basic rights, frequently enforce seclusion); heedless of the bsic human rights of homosexuals (murder); abusive of children (indoctrinating kids to be suicide bombers in PUBLIC SCHOOLS); racist (if you are unable to honestly evaluate Arab hate for Jews, that is your issue); and demonstrably aggressive without legitimate justification.
In the interest of this preference, you misrepresent history without shame.

You have chosen sides, and apparently feel it is far too late to consider facts. The irony is that, if you were to be dropped into one or other of the two contending societies, you would inevitably choose Israel... where you have freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and recourse to an independent judiciary rather than lynch mobs.

But so be it. Good day, and perhaps we can converse on other topics another time.

sjt18
Sorry for the long break, had to work! If you are still following this line, I want to suggest a slightly different scenario to you.

"I agree that Adam and Eve had a choice. But their case is direct evidence of the premium that God puts on the life of things made in His image. Their choice of death broke fellowship with Him eventually requiring the blood of Christ to provide a means of reconciliation."

You are basically correct but it would be naive to think that God didn't know perfectly well from the very beginning that they would transgress. In fact it was a sure thing. Consider, they were like children and immortal and Satan had unlimited time to persuade them. (The Bible doesn't give us a clue as to whether it took ten minutes or a hundred years) So, there had to be a reason. It was necessary that mankind go through a mortal probation and learn from experience the difference between good and evil, but God, being perfectly just, would not cut them (or us) off from his presence so that they could do so except by choice and that choice had to be a transgression (as they were innocent and unable to make it any other way). Choice was all important. Had he wanted to make it impossible to for them to transgress, he surely could have done so. (As you pointed out, they chose mortality and eventual death which would require a Redeemer to provide reconciliation).

My point was that if God put such a "premium on life", innocent children (too young to choose to sin) would never be killed unjustly;

"We all deserve death... we have no right to either the general or special grace He affords us."

"That doesn't follow. God gave us life. It is a "right" in the very highest sense."

This is contradictory.

Yes, life is a premium, so is choice, but as I hope you can see, choice is number one.

As for our purpose being to "glorify God", I agree but I don't believe that God is narcisstic. We glorify Him by emulating Christ because He wants the best for us, just as you would want the best for your children.

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.