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
Friday, May 18, 2007
David Limbaugh :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Paradoxical Hatred of Christopher Hitchens
by David Limbaugh
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will Congress pass Obamacare by the end of the year?

I was actually surprised to hear writer Christopher Hitchens' attitude toward Reverend Jerry Falwell's death, given the good sense this liberal has exhibited on the war issue.

As a war supporter, I have been heartened by Hitchens' fervent and eloquent support for the Iraq war. I didn't quite understand how his war support could be reconciled with his liberalism considering liberals' near-uniform opposition to the war, but I was nonetheless grateful for it.

Naively, I even speculated that Hitchens was on the verge of an ideological conversion. But after watching him on "Hannity and Colmes" about the departed Falwell, I realized his anti-Christian and anti-theistic worldview is, for now at least, an insuperable barrier to any ideological transformation.

Indeed, I now surmise that his very support for the war is rooted in his contempt for Muslim extremism, which he appears to conflate with orthodoxy of all other religions. I don't know whether Hitchens considers strong evangelical Christians, like Falwell, to be as evil as jihadists, but he made clear he has abundant contempt for them.

Some might object that Hitchens' contempt is particularly reserved for Falwell or, at most, a small group of "extremist," vocal Christian conservatives. To be sure, Hitchens made disparaging references to Falwell personally, calling him "a vulgar fraud and crook," by which Hitchens, in fairness, did not mean to indict Christians generally. But many of his other references were broadsides directed at garden-variety Christians.

Hitchens said, "Jerry Falwell made a career out of sponsoring dislike and superstition, said that people he didn't like were going to hell, said the United States deserved to be attacked by Islamic fascists, said that he believed that people would be raptured into heaven, leaving all the rest of us to wallow behind."

Leaving aside Falwell's regrettable comment about 9/11, for which he repeatedly apologized, one wonders what beliefs Hitchens is referring to as superstition. Given the subject of his recently released book, "God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything," I think it's fair to infer he is talking about Falwell's belief in Christian doctrine, not just Falwell's occasional objectionable outburst.

Obviously, those who believe in the rapture are despicable in Hitchens' view, and, though this may stun some of you, that includes many people. Even more believe in heaven and hell -- an overwhelming majority, excepting those who subscribe to "universal salvation." Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
David Limbaugh, brother of radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, is an expert in law and politics and author of Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today's Democratic Party.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read David Limbaugh's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
I guess the thread is over
I will say this on an optimistic note.

The logic should be easy to understand; if everything exists at the whim of God, everything is God's to remake or rescind. The logical conclusion is that even our own lives don't really belong to ourselves, there's an authority higher than us who holds the deed. And humans have no power or legal standing to change that.

But do not be lost to what we have in common. Those of us who beleive in the ideals of the Declaration of Independence agree on who **doesn't** own an individual's life, thoughts, or honestly-gained property. Whether or not those things are ultimately deeded to God, they are **not** deeded to some human entity aside from the individual in question. Government can bill us for services rendered (as a business does), but it doesn't own our stuff. Parental authority is near-absolute, but even that has limits (which could make up a whole new comments thread). Disagreement on the God-human relationship doesn't preclude lots of agreement on the human-human relationship.

You don't get it
Genocide, murder:

What have I said earlier? God owns everything, God is the highest authority of existence. With no higher level of government above him, he certainly has the authority to implement capital punishment.

Israel teaches us an important lesson: God delegates only a smidgeon of that authority, even under a theocracy. Sins fall in two caregories; man-vs-man-and-God, and man-vs-God-alone. Only God can authorize criminalization of the latter - he is the sole plaintiff - only God can write a constitution that criminalizes such sins. He has not authorized any more theocracies after rescinding the first, so human governments are authorized to prosecute only the former.

The principle of equitable punishment - "eye for an eye" - places this restriction: human punishment must be assessed on the basis of the level of injury inflicted ON THE HUMAN PARTY. All sins grieve God equally, on the basis of what they do to the relationship between the sinner and God, but all sins do not harm humans equally. Human capital punishment is thus severely restricted. Assuming this principle is followed, capital punishment is not murder, any more than a fine is theft.

Hitler and Stalin make my point. They stole authority that didn't belong to them. They murdered because they believed that some lives were less valuable than others, and becuase they rooted the value of a life to be gauged by the individual's conformity to the totalitarian ideal in question. Christianty teaches that we are *not* God, that only God owns a person's life, that we better damn well be careful that we don't let Caesar take what isn't Caesar's.

Incest and polygamy:

Abraham was not above the law. Right and wrong never changed. God has implemented varying degrees of leniency over time with direct enforcement. One sign of that leniency is the fact that he doesn't kill us all for our man-vs-God-alone crimes, starting from scratch without so much as a few refugees in an ark.

You fail to consider the possibility that God regards divorce as a greater ill than Abraham's (or Jacob's) marital arrangements. You also fail to note that God never picked prophets on the basis of moral perfection - considering that humans aren't morally perfect. The prophets didn't earn their offices - they were chosen because God had specific missions for them.
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.