In response to:

Narrowing our public discourse

Alan from NJ Wrote: Jan 09, 2010 2:27 AM

While much younger I met a true liberal. She disdained our culture and folkways and had no room for our personal faith. Yet she would have sat in deeply respectful silence (nodding in encouraging accord)watching some man in New Guinea, with a bone through his nose, try to explain the spiritual connection his people had with eating grubs. She would have left such a show quite self-satisfied.
She may have worshipped iconoclasm, but that was only if the icon was a familiar one. I thought her a true hypocrite.

Join the Debate!

Read Full Story

Narrowing our public discourse

WASHINGTON -- After urging Tiger Woods to accept the "forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith" -- and comparing Buddhism unfavorably to that hope -- journalist Brit Hume insisted he was not proselytizing. In this, he is wrong. His words exemplify proselytization.

For this, Hume has been savaged. Media critic Tom Shales put him in the category of a "sanctimonious busybody" engaged in "telling people what religious beliefs they ought to have." Blogger Andrew Sullivan criticized Hume's "pure sectarianism" which helps abolish "the distinction between secular and religious discourse." MSNBC's David Shuster called Hume's religious advice "truly...

Related Tags: Christianity Marriage Faith