Rush Limbaugh, God, and Global Warming

These particular arguments of Limbaugh's that you pick on are not the most reasonable use of the knowledge of God.

Atheism is not the automatic opposite of conservatism in every respect - but it is the opposite of preserving faith in God, which is one of those tested virtues that progress should not discard. While conservatism would reach a broader audience if it were atheistic, it would only do so at the expense of what is normally meant by conservatism.

You have the credentials as some sort of conservative, without belief in God. But the fact of the matter is, conservatives can't argue for preserving our religion against its enemies if we discard religion in order to do so. But, it is your transparently unreasonable argument that this is what we must do.

I'm not sure you've read my blog based on your comments. We agree that Limbaugh's arguments aren't a good use of the knowledge of God. Our agreement ends there, and you're completely misrepresenting what I've written.

I don't state that athieism is the opposite of conservatism, but you argue the point as if I have. And I've never argued that conservatism would reach a broader audience if it were "athieistic." Therefore, I'll assume that your judgment that my argument is transparently unreasonable is based on your misrepresentations.

Generally speaking, conservatism is the opposite of liberalism and athieism is the opposite of belief in God. You're mixing the two, where I never did. I prefer to think of it as a four-square matrix with four possibilities: 1) religious conservative, 2) religious liberal, 3) secular liberal, and 4) secular conservative.

To clarify the second misrepresentation (that conservatives should be "athieistic"), I think conservatives should be religious if they are religious. I think religious conservatives would do better to remove religious *language* from their rhetoric in order to appeal to a broader audience. Removing religious language doesn't mean removing religion. I'm not trying to convert anyone to my secular beliefs.

I want to be a part of the conservative group without being chastised for my lack of religion.

-tsc

American conservatives are united by an appreciation of the constitution and the original intent of the founding fathers.

The founding fathers were united by their belief in God, among other things.

We could focus our efforts on advocating conservatism, and beating down ridiculous liberals, but you choose to focus on the guy who doesn't believe in God? You guys should stop trying to push people out of the conservative tent... time to prioritize.

-tsc

Because this will just trigger another internal debate, but...

Religious conservatives need to wake up. You may not have noticed, but religious belief is on the decline in the industrialized world. You probably won't accept that, but I'm not going to argue facts with you. Let's argue about what those facts mean.

If you insist that conservatives must also believe in God, conservatism will fade into history. You're the past; I'm the future of the party. (I'll clip that out and put it in a time machine -- I'll look prophetic)

I know you hate to play this game, but assume that I'm right. If I'm right, your approach is wrong. You need to be more inclusive. If I'm wrong, it still wouldn't hurt for you to be more inclusive.

The founders were united in their belief in God. Great, they did a good thing. Traditionally, conservatives are also religious. I DON'T DISAGREE. But it's possible to be conservative, and not religious. I'm the proof. As soon as you define conservatism as requiring a belief in God, you're excluding good people.

I'm a conservative. I believe in freedom of religion. I'm secular, but I don't care if you're not. Why can't you reciprocate?

You seem to think that I didn't read your article, enoren; but you misunderstood what I said, so completely that it's not worth trying to fix your misunderstanding.

But I will repeat my case to you, in words that may be less prone to your misconstrual.

I'm not picking on you or focusing on you. That's your imagination. You appeal to me to stop referring to God. I'm just answering you: "no".

If you DON'T KNOW HOW to advocate conservatism without invoking God, I feel bad for you. Conservatism simply makes sense, and it's easy to tell others -- including those who don't share your beliefs -- about why conservatism makes sense.

If you KNOW HOW BUT CHOOSE NOT TO advocate conservatism without invoking God, I feel sorry for your audience. Your belief has meaning to you, not your audience. First rule of persuasion: seek to meet the needs of your audience.

-tsc

One of those public virtues most worth preserving is the respect for religious reasoning in the secular sphere, that exists in this country - which we are in peril of losing.

The way we think about property and wealth, our personal responsibility toward family and neighbor, the value of life, the legitimate powers of the state and the limitations on its power, the rules governing the just transactions of economy, the value of public order and the limitations of coercive means toward producing genuine virtue or spiritual good, and so on, all have something to do with God. Our political rhetoric makes this connection more or less evident.

We have no reason to be ashamed of making this connection, especially if it's done reasoned - it is simple honesty to explain from the beginning where our convictions come from, and how we have worked them out. When you ask us to hide the religious grounds of our reasoning, we will simply answer you that this habit of open and unashamed public discourse is a meaningful aspect of our heritage, which we intend to keep.

"done reasoned" should have been "well-reasoned".

Perhaps secular republican would be more accurate.

Conservatism in America is a movement dedicated to preserving the tradition of our founding fathers and our constitution.

Both are saturated with belief in God and the understanding of divine providence in our lives as individuals and as a nation.

The most prominent of our Founding Fathers were united by their love of liberty and by their faith in reason, which they viewed as a corrective to the arbitrary judgments of so-called revealed religion.

The Declaration of Independence affirms the "Laws of Nature and Nature's God," not the laws of Jesus' god, Moses' god, or Mohammed's god. And for the authors of the Declaration, the laws of Nature and Nature's God were discerned through reason, not through scriptures, although scriptures might also reflect them to the extent that reason played a part in their writing.

Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, after all, were deists. Adams was a Unitarian. Washington was an indifferent Episcopalian who abstained from communion. Madison had nothing to do with religion from his young adulthood onward.

While it's unlikely that any of these men was ever an atheist, it's just as clear that none of them was the sort of dogmatic evangelical Christian who ignorantly misrepresents them as fellow-believers.