I’ve been thinking of Kirsten Powers of late. You know, Kirsten Powers, leftist, blond hair, brown eyes, a lovely and bright woman? I’d always appreciated her appearances on various Fox News shows because unlike many on the left, Powers has been able to discuss matters civilly. In fact, when the left–including their lord and savior, Barack Obama–have been wrong, Powers has often forthrightly admitted it, no qualifications, no spin, no lies.
Kirsten Powers
credit: realclearpolitics.com
I find this so compelling because it has been my experience, personally and through observation and research, that it is virtually impossible to discuss anything with a leftist. Conservatives and Independents are generally willing to have a calm, rational conversation with anyone, largely because they expect that logic and fact matter and that they should determine the outcome of any debate. Leftists, however, do not share that outlook, and when challenged–and by this I mean when they hear anything that doesn’t absolutely conform to their views–quickly become very angry and begin name-calling, playing the race card, and expressing undying hatred for anyone daring to mention another viewpoint. Often, their vehemence is startling, even shocking.
In a recent interview with Rush Limbaugh, David Horowitz–whose former leftist upbringing and credentials were impeccable, said:
I think the most important thing I’ve done in this book is to show the continuity in the left with its communist forebears. These are not liberals. We should never call these people liberals. To begin with, they’re bigots. They’re bigoted against Christians, against America, against white people. They don’t like conservatives. They don’t want two sides to a question. We are liberal. I don’t know of a conservative who wants to shut off the conversation, but leftists do.
His experience has certainly been mine.
It has often been said that if God did not exist, we would have to invent Him. There is a spiritual dimension to the human soul. Deny it, ignore it and there are consequences. At best, we feel empty, lost, rudderless. At worst, we commit unspeakable atrocities, even genocide.
Kirsten Powers was, until recently, something of an enigma. An occasionally rational leftist? Does such a thing exist? No. It does not. But now, thanks to what Christians would call “witnessing,” I understand Powers better, even as I worry about her: she’s existing in a state of limbo, a political purgatory of sorts.
Imagine a leftist writing an article for Christianity Today about their acceptance of Christ. That’s what Powers did in October. Some excerpts:
Just seven years ago, if someone had told me that I’d be writing for Christianity Today magazine about how I came to believe in God, I would have laughed out loud. If there was one thing in which I was completely secure, it was that I would never adhere to any religion—especially to evangelical Christianity, which I held in particular contempt.
Like many, Powers’ faith was a flimsy, on and off again matter. In her first political job, she was surround by leftists, who, unsurprisingly, expressed no faith in God. Powers writes about such expression in the sense of speaking about it–expressing faith out loud–but I suspect she also means there was no evidence of it otherwise in their lives:
From my early 20s on, I would waver between atheism and agnosticism, never coming close to considering that God could be real.
After college I worked as an appointee in the Clinton administration from 1992 to 1998. The White House surrounded me with intellectual people who, if they had any deep faith in God, never expressed it. Later, when I moved to New York, where I worked in Democratic politics, my world became aggressively secular. Everyone I knew was politically left-leaning, and my group of friends was overwhelmingly atheist.
I sometimes hear Christians talk about how terrible life must be for atheists. But our lives were not terrible. Life actually seemed pretty wonderful, filled with opportunity and good conversation and privilege. I know now that it was not as wonderful as it could have been. But you don’t know what you don’t know. How could I have missed something I didn’t think existed?
Powers began dating a Christian, and though his faith revolted her, the attraction between them kept her involved. Seeking marriage, he asked if she could ever convert, which was nearly as deadly a fate as asking her to become a conservative. She refused, of course.
Then he said the magic words for a liberal: “Do you think you could keep an open mind about it?” Well, of course. ‘I’m very open-minded!’ Even though I wasn’t at all. I derided Christians as anti-intellectual bigots who were too weak to face the reality that there is no rhyme or reason to the world. I had found this man’s church attendance an oddity to overlook, not a point in his favor.
As he talked, I grew conflicted. On the one hand, I was creeped out. On the other hand, I had enormous respect for him. He is smart, educated, and intellectually curious. I remember thinking, What if this is true, and I’m not even willing to consider it?
What if, indeed. Powers went to church with him and was amazed to find that such a thing as an evangelical Presbyterian existed. More amazing was the shattering of leftist stereotypes.
A few weeks later I went to church with him. I was so clueless about Christianity that I didn’t know that some Presbyterians were evangelicals. So when we arrived at the Upper East Side service of Redeemer Presbyterian Church, I was shocked and repelled by what I saw. I was used to the high-church liturgy of my youth. We were meeting in an auditorium with a band playing what I later learned was ‘praise music.’ I thought, How am I going to tell him I can never come back?
But then the pastor preached. I was fascinated. I had never heard a pastor talk about the things he did. Tim Keller’s sermon was intellectually rigorous, weaving in art and history and philosophy. I decided to come back to hear him again. Soon, hearing Keller speak on Sunday became the highlight of my week. I thought of it as just an interesting lecture—not really church. I just tolerated the rest of it in order to hear him. Any person who is familiar with Keller’s preaching knows that he usually brings Jesus in at the end of the sermon to tie his points together. For the first few months, I left feeling frustrated: Why did he have to ruin a perfectly good talk with this Jesus nonsense?
Each week, Keller made the case for Christianity. He also made the case against atheism and agnosticism. He expertly exposed the intellectual weaknesses of a purely secular worldview. I came to realize that even if Christianity wasn’t the real thing, neither was atheism.
I began to read the Bible. My boyfriend would pray with me for God to reveal himself to me. After about eight months of going to hear Keller, I concluded that the weight of evidence was on the side of Christianity. But I didn’t feel any connection to God, and frankly, I was fine with that. I continued to think that people who talked of hearing from God or experiencing God were either delusional or lying. In my most generous moments, I allowed that they were just imagining things that made them feel good.
I’m sure, gentle readers, that many of you can relate to Power’s internal conflict. Most of us, at least once in our lives, have struggled with surrendering the ego and knocking on the door, the door that will always be answered. And many of us have had our own road to Damascus moment. Many have also done a face plant on the road that leads to death; faith isn’t easy.
Then one night in 2006, on a trip to Taiwan, I woke up in what felt like a strange cross between a dream and reality. Jesus came to me and said, ‘Here I am.’ It felt so real. I didn’t know what to make of it. I called my boyfriend, but before I had time to tell him about it, he told me he had been praying the night before and felt we were supposed to break up. So we did. Honestly, while I was upset, I was more traumatized by Jesus visiting me.
I tried to write off the experience as misfiring synapses, but I couldn’t shake it. When I returned to New York a few days later, I was lost. I suddenly felt God everywhere and it was terrifying. More important, it was unwelcome. It felt like an invasion. I started to fear I was going crazy.
Many leftists/intellectuals love book clubs and conversations about books, but they consider Christians discussing the Bible and its implications the twitterings of nitwits. Powers was no different, but desperate, she began to attend a Bible study; she ventured among the enemies of the state.
I remember walking into the Bible study. I had a knot in my stomach. In my mind, only weirdoes and zealots went to Bible studies. I don’t remember what was said that day. All I know is that when I left, everything had changed. I’ll never forget standing outside that apartment on the Upper East Side and saying to myself, “’t’s true. It’s completely true.’ The world looked entirely different, like a veil had been lifted off it. I had not an iota of doubt. I was filled with indescribable joy.
Reading Power’s words, I find myself wiping away tears, for I share in her sense of wonder and joy, and I am thankful that she has found Christ, as I am for all that do the same. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. But the religion of leftism relinquishes its grasp only reluctantly:
The horror of the prospect of being a devout Christian crept back in almost immediately. I spent the next few months doing my best to wrestle away from God. It was pointless. Everywhere I turned, there he was. Slowly there was less fear and more joy. The Hound of Heaven had pursued me and caught me—whether I liked it or not.
On that note, Powers’ conversion tale ends. And therein lies a central question: Is it possible to be a committed leftist (use whatever term you prefer) and a Christian?
On one hand, the answer is, at least intellectually, yes. Americans live the tradition of separation of church and state, and Christ, in Matthew 22:20-22 said “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s’ and unto God the things that are God’s.” We judge not each man’s personal relationship with God that we be not judged. But I speak of the practical quality of daily living.
David Horowitz explains:
What’s in it for them is the fact that progressivism is a religion, or a crypto-religion. Like religious people, they believe the world is a fallen place. But they also believe that they can be its saviors. Salvation and redemption are not going to come from a divinity, but from the movement they are part of, from the organized left. What they get out of this is the consolation of religion. They get a sense of personal worth; they get a meaning to their lives. That’s what drives them. It’s not money. It’s much more powerful.
Virtually every Christian teaching is contradicted, not only in philosophy but in practice, by leftism. Those old enough to have lived through the Cold War understand the viciously anti-God doctrine and actions of the Communists who murdered hundreds of millions, most their own people. Nothing could be allowed to challenge the supremacy of the state. Even today, Socialists–essentially communists lite–profess to care very much for “the people,” but in practice are more than willing to destroy individuals, whether through legal persecution as in the IRS scandals or Fast and Furious, or through the British wonder of socialized medicine that allows the sick and helpless to die unattended in hospital beds, soiled by their own waste, dehydrated, starved to death. Leftists profess to care very much about the poor, but Conservatives give far more, and by obscenely large margins, of their own money to alleviate true need.
This is because conservatives believe in equality of opportunity, that each man should be equal under the law, that each man has equal worth and dignity and must be able to succeed or fail by his own efforts. They also believe that man is not perfectible. No matter how many laws or regulations are written, some men will disobey them, and people must have the free will to make those choices. Salvation comes not on Earth, but in heaven.
Leftists believe in equality of outcome. Everyone, regardless of their sloth and lack of character and concern for others, should have the same quality of living. To this end, big government and confiscatory taxes are mandatory. It is only when the self-imagined elite are in charge and force the right laws and regulations on the less worthy–for anyone not buying fully into the leftist agenda is not worthy of human dignity and must be suppressed or destroyed–that paradise on earth can be achieved. All will be made to be diverse and inclusive, and free of racism, sexism, and any other imagined evil unacceptable to the refined leftist imagination.
Conservatives tend, overwhelmingly, to be Christian and do their fallen human best to implement its commandments, which acknowledge the value and equality of all men. Above all, Christianity is embodied in 1 Corinthians 13: 4-13: “And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.”
One does not demonstrate love through forced redistribution, by taking the possessions of others and giving them to political supporters and cronies to buy influence and votes, but by willingly giving to help others in need. The former is the political exercise of raw, brutal power, the latter the exercise of Christian mercy and love.
And this is Kristen Power’s quandary, though not hers alone. How can one love–as Christ would have us love–while embracing a political religion of bigotry, rage, corruption, lust for power, control over one’s fellow man–for his own good, of course– and hatred? How can one follow Christ and follow worldly political saviors?
I hope that Powers is able, like David Horowitz, to eventually abandon the political religion that gave her a false sense of intellectual and moral superiority for so many years. Her acceptance of Christ is her salvation, but we live on Earth. He fills the soul, just as Christ has promised, and in Him are no lies. Leftism is a lie. It demands an unshakable belief in the superiority of the elite leftist–and their infallible political doctrine–over all, including God. It leaves a gaping hole in the soul, or drains it altogether.
I know that I cannot reconcile my faith in Christ with believing that I know better than another man what his family and he need, that I know better how to spend his money and what to force him to buy, do, think and say. Walking with Christ, yet thinking so highly of myself and so little of others simply doesn’t work for me. I suspect Kristen Powers feels the same way. She’s just not able to admit that–yet.
What do you think, gentle readers? Is it possible to be a committed Christian and a Leftist, or are they mutually exclusive, as I believe them to be?
Stately McDaniel Manor 
“At best, we feel empty, lost, rudderless. At worst, we commit unspeakable atrocities, even genocide.” — Yeah, that last part, ‘religion’ ranks up there REALLY frickin’ high as to why such things as ethnic cleansing and genocide occur. Government, religion, Race I believe are the top 3, not sure about the order.
MIGHTY big brush, Mike.
“…but they consider Christians discussing the Bible and its implications the twitterings of nitwits….” — brush keeps getting bigger…
“for anyone not buying fully into the leftist agenda is not worthy of human dignity and must be suppressed or destroyed–that paradise on earth can be achieved” — and bigger….
“…of course– and hatred?…” — and, boom goes the dynamite.
There is a certain irony in making a diatribe about how poorly the other “side” behaves, in which you assume the moral high ground, make blatant generalizations, and that there is no such thing as a liberal Christian; less of course this turn into the Islam debate, in which case they aren’t practicing to your benchmarks, either politically or religiously.
“…and any other imagined evil…” — Just to be clear here, racism and sexism are imagined evils? Laws regarding discrimination were passed because they were just an imagined problem? There is no glass ceiling, and women are not paid lower sums of money for the same job in many cases?
“and, boom goes the dynamite” – What dynamite? I didn’t see it. I’m not sure I get your point about ‘big brushes’ either. Those on the Left certainly reject the Bible and its teachings, or at least misinterpret them. The writer made a valid point there.
You resort to generic arguments about ‘ethnic cleansing and genocide’ to smear “religion” but you didn’t provide any specifics about which instance of “ethnic cleansing and genocide” you’re referring to or which religion. Details mattter
So… you are stating that religion, race, and government are NOT the big three for genocide, Philly? I wanna make sure that I am answering the right objection.
“Those on the Left certainly reject the Bible and its teachings, or at least misinterpret them. The writer made a valid point there.” — a valid point for a percentage of people, though a far stretch from all inclusive. Hench the big brush, painting with a big brush covers a lot of the stuff you might not want to paint.
The Jews, the Islams, the Christians, the other Christians, the Pagans, the Inquisition, the Crusades… I am surprised I need to mention examples of religious genocide, history is rife with them. “Which religion”? It doesn’t matter, Philly. Its all faith based, and all set from the stance of divine right, no matter how twisted the acts committed, or how righteous the cause may be.
In the Islam vs Christian “jihad” each of them has a book claiming they are right, and each of them has the mind set the others are practicing their faith incorrectly, and each of them can reference their own book and earthly scholars on how right they think they are, and each have the capability to rationalize the outdated parts of their text (and ignore it completely), yet refuse to allow the ‘other’ side to do so.
I don’t know about Religion, Race, and Government being the “big three” in genocide, but I can tell you the “big five”:
Chairman Mao
Joseph Stalin
Adolf Hitler
Hideki Tojo
Pol Pot
The world’s greatest atrocities have been committed by those who replace God with Government. It is the absence of religion – i.e. an absence of faith in God – that has contributed the most to historical genocide. The Twentieth Century will stand as a permanent example of the outcome of atheism carried to its logical conclusion.
Where have Christians committed religious genocide? If you say the Crusades, then you apparently need to re-learn history, because in the Crusades, it is the Muslim who were the invaders, and the Christians who fought to repel them.
The vast majority of religious genocide has come at the hand of the Muslim. Islam was built on a foundation of genocide carried out at the hand of Mohammad himself, and has continued that tradition for a millennium and a half. Lumping the rest of the world’s religions in with Islam is asinine.
Dear Chip Bennett:
What you said.
“Where have Christians committed religious genocide?” — Go through that list I mentioned again, it started with an “I”, and the Crusades, btw, I don’t find any party not guilty in that mess, it was nearly 200 years of one religious group killing another group on the basis of faith. Darn those Muslim invaders, we shall kill them for blocking our access to our holy places of peace.
“Lumping the rest of the world’s religions in with Islam is asinine” — I find the concept of organized faith asinine, so one lump is just as good as another. Stating “I find God (or whatever power you see fit) to be thusly, and worship accordingly” is one thing, but the inherent human nature of a group begins to subtlety alter that viewing of a divinity, and when that starts to occur, it inevitably begins to alter how that Entity behaves. The re-envisionings and re-boots start to occur. Mass appeal starts becoming a goal, rather than the merits of their own respective faith.
And then it hits the ballot box.
Dear RuleofOrder:
I’m painting with the brush Ms. Powers provided. In fact, I heard a radio interview she gave just yesterday and it was fascinating to hear her make, almost word for word, the points I made in discussing the relative outlook of leftists toward Christians. She was not only speaking of her former beliefs, but those of her leftist friends and colleagues, many of whom are no longer her friends, or as Shakespeare wrote in Julius Caesar, hot friends that have cooled.
And I have indeed experienced–on many occasions–a hatred that borders on insanity from leftists unable to so much as discuss matters of faith and politics. I present in this article, a polite version of their invective.
Of course we all understand that not every leftist thinks precisely alike, nor does every conservative, but by their basic philosophies and beliefs do we know both, and Ms. Powers has intimate knowledge of both ways of thinking and being. There are, of course, Christians with leftist social and political bents. My point remains that those philosophies and practices are at odds with any honest understanding of Christianity, and will inevitably make life difficult for them and those with whom they associate. I do not think to judge the depth and quality of their relationship with the Almighty.
I would hope too that we could all understand that I am not suggesting that racism and sexism (depending on a rational definition, of course) are in any way a good thing. And while some Christians once advocated slavery, let us remember that they were, almost exclusively, Democrats. It was Republicans that had to drag them, kicking and screaming, into the nation we are today where actual racists are social pariahs, and thankfully so. Mrs. Manor is my equal in dignity and practice, as are my female colleagues and friends.
Thanks, as always, for your comments!
“And I have indeed experienced–on many occasions–a hatred that borders on insanity from leftists unable to so much as discuss matters of faith and politics.” —- I assure you, such occasions are not unique to you, and that shoe is just as easily worn on the other foot. “Obamaroid”, “libturd”, “demonrats”, etc are not self ascribed.
Liberalism is a mental disorder, Amirite?
The pseudo-religion of the political left is very interesting. In connection to your observation that “No matter how many laws or regulations are written, some men will disobey them, and people must have the free will to make those choices” I’d like to add that leftists not only have faith in the ability to legislate every aspect of human behavior, but are also dogmatically blind to the potential for abuse on the part of the state. It is especially obvious in discussion over gun control laws, where the suggestion that legislative power will be abused by the government is unimaginable to those on the left. I think this is because liberals are so prone to supporting charismatic leaders (another religious feature, though of course a politician’s ostensible charisms are necessarily vague) who they cannot imagine abusing power. That God-Emperor Obama could, with a straight face, say:
“Unfortunately you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all of our problems. Some of these same voices do their best to gum up the works. They’ll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices.”
Only if he could be sure of the absolute faith of his followers could a powerful political leader instruct people to dismiss any concerns about tyranny. The irony of a sitting US President making such a statement is comically obvious, but not to those dedicated followers he was addressing.
I noticed the same thing about Obama telling us to dismiss tyranny, Joey. His points are as deep as a puddle after 8 hours in midday heat, his followers even less so. Yet we elected him twice to the highest office in the world. I’ve never been more embarrassed for my country.
By the way, did you know he said he was going to end something called “gun violence”? According to him, Treyvon Martin would be a victim of “gun violence”. no such thing as the Law of Self Defence…
Dear Joey Miller:
Just as the tyrant labors to convince everyone that (A) he is certainly not a tyrant, and (B) even if he is, tyranny is good for you, Satan’s greatest accomplishment was convincing people he doesn’t exist.
For those a bit too literally minded, I’m not comparing President Obama with Satan, merely drawing an analogy regarding deception and political practice.
Thanks, Joey!
There are two answers to your question.
If you think deeply about it, you are right. Christianity is incompatible with forced redistribution policies. In fact, the founders and early thinkers in the church of my childhood concluded that a person who is Christian cannot ethically participate in government at all, stating that a Christian should not “go to law.”. I tend to agree with them. At a fundamental level, government is sustained by violence – this is the antithesis of Christ’s message. Principled Christians should not be using violence against their neighbors, with or without the state as an intermediary.
Sadly, most people don’t think deeply about it. Many churches, including the church of my childhood, now advocate for forced redistribution. To today’s brilliant rationalizers, the end justifies the means.
It sounds like Powers is the kind of person who thinks deeply about these things, so it may be interesting to observe her philosophical evolution as she tries to integrate the two philosophies into her world view.
Where did you get the quote about Christians ‘not going into law’? Just curious…
It’s from the Church of the Brethren. One of the so-called, “peace churches”. It’s not a very large church, and I don’t think they’ve adhered to this view for quite some time, but it was one of their foundational beliefs. http://www.cob-net.org/mack/honors.htm
“5.) Christians should not go to law, take the oath, or become government officials.”
Once upon a time, they really were pacifists. Now, they’re just anti-war.
Hmmm. If you look at the early church, you will find that the purest form of communism was practiced by the early Christians. They had all things in common, the rich would sell what they had and bring the money to use for everyone, so that no one would lack for anything. Admittedly, it was a volunteer process, but it was still done – “They held all things in common.” I recently heard one very knowledgeable, very Christian gentleman state that in the old testament, there are passages that discuss why certain kingdoms had been brought down, and in all of them the main reason given was the fact that the poor and the ill were not cared for. Although imperfect, he views things like welfare and the healthcare act as at least an attempt on a national level to care for the poor and ill, and he does not understand how you can be Christian and not support such things.
Not sure what you mean when you say “earliest Christians”. The 12 that followed Jesus where the earliest. Some were fishermen, some where physicians, really nothing in common (certainly not “all things”) at least in the sense you suggest. They certainly were not communists, as you labeled them. Their (His) agenda was not political, at all. It isn’t today, either. Nor tomorrow…
You didn’t mention which verses of the Old Testament the “knowledgeable, very Christian gentleman” you quoted to support your arguments concerning why certain “kingdoms” had been brought down “because the poor and the ill were not cared for.” Where is that in the Bible??
The volunteer status of sharing among early Christians is a very important detail, because it marks the difference between charity and stealing. There are certainly some commie-sounding parts of Jesus’ message: The admonition that a rich man entering the Kingdom of Heaven would be as easy as a camel passing through the eye of a needle; Or the promotion of charity in feeding the hungry and clothing the naked. But there is a stronger argument for individual rights, as there is not mention of the central feature of communism which is that the state redistributes wealth by force. Make no mistake, even widely propagandized programs like the Affordable Care Act still rely on force. Paul advises how early Christian communities should live in his Letter to the Thesselonians:
“Now we command you, beloved, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to keep away from believers who are living in idleness and not according to the tradition that they received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us; we were not idle when we were with you, and we did not eat anyone’s bread without paying for it; but with toil and labor we worked night and day, so that we might not burden any of you. This was not because we do not have that right, but in order to give you an example to imitate. For even when we were with you, we gave you this command: Anyone unwilling to work should not eat. For we hear that some of you are living in idleness, mere busybodies, not doing any work. Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work quietly and to earn their own living. Brothers and sisters, do not be weary in doing what is right” (2 Thesselonians 3:6-13).
And again in his Letter to the Galatians:
“Brothers and sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore that person gently. But watch yourselves, or you also may be tempted. Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. If anyone thinks they are something when they are not, they deceive themselves. Each one should test their own actions. Then they can take pride in themselves alone, without comparing themselves to someone else, for each one should carry their own load. Nevertheless, the one who receives instruction in the word should share all good things with their instructor.
Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers”(Galatians 6:1-10).
This model of early Christian community absolutely supports charity, and caring for one’s neighbor, but not communism. John Locke was an influential Enlightenment philosopher, and proposed that individual rights were protected under natural law (i.e. in line with God’s order of creation), including property rights. James Madison, the father of the Constitution, as well as others among the framers, took the same view. American law, rooted in the Constitution, John Locke’s philosophy, as well (to the dismay of liberals) in Christian theology, holds that the common good is best served by protecting individual rights.
Dear Joey Miller:
You’re absolutely correct. The scriptures, particularly the New Testament, make clear that people are expected to take care of themselves, but that one should show Christian mercy to those in need, as in the case of the Good Samaritan.
Communism is an economic theory manifest via politics and force. Christ made clear that the kingdom of Heaven and the kingdoms established by men are not compatible. Communism and socialism are political systems inherently hostile to faith of any kind. Democracy, however, is compatible with any non-violent faith that has no designs on political power. It’s interesting to read the writings of Cal Thomas who was once a part of the Moral Majority and its campaign for political power and control. He, like virtually all Christians, came to understand that trying to intertwine faith and politics inevitably and rapidly corrupts both and everyone involved.
One should not confuse the practical sustenance necessities of wandering apostles with the practices and beliefs of an entire faith.
If you ‘share with the poor’ because I hold a gun to your head, how is your act godly? If I force you to follow the dictates of my religon by threatening you with force, how does that make either one of us godly?
If the dictate I choose to force onto you is something other than to feed the poor, is there a practical difference?
Pingback: … A Really Fascinating Story … « Lake Erie Conservative
Mr McDaniel,
I’d really like to thank you for the thoughtful analysis you provide on the issues. I believe I stumbled on to your “scruffy blog” (it is anything but scruffy) during the Treyvon Martin case and have been an avid reader ever since. You provide high quality intellectual content and dissect the details in an impressive way. I am a fan and I wish that there were more like you. Our country needs it badly.
Dear PhillyTrue:
Welcome to SMM, and thank you for your kind comments. I’m honored.
My honor, Sir. You educate me. I thank you.
Mike, I had the same reaction to reading her article, that you did. I was truly happy that she had found Him.
I’ve always thought of KP as a rather sane/rational Leftist. I think if anyone on the Left would become a Conservative, I think she’d be the one to convert.
I’ll keep my fingers crossed for her.
Now, to answer your question: No. It’s not possible.
Pingback: We Have To Choose | Stately McDaniel Manor
Pingback: Too Stupid To Survive, #30 | Stately McDaniel Manor