Rhetoric of Hate
Over at the Corner today, Stanley Kurtz pulled his head out of his ass just long enough to complain about what he thinks the Democratic strategy for the coming election will be:

The strategy seems to be to tar the Republicans as captive of Dominionist Christians–folks who want to force every American to pay church tithes and bring back capital punishment for blasphemy and witchcraft.

Imagine that. The Democrats plan to tell Americans that the Senate and House majority leaders, not to mention a host of other elected officials, are hand-in-glove with people like Al Mohler and James Dobson and Tim LaHaye. Kurtz seems to think this is preposterous, as he explained in his column yesterday, which was such a piece of garbage that it's worth dissecting:

Harper’s Magazine’s May cover stories about “The Christian Right’s War On America,” frightened me, although not the way Harper’s meant them to. I fear these stories could mark the beginning of a systematic campaign of hatred directed at traditional Christians. Whether this is what Harper’s intends, I cannot say. But regardless of the intention, the effect seems clear.

The phrase “campaign of hatred” is a strong one, and I worry about amplifying an already dangerous dynamic of recrimination on both sides of the culture wars. I don’t doubt that conservatives, Christian and otherwise, are sometimes guilty of rhetorical excess. Yet despite what we’ve been told, the most extreme political rhetoric of our day is being directed against traditional Christians by the left.

Really? What about the vile statements from the putrid mouth of Pastor Fred Phelps? Or Ann Coulter? Or Michelle Malkin? What about Tom DeLay's diatribe against the judiciary? What about James Dobson's comparison of the Supreme Court to the KKK?

It’s been said that James Dobson overstepped legitimate bounds when he compared activist judges to the Ku Klux Klan. Yes, that was an ill-considered remark. I hope and expect it will not be repeated. But Dobson made that comparison extemporaneously and in passing. [snip]

Oh, okay. It was only said in passing, on the radio. He was only funnin'. And I bet he's very restrained when he's off the air.

Chris Hedges, who wrote one of the Harper’s cover pieces, is . . . worried about extreme Christian theocrats called “Dominionists.” He’s got little to say about who these Dominionists are, and he qualifies his vague characterizations by noting in passing that not all Dominionists would accept the label or admit their views publicly. That little move allows Hedges to paint a highly questionable picture of a virtually faceless and nameless “Dominionist” Christian mass. Hedges seems to be worried that the United States is just a few short steps away from having apostasy, blasphemy, sodomy, and witchcraft declared capital crimes. Compare this liberal fantasy of imminent theocracy to the reality of Lawrence v. Texas and Roper v. Simmons (the Supreme Court decision that appealed to European precedents to overturn capital punishment for juveniles). Both of these decisions relied on the existence of a supposed national consensus on behalf of social liberalism. In conjuring up that false consensus, the Court treated conservative Christians as effectively nonexistent. That is the reality of where the law is, and where it is
headed . . .

Not if Jesus Frist and his followers change the Senate rules on filibusters, you moron.

For a very long time now, secular liberals have treated conservative Christians as the modern embodiment of evil, the one group you’re allowed to openly hate. Although barely noticed by the rest of us, this poison has been floating through our political system for decades. Traditional Christians are tired of it, and I don’t blame them. That doesn’t justify rhetorical excess from either side. But the fact of the matter is that the Left’s rhetorical attacks on conservative Christians have long been more extreme, more widely disseminated, and more politically effective than whatever the Christians have been hurling back. And now that their long ostracism by the media has finally forced conservative Christians to demand redress, the Left has abandoned all rhetorical restraint.

Notice the continual references to a supposed rhetoric of hate from those of us on the Left without any specific examples being cited, other than the Harper's article, which he discusses only generally. I don't know a single liberal who advocates anything but tolerance for the religious practices of others. Like I've said before, I don't give a shit if these people want to worship goats. What I want is for them to keep their religious beliefs to themselves and stop forcing them on others. You don't like abortion? Fine, don't have one. You don't agree with same-sex marriage? Don't marry someone of your own sex. You think contraception is wrong? Don't use it. But stop preventing others from doing so. That is the difference that Kurtz pretends not to understand.

Conservative Christians have good reason to fear cultural ostracism. The mere expression of their core religious views is being legislated against. The courts have banned traditional morality as a basis for law and have turned instead to secular Europe for guidance. Traditional Christians can’t even set up a college in New York City. And now Harper’s is calling them evil fascists. Yes, conservative Christians have the ear of the president and of the Republican leadership — you bet they do. Given the way they’re being treated in the culture at large, they’d be fools not to protect themselves by turning to politics.

Those poor oppressed Christians. They're just trying to defend themselves. And so what if they are pulling the strings behind the Republican puppet President and House and Senate Majority Leaders. We need not fear them.

[I]f Christians are increasingly bold and political, they’ve been forced into that mode by 40 years of revolutionary social reforms. David Brooks has already explained how Roe v. Wade unnecessarily polarized the country, making it impossible for religious conservatives to have a voice in ordinary political give and take. We’re still paying the price for that liberal judicial arrogance.

Now judicial imposition of same-sex marriage has poured fuel on the fire. When Frank Rich compares conservative Christians to segregationist bigots, when Chris Hedges compares conservative Christians to evil fascist supporters of Hitler, its the Christian understanding of homosexuality that’s driving the wild rhetoric. None of the American Founders would have approved of same-sex marriage, yet suddenly we’re expected to equate opposition to gay marriage with Hitler’s genocidal persecutions . . .

Leaving aside Bobo's utter crapfest of a column, isn't it amazing how Stanley Kurtz can commune with the dead and let us all know what the Founding Fathers thought about same-sex marriage? Wow.

If “Dominionists” try to force all Americans to pay church tithes, or call for the execution of blasphemers and witches, I will oppose them.

It will be too late by then, you idiot.

But that is not the danger we face. The real danger is that a growing campaign of hatred against traditional Christians by secular liberals will deepen an already dangerous conflict. The solution is to continue our debates, but to change their framing. Conservative Christians cannot stop complaining of exclusion and prejudice until cultural liberals pare back their own excesses. Let’s stop treating honest differences on same-sex marriage as simple bigotry. Let’s stop using the courts as a way around democratic decision-making. Let’s stop trying to criminalize religious expression. Let’s allow Christians to establish their own institutions of higher learning.

Because right now they are prohibited from doing so? WTF?

And let’s stop calling traditional Christians fascists. It would be nice if the folks complaining about “Justice Sunday” addressed these issues as well.

We can debate with the fundies from now until the Crapture, they are not going to change their minds about same-sex marriage, or abortion, or abstinence education, or any of the myriad other social issues they are so worked up about. The Bible tells them so, as the song says. Basically, Kurtz wants the Democrats to roll over and lube up, because then it won't hurt as much. Thanks, but no thanks. I'll pass.

(Please note that I did not use any rhetoric of hate against anyone except Stanley Kurtz throughout this entire post, although, now that I think about it, James Dobson is a fucking fascist.)

Update: Despite Kurtz' pooh-poohing of Democrats' concern that witches could again face persecution in the New Dominionist World Order, just yesterday it was reported that the ACLU filed a petition for an en banc review of the Fourth Circuit's recent decision upholding Chesterfield County's "right" to refuse to allow Cynthia Simpson, a witch of the Wiccan faith, to lead the invocation at its Board of Supervisors meetings (only members of the Judeo-Christian faith need apply, as far as this Virginia county is concerned).
- posted by TJ @ 11:29 AM