From
the Family Research Council email advertising the now infamous Louisville conference:
Many of these nominees to the all-important appellate court level are being blocked, not because they haven't paid their taxes or because they have used drugs or because they have criminal records or for any other reason that would disqualify them from public service; rather, they are being blocked because they are people of faith and moral conviction.
Pat Robertson:
"When I said during my presidential bid that I would only bring Christians and Jews into the government, I hit a firestorm. `What do you mean?' the media challenged me. `You're not going to bring atheists into the government? How dare you maintain that those who believe in the Judeo Christian values are better qualified to govern America than Hindus and Muslims?' My simple answer is, `Yes, they are.'" --from Pat Robertson's "The New World Order," page 218.
OK, so the theocons think that it is perfectly fine to block some religious views, such as Islam, from being held by people serving in the US government, but that it is wrong to block other views, such Christianity, from being held by people serving in the US government. This is an obvious case of bigotry against people of certain faiths, and it is coming from those who often claim they are oppressed because of their faith.
This post is not just about this contradiction, however. Living in the political blogosphere, as I tend to do, I feel as though I run across posts pointing out stuff like this several times a day. Heck, I feel like I've run across this stuff severall times a day for years. To tell you the truth, I'm actually getting a little bored with it. I mean, conservatives frequently take contradictory positions? Wow. That's a real stunner. The theocons are really just about promoting their version of Christianity above all other religions and versions of Christianity? Again, that is a real stunner, and I am surprised to learn that.
It is not just that it is repetitive, however. It is that it is repetitive and nothing ever happens. What are we doing in pointing all this stuff out? No one seems to ever do anything about it. As John writes as Americablog:
Will the lefty organizations take advantage of this golden opportunity to finally destroy Robertson and Sheldon? Don't hold your breath. This is about more than just press releases, this is an action campaign now. Demanding an apology. Demanding Bush and any politician who's dealt with these men publicly distance themselves from them. Demand that Bush and all politicians reiterate their support for Muslim-Americans. Hell, I'd create a tolerance pledge that politicians are asked to sign that they will not discriminate in hiring and firing of Muslim-Americans.
There are tons of things the civil rights groups and fight-the-right groups could do.
But will they? Ha.
Yeah, really. This is the sort of thing that should happen when this stuff is pointed out, but it never does. Instead
ABC is going to run Focus on the Family ads after rejecting ads from the United Church of Christ last year because
their message of tolerance was too controversial.
So, seriously, what is the point of all this? If left-leaning groups never take any action on stuff like the rancid Robertson comments, while right-leaning groups can get messages of tolerance toward homosexuals off the air because they are "too controversial," what the hell are we doing? Sometimes I think that instead of at lest bringing a knife to a gunfight, we are just bringing a blindfold and standing up against the wall. If we do speak when we show up, it is to criticize the others standing next to us for smoking before we all get shot. Arrrggghhh.
