I donÂ’t know that Kathleen Parker will succeed in mollifying her many conservative critics (including me) with her most recent column, but she does make a good point that I believe bears repeating.

How about social conservatives make their arguments without bringing God into it? By all means, let faith inform one's values, but let reason inform one's public arguments.

It is, I would have to say, a quite valid position – and one to which I personally subscribe. As long as arguments are presented in strictly theological terms, conservatives ought to lose any argument on public policy. Indeed, that is why I am often embarrassed by some of the language in the Texas GOP platform – not because I disagree with the sentiments expressed, but because such a document ought to be a reasoned outline of policy positions rather than a profession of faith.

Take, for example, abortion, which Parker uses to illustrate her position.

They might take a cue from Nat Hentoff, a self-described Jewish-atheist, who has written as eloquently as anyone about the "indivisibility of life" and the slippery slope down which abortion leads.
He uses logic and reason to argue that being pro-life, rather than resolving the religious question of ensoulment, is really a necessary barrier against selective killing, such as when someone else decides it's your time to die.

Even during my days studying for the priesthood, I never made the argument against abortion from a theological point of view. After all, such an argument is easily dismissed with the statement “I believe differently.” The moral argument, however, that a human being exists from conception is difficult to dispute scientifically – and the self-evident importance of defending innocent human life is something that brings most abortion supporters up short. But the moment someone trots out Biblical passages about God knowing us in our mother’s womb, the argument instead becomes one of religious freedom that is difficult to win. The same sort of thing applies in the gay marriage debate as well, which is why the folks who opposed Prop 8 are now actively appealing to religious bigotry in their efforts to overturn a ballot measure supported by virtually every demographic segment in the state of California.

But most importantly, the issue that needs to be dealt with is one of perception, as Parker notes. As long as GOP is seen as a party dominated by one segment of religious believers, the party will alienate many sympathetic to conservative and libertarian political philosophy. That doesn’t mean repudiating the values many of us draw from our faith, but instead requires that we present them in a way that are palatable to our fellow citizens. And I say that as a conservative who is unapologetically Christian – but who is certainly not a Christian Conservative.

But Kathleen – loose the oogedy-boogedy thing. It seems condescending and offensive to me, especially since you can’t particularly explain what you mean by it. Admit you were wrong, apologize, clarify what you meant, and move on – most of us are more than willing to forgive you if you do.

Posted by: Greg at 12:29 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 524 words, total size 3 kb.