A Christian reviews "Godless" by Ann Coulter
I'm still processing Ann Coulter's book. It seems to be a direct assault on my core beliefs.
I probably won't have a copy over here in the Middle East for some time but, thankfully, large portions are excerpted on the web. All the following quotes are from Chapter One.
Coulter's beef does not seem to be with liberal Christianity. In her fantasy world, liberalism is a religion battling with Christianity. Christianity is indistinct from conservatism.
Liberals love to boast that they are not "religious," which is what one would expect to hear from the state-sanctioned religion. Of course liberalism is a religion. It has its own cosmology, its own miracles, its own beliefs in the supernatural, its own churches, ...
Her premise is just plain false.
Lots of liberals are religious. I'm surprised she didn't notice that since the conservative Christians I know are acutely aware of the liberal church.
There are whole liberal denominations and there are large liberal wings of mainstream denominations. There is even a liberal wing of the evangelical movement -- roughly 25%.
There are millions of liberal Christians not to mention the millions of liberals who are religious/pious/spiritual in some other-than-Christian way.
With the founding premise of her book being clearly wrong, it makes it hard to analyze her arguments point-by-point.
But here goes:
Liberals hate science and react badly to it. They will literally run from the room, lightheaded and nauseated, when told of data that might suggest that the sexes have different abilities in math and science.
Does this square with what all of us have followed in the news? The teaching of evolution? The science of global warming? The age of the earth? Stem cell research? The funding of scientific research?
Environmentalists want mass infanticide, zero population growth, reduced standards of living, and vegetarianism. The core of environmentalism is that they hate mankind.
Again, does this square with your observation of environmentalists? Does it square with you? Probably you want clean air and water. Probably you want nature to thrive and the oceans to be full of life. Do you also want mass infanticide? Do you hate mankind? Of course not. Coulter's claim is really stupid.
Liberals want us to live like Swedes, with their genial, mediocre lives, ratcheting back our expectations, practicing fuel austerity, and sitting by the fire in a cardigan sweater like Jimmy Carter.
There may be some truth to this. I would compare this to the conservatives who want us to live like Pakistanis... hundreds of millions of minimum wage workers and a few hundred billionaires.
They believe in the coarse physical appropriation of women by men--hookups, trophy wives, strip clubs. Through movies, magazines, and TV, liberals promote a cult of idealized beauty that is so extreme as to be unimaginable.
This comes from a woman who wears a micro-mini dress to the morning talk shows!
Sex must be dissociated from the idea of raising children, liberated from the transmission of humanity. It’s a natural function that should carry no more moral consequence than drinking a glass of water,
I guess she assumes this because liberals usually believe in sex education, treatment of venereal disease and availability of birth control. Many conservatives consider these things an invitation to promiscuity.
It is fair to say that most liberals believe sex is more than making babies. It is about intimacy and bonding... ideally in marriage. Ideally but not always.
We accept that sex often happens outside of marriage. I'll go out on a limb here... I'm guessing that even Ann Coulter has sex outside of marriage. If she does, I hope she uses a condom. Does that make me condone her promiscuity? I don't think so. Certainly Ann's sexual behavior has consequences.
Instead of seeking wisdom, liberals desire to be seen as clever by being counterintuitive, crazy, and outré.
Doesn't this better describe Coulter herself? She does loves shocking people with her crazy, counterintuitive zingers. (I have no idea what "outré" means but Coulter sure must be clever for using it.)
They have an irreducible fascination with barbarism and will defend anything hateful... If Hitler hadn’t turned against their beloved Stalin, liberals would have stuck by him, too.
This is the kind of statement that qualifies as "crazy" (and maybe "outré.") Do you know a single liberal who loves Stalin? -- perhaps in some weird fringy wing of liberalism just like you can find neo-Nazis in weird fringy wings of conservatism.
But liberals have the entire taxpayer-funded "education" apparatus to support them. Public schools are what columnist Joe Sobran calls "liberalism’s reproductive system."
Yes, most liberals deeply value education don't also conservatives? It should be pointed out that, well into adulthood, Coulter chose to go to a taxpayer-funded university.'
Public schools are forbidden from mentioning religion not because of the Constitution, but because public schools are the Left’s madrassas.
More of that crazy, counter-intuitive, outré talk! Liberals have no problem with neutral education about religion. It's using the public schools to propagate or favor one religion we object to. It's just crazy (and perhaps outré) to liken this to a madrassa which teaches Islam and only Islam.
Liberals used to tell us they were teaching fisting to fourth-graders because "kids are going to have sex anyway!" (Yes, "fisting" is exactly what it sounds like; have a nice day!) Now they’ve dispensed with that and openly concede that they believe virtue is just one of many equally valid points of view that must be counterbalanced with the argument for promiscuity, group sex, fisting, and other lifestyle choices.
I have one comment about this: Ewwww!
I held my nose and Googled "fisting fourth-graders teach" which gave me a circular reference back to Ann Coulter. (and probably set off an alarm at the FBI)
Ann! This is just creepy!
And I'm worn out. I feel dirty just reading her book. If I get the energy, I'll review more, later.