Public practice of religious beliefs by a conservative is viewed as corrupting.

Often because they attempt to force their particular religious beliefs on others through legislation David – and often, it seems, because they care more about their beliefs than about equality and justice.

I did not dislike Bush, for the record – In many ways I thought he was a good man, but there is evidence that he misled the American people – why did Bush and Cheney say things that even the bad intelligence of the day did not support? I agree he may not have done it for religious reasons, but I don’t believe that his reasons were selfless either, or that he was doing it for some grand democratic agenda. Why he did it you and I will probably never know, so its probably pointless to speculate –

However, – this article which seems to whine about the treatment some religious conservatives get when they tolerate or foster so much fear-mongering! The anti-gay marriage ads, and the anti-muslim sentiments so prevalent in this country for awhile sure were not coming from the left. These folks may have been screaming because they are passionate about these things but that doesn’t mean the speech isn’t filled with intolerance or prejudice or bigotry.

Concern about the separation of church and state, is mainly verbalized by the left.

From the right, involvement of church and state often involves moral demands on the individual

From the left, involvement of church and state often involves moral and financial demands placed on the individual.

Public practice of religious beliefs by a conservative is viewed as corrupting.

Public practice of religious beliefs by a liberal is viewed as inspiring.

Ultimately, while I am annoyed by the amount of money (and thus political traction) that both sides of the aisle generate with this stuff, I find being amused by it more satisfying that worrying about it. Thankfully it seems to (mostly) balance itself out.

The volume and creatively of logic my four year old can reach when he wants a cookie and doesn’t get it is impressive, but it doesn’t make his argument any more valid. 🙂

Pulling an example from “The Religious Institute” (which a quick visit to their website shows has a statement only 3,300 religious leaders has signed) which claims a multifaith basis and a clear left-of-center bias as his example of misuse of faith is fine. To extrapolate from it that it represents the same views as Ralph Nader and Lawrence O’Donnell to show a double standard is incorrect: I suspect many members of The Religious Institute, while they might not agree with Bush’s decision, would’ve felt “seeking guidance” entirely appropriate. For a double standard to exist, it has to be the *same* standard (by the same person or well-defined group – and “the left” is not a well defined group) applied inequitably.

I doubt Dr. Kengor likes being compared to Nader, but his rhetoric here is similar: as long as Jesus supports my ideology (i.e. told me it’s okay to go to war) then referencing Him is allowed in the public sphere. If He doesn’t (i.e. supports a pro-choice agenda) then it deserves to be labelled inappropriate.

Keep in mind I’m not saying I disagree with Kengor’s views on abortion, merely that he’s engaging in the very double standard he says annoyed him under Bush.