Sermon on the Swamp
Marc Thiessen and Michael Gerson are both conservative
commentators. Some would say, not without reason, that they are both
ultra-conservative. Both write for the Washington
Post.
It is worth noting that the Washington Post is often (inaccurately) demonized by the far-right
as a leftist publication. But one (of many) things that expose this as a lie is
that the Post employs people like
Thiessen and Gerson—the Post is a
professional new organization interested in helping us understand the conflicts
we face and doing that requires us to understand the multiple perspectives in
play.
This is one (of many) reason the criticism of Fox Noise as a
right-wing propaganda outlet is not a lie—they make no effort, zero, of
presenting all sides on the issues we need to understand today. Quite the
opposite.
Anyway, back to the story at hand: understanding why voters
for whom being Christian is the most important part of their identity so
overwhelmingly support the most indecent and crude and unchristian president in
our lifetime.
This question continues to perplex me. I also think it is an
important question for us all to wrestle with thoughtfully and seriously—that is,
without framing it as ‘this confirms what I have always thought’ about either
evangelicals or Trump or voters or democracy.
Below you will find the full text of both Gerson and
Thiessen. Both conservatives. Gerson argues evangelicals have sold their soul
and makes a good case that this will ultimately hurt them and the political
causes they support.
Thiessen does not so much disagree with Gerson as examine the
question from another angle, arguing there are good reasons for evangelicals to
support Trump. He makes a good case and if we extend his logic to loop back to
Gerson, the concrete gains noted are likely to pay enormous political dividends
for evangelicals and the causes they care about for generations to come.
As I see it, a core of the shared argument here is that Trump
appeals to these voters because he voices their grievances. Stating it this way
makes Trump like just about any other politician in kind, if not in degree.
Trump goes beyond voices the grievances of his supporters—he has raised
grievance to a political ideology that validates the sense among many that
their way of life has been under attack and Trump is fighting back for them.
As Gerson (and Perkins) put it, what many see as Trump’s
greatest liability is likely seen by these voters as his greatest strength. His
“approach to public discourse is actually the main selling point. His bullying
— his cruelty, crudity and personal insults — is admired because it is directed
at other bullies.”
In this sense it matters less that he often gets the facts
wrong and more that, right or wrong on the specifics, he is accurately articulating
a grievance-centric world view the animates many voters…and he is willing to
back up his crude and often inaccurate rhetoric with decisive and powerful
action against those seen as the ‘real bullies’ by those who hold this
grievance-centric world view.
See what you think.
Trump
Evangelicals Have Sold Their Souls, Michael Gerson
With their reactions to the Roy Moore candidacy and the Stormy Daniels scandal, the Trump evangelicals
have scaled the heights of hypocrisy to the summit. Family-values conservatives
who dismiss credible accusations of sexual abuse and wink at hush money for a
porn star have ceased to represent family values in any meaningful sense. They
have made a national joke of moral standards that were once, presumably, deeply
held. At least when a Democrat violated them.
My friend Pete Wehner proposes a thought experiment: If a
militant atheist were to design a trap with the goal of discrediting
evangelical Christians, could they do better than Moore and Daniels? It would
take some consideration.
But this barely scratches the surface of the moral
compromises being made. The problem with Trumpism is not only the transparent
excuses it offers (and requires others to accept) for shoddy and offensive
behavior. As I argue in the Atlantic ,
the deeper issue is the distinctly non-Christian substance of President Trump’s
values. His unapologetic materialism. His tribalism and hatred for “the other.”
His strength-worship and contempt for “losers,” which smack more of Nietzsche
than of Christ.
Trump’s nasty mash-up of the power of positive thinking, the
Playboy philosophy and the will to power is a naturally poor fit for religious
conservatives. Or so one would have thought.
Trump evangelicals defend their support for the president in
the pose of political realists. A president, they argue, is not a pastor. A
certain amount of compromise is necessary to get conservative judges and more
favorable treatment of Christian institutions. This is the way of the world.
There are sometimes conflicted political choices in a fallen
world. But this argument would be more credible if so many Trump evangelicals
were not such sycophants. It is one thing to point to the difficult binary
choice between Trump and Hillary Clinton. It is another to provide Trump
political cover in every scandal and offer preemptive absolution of every character
failure.
There is something else at work here than weary
realism — something that Tony Perkins of
the Family Research Council recently clarified. Conservatives, he said, “were
tired of being kicked around by Barack Obama and his leftists. And I think they
are finally glad that there’s somebody on the playground that is willing to
punch the bully.” In this explanation, Trump’s approach to public discourse is
actually the main selling point. His bullying — his cruelty, crudity and
personal insults — is admired because it is directed at other bullies.
This is, perhaps, politically and psychologically
understandable. But it has absolutely nothing to do with the Sermon on the
Mount. Nothing to do with any recognizable version of Christian ethics. The
very thing that should repel evangelicals — Trump’s dehumanization of others —
is what seems to fascinate and attract some conservative Christians. It is yet
another example of discrediting hypocrisy.
The Trump evangelicals are best understood as conservative
political operatives, seeking benefits for their interest group from
politicians who are most likely to provide them. So how good is the quality of
their political advice?
Not particularly good. Identifying evangelicalism with
Trump’s ethno-populism may have some short-term benefits. But public influence
eventually depends on the persuasiveness of public arguments. And close ties to
Trump will eventually be disastrous to causes that evangelicals care about.
Pro-life arguments are discredited by an association with misogyny. Arguments
for religious liberty are discredited by association with anti-Muslim bias.
Arguments for family values are discredited by nativist disdain for migrant
families.
The damage radiates further. Trump evangelicals are blessing
the destruction of public norms on civility, decency and the importance of
public character.
And the ultimate harm is to the reputation of faith itself.
The identification of evangelical Christianity with ethno-nationalism and white
grievance is a grave matter. Evangelical Christians hardly distinguished
themselves during the civil rights movement. Some used Christian academies as a
cover for continued segregation. Getting this issue wrong again would be
particularly damning in a nation — and in Christian churches — growing
inexorably more diverse.
Here are the sources of hope: Evangelicals have a rich
history that includes abolitionists and social reformers to inspire them. They
have a rising generation of leaders — from Pastor Timothy Keller, to the Southern Baptist
Convention’s Russell Moore, to Bishop Claude Alexander, to Bible teacher Beth Moore,
to anti-slavery activist Gary Haugen — who are embracing a different and
better model of social engagement. And they hold to a faith that for two
millennia has survived not only the wrath of its opponents but the cynicism of
its advocates.
Why
Conservative Christians are Sticking with Trump, Marc Thiessen
As "60 Minutes" prepares to air its interview with
adult-film actress Stormy Daniels, conservative Christians are being accused of
hypocrisy. How can so-called "values voters" continue to stand with
President Trump despite revelations that he allegedly had affairs with a porn
star and a Playboy model, and paid them for their silence?
No doubt some Christian leaders have gone too far in
rationalizing Trump's past personal behavior and excusing his offensive
comments while in office. He is a deeply flawed man. But Trump does have one
moral quality that deserves admiration: He keeps his promises.
During the 2016 campaign, Trump pledged to defend religious
liberty, stand up for unborn life and appoint conservative jurists to the Supreme
Court and federal appeals courts. And he has done exactly what he promised. The
abortion-rights lobby NARAL complains that Trump has been
"relentless" on these fronts, declaring his administration "the
worst .?.?. that we've ever seen." That is more important to most
Christian conservatives than what the president may have done with a porn
actress more than ten years ago.
Trump's election came as religious liberty was under
unprecedented attack. The Obama administration was trying to force the Little
Sisters of the Poor to violate their religious conscience and facilitate
payment for abortifacient drugs and other contraceptives. During oral arguments
in the Obergefell v. Hodges case, President Barack Obama's solicitor general
told the Supreme Court that churches and universities could lose their
tax-exempt status if they opposed same-sex marriage.
Hillary Clinton promised to escalate those attacks. In 2015,
she declared at the Women in the World Summit that "religious beliefs ...
have to be changed" -- perhaps the most radical threat to religious
liberty ever delivered by a major presidential candidate. Had Clinton won, she
would have replaced the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia with a liberal
jurist, giving the Supreme Court a liberal judicial-activist majority.
The impact would have been immediate, as the court prepares
to decide two cases crucial to religious liberty.
In Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission,
the Court will soon determine whether the government can compel a U.S. citizen
to violate his conscience and participate in speech that violates his sincerely
held religious beliefs.
In National Institute of Family Life Advocates v. Becerra,
the Court will decide whether the state of California can compel pro-life crisis
pregnancy centers to advertise access to abortion to their clients, in
violation of their conscience.
Those cases are being heard not by five liberals, but five
conservatives, including Justice Neil M. Gorsuch -- because Trump kept his
promise to "appoint justices to the Supreme Court who will strictly
interpret the Constitution and not legislate from the bench."
The president is moving at record pace to fill the federal
appeals courts with young conservative judges who will protect life and
religious freedom for decades. He also fulfilled his promise to defend the
Little Sisters from government bullying, by expanding the religious and
conscience exemption to the Obamacare contraception mandate to cover both
nonprofit and for-profit organizations.
Trump ordered the creation of the Conscience and Religious
Freedom Division at the Department of Health and Human Services to protect the
civil rights of doctors, nurses and other health-care workers who refuse to
take part in procedures such as abortion, reversing an Obama-era policy that
required them to do so. And his Justice Department issued 25-page guidance to
federal agencies instructing them to protect the religious liberty in the
execution of federal law.
While Clinton promised to repeal the Hyde Amendment barring
federal funds for abortion, Trump has been a pro-life champion. He became the
first president to address the March for Life when he spoke by satellite video
from the White House's Rose Garden. He reinstated and expanded the "Mexico
City policy" -- which prohibits U.S. foreign aid from going to groups that
perform or promote abortion. He signed legislation overturning an Obama-era
regulation that prohibited states from defunding abortion service providers.
Indeed, Trump has arguably done more in his first year in
office to protect life and religious freedom than any modern president. Little
wonder that religious conservatives stick with him despite the Daniels
revelations. This is not to say that Christians don't think a culture of
fidelity is important. But the culture of life is important too. So is a
culture that is welcoming to religious believers rather than waging war on
them.
No one upholds Trump as moral exemplar. He is not the most
religious president we have ever had, but he may be the most pro-religion
president. Christian conservatives are judging Trump not by his faith, but by
his works. And when it comes to life and liberty, his works are good.
No comments:
Post a Comment