Kathleen Parker Stands Down On War On Social Conservatives

At least some. She has a column here that in many parts makes good sense at Them Oogedy-Boogedy Blues

Ramesh Ponnuru I think responds well to two her criticisms at Parker Retreats

Let me go and add to the points that Ponnuru makes

........That’s a start, but let’s take it another step. 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.That was and remains my point. It isn’t so much God causing the GOP problems; it’s his fan club.The broad perception among centrists, moderates, conservative Democrats, renegade Republicans, etc., is that the GOP is the party of white Christians to the exclusion of others, some of whom might also be social conservatives.

I think the point of the fan club causing problems at time is true. Social Conservatives are not perfect in this regard but does not every group have similar folks that are not best spokespeople? I am first off not a big fan of the term "religious right" because I think it is becoming a useless term that now has too mnay people lumped under it. But since it is in use here I shall proceed.

One problem of course that obscure members fo the "religious right" that most people do not even know about suddenly become Leading Spokespeople for the religious right. The media appoints them for some strange reason. Sort of how the media anointed Kathleen Parker (who I had barely taken notice of) as a leading conservative opposed to Governor Palin

A good example was in 2006 and the Evangelist Ted Haggard Scandal out in Colorado Springs. Suddenly I am reading LEADING RELIGIOUS RIGHT LEADER IN GAY SEX SCANDAL. I think many social Conservatives outside Colorado were going who?

Other religious right leaders that at times can be taxing have really passed off the scene and many people are not taking notice of much at least as to social conservatives. Pat Robertson is a big example of this. His day has sort of come and gone but the media treats him at times like it is still 1988.

As Ponnouru points out Social conservatives have and been doing NON BIBLICAL arguments for some time. Can it be done better and more often? Of course. However it should be noted the best people that do this can rarely get on TV or get a shot by the media. The Media much more wants the more sensational folks. Like Hagee.

Also speaking from a Catholic viewpoint we have some pretty big guns we can bring to bear on this. However they never get invited on TV or are talked about in the media. Why is that?

Further as I have pointed out it would be helpful if Social Conservative people running for Office did not have that the only thing about them discussed. See Huckabee and especially Governor Palin.

She states:
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.

I have to state I think the major people of the year that were talking about "ensoulment" in defense of the their positions were not people of the "religious right" but the current Vice President Elect and Speaker Pelosi.

But as a regular matter I think RP is right when he states states:

But most pro-lifers agree with this too! The National Right to Life Committee doesn't base its arguments on ensoulment; my book on the life issues, widely praised by pro-lifers, does not advance a single theological argument or differ in any significant respect from the argument that Hentoff makes; the Catholic Church doesn't even base its argument for protecting the unborn on Scripture or any doctrine about ensoulment; the Human Life Review runs Hentoff all the time.

There seems to be a lot of talk about "white evangelicals" you know those scary folks. The fact that white evangelicals are all over the political spectrum seems to never be a obvious fact to people. On the conservative side these folks went all over the place in the 08 GOP primary.

We are not losing blacks and Hispanics and other because they are sacred of someone that is going to the First Baptist Church of Bossier City Louisiana.

Anyway I think the tone and the whole argument Mrs Parker is presenting is a lot more better than what we saw just weeks ago.At least I think these are some valid areas of discussion. Though I still think it is folly in a year where Social Conservatives Issues played little National Importance as a part of the debate or other hot button issue (like guns) to blame 08 and the loss on social conservatives