Conservative Heritage Times

             CHRISTIAN VOTERS GRUDGINGLY EMBRACE PETER SINGER CAMPAIGN 

 J.D. Salyer

 INN Correspondent

March 26, 2007

The discussion about Rudy Giuliani’s presidential campaign has been swept aside by the startling buzz about the latest Republican candidate:  Princeton philosophy professor Peter Singer.

 

            At first glance Singer’s announcement that he has become a Republican and seeks the GOP presidential nomination seems to make little sense.  The eccentric philosopher does, after all, advocate granting silverback-gorillas with metaphysical and legal status equal to that of human beings, is openly contemptuous of the right to gun-ownership, and supports the ongoing extermination of 4,000 children per day via abortion. 

 

Hence his stances on social issues stand in stark contrast to those of his more right-wing competitor Giuliani:  The conservative New York City mayor has never once lent support to the silverback-gorilla lobby.

 

            Yet unlike Giuliani, Singer has yet to cohabitate with homosexuals — a fact that has attracted admiration from cultural-conservative circles and the various corporate-subsidized pundits who speak on behalf of God Almighty.

 

            On the grassroots level enthusiasm for Singer is growing as well.

 

            “Sure, I have my reservations about him… he holds some troubling positions, like the legalization of infanticide,” says born-again Christian Larry Taylor from his backporch in Frederick, Maryland.  “But in these troubled times we as Christians can’t afford to be so bound up in making litmus tests for a candidate.”

 

In other words, Taylor goes on, if both the Republican and Democratic candidate were servants of Satan, the role of a Christian is not so much to get hung up on ideological purity, but rather “to discern – with the help of the Holy Spirit – which of the two candidates is less enthusiastic about that service.”

 

Adds Taylor:  “I’ll wait till I find out how Singer stands regarding the War on Terror – if he’s strong on homeland defense then I’ll definitely vote for him, all other issues aside.”

 

Not all voices are so enthusiastic, however – some fanatical-extremists have argued that a Singer nomination might justify the perverse (and, according to Taylor, arguably blasphemous per sola scriptura theology) measure of casting their ballots for a third party.  Taylor dismisses such radicalism.

 

“As a Bible-believer I adhere to the Gospel, which means I can’t in good conscience vote for a third party — because that means I would be turning my back on a potentially successful Republican candidate simply because his principles violently go against the teachings of Jesus Christ.” 

Patting his 6-year old daughter on the head, Taylor notes that in practical terms “the Republican Party is slightly slowing America’s ongoing rush toward Sodom, which means that the day of reckoning will be put off till after I’m dead, God willing.”

 

Additionally, he observes that the best way to ensure the Republican Party remains true to its social-conservative commitments is for Christian voters to greet any and all Republican nominees with servile, unconditional support.  It takes strong faith, but he contends that such faith is a duty:  “Very, verily, how can I believe in the God I haven’t seen unless I believe in the GOP I have seen?  (Limbaugh 3: 22)”

 

Taylor cites last year’s case of Republican governor Bob Ehrlich, who fired a state employee for having expressed the belief that homosexuality goes against Christian teaching.

 

“Ehrlich only fired the man and went out of his way to condemn the homophobia of Christians,” he expounds.  “So it’s not like he fed the guy to the lions in a Colosseum or anything, which is what one of those leftist liberal Democratic governors would have done.”

 

Although deeply religious, Taylor’s small-town common-sense is still alive, which warns him to avoid idealistic absurdity.

 

“It’s one thing to believe in Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt, or accepting the Trinity – it’s another thing entirely to listen to wild-eyed loonies who claim that there is an alternative to a centralized two-party system,” says Taylor, shaking his head in bewildered frustration at the weakness and folly of men.  “Sure, with God all things are possible.  But that doesn’t mean we should throw away our votes on some pathetic-quixotic loser. Give us Barabbas – er, I mean Giuliani. Er, I mean Singer.”

 

In contrast to Taylor, young urban professional Sam Sneed of Washington, D.C., is Catholic vice Protestant.  And so he reserves judgment on the Singer campaign until Church authorities such as David Frum issue a decree on the matter.

 

But in his own way Sneed is, like Taylor, just as committed to the Gospel.  His fidelity toward the teachings of National Review is a striking contrast to the cynical skepticism so prevalent in mainstream American culture.

 

Unfortunately his busy vocation as a professional conservative of the Beltway leaves Sneed little time to follow the nuts-and-bolts of politics:  His exhaustingly long workdays consist of nodding his head vigorously, taking notes of what Very Important People say, and diligently cleaning their boots with his tongue — which leaves the aspiring functionary with little energy for less-contemplative studies of culture and society.

 

Yet he is willing to make a few thoughtful, cautious reflections.

 

“Well, at least Singer has an Ivy League education,” Sneed observes as he sips a five-dollar cappuccino in a Georgetown coffee-shop.  “So from one angle his class interests are similar to mine – er, I mean, his commitment to knowledge meshes well with the glorious cause of Christian tradition.

 

A tradition which — as anyone familiar with C.S. Lewis’ thesis of ‘Men Without Chests’ knows – is centered upon the invisible hand of a detached and sequestered managerial-elite gently guiding benighted serfs and peasants from the cradle to the grave, guiding them toward salvation via mass-marketing and consumerism.”

 

He admits, of course, that Sneed is not the ideal candidate from a Catholic perspective.

 

“But then, who is?”  demands Sneed combatively.  “We can’t let cafeteria-Catholics who rationalize heretical voting for pro-choice Democrats have their way. And they will have their way, unless we all learn to recognize that politics is the art of knowing which way the wind is blowing.”

 

Sneed also notes that Singer’s philosophy ultimately supports the progressive utilitarian theme of modern America, which makes him preferable to less grounded thinkers, such as those in the paleoconservative movement.

 

“And at least he’s not some nutty devotee of the American South like Flannery O’Connor, or like some of the less reputable pontiffs of the Church,” he muses.

 

              Deeply devoted to dabbling in the ornamental side of Catholic tradition, Sneed admits that Roman Catholicism has some historical ties to the Southland, but then explains that such ties should not be taken too seriously:

 

“Of course I’ve explored a lot of really challenging and revolutionary ideas thanks to, say, Pius IX – like, ‘religion is good’, ‘gay marriage isn’t’, and ‘art is nice’, but …. well, I’m afraid he also had a lot of wacky notions as well. He was definitely not 100% solid. He was bamboozled by experience – having met Southern gentlemen, he fell under the delusion that Southern gentlemen exist.”

 

The young man concedes generously:  “But it’s hardly the fault of Pius if he didn’t understand the right way to regard Southerners.  He was a dreamer.  He wasn’t blessed with the wisdom and objectivity that comes from being a twenty-something member of an affluent and privileged circle of political operatives in C.E. 2007.”

 

Both Taylor and Sneed are steeled for the possibility that the Democrats will win the next election regardless of who the Republican National Committee puts forward.

 

Yet regardless of doctrinal differences, both Protestant and Catholic are bound together by a creed of hope.

 

Ecumenically-united by their faith in GOP, they take the long-term, big-picture view:  Whoever wins the next election, contends Taylor, sooner or later the Beltway ring of power will return to the proper hands of the officially-sanctioned conservative establishment, and America will be able to resume the course of national greatness set by the Bush administration.

 

“Dinners at chic restaurants, big-name conferences, meeting people-who-matter at cocktail-parties… no matter what, we must preserve the precious … yes, we must, gollum, gollum,” concludes Sneed with pensive optimism.

 

 

“THE IMPERIAL NEWS NETWORK:  BRINGING THE GLORIOUS

LIGHT OF PROGRESS TO YOUR PITIFULLY-BACKWARD LITTLE

                        CORNER OF THE HEGEMONY”

 

7 Responses to “DON’T BLAME ME, I VOTED FOR SARUMAN”

1. Filmer on 26 Mar 2007 at 7:55 pm #

   “It’s one thing to believe in Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt, or accepting the Trinity – it’s another thing entirely to listen to wild-eyed loonies who claim that there is an alternative to a centralized two-party system,” says Taylor, shaking his head in bewildered frustration at the weakness and folly of men.

   That is hilarious.

2. Bede on 26 Mar 2007 at 11:44 pm #

   Great satire! It’s unbelievable how these so-called Christians will bend backwards to support liberal Republicans. “Well, he’s a Republican, ain’t he? That’s good enough for me (and Jesus).”

3. Bede on 26 Mar 2007 at 11:47 pm #

   It’s no wonder that the Israel lobby calls Christians their “useful idiots.”

4. Chuck on 27 Mar 2007 at 2:42 am #

   Just shut up and vote Republican already….. You know you want to….. Or would you rather let BeelzeHillary win?

5. Filmer on 27 Mar 2007 at 3:03 am #

   Chuck, are you being serious or just kidding?

6. Maquisard on 27 Mar 2007 at 2:24 pm #

   Brilliant satire! We dissident, libertarian, paleo-Conservative freedom-lovers (or whatever you want to call us) have found our own P.J. O’Rourke in J.D. Salyer.

7. Al Doyle on 28 Mar 2007 at 8:34 pm #

   This is satire? It sounds like current reality among clueless, naive evangelicals. Great writing.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (hidden) (required)

Website