How the word "hypocrisy" does not explain the politics of the LA sen. on D.C. madam's client list

[marmar]

from OurFuture.org:


Night of the Hunter


By Rick Perlstein on July 10, 2007 - 7:52pm.

The Internets are ablaze with the news that über-family values senator David Vitter of Louisiana was a habitué of a D.C. prostitute. Vitter is a big-time sanctity-of-marriage sort of cat, one who doesn't "believe there's any issue" more important than the proposed Constitutional amendment to "protect the sanctity of traditional marriages," who indeed finds the breakdown of marriage so dangerous to the republic that he spun an elaborate metaphor comparing gay marriage to "the crossroads where Katrina met Rita." He is a "true social conservative," adjudge the ones who know.

Thanks to the great Glenn Greenwald for researching those quotes. But Glenn also makes a mistake common to us liberals when he understands the meaning of this event as "hypocrisy"—saying one thing and believing another. The implication being: How many more examples—beyond politicians like Gingrich, Livingston, Giuliani, and Limbaugh; beyond clergy like Jim Bakker and Ted Haggard—do conservative Christians need before they wake up to the truth: that their leaders' pledges of fealty to the concept of "traditional marriage" are meaningless? And that these leaders, as a body, are worthless, only out for themselves?

The answer is: they will never "wake up." The answer is that conservative Christianity is a culture radically different from that of secular (or even religious) liberalism, and that to understand the political meaning of events like this for its members you have to understand that culture's rules. Most importantly, you must understand its rules about sin and redemption. Which are, at heart, an argument about human nature. "True social conservatives" don't reject their sinners—because we are all sinners. They call upon them to repent. Which suggests an entirely different political dynamic than the one native to the secular (or even religious) liberal mindset.

Ted Haggard, pastor of the massive New Life Church in Colorado Springs and leader of the National Association of Evangelicals, provides the best case study. If you believe, as Haggard does, as do all his followers, and their religious tradition going back to time immemorial, that Satan is real, forever laying siege to the faithful, forever providing us tests of our faith, forever reminding us of mankind's inherently sinful nature--well, then, the kind of leader they will most respect would be the kind of person who feels that reality most intensely, and is able to communicate it most convincingly. ......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://commonsense.ourfuture.org/night_hunter

[Benhurst]

1. Ah, those horny barn-again Christians. Nothing inspires them like seeing their representative

in Congress in full rut.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. I had a conservative friend

who believed she could do whatever she wanted to during the week, because every Sunday she took communion, which "washed away" her sins.

[BOSSHOG]

5. A former shipmate of mine in the Navy

was a steaming, drunken, whoring machine. Gave Sailors a bad name. He's retired now and on wife number four. She turned him on to religion and now he's saved, forgiven, born again and on the fast track to heaven. He'd have to spend months in a Catholic Confessional to share all he has done that a church would think was sinful. But, just like that he's healed, praise the lord.

[Frances]

3. I can't buy this argument

because Clinton repented, but none of the big-name fundamentalist leaders forgave him.

[kenny blankenship]

4. God said it was OK! What is the matter with you?

Would God tell Senator Vitter not to worry about it if it wasn't OK by Him? Obviously not-or maybe you know better than God.
Maybe you are now going to say that you don't believe God told the Senator it was nothing to worry about. Oh great. Now you're calling God a liar: nobody in history has furnished more or better proof that God has spoken to him than Senator Vitter has, yet in this case you choose to play the skeptic and will not believe. So to review: God goes to the trouble of revealing Divine Truth to someone living in the present day--a textbook example of a miracle--but you claim His new word is inauthentic. I'm sure God will be thrilled to learn that He now has an editor.

Whoremongering no longer a big problem--God said it, I believe it. The end.