Archive for October 26th, 2009

This could be the real significance of last week’s invitation. What’s being interpreted, for now, as an intra-Christian skirmish may eventually be remembered as the first step toward a united Anglican-Catholic front — not against liberalism or atheism, but against Christianity’s most enduring and impressive foe.

I need to put that quote from Douthat’s most recent op-ed in the New York Times in context so it makes sense. Douthat sees Pope Benedict’s move to bring Anglicans in England back to the Catholic Church not as an attempt at Christian unity or an effort to increase the size of the Catholic Church. Douthat believes it was done so that Christianity is better equipped to stand against “Christianity’s most enduring and impressive foe,” which is Islam.

“Wait,” you say. “I don’t get it. I thought you were going to put that quote into context so it would make sense, but that makes absolutely no sense.” I agree. That makes no sense to me.

Part of the evidence he uses to support this claim is that the Pope said, three years ago, that Islam may not be compatible with the Western way of reason. So non-Catholics that want to take an active role against 1.5 billion of the world’s population will join the Catholic Church for holy war.

Seriously? Glenn Greenwald has a response to this op-ed. He points out how ridiculous it is to turn to a group that believes in papal infallibility, tries to keep birth control out of areas of poverty, AIDS, and overpopulation. The main point is that religious extremism in general isn’t in line with Western reason. Greenwald points out that the Texas GOP wishes to criminalize all sex between homosexual adults (among several other things). Also, are torture, rendition, and non-prosecution in line with Western reason?

Then you have to wonder just how Douthat thinks Christians will meet this “challenge.” What exactly is he advocating? Kicking them out of Europe? Making their religion illegal? It seems like anything he would be advocating would go against Western reason.

Enjoy holy war, I guess.

Adam Feser

Update – The Senate has included the public option with an opt-out clause in their bill. Public Option in Senate Bill

Democrats remain optimistic about the public option, and even John McCain accepts that it will pass. The main question now is what form it will take.

It is starting to seem likely that an opt-out clause will be included. This would allow states to opt out of the public option. Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) seemed to favor this option. It is likely because this would allow him to appease both Democrats and his more conservative constituency.

It is also likely that there will eventually be a vote on the public option trigger based on economic conditions, which is an idea favored by the lone Republican that may vote in favor of the plan, Olympia Snowe (R-ME).

Regardless of where you stand on the public option and which type you like, there are a lot of interesting possibilities and parliamentary maneuvers coming. Which plan would be the most likely to get sixty votes in the Senate? Just how badly do they want Snowe on board? Will Blue Dog Democrats in the House have a bigger say than the more liberal contingent? It will be interesting to see how this shapes up.

Enjoy the myriad possibilities.

Adam Feser