These days, you can self-identify as anything. For example, Joe Biden identifies as a Roman Catholic, despite the fact that he holds many views–on abortion and LGBT issues, for starters–that are incompatible with his alleged faith. Which is to say, he isn’t Catholic by any objective definition, and by Catholic standards has rendered himself inadmissible for Communion. The only reason he–and plenty of other Democrat politicians–still claim to be Catholic is because it is still an important cultural identifier and is helpful politically. Barack Obama wrote in his memoirs that when he realized he wouldn’t get far in Chicago if he didn’t go to church, he headed off in search of a church. An inspiring faith journey, I’m sure you’ll agree. But that’s why the same Democrats who claim anyone holding to Christian orthodoxy is a hateful bigot still demand that we accept their religious self-identification. It allows them to play their favorite game: “Of course Christians can be pro-abortion–look, we have a pro-abortion Christian right over here! Are you saying he isn’t Christian? How dare you!”
It is well-known that the progressive Democrats despise orthodox Christianity, and most of them make little attempt to hide it. Consider this response to The Atlantic’s Shadi Hamid on Twitter, who rightfully pointed out that a Christian holding to a Christian position is, by definition not news. The young woman responding to him (who has since protected her tweets) is a graduate of Mount Holyoke (2017) and is Joe Biden’s deputy data director for Pennsylvania:
I’d bet a lot of money that this point of view is mainstream amongst Biden staffers. They believe that the fundamental beliefs of orthodox Christianity, Islam, and Judaism on sexuality should be considered “disqualifiers” for the Supreme Court and, presumably, from public office altogether. And why not? They openly state that those who disagree with them on the LGBT agenda are bigots and haters, despite the fact that no nation on earth permitted same-sex marriage prior to 2000. These people want to run America, and they have a very different idea of what America is like than the Founders did.
Now, why would people like that be working to elect Joe Biden if Joe Biden is a Catholic? I think we all know the answer to that.
2 thoughts on “Biden staffer says America is still “relatively intolerant” due to Christianity–and religion should be a “disqualifer” for Supreme Court”
Sam says:
First, say hello to my little friend, the “No True Scotsman”.
Second, Christianity and Catholicism are vast arrays of beliefs with many different positions on a litany of issues, both theological and social.
Third, “Nik” did not say Christians can’t / shouldn’t be elevated to SCOTUS, she said she preferred tolerant figures in power.
Fourth, judging Biden by the views of his campaign’s “Deputy Data Director for Pennsylvania” is a little rich – she has 0 effect on his policy positions.
If you would like, we can judge Trump by his senior advisors – Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, Corey Lewandowski, Stephen Miller, Brad Parscale, Steve Bannon, Sam Clovis, George Papadopoulos – at least 3 of which have landed criminal charges / convictions, one of which barricaded himself in his home on Sunday and had a standoff with police and one that may have been a Russian dupe. If we’re judging candidates by their hires, does that make Trump a criminal and Russian dupe?
First, say hello to my little friend, the “No True Scotsman”.
Second, Christianity and Catholicism are vast arrays of beliefs with many different positions on a litany of issues, both theological and social.
Third, “Nik” did not say Christians can’t / shouldn’t be elevated to SCOTUS, she said she preferred tolerant figures in power.
Fourth, judging Biden by the views of his campaign’s “Deputy Data Director for Pennsylvania” is a little rich – she has 0 effect on his policy positions.
If you would like, we can judge Trump by his senior advisors – Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, Corey Lewandowski, Stephen Miller, Brad Parscale, Steve Bannon, Sam Clovis, George Papadopoulos – at least 3 of which have landed criminal charges / convictions, one of which barricaded himself in his home on Sunday and had a standoff with police and one that may have been a Russian dupe. If we’re judging candidates by their hires, does that make Trump a criminal and Russian dupe?
You’re not going to need to spend a whole lot of time persuading me that Trump is swampy.