EJ Dionne: You Should Totally Practice Religious Peace And Tolerance, Christians

It’s cute that Leftists typically want to separate Church and State,and are upset by religions in public….well, the Christian religion. They are typically A-OK with Islamic stuff not only in public, but in government owned buildings. But, they seem to love to attempt to use Christianity for their own purposes, especially when they have a Narrative to push. Here’s the Washington Post’s E.J. Dionne, creating a subtext for, well, you’ll see

If you preach religious peace and tolerance, then practice them


This will not be the first or the last Christmas when the world mocks the day’s promise and when religion finds itself a source of violence, hatred and, among many not inclined toward either, a dangerous mutual incomprehension.

Killing in the name of God is not a new thing in history, and nothing does more to discredit faith. Believers regularly argue that religion is often invoked as a cover to justify violence carried out for reasons of politics, economics and power that have nothing to do with God. There is truth to this — and also to the idea that in the 20th century, secular forms of totalitarianism unleashed mass murder on an unprecedented scale.

This is meant both to subtly condemn Christianity and say that the violent Islamists aren’t really Islamic.

We are now focused on the thoroughly ungodly violence of the Islamic State, but Sacks is careful to document that wars of religion are not unique to Islam. He believes that to persuade religious people of the Abrahamic faiths — Judaism, Christianity and Islam — arguments against religious violence must be rooted in theology, not in secular ideas alone. These have to do with the nature of God. “When religion turns men into murderers,” he insists, “God weeps.”

Notice that first he states that ISIS is not religious, then equates what ISIS does with Judaism and Christianity. So, what to do?

Sacks argues for a separation of religion from power because religion and politics “are inherently different activities.” This is tricky, since many of the genuinely ethical norms that religious people bring to public life are rooted in their faith. Nonetheless, he is surely right that religion “is at its best when it relies on the strength of argument and example. It is at its worst when it seeks to impose truth by force.”

Dionne is using yet another hardcore Leftist to argue for removing religion from Public Spaces, because ISIS is evil, meaning Christianity must be punished.

And the strength of example must mean that those who preach religious peace and toleration should practice them. This is why the rank prejudice being shown against Muslims, usually for political reasons, is so destructive, as Cardinal Seán O’Malley, the archbishop of Boston, argued in a powerful column this month in his diocesan newspaper.

See? It’s all the fault of Christians. When will Islamists be exhorted to show peace and toleration? Oh, wait, can’t do that in Liberal World. Everything is the fault of the United States and Christians in their world.

And there is an important lesson in the Christmas story that, God willing, will be heard from many pulpits. “As we mull over the debate about refugees, let us remember the doors that were closed in the face of Mary and Joseph in Bethlehem,” O’Malley said. “We must ask our leaders to be vigilant and protect our citizens, but at the same time we cannot turn our back on so many innocent people who are hungry, homeless, and without a country.”

It’s cute how Dionne, a confirmed Christian religion hater, uses religious words to advocate for unfettered immigration.

Muslims are constantly called upon to condemn violence. One who has done so consistently is Eboo Patel, an American whose argument in his book “Acts of Faith” parallels the lessons from Rabbi Sacks and Cardinal O’Malley.

“To see the other side, to defend another people, not despite your tradition but because of it, is the heart of pluralism,” Patel writes. “We have to save each other. It’s the only way to save ourselves.”

In other words, what can Christians do to help out with the hardcore Islamists. We’re supposed to “see their side”. Considering how their side treats women and gays, one would think Leftists would be against radical Islam. Perhaps one of them can explain why women and gays are thrown in the trashheap when Islam comes up.

This idea is worthy of the good news in Luke where an angel tells us: “Do not be afraid.”

Huh. Liberals have conniption fits over the Biblical passage which includes those words and is included in A Charlie Brown Christmas. They do not want it shown on TV nor in school plays. They have fits over representations of the birth of the person those words refer to, constantly suing or threatening to sue manger scenes, especially if they are on government (ie, owned by The People) property.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “EJ Dionne: You Should Totally Practice Religious Peace And Tolerance, Christians”

  1. Jeffery says:

    Mr. Dionne, quoting Rabbi Sacks and Cardinal O’Malley, makes the point that hatred, bigotry and discrimination against all Muslims based on the actions terrorists, while understandable, harms us all.

    “One of the most pernicious effects of terrorism is that it can instill prejudices and group hatred in people’s hearts and minds,” ,Archbishop> O’Malley wrote. “All of us are horrified by the evil perpetrated by radical terrorists, but we must not let their inhumanity rob us of our humanity.”

    Said Sacks: … religion “is at its best when it relies on the strength of argument and example. It is at its worst when it seeks to impose truth by force.”

    William uses Dionne’s call for peace to attack others for thinking different from William, the ‘true victim’ today. With each day, William becomes more dishonest, more evil. Today every interjection that William makes between the quoted content is a lie. And on Christmas Eve.

  2. gitarcarver says:

    William uses Dionne’s call for peace to attack others for thinking different from William, the ‘true victim’ today.

    When Dionne characterizes Christianity, his statements should be attacked. We all know that you hate Christians as well, so it is not surprising that you side with Dionne.

    Furthermore, while Dionne says he likes the “peace” of the Christmas story, he misses the violence and threat of violence that was lurking.

    Matthew 2

    13 When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. “Get up,” he said, “take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.”

    14 So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, 15 where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.”[c]

    16 When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 17 Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:

    18 “A voice is heard in Ramah,
    weeping and great mourning,
    Rachel weeping for her children
    and refusing to be comforted,
    because they are no more.”[d]

    Gee, no wonder Jeffery and Dionne fail to remember that part of the story which certainly must have terrified people and seemed like terror. Then again, Jeffery does love the death and blood of children on his hands.

    With each day, William becomes more dishonest, more evil.

    The depth of Jeffery’s argument is that people who disagree with him are evil.

    Of course, the hypocrisy here is that Jeffery wants his religion and cult of AGW to be followed without question. He wants the governments from around the world to force his beliefs on others.

    And this isn’t even something that happens just on Christmas Eve. Jeffery wants people to be under his religion all year long.

  3. Jeffery says:

    So if anyone “characterizes” Christianity, they should be attacked. Got it. Sort of like attacking those that characterize Muhammad. You hypersensitive, far-right, Christianist, conservative, mind-reading victims attribute to writers what they didn’t write!

    Again. The call was to not give in to the easy and understandable hatred of the “other”.

    William lied at every turn and claimed the mantle of victimhood for himself and the Christianists. That is evil.

    I don’t hate Christianity, although I do push back against the actions of Christian bullies who try to impose their beliefs on non-believers. You want a crèche on your private property? I support that! Do you want my taxes to pay for it? No thanks.

    Professional Christianist “victimologists” like you and William (and the FOX corporation) breathlessly lie about how non-far-right Christians and non-believers are oppressing your vocal (and sometimes violent) minority. Waah!

    We get it. Uber-right Christianist conservatives want their own US-based caliphate. You would love to blend the government and your religion. Ban Gays. Ban abortion. Ban Muslims. Force others to recite your prayers in public schools. Post your credos in schools, courts, libraries. Teach X-ianist principles in public schools (no science!). Government support for religious schools. We get it. You want your own caliphate, so you build and attack straw men.

    The problem with religious extremists, whether Islamist or Christianist, is their insistence that others abide by their beliefs.

    Religionists hate others who don’t believe the way they do because the existence of non-believers threaten the religionists whole being.

Pirate's Cove