The things you learn. For instance, that there is such a thing as a “bloxicon”. Cute.
This here is the latest in one branch of the “whither conservatism” debate (call it the G-D subdebate). It may be me, but I’m having some trouble following her argument. Seems to be going back and forth a bit, without ever coming out and saying simply what seems to be her point: That religious zealots make her skin crawl. (The closest she gets is: “It isn’t so much God causing the GOP problems; it’s his fan club.”)
I know how it’s like. A lot of them make mine do exactly that, as I’ve explained before. I’m not against religion, but I tend not to associate with those who can’t resist talking about it even when religion isn’t anywhere near the subject at hand. I don’t mind sharing a political philosophy with the religious, not one bit. But it’s true that some of them aren’t always helping the cause with their presentation (sort of like Stéphane Dion that way).
But here’s the thing I don’t get: If, say, the GOP (or here, the Tories) did shed their oogedy-boogedy types, but kept conservatives who, like me, do not use religion to explain their position on social policy, would it really make these parties more acceptable to more moderate voters? I don’t think so. I’m pretty sure pro-choicers don’t care why I’m against abortion. They only care that I’m against abortion.
Yes, religion is here to stay. So are the religious, whether I like them or not. I can’t keep them out of my political philosophy, and they sure can’t exclude me either. We just have to learn to co-exist nicely. Find common grounds (for instance: it’s wrong to terminate the lives of innocent and vulnerable beings not just because life is a gift from God but because no society where the weak and innocent aren’t protected can call itself civilized) and move from there.
Wouldn’t that be more useful than arguing over which one of us has the best neologism for the bloxicon?
____________________________
Andrea adds: I’ve had my fair share of run ins with overzealous Christians, to be sure. (My favourite was on campus, when a girl sat down next to me and asked me if I was Christian. I said yes. She said, really? And proceeded with her spiel anyway. One thing worse than someone trying to convert you is someone testing you because they don’t believe you are already converted… But I digress.) In my experience, secular libertarians aren’t always exactly hootin’ hollering fun. They feel absolutely zero impetus to clamp down on the God is Dead rhetoric—and what with the zeitgeist being on their side and all, continue through by making progressively more idiotic comparisons between God and Santa Claus, fairy tales, imaginary friends, religion is bad/manipulative for children! Bla bla bla. You can often barely get a word in, not even to slide in an excuse to get away, say to the loo. We have to get over it. People are people. And there are strange ones on every team.
That was a long-winded way of saying yes, we do all have to get along.
_______________________________
Tanya chuckles a little: But see, Brigitte, the thing is that you’re a minority here. A non-religious conservative? What are there, like 27 of you?
I agree that it’s hardest of all to get along with the oogedy-boogedy ones, but there are a heck of alot of them. I’ve been referred to as oogedy-boogedy myself a few times…what can you do? Stick to your guns and try to come off less creepy next time, I guess. (But, alas, one man’s creepy is another man’s…you get the gist of it.)
by 
Leave a Reply