So many leftist blows reign down on our society in the average week, it is difficult for this columnist to keep up. It is a challenge to write a column that is current because everything in the culture seems to be changing at once. This column is based on an event from just a week ago and yet seems somehow dated. Perhaps I should have written regarding the Mitch McConell/Ashley Judd fiasco. (An event which should be more about Watergate revisited much more than about anything said in a supposedly private conversation.) Certainly, the horrid partial birth abortion trial of Kermit Bosnell deserves its own column (and it will get one from this writer very soon). Still, the issue of homosexual marriage and the denial of core values could point us to a more encompassing “root cause” of these other problems.
That being said, I share with you the following letter that I sent to Bill O’Reilly. The letter was ignored by him and his staff. Perhaps publication in this larger format will get their attention.
You consistently challenge your guests to “tell me where I am wrong”. Well, you are wrong on the homosexual marriage issue in a number of areas.
1. The derisive “Bible thump” comment (for which you would have scolded a conservative as being a “bomb thrower”), your condescension to Dennis Miller which made him visibly and righteously angry a couple of weeks ago when you accused him of making arguments against Obama that were ideological and not fact based, and the arrogant and condescending treatment of Dr. Robert Jeffress during his recent appearance (do you actually believe you know the Bible better than this pHD Theologian?), indicate a bias on your part against Christians or anyone who bases their views on an ideology. Such a bias is only valid if the ideology under discussion is flawed. You assume that a Christian faith based argument is an intellectually inferior argument.
2. You continually draw a moral equivalency between the extreme left and what you categorize as the “extreme right”. First of all the people that you try to pigeon hole into the “extreme right” category do not fit the description. Second, there is no equivalency between say Chris Matthews and Rush Limbaugh.
3. You do not accurately demonstrate the facts when you say that you have “no feud” with Limbaugh and other radio talk hosts. You may not mention them by name but you consistently write off all their arguments as frivolous by lumping them all together and using the derisive term “right wing bomb throwers”. Everyone knows who you are referring to when you do that. I have been a loyal viewer for years and I have heard you make dozens of thinly veiled comments of this type regarding conservatives.
4. You presume a position of intellectual and moral superiority for your own arguments that doesn’t exist in reality. Your assumptions stem from your firm, unyielding, and often stubborn insistence on occupying the mushy middle. In so doing you render yourself intellectually dishonest because you borrow from the capital of conservatism and Christianity where and when it suits you. I will give you a specific example relating to gay marriage.
You claim to argue from a non-Biblical point of view regarding heterosexual marriage? However, if you say that heterosexual marriage is for the good of society, then why is it good for society? (Answer: because God’s Biblical model for marriage is best.) If you say that no civilization in 6000 years has accepted homosexual marriage then why haven’t they? (See the answer above). Granted, these societies may not acknowledge that they are basing their mores on God’s natural law, but that is in fact what they are doing even if it may be unwittingly.
I often use the argument that words have meaning. The word marriage has a definition. If we start randomly changing the definition of words, then society suffers. Still, marriage was given meaning precisely because of the standard of reference of God’s moral absolutes. Relativism is relativism precisely because it denies the existence of God and his moral law.
If you throw these Bible based arguments out of the discourse under the pretense that they are ideological then all you are left with is Bill O’Reilly’s opinion, which opinion has no more and no less value than the opinion of any pro-homosexual marriage proponent. Ideological arguments only err if they are based on an inaccurate or harmful ideology.