Sorry--I had to do "Palin" word play, and that was the best I could manage. It won't happen again. At least, not in this post.
So... in case you haven't heard, some on the left (my side, by the way) want the media to question Sarah Palin hard and in detail about her possible ties to the Third Wave/Joel's Army movement--specifically, they want her to reveal, once and for all, her intentions regarding the end of the world. As in, if she becomes VP, does she plan to use her office to bring it about? The end of the world, I mean. Just what are her End Times policies?
Questions like that. Someone suggested Bill Moyers to do the interview, though Art Bell seems like a better choice to me.
In other words, we're (the left) up to our usual Oh-my-God-somebody-mentioned-God dumbness. Last time, it was Obama with his talk of faith-based initiatives--before that, it was Nancy Pelosi revealing to the press that she (gasp!) prays. Palin's Assembly of God association, of course, has caused far more progressive consternation (and it does seem to be progressing), but the root issue is the same. That issue being the left's determination to use religion as a metaphor for 1) the Religious Right, 2) everything and anything conservative, 3) "organized" religion, 4) uncoolness, 5) mind control, 6) etc.
That is, the left has programmed itself to assume a sarcastic, superior, preachy, and generally hostile posture whenever the subjects of religion, God, prayer, the end of the world, the Bible, Word Records, or Little Marcy comes up in print or speech. As a result, the general public has assumed that the left is anti-God. And why wouldn't they? Sure, we aren't, but because we've worked so hard to create that impression, we've earned everything that goes with it. Including lost votes, talking points for the right, and so on.
Our anti-God stance is a fashion statement. It's how we distinguish us from them. It's a knee-jerk ritual, and few of us spend two seconds thinking about the harm we're causing with such a posture. After all, as richard dawkins and sam harris point out, why treat religion as some sacred subject (no pun intended)? Why can't we speak critically of faith? Never mind that we've been doing just that for several years now, and nonstop, and with no one ending up in prison, the nearest river, Hell, or Alaska.
