Tuesday, September 21, 2004

JUST FOR FUN

Though my doctor (who also happens to be my lawyer) has strongly advised me to ignore the rantings of theocratic conservatives, this column by Dennis Prager is just so overflowing with stupidity that I simply can't resist.

To understand the worldwide ideological battle -- especially the one between America and Western Europe and within America itself -- one must understand the vast differences between leftist and rightist worldviews and between secular and religious (specifically Judeo-Christian) values.

One of the most important of these differences is their attitudes toward law. Generally speaking, the Left and the secularists venerate, if not worship, law. They put their faith in law -- both national and international. Law is the supreme good. For most on the Left, "Is it legal?" is usually the question that determines whether an action is right or wrong.

Laws are the Left's vehicles to earthly salvation. Virtually all human problems have a legal solution. Some men harass women? Pass laws banning virtually every flirtatious action a man might engage in vis a vis a woman. Flood legislatures with laws preventing the creation of a "hostile work environment." Whereas the religious world has always worked to teach men how to act toward women, the secular world, lacking these religious values, passes laws to control men.


Yeah, I spit coffee all over my monitor after reading that, too. The idea that women are better off in religious, rather than a secular, societies is, of course, skull-clutchingly dumb. For the vast majority of history the "religious world" has taught men to treat women essentially as property (I think it's also worth noting that, as recently as the 19th century, women in Islamic societies had more rights than those in Judeo-Christian societies). I'm more interested, though, in Prager's assertion that "the worldwide ideological battle [is] between secular and religious values." I generally agree with this, though I'd frame it as a conflict between absolutism and constitutionalism. And I think it's clear that Prager's on the wrong side.

No comments: