Sometimes Alan Jacobs is such a good writer that it almost makes me angry. This happens when I've tried to say something, and then he comes along and says it the right way. For example, my convoluted mess on Christianity, secularism, and public reason is supposed to mean the same thing as this single paragraph from The American Scene:
“If your primary concern is to influence public policy, then of course you should use the arguments that are most likely to persuade people whose support you need, which may mean keeping some of your own distinctive convictions in the background. But some Christians believe that something is more important that influencing public policy, and that is bearing public witness to Christian faith and practice. And if that’s your primary goal, then coming up with ‘adequate secular reasons’ for your beliefs is pretty much the last thing you’ll want to do. But then of course you shouldn’t complain if people find your arguments puzzling or even repulsive.”
I mean, that's pretty much it. All you can add is that the Republican Party is an organization hoping to persuade in a secular environment, and therefore should (and almost always does) take the first path.
EDIT: Looking over my other post, I did have some stuff in there about political honesty, so maybe my words weren't a complete waste.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment