The subhead on this story in the print version that I read was slightly different from the online one. Instead of "Generous Tithing to Church," it was worded as "Large Donations to Church."
Whichever way you put it, there’s an absurdity to such a "disclosure" that makes me wonder whether 
the Journal‘s headline writers were conscious of the irony.
I found I sort of wanted them to have an even smaller subhead under that one, saying something like, "Also Said to Like Mom, Apple Pie."
Even though I’ve spent my whole professional career in it, I’m still not fully adjusted to a political world in which embracing traditional morality and being fully involved in one’s church or synagogue can plunge a person into controversy.
Of course, none of these revelations indicate how Harriet Miers would interpret the law, as The New York Times was careful to point out. But that doesn’t stop the folks who want to choose up sides and fight about it from doing so.
Roe v. Wade has done some strange stuff to this country. Of course, it had help from a lot of other factors along the way, but what it’s done all by its lonesome is impressive.
Related Posts
Roe v Wade was a bad case, and a bad decision. Abortion supporters know that, and dread a really intellectual application of jurisprudence to the subject. Not surprisingly, their primary tactic is to attack anyone making an intellectual argument as a predisposed bigot.
Since many socialists, progressives and modern liberals are not only agnostic, atheistic, or mystics, and ignorant of the complexity of Christian theology on many social subjects, their antagonism against the religion opposing their secularism is a powerful reactionary force.
Brad, is this a new category? If so, I love it.
As far as Ms. Miers’ church involvement goes, the administration trotted that out to soothe Republicans’ unease about her cultural-conservative credentials. Obviously pro-choice people are going to want to find out her feelings on the Roe topic, but that would be true regardless of how much she participated in her church or gave money to it.
I must say I’m not familiar with this world you describe where “embracing traditional morality and being fully involved in one’s church or synagogue can plunge a person into controversy.” The country I live in is one where doing just that is practically a prerequisite for public service or having your voice count for anything in the society. You want controversy? How about an openly gay nominee for the Supreme Court, or even better, a professed atheist? A black Muslim? Think that will happen anytime soon? Even though I agree with you that Ms. Miers’ church affiliations should play no role in the confirmation process, I just can’t muster up very much sympathy for her having to undergo a few uncomfortable questions about her embrace of “traditional morality.”
What does make me feel a little sorry and embarrassed for her is reading this morning that she had her homework handed back to her with a grade of “Incomplete.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/20/politics/politicsspecial1/20confirm.html?th&emc=th
Republicans may have "trotted that out" as a political ploy, but the fact that an ex-Catholic is actually tithing, and more than tithing, indicates sincerity on HER part, at least.
The more I think about it, it may be sufficiently noteworthy to be worth a front-page headline on its own, thereby undermining the premise of my post.
As one baptized in an evangelical church who converted to Catholicism as an adult, I am painfully aware that unlike, say, Baptists, Catholics by and large don’t contribute significantly to the support of their church. I’ve served on two different parish councils, and I know this stereotype to be accurate.
But somehow I don’t think that’s why it got the play it did. I think it was more like, "Look, this religious fanatic gives so much to her hick Texas church that despite being a successful lawyer, she’s not a millionaire." The New York Times even separated that news out into its own sidebar on the jump page, headlined "Nominee’s Financial Disclosures Show Worth of Less Than $1 Million." (Gasp! The poor, deluded thing!)
And yes, it’s a new category. I was shocked to realize it didn’t already exist, and created it immediately.
A judge with a net worth of $1,000,000. Shocking.
As much as Chief Justice Roberts’ annual income as an attorney.
$1.5 million less than Ralph Nader’s blue chip stock portfolio.
1/12 Judith Miller’s book deal.
1/2 the retirement package of a junior U.S. Senator.
With evil fanatics like Pat Robertson around(and given credibility by media),it’s easy to mistrust those who’ve supposedly “got religion”.
…and besides,the majority of churches in this country and especially this state are little more than tax exempt hate groups.
Kulturkampf, indeed! Easy, Bill…I’m neither a Christian nor a follower of any organized religion, and I worry often about the dangers of religious fanaticism, but I can’t agree that the “majority of churches…are little more than tax exempt hate groups.”
Christianity in the US suffers from a (thank, um, God) much, much, milder version of what has beset the Muslim world, where extremists get all the press and media attention, while the vast majority of those who believe in peace and loving mankind get their quieter message drowned out. Fortunately our Christian extremists (mostly) just talk. But they get disproportionate attention, in large part because of their mastery of the media.
As for Islam, one hopes that moderates will increase their ostracization and condemnation of violent extremists in their midst. One would also hope that mainstream Christians truly following the example of the life of Christ will speak out and resist the more extreme efforts of fundamentalists to impose their views on the rest of us. But Bill, I still think most Christians’ connection to their God is based more on love than on hate.
Christians hate sin, not the sinner, but many sinners cannot abide that.
It appears Bill has some anger issues.
I agree with Phillip (but I am a Christian who attends a Baptist church).
The media focuses on the extremists in a lot of groups.
Just as many folks that don’t know any Muslim people think that almost all Muslims are violence lovers, those that don’t really go or get involved in their local Christian church probably think all Christians are nut jobs intent on forcing their ways down someone elses throat.
Most non church goers to active Christian churches don’t have any clue what their local congretation does for the local community. Heck, even some fairly regular church folks don’t know how much their local church does for people every single day.