Thomas A. Timmerman wrote:
> I think my problem lies with equating the dishonest Creationists
> with the "religious right". Creationists who have demonstrated
> dishonest behavior obviously deserve every stone tossed their
> way. Assuming that the vast majority of "religous righters" must be
> dishonest (because those loud-mouthed Creationists are), is an
> example of unfairly stereotyping a group of people defined by their
> religous beliefs.
This is a distinction I should have made more clearly, and I plead guilty
to "equating the dishonest Creationists with the 'religious right'".
However, the creationist dishonesty is only one example of dishonesty among
persons associated with the religious right. Other examples abound, from Dr.
Laura's lies about a "homosexual agenda" to the rampant fabricating of the
anti-abortion groups (for example, Reggie White's claim that Planned
Parenthood is a eugenics organization aimed at wiping out black people) to
last year's feigned shock over Clinton's lying under oath. Watch Pat
Robertson's cable network for a half hour, and you can't miss my point.
Isn't the term "religious right" what we use to refer to that group of
people who push for the teaching of creationism in science courses, try to
restrict the rights of homosexuals, and fight against abortion? I can't use
the term "creationist", because that's only part of the problem. I don't
mean the term "religious right" to apply to just anyone who believes in god
(for that, I'd use the term "religious", right?). _That_ would be an unfair
stereotype. But my heavily qualified "But I believe that the majority, and
perhaps the vast majority are somewhere between dimly aware and well aware
that most of what they say is untrue", when applied to the "religious right"
as defined here is hardly on a par with (say) Reagan's comments about
"welfare queens".
Paul Smith
Alverno College
Milwaukee
