Over at VFR Auster declares Lee Harris the winner of The Most Tortured Argument of the Week Award for his non-persuasive argument in favor of the view that Romney's speech missed the mark.
I agree that Mr. Harris should be the hands-down winner of this prestigious award given that part of his case involves his declaring that he "doesn't have a problem with Satan worshippers in America, he just isn't inclined to vote for one." What!?
I can say that I don't have a problem with the followers of modern Mormonism in this country (and I enjoy the Mormon Tabernacle Choir's patriotic music very much!), I'm just not inclined to vote for one, and this would be consistent with my view and I think a reasonable position to take. On the other hand, I can't say that I don't have a problem with Satan worshippers. And I damn sure can't say that I'm merely disinclined to vote for one. I can say that I would never vote for a known Satan worshipper irregardless of his superior qualifications otherwise. I can say that I have a serious problem with Satan worshippers in this country without reservation.
So, what's with the goofy analogy offered by Mr. Harris here? He's disinclined to vote for a Satan worshipper in the same way that I'm disinclined to vote for a Mormon? How am I supposed to identify with a nonsensical statement like that which in no way is representative of my view towards Mormons?
I'm not inclined to vote for a Mormon as I've already said, but that doesn't mean I'd never vote for one as with Satan worshippers ... or Muslims.
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Standout negative reaction to Romney's faith speech
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment