By Ben Shapiro
Wednesday, April 05, 2017
Leftists, it seems, have discovered the Bible.
This week, the Washington
Post ran a story by Caitlin Dewey with this shocking headline: “GOP
lawmaker: The Bible says the unemployed ‘shall not eat.’” The lawmaker at issue
was Representative Jodey Arrington (R., Texas), who spoke at length about
means-tested welfare programs such as food stamps. He said:
The Scripture tells us in 2
Thessalonians 3:10: “For even when we were with you we gave you this rule: If a
man will not work, he shall not eat.” And then he goes on to say, “We hear that
some among you are idle.” I think that every American — Republican or Democrat
— wants to help the neediest among us. And I think it’s a reasonable
expectation that we have work requirements. I think that gives more
credibility, quite frankly, to [the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program].
This wasn’t good enough for the Post, which quickly suggested that Biblical conservatives were
cruel and overbearing — but true Christianity would stand for government
support for the unemployed.
Meanwhile, over at the New York Times, noted theologian Nick Kristof ran a satire piece
titled, “And Jesus Said unto Paul Ryan.” The column was just as cringeworthy as
you’d expect: It placed the speaker of the House into various scenarios with
Jesus, correcting Jesus about mercy and kindness. So, for example, Kristof
writes:
A woman who had been bleeding for
12 years came up behind Jesus and touched his clothes in hope of a cure. Jesus
turned to her and said: “Fear not. Because of your faith, you are now healed.”
Then spoke Pious Paul of Ryan: “But teacher, is that wise? When you cure her,
she learns dependency. Then the poor won’t take care of themselves, knowing
that you’ll always bail them out! You must teach them personal responsibility!”
Kristof then relates the New Testament parable of the
Good Samaritan, with Ryan interjecting that the Good Samaritan’s intervention
is “unsustainable and sends the wrong message. It teaches travelers to take
dangerous roads, knowing that others will rescue them from self-destructive
behaviors.”
What does the Left’s newfound enthusiasm for the Bible
tell us? It tells us that the Left doesn’t actually believe in the Bible — the
Left believes in government. Every time the Left cites the Bible, it does so as
an excuse to let government take from some and redistribute to others, or
compel work from some on behalf of others. Neither the Old Testament nor the
New talks about government-compelled redistribution of wealth. Even the passage
of Leviticus requiring farmers to leave a corner of their field uncut requires
the poor to do the hard work of reaping the field — and there is no specified
amount of the field in the Torah (rabbis later established a minimum of
one-sixtieth of the field).
But according to the Left, theocracy is fine, so long as
it pushes a socialist agenda. That ignores the founding view of religion: that
voluntary religious practice and association would provide the basic social
framework that would make liberty from government possible. The Founders
understood that human beings seek to care for the poorest and most unfortunate
among us; they also understood that in order to both provide for those who
can’t provide for themselves and
prevent government’s heavy hand from crushing individual rights, voluntarism
would have to fill the gap. The Founders believed that religion, publicly
practiced in community settings, could bridge the divide between the needs of
community and the rights of the individual. That
is what Alexis de Tocqueville meant when he said that “Americans of all ages,
all stations in life, and all types of disposition are forever forming
associations. . . . Nothing, in my view, deserves more attention than the
intellectual and moral associations in America.” Why did such associations
matter? Because, Tocqueville said, Americans sought “self-interest rightly understood.”
Robert Putnam, author of Bowling Alone,
explains, “A society that relies on generalized reciprocity is more efficient
than a distrustful society, for the same reason that money is more efficient
than barter. Honesty and trust lubricate the inevitable frictions of social
life.”
But the Left doesn’t believe in religion, publicly
practiced, in order to preserve liberty. The Left scoffs when Mike Pence says
that he lives his religion by protecting himself from risky situations with
women from the office — the Left favors irreligion in personal activity, with
sin punished by harsher governmental regulation rather than avoided through
Biblical living. In fact, sin helps drive the need for government activity —
the worse the people, the bigger the government necessary. The Left doesn’t
believe in preserving individual liberty: The needs of the state always
override the needs of the individual, and the existence of voluntary religious
community threatens that state.
Thus the Left endorses theocracy rather than voluntary
religious practice; it seeks an awkward shotgun marriage between Biblical
mandate and secularist overreach. Even as the Left assures its constituents
that the Bible is a book of government compulsion with regard to
redistribution, it insists that the government can override individual Biblical
living at will: The government can force nunneries to provide birth control,
require religious bakers to take part in same-sex weddings, and prevent
voluntary prayer in public schools. Even as the Left dismisses Biblical thought
— and indeed, secularist scientific thought — with regard to the role of
government in preventing the murder of the unborn, it insists that a vague
reading of “the least of these” results in a moral injunction to steal the
wealth of some and hand it over to others.
This is the theocracy of the casually religious — and
it’s even less attractive than the theocracy of the Biblically extreme. At
least the Biblically radical have a textbook guiding them; leftist theocrats
merely follow the dictates of their own heart, imputing those dictates to God
when the opportunity arises. This makes them not merely tyrants, but heretical
tyrants at that.
The proper role of religion is to guide the values of the
citizens, making freedom possible without Biblical cramdowns. Without a
religious revival, freedom fades in favor of collectivism — and that’s just
what the Left wants, which is why they deliberately twist the Bible to portray
it as alternatively sacrosanct and absurd, leaving themselves as both the
ultimate moral arbiters and the great godlike sponsors of government.
No comments:
Post a Comment