Home > News > God & Country > Exclusive: Grover Norquist Gives Religious Conservatives Tough Love

Exclusive: Grover Norquist Gives Religious Conservatives Tough Love

Reader Comments
Back to blog

The First Amendment states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
Religion is an organized body of belief. Conservatism implies a rigidity of rules and behavior whether the religion is Islam or Atheism that is irrelevant to the laws under which all citizens live.
Values are subjective. Those values applied to Federal law are the least intrusive and agreeable to all citizens. The imposition of any personal belief diminishes the rights of all. How 'leave us alone' can result in the inclusion of 'family values' or Protestant evangelism is a mind bending theological exercise in delusion. It is the source of hyphenated American
special interest groups. It has degraded the liberties and rights of all Americans.

Morton Kurzweil of FL 5:05PM July 18, 2009

In 2012 we must vote for Governor Mitt Romney to become our President starting on January 20, 2013 , and we must vote for Governor Sarah Palin to become our Vice President on January 20, 2013 bcause of their superior rightwing conservative philosophy . Their superior rightwing conservative philosophy is shown in that they are pro God and Christianity, pro life, pro marriage; pro guns-second amendment, pro low taxes, pro low government spending; pro small government, pro unintrusive government, pro traditional and Judeo Christian values; pro Bible reading and prayer in our public schools, pro Christians schools and private education , pro private and free enterprise; pro military spending, anti arms agreements with Russia, pro creation; pro nuclear, pro conservative supreme court judges, pro American sovereignty; pro capitalism, anti communist, anti socialist; conservative on immigration, and pro constitution. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are of the inferior liberal and left wing ideology in that they are against every thing that Governors Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin are for and they are for every thing that Governors Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin are against
John Warren

John Warren of NJ 4:44PM June 13, 2009

When America was founded, the FEDERAL government didn't even have a law against MURDER.
It was left to each of the states to manage.
So why should the Federal government ban abortion nationwide?
This and most other issues should be left to the states. As such, there will be differences throughout the country.
And? We'd possibly live in peace.
You can't enforce your vision on everyone for ONE simple reason that America's Founders understood:
Centralized power will corrupt the leaders, and you won't get what you want on ANY level.
Sound like today's situation?
The Founders would be sad to learn we had forgotten their wisdom in creation of the 10th amendment, which leaves issues, mostly, to the states.
By the way, liberals love the diversity of the 10th amendment when they are presented with it.
The 10th amendment (peace) solves our problems, should we care to use it. Too bad Norquist overlooks mentioning it.

Dan Litwin of CA 3:40PM June 12, 2009

i'm all for an injection of Classic Liberalism into the GOP, but let's make sure that everyone knows that Classic Liberalism is not opposed to religion but only insists that the choice be left to the individual.
how we deal with ppl who want to use the power of the State to enforce a religious agenda is going to be as tough as dealing with the secularists who want to use the State to enforce an anti-religious agenda.
i say we should beat them with sticks, who's with me?

shoey of IL 2:40PM June 12, 2009

I am a Christian Conservative, note I didn’t say Christian Republican. The last time that I voted for a Republican that I liked and respected was in 1984, and that was Ronald Reagan. Since then I have held my nose and voted for the Republican that the Party told me was the best that there was. This last year I had, had enough, and when McCain was nominated, I decided to vote for the Constitutions party. Then McCain brought in Sarah, a Christian Conservative and then my vote went to the Republicans. So in three years, if the republican party tries to push a middle of the road, wishy washy republican on me, they won’t get my vote.
Also I think that the current Red State, Blue State coloring for if a state is conservative or liberal is dead on. Red states are where the Rednecks live, people that just want to do their own thing. And the Blue states are where the Blue Bloods live, people that want government to tell them how to live.

Dave Jones of CO 1:57PM June 12, 2009

"If what you want is to be able to raise your kids to be orthodox, Catholic, or Greek Orthodox, that's nonthreatening to the gay atheist...."
Sorry, but someone being religious is a major threat to that gay atheist. I live in the San Francisco Bay Area. I live and work with many gays and lesbians. I have witnessed numerous rants from gay colleagues and neighbors in which they stated that their ultimate goal is to see all religions disappear. They cannot abide the idea that anyone exists who does not or will not approve 100% of their lifestyle. The only way for them to feel good about themselves is to destroy religion and any other viewpoint that contradicts their own world view.
"There is nothing fundamentally different from the Religious Right in America and any form of religious extremism in the world."
Let's not forget the Religious Left who would like the U.S. taxpayer to support terror groups around the globe in the name of "social justice." And, let's not forget the extremism of the religion of Environmentalism which seeks to control every aspect of our behavior in the name of "saving the Earth."

Anneke of CA 12:11PM June 12, 2009

But then the minds of most closeted homosexuals are -- and the GOP has a LOT of those besides Norquist. Too bad you couldn't show him some "tough love" by asking about that phenomenon.

penalcolony of DC 11:12AM June 12, 2009

is evidenced by Glenda of VA when she writes about abortion and murder. The wisdom of the Roe v. Wade decision is that it recognized the right of a pregnant woman to control her own body, even when other human life was present in it, but that the state (i.e., collective society or government) started to have some (but not unlimited) rights to protect that other life when that life became a sentient being (i.e., when personhood began). Thus, with exceptions for the pregnant woman's health and life, a developing embryo-fetus-unborn child started to have some right to life further on through its mother's pregnancy. This seems pretty sensible to me. Human life is not the same as a human person; human life may or may not develop into a human person (i.e., spontaneous abortion or miscarriage ends a developing human life if it occurs before the fetus' sentience).
By the way, Glenda and all anti-abortion people, what punishment (long prison sentence, short jail time, fine, probation, community service, etc.?) would you recommend for a woman who voluntarily seeks and has an abortion? If, in your thinking, she is procuring an agent (a doctor) to commit murder, isn't she complicit in a criminal act? Would you recommend a lighter punishment if she seeks an abortion earlier rather than later in her pregnancy? Would you still recommend punishment for her if her pregnancy resulted from rape or incest?
For a fine article giving a depth of insight into the religious aspects of abortion and mentioning the many strands of this issue, Google: garry wills abortion.
Almost all abortions in the US take place before the fetus' sentience; and those that take place later are almost all to protect the life or the health of the pregnant woman. I think the state and those who oppose abortion have to stay out of the way of the freedom to act of a pregnant woman before the fetus' sentience.

Rob Winslow of FL 11:05AM June 12, 2009

It is nice to know that Glenda (Va) is opposed to all wars, opposed to ignoring povery, advocating universal health care, opposed to capital punishment, and comes down on the side of life on issues that adversely affect the lives of persons around the globe.
Still, it is idiotic to repeat ad nauseum that "abortion is murder." It is not murder; it is a variety of killing. But only an idiot thinks that all killing is murder. That chicken I ate last evening was killed prior to cooking; but the chicken was not murdered. The crab grass I killed with a spray bottle was killed; but it was not murder.

Asinus Gravis of TX 10:27AM June 12, 2009

Abortion is murder. Murder is against the law. Period. We who respect life feel that we cannot stand by and allow the slaughter of the innocent. I don't know of anyone who would argue that we have the right to kill a child who is innocently standing in a room, so why do some argue that it is okay to kill that child right up to the moment of birth? We live in a sick world when we spend so much time protecting the rights of terrorists and cats and dogs, but we have become apathetic to the suffering of the unborn. I pray for the future of this country.

Glenda of VA 9:11AM June 12, 2009