"Andrew Sullivan is the editor of the New Republic and the blogmeister of The Daily Dish. Openly gay, Sullivan is a major conservative voice in U.S. politics and he is angered that his GOP party has been taken over by neoconservative Christians, especially the fundamentalist evangelicals. Sullivan states, "The new divide between the left and the right is the separation between state and church and the fusion of religion and government." He also says that he is trying to "rescue" modern U.S. political conservatism from "the current [Christian] fundamentalist supremacy" that now dominates it." Source: PoliticsinMudville.blogspot.com
Liberal Democrat of Toledo says Sullivan is "an honest conservative. I can deal with the open, and honest conservative; he puts his cards on the table. As can be seen often in this blog, I have great difficulty in dealing with the so-called Christian conservative whose agenda is held between the two covers of the ancient Hebrew text."
I would ask LD, "Why is one 'whose agenda is held' in the Bible less HONEST than an Andrew Sullivan? It's not a "dishonest conservative" to whom LD objects; it IS, as he admits, the Bible Believing Christian conservative --who is no less honest just because he believes.
I had personal email correspondence a few times with Andrew Sullivan on the topic of his homosexuality. It was a cordial conversation and he does have a book on that subject as well. He is respected by conservatives because he is STILL conservative, even though he is homosexual --and he is a very bright and intellectual fellow. But he also is lost if he doesn't accept the fact that God did not create him to live with a man as he does. Like any homosexual, he was damaged in his sexual orientation, first by outside influences, and secondly, by his own choices.
His sins are no different than anyone else's. We all have sinned. The problem lies in not recognizing sin for what it is --and not believing the book--thus not repenting.
But it's not DISHONEST to put one's faith in The Book, L.D. It's not dishonest to believe that God made us male and female for HIS purposes --that we might replenish the earth. He forbade us to short-circuit our potential by having sex with our own sex.
As for the fundamentalists commandeering the Republican Party. No, the Liberals just got very licentious in their views --so that the parties were no longer similar in our definitions of morality. It used to be that a Democrat would share the same moral views as a Republican. They agreed that girls were girls and boys were boys and they should marry each other. They agreed that people ought to marry before they live together. They agreed that if they got the baby before the wedding, they had better hurry up and get married. They agreed that porn and sex clubs were bad for a community. They agreed that TV and movies shouldn't cross certain lines in nudity and foul language. They agreed that constitutional rights did not include a right to abortion. They agreed that prayer in school was a good thing, along with giving out Bibles for graduation. They agreed that the Christmas creche should be in the public square and that the Bible was a respectable book, that the Golden Rule was good for all.
So who was it, anyway, who got ahold of the DEMOCRATS? Because THEY are the ones who changed --and all the orthodox believers in God jumped the fence to the party that was still saying abortion mattered; sexuality matters; religious freedom in the public square and respect for the nation's Christian roots --matter.