- The Washington Times - Thursday, February 25, 2010

Carrie Prejean II

“There really is no legitimate reason to care what some spoiled pageant brat thinks about gay people. Nevertheless, we are intrigued by Miss Beverly Hills 2010, Lauren Ashley, because she’s either too stupid to realize that she has blown any chance at winning the Miss California competition, or, if she didn’t really care about that, savvy enough to realize that her outspoken anti-gay opinions could make her a fleeting mini-celebrity in ultrareligious circles.

“Anyway, here’s what she told Fox News: ‘The Bible says that marriage is between a man and a woman. In Leviticus it says, “If man lies with mankind as he would lie with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death and their blood shall be upon them.” The Bible is pretty black and white,’ Ashley told Pop Tarts. …

“It’s okay, though, because she has ‘a lot of friends that are gay.’ She just thinks that they should not be alive.”

Dan Amira, writing on “This California Pageant Girl Makes Carrie Prejean Look Like Richard Simmons,” on Feb. 24 at the New York magazine blog Daily Intel

Abortion lessons

“Archbishop Vincent Nichols, leader of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, has got some leading to do.

“[British Schools Secretary] Ed Balls is insisting that Catholic schools must provide information to teenage girls on where they can kill the child in their womb. And this requirement is not affected by the amendment to the Schools, Children and Families Bill, which was passed yesterday and the ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ Catholic Education Service is presenting as some sort of victory for Catholic schools. …

“Balls and his department are quite clear that all schools must provide ‘non-judgmental’ information about procuring abortions. Will they?”

Damian Thompson, writing on “Archbishop Nichols, tell us,” on Feb. 24 at the Daily Telegraph

Necessary conflict?

“Writing in the Jerusalem Post this week, Prof. David Newman approvingly cited a commentary published last Friday by Shlomo Aviner, a leading religious Zionist rabbi from the settlement of Beit El. Aviner wrote that he refuses to accept money from evangelicals, because their ultimate aim is to convert the Jews to Christianity, and their end-of-days vision is of a world where Christianity has vanquished all other religions. Newman concurred. …

“But in this case, the eventual conflict is a trumped-up bogeyman that has no chance of ever occurring in reality — because according to evangelical theology, it is due to take place only at the end of days. There are only two possible scenarios for what this end of days can look like, and contrary to the doomsday crowd, neither leads to Jewish-Christian conflict.

“The first scenario is that the Jews are right and Jesus is not the Messiah. In that case, there will be no second coming, so the end-of-days demand that the Jews convert will never arrive, and fruitful cooperation between Jews and evangelicals can continue for all eternity. The second is that the Christians are right, and Jesus is the Messiah. In that case, when he comes again, the Jews should all convert. After all, if they’re right, they’re right.

“Needless to say, I believe the first, and my evangelical friends believe the second. But as long we can agree to disagree until the end of days arrives to settle the question, there is no conflict, and no potential for one.”

Evelyn Gordon, writing on “End-of-Days Fallacies” on Feb. 24 at the Commentary magazine blog Contentions

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide