Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Brain Food (Amazingthing about Godless is the amount of intellectual meat Ann Coulter has packed...)
The American Prowler ^ | 6/30/2006 | Richard Kirk

Posted on 06/30/2006 12:42:04 AM PDT by nickcarraway

The most amazing thing about Godless is the amount of intellectual meat Ann Coulter has packed into its pages.

Godless: The Church of Liberalism
by Ann Coulter
(Crown Forum, 310 pages, $27.95)

What's most amazing about Ann Coulter's book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism, is the amount of intellectual meat she packs into 281 breezy, barb-filled pages. Among the topics the blonde bomb-thrower discusses in some depth are the following: liberal jurisprudence, privacy rights and abortion, Joe Wilson's modest career and inflated ego, and the solid record of failure in American public schools. The topics of Intelligent Design and Darwinism, to which the last eighty pages of text are devoted, are analyzed in even greater detail.

As one would expect from an author with a legal background, Supreme Court cases are high on Coulter's hit-list -- especially the idea of a "living Constitution." Citing various cases-in-point, Coulter shows that this popular doctrine is nothing more than a paralegal pretext for making the Constitution say whatever liberal judges want it to say. Though such a philosophy grants to the nation's founding document all the integrity of a bound and gagged assault victim, it at least has the virtue of mirroring liberals' self-referential view of morality.

Another dogma that Coulter skewers is the liberal commandment, "Thou Shalt Not Punish the Perp." This counterintuitive principle not only rejects the link between incarceration and lower crime rates, it also permits benevolent judges (like Clinton federal court nominee Frederica Massiah-Jackson) to shorten the sentence of child rapists so that other innocent children can pay the price for society's sins.

An unexpected bonus in this chapter is the author's extended sidebar on Upton Sinclair, the muckraking author of Boston who, as his own correspondence shows, knew Sacco and Vanzetti were guilty but chose, for ideological and financial reasons, to portray them as innocent victims. In a related chapter, "The Martyr: Willie Horton," Coulter provides detailed information about Horton's crimes, Michael Dukakis' furlough program, and the precise nature of the Horton ads aired in the 1988 presidential campaign

CONTINUING THE RELIGIOUS IMAGERY, Coulter asserts in chapter five that abortion is the "holiest sacrament" of the "church of liberalism." For women this sacrament secures their "right to have sex with men they don't want to have children with." A corollary of this less-than-exalted principle is the right to suck the brains out of partially born infants. How far liberal politicians will go to safeguard this sacrament whose name must not be spoken (euphemisms are "choice," "reproductive freedom," and "family planning") is shown by an amendment offered by Senator Chuck Schumer that would exclude anti-abortion protestors from bankruptcy protection. How low these same pols will go is illustrated by the character assassination of Judge Charles Pickering -- a man honored by the brother of slain civil rights leader Medgar Evers but slimed by liberals at his confirmation hearing as racially insensitive. Coulter notes that the unspoken reason for this "Borking" of Pickering was the judge's prior criticism of Roe v. Wade.

The single chapter that Coulter's critics have honed in on is the one that exposes the liberal "Doctrine of Infallibility." This religiously resonant phrase applies to individuals who promote the Left's partisan agenda while immunizing themselves from criticism by touting their victim-status. In addition to the 9/11 "Jersey Girls," Coulter identifies Joe Wilson, Cindy Sheehan, Max Cleland, and John Murtha as persons who possess, at least by Maureen Dowd's lights, "absolute moral authority." Curiously, this exalted status isn't accorded victims who don't push liberal agendas. Perhaps the fact that Republican veterans outnumber their Democrat counterparts in Congress, 87 to 62, has something to do with this inconsistency.

Coulter's next chapter, "The Liberal Priesthood: Spare the Rod, Spoil the Teacher," focuses on the partisanship, compensation, and incompetence level of American teachers. A crucial statistic in these pages concerns the "correlation [that exists] between poor student achievement and time spent in U.S. public schools." In this regard, comments by Thomas Sowell and Al Shanker stand out. Sowell notes that college students with low SAT and ACT scores are more likely to major in education and that "teachers who have the lowest scores are the most likely to remain in the profession." From a different perspective, the late President of the American Federation of Teachers stated, with refreshing bluntness, "When school children start paying union dues, that's when I'll start representing the interests of school children." The words of John Dewey, a founder of America's public education system, also fit nicely into Coulter's state-of-the-classroom address: "You can't make Socialists out of individualists -- children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society which is coming, where everyone is interdependent." Coulter responds, "You also can't make socialists out of people who can read, which is probably why Democrats think the public schools have nearly achieved Aristotelian perfection."

The last third of Godless focuses on matters scientific. Chapter seven, "The Left's War on Science," serves as an appetizer for Coulter's evolutionary piece de resistance. Prior to that main course, Coulter provides a litany of examples that illustrate the left's contempt for scientific data that doesn't comport with its worldview. Exhibits include the mendacious marketing of AIDS as an equal opportunity disease, the hysterical use of anecdotal evidence to ban silicon breast implants, and the firestorm arising from Lawrence Summers's heretical speculation about male and female brain differences.

THE REMAINING CHAPTERS OF GODLESS all deal with Darwinism. Nowhere else can one find a tart-tongued compendium of information that not only presents a major argument for Intelligent Design but also exposes the blatant dishonesty of "Darwiniacs" who continue to employ evidence (such as the Miller-Urey experiment, Ernst Haeckel's embryo drawings, and the famous peppered moth experiment) that they know is outdated or fraudulent.

Within this bracing analysis, Coulter employs the observations of such biological and philosophical heavyweights as Stephen Gould, Richard Dawkins, Michael Behe, and Karl Popper. The price of the whole book is worth the information contained in these chapters about the statistical improbability of random evolution, the embarrassing absence of "transitional" fossils, and the inquisitorial attitude that prevails among many scientists (and most liberals) when discussing these matters. Unlike biologist Richard Lewontin, who candidly admits that a prior commitment to materialism informs his allegiance to evolution, most of his colleagues (and certainly most of the liberal scribblers Coulter sets on the road to extinction) won't concede that Darwinism is a corollary, rather than a premise, of their godlessness.

Coulter's final chapter serves as a thought-provoking addendum to her searing cross-examination of evolution's star witnesses. "The Aped Crusader" displays the devastating social consequences that have thus far attended Darwinism. From German and American eugenicists (including Planned Parenthood's Margaret Sanger), to Aryan racists, to the infanticidal musings of Princeton's Peter Singer, Darwinian evolution boasts a political and philosophical heritage that could only be envied by the likes of Charles Manson. Yet it is a history ignored by liberals for whom Darwin's theory provides what they want above all else -- a creation myth that sanctifies their sexual urges, sanctions abortion, and disposes of God.

Coulter's book is clearly not a systematic argument for the idea that liberalism is a godless religion. Indeed, prior to the material on evolution, the concept is treated more as a clever theme for chapter headings than as a serious intellectual proposition. In those final chapters, however, Coulter manages to present a cogent, sustained argument that actually begins to link modern liberalism (or more specifically, leftism) to an atheistic perspective. At the very least Coulter succeeds in raising an important issue -- namely, that American courts currently ignore the religious or quasi-religious character of a philosophy that pervades public institutions and is propagated with public funds. This fact, if honestly recognized, would render contemporary church-state jurisprudence untenable. A Court taking these arguments seriously would have to recognize that all philosophies, including "liberalism," swim in the same intellectual current as religion.

THUS FAR, THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA have focused almost all their attention on Coulter's take-no-prisoners rhetorical style -- and particularly on the "heartless" remarks about those 9/11 widows who seem to be "enjoying their husbands' deaths so much." Clearly, diplomatic language is not Coulter's forte, as one would also gather from this representative zinger: "I don't particularly care if liberals believe in God. In fact, I would be crestfallen to discover any liberals in heaven."

What undercuts the liberals' case against Coulter on this score, however, is their own (not always tacit) endorsement of vile epithets that are regularly directed against President Bush and his supporters by the likes of Cindy Sheehan, Michael Moore, and a gaggle of celebrity politicos. Coulter employs the same linguistic standard against liberals (with a touch of humor) that they regularly use (with somber faces and dogmatic conviction) when they accuse conservatives of being racist homophobes who gladly send youngsters to war under false pretences to line the pockets of Halliburton executives. Hate-speech of this stripe is old-hat for leftists.

Until Air America, Helen Thomas, and most Democrat constituencies alter their rhetoric, I see no reason for conservatives to denounce Coulter for using, more truthfully, the same harsh language that leftists have employed, with no regard for accuracy, since the time of Lenin. When liberals denounce communist tyrants as fervently as they do real Nazis, then it will be time for Coulter to cool the rhetoric. Until that time her "verbal reprisals" serve a useful function within an intellectual marketplace that resembles a commodities pit more than a debating society.

Richard Kirk is a freelance writer who lives in Oceanside, California. He is a regular columnist for San Diego's North County Times. His book reviews have also appeared in the American Enterprise Magazine, First Things, and Touchstone.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Political Humor/Cartoons; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: anncoulter; bookreview; coulter; crevolist; godless; idjunkscience; junkscience; pavlovian; pavlovianevos; pseudoscience; richardkirk
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 561-580581-600601-620 ... 661-664 next last
To: qam1

"Modern day Japan is for all practical purposes an Atheist country yet their society seems to be doing fine. "

You should do some more research on this. I would not say they are doing fine for several reasons, one of which is that they have an extremely high rate of suicide (it's not discussed very openly). In fact the gov't has become concerned about online "suicide pacts", which they are afraid will cause even more people marginally predisposed to commit suicide to actually go through with it.

BTW, ever been to Japan? Your point about them being an atheist country shows your total ignorance about Japan. They are a very spiritual people and would never call themselves atheist.


581 posted on 07/05/2006 7:40:31 AM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 578 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
It appears you failed to read the article we are discussing; you know, the one which spent half its words discussing Ann's embarrassing creationist talking points.

Actually, it appears you are the one who failed to read. I didn't write what you commented on and I'm not interested enough in this thread to go back and find out who did.

582 posted on 07/05/2006 9:15:33 AM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: OmahaFields


>>Interesting how the Islamists are allying with the Christian fundamentalist in pushing ID down our throats in their battle against western science.

First, What is an islamist?
Second, what he heck are you talking about?


583 posted on 07/05/2006 10:18:26 AM PDT by RobRoy (The Internet is about to do to Evolution what it did to Dan Rather. Information is power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 568 | View Replies]

To: jennyp

>>OK, I'm going to step away slowly & nonthreateningly now. Ummmm... Good luck with ... that ...<<

This is actually legal in the US today if your child is under a specific age. It is called abortion.


584 posted on 07/05/2006 10:19:50 AM PDT by RobRoy (The Internet is about to do to Evolution what it did to Dan Rather. Information is power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 572 | View Replies]

To: CarolinaGuitarman

>>And creationists wonder why evolution supporters don't take their holier-than-thou pontifications seriously. We have seen support at various times for slavery, for banishment of medicine, for the rejection of reason as a tool of Satan, and now for filicide. But acceptance of evolution makes one wicked... lol<<

You are not taking my words at face value. You are reading things that are not there. God gave man the ability to make choices, even bad ones. But He did not give us the right to do anything. For example, so far it appears that he did not give us the right to travel backwards in time.

Here is a simple test to see if God gave you the right to choose to do a thing. Try to do it. If you can, He gave you that right. Of course, your actions may have negative consequences.

So yes, God gave Hitler the right to kill jews, otherwise he would have been incapable of such action. He gives parents the right to kill their children, otherwise abortions would not be possible.

However, acting on that right may be as devastating as when Adam and Eve acted on their rights by eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Saying someone CAN do a thing is not the same as saying they SHOULD do it.


585 posted on 07/05/2006 10:24:20 AM PDT by RobRoy (The Internet is about to do to Evolution what it did to Dan Rather. Information is power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 574 | View Replies]

To: jennyp


See my post 585.


586 posted on 07/05/2006 10:25:43 AM PDT by RobRoy (The Internet is about to do to Evolution what it did to Dan Rather. Information is power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 577 | View Replies]

To: qam1

Your whole post misses one clear point: There is a difference between an atheist and a professing atheist. Also, there is a difference between a "Christian" and a professing "Christian". I will add that having worked in prison ministry I have found that many entered prison as professing atheists/agnostics but became Christian (and Muslim for that matter) while in prison.

Fact is, we are all spiritually "sick". The difference between a Christian and a non-Christian is that a Christian at least KNOWS he is sick.


587 posted on 07/05/2006 10:29:01 AM PDT by RobRoy (The Internet is about to do to Evolution what it did to Dan Rather. Information is power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 578 | View Replies]

To: TomSmedley
You are not embarassed by the behavior of such consistent evolutionists oxygen breathers.as Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and Sanger?

Breathe any oxygen lately?

Honestly - If Hitler liked chocolate ice cream - then anybody who eats chocolate ice cream is a Nazi??

588 posted on 07/05/2006 10:34:09 AM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: trebb
how the Evos are so quick to "Bork" any information that doesn't fit thier belief system...

Evos???.....Evos???

What is it with the name calling? You realize that speaks volumes about your arguments. There is no such thing as "evos". What do you call those who believe the earth is round, not flat? Roundos?

I don't waste my time calling those who do not believe in evolution "Creatins" - but I could.

589 posted on 07/05/2006 10:39:29 AM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

"You are not taking my words at face value."

Yes I am. You said parents can kill their children. You said the Old Testament supports this.

"He gives parents the right to kill their children, otherwise abortions would not be possible."

You have a very unique definition of rights.

"Yes, God gave them the right to make that choice. Otherwise, they would find themselves incapable of doing so. In fact, if you read the old testament you may find Gods instruction on what to do with an incorrigible child rather interesting."

So, what interesting things does the Old Testament say about what to do with an incorrigible child?


590 posted on 07/05/2006 10:40:05 AM PDT by CarolinaGuitarman (Gas up your tanks!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 585 | View Replies]

To: Tokra
What is it with the name calling? You realize that speaks volumes about your arguments. There is no such thing as "evos". What do you call those who believe the earth is round, not flat? Roundos?

I don't waste my time calling those who do not believe in evolution "Creatins" - but I could.

That's some argument you put forth. Add a degree in science and $12.00 and you can get into the local zoo for a looksee at your relatives. Please note that none of my family line is on display there. By the way - "evo" fits in "evolutionist" without changing any letters. "Creatin" changes the natural spelling order and makes for a childish, spiteful slap, rather than a structured argument.

591 posted on 07/05/2006 10:50:24 AM PDT by trebb ("I am the way... no one comes to the Father, but by me..." - Jesus in John 14:6 (RSV))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 589 | View Replies]

To: Nateman
Socialism, will be around forever; as long as people who want to dictate, desire to be "in charge"...like Hilter and others, they can not disclose their real intention's, but have to shroud the real motivations, by introducing socialism, it is something like giving candy to children, in order to get the child to conform to the parents will....
592 posted on 07/05/2006 10:56:27 AM PDT by thinking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
Interesting how the Islamists are allying with the Christian fundamentalist in pushing ID down our throats in their battle against western science.

First, What is an islamist? Second, what he heck are you talking about?

Both are pushing anti-materialism (read the articles) / anti-science. Both are pushing ID.

There is no inherent clash between Islam and Christianity/ID.(IslamOnline)

ID: The Christian hope for Muslims (NRO)

593 posted on 07/05/2006 11:11:21 AM PDT by OmahaFields ("What have been its fruits? ... superstition, bigotry and persecution.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 583 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
I have found that many entered prison as professing atheists/agnostics but became Christian (and Muslim for that matter) while in prison.

yea, who want to go infront of the parole board saying "I'm a f'n atheist. So What". The question is how many stay Christians after they get out?

594 posted on 07/05/2006 11:16:44 AM PDT by OmahaFields ("What have been its fruits? ... superstition, bigotry and persecution.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 587 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
Here is a simple test to see if God gave you the right to choose to do a thing. Try to do it. If you can, He gave you that right.

I think I am going to change my tagline. How about:

"Murder, a God-given right. RobRoy.

595 posted on 07/05/2006 11:19:15 AM PDT by OmahaFields ("What have been its fruits? ... superstition, bigotry and persecution.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 585 | View Replies]

To: OmahaFields

>>The question is how many stay Christians after they get out?<<

Or more likely, how many really were in the first place.


596 posted on 07/05/2006 11:32:32 AM PDT by RobRoy (The Internet is about to do to Evolution what it did to Dan Rather. Information is power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 594 | View Replies]

To: OmahaFields

>>"Murder, a God-given right. RobRoy.<<

Feel free. It is true.


597 posted on 07/05/2006 11:33:00 AM PDT by RobRoy (The Internet is about to do to Evolution what it did to Dan Rather. Information is power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 595 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
"Murder, a God-given right. RobRoy.

Feel free. It is true.

I don't understand.

598 posted on 07/05/2006 11:45:44 AM PDT by OmahaFields ("What have been its fruits? ... superstition, bigotry and persecution.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 597 | View Replies]

To: trebb
Add a degree in science and $12.00 and you can get into the local zoo for a looksee at your relatives. Please note that none of my family line is on display there.

So everyone in your family all descended from Noah. Every race - blacks, whites, orientals - all of us came from Noah & his wife. Not only that but we've somehow evolved into all the different races of mankind in just a few thousand years. Amazing. It's also quite amazing that Noah was able to fit over 10 million species of animal life into a 3 story ship measuring 450' X 75'. I also find it quite amazing that the entire globe was under water - even Mt. Everest. If the water was that deep (at least 29,000 feet above sea level) - just where did all that water go when the "waters receded"?? Receded to where? The moon??

I find all that a little harder to believe than the fact that we and apes descended from a common ancestor.

Note - I did not say that we descended from apes. That's a strawman argument that you Creationists put out. (Also notice how I didn't call you by a flippant abbreviation.)

One more question that the anit-evolutionists don't ever seem to answer - why do some species of snakes have vestigal legs? Why would God create some snakes with legs and some without?

Any answer that doesn't involve "we can't understand the mysteries of God" would suffice.

599 posted on 07/05/2006 11:54:27 AM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 591 | View Replies]

To: OmahaFields

>>"Murder, a God-given right. RobRoy.
Feel free. It is true.

I don't understand.<<

Let me clarify: If you can do a thing, it is, by definition, a God given right to choose to do it and carry out the act. It means he has given you the authority to choose to do the thing, but also the responsibility for the consequences for doing it.

In other words, God gives you the right to murder someone, and then you suffer the consequences for doing it.

And it begs the question, what about the "rights" of the person you murdered? For that, you will need to read C.S. Lewis' book "The Problem of Pain".


600 posted on 07/05/2006 1:50:59 PM PDT by RobRoy (The Internet is about to do to Evolution what it did to Dan Rather. Information is power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 598 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 561-580581-600601-620 ... 661-664 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson