But the intellectuals have taken the approach that Coulter should not be viewed as offensive, but rather as misunderstood. At PrawfsBlawg (note the credit for the following quotation);
From an intra-faith perspective, one might question whether Coulter was speaking out of a genuine Christian spirit of faith and humility, or whether she was trivializing her own faith by using it as a talking point or, worse, as a vehicle in the age-old game of “From an intra-faith perspective, one might question whether Coulter was speaking out of a genuine Christian spirit of faith and humility, or whether she was trivializing her own faith by using it as a talking point or, worse, as a vehicle in the age-old game of “epater le bourgeois.” .”
So it just the age-old game of “epater le bourgeois,” is it? I looked it up. It means “to shock the middle class.” So this was a planned connivance to make people like me sit up and take notice of her shocking revelation?
Volokh, on the other hand, rationalizes the underpinnings of a prosteletizing religion to exclaim that this is to be expected, and Coulter was merely being impolite in saying so. But the thought was, well, okey dokey, since that’s what Christians believe.
So, I’ve decided to ponder long and hard on the subject, lacking any French phrases to characterize it that will show me to be the bon vivant that hides beneath my coarse exterior. Done. Here’s what I’ve come up with.
It doesn’t really matter whether this was a true believer publicly stating closely held religious beliefs, or whether this was a scheming conniver using a shocking statement to position herself as the darling of the religious right. Ann Coulter is not worth this much thought. She certainly isn’t worth deep analysis, though I can’t fault law professors for doing so considering there’s no new Harry Potter book for them to spend their time on.
For me, the answer is clear. She is an obvious media slut, saying outrageous things to promote herself to the farthest fringes of the right wing. But her commentary is presented in such an awkward, non-thought-provoking way as to suggest that she lacks the capacity to scheme, but merely to open her mouth and let dumb stuff come out.
If she had a pro-Christian purpose to her statements, she could have phrased her comments in a way that would clearly show her purpose. I believe she’s smart enough to have realized this, and experienced enough with the media to accomplished it.
So, having managed to present herself and her comments in a way that lacked any of the finesse of making a valid point on behalf of a prosteletizing religion to express a fair religious belief, and instead taking the gutter route, she gets no free pass in being offense. Ann Coulter is just an ordinary, offensive big mouth.
But this does beg a more important question: Why do they keep putting her on the air to spew her crap?
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Entertainment value is the only thing I can think of.
According to the movie Private Parts, people who hated radio shock-jock Howard Stern actually spent more average time per day listening to him than people who liked him, and the number one reason for listening to him, by people in either group, was to “see what he’ll say next.”
I don’t know if any of that story is true, but I think it offers considerable insight into your final question.
If Jews refuse to be “perfected”, then what?
“My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice…. And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people…. When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited.”
Even if s/he were humble, “speaking out of a genuine Christian spirit of faith and humility” would be no defense to bigotry. An antisemite is an antisemite.