A funny quote from the Sojourners e-mail bulletin, referring to Pat Robertson’s comments about assasinating Hugo Chavez: “Who would Jesus assasinate?” Unfortunately, you have to register to see the “Sojomail” columns online, so I can’t link you to it; actually, the rest of the commentary is a bit over-the-top, and I haven’t seen any Evangelicals defending Robertson’s comments, but you gotta admit the headline is funny.
“The stories … may not include alcohol consumption by Christian characters, dancing, card playing, gambling or games of chance (including raffles), explicit scatological terms, hero and heroine remaining overnight together alone, Halloween celebrations or magic, or the mention of intimate body parts.”
Writer guidelines from Steeple Hill, the Christian imprint of romance novel giant Harlequin.
(Hat Tip: Christianity Today.)
I wonder how the New Testament would fare under these silly writer’s guidelines? Let’s see what a letter from the Harlequin editors to the NT authors might have looked like:
Conductor over the intercom: “Attention passengers. Now arriving at our final stop, New York Penn Station. After this stop, this train will proceed to the railway terminal in Sunnyside, Queens for servicing. You do not want to spend your day in Sunnyside, Queens.”
I was listening to the Sean Hannity show on my way into the office this afternoon. He was discussing the Florida District Court’s ruling denying the plaintiffs’ request for a temporary restraining order under the federal statute passed by Congress (the “Schiavo Act”). Hannity stated that he believed the court’s opinion did not even reference the Schiavo Act. He was hammering the federal court’s decision as symptomatic of the arrogance of the judiciary. Senator Rick Santorum came on the Hannity show and claimed the Schiavo Act required the federal court to order the reinsertion of nutrition and hydration tubes pending a full hearing on the merits. Santorum also decried the ruling as an abuse of judicial power. This seems to be the Christian Right’s theme: a National Right to Life Committee spokesman referred to the federal court’s decision as a “gross abuse of judicial power”; Christian Defense Coalition Director Pat Mahoney, quoted in a Focus on the Family article, attributed the federal court’s decision to “an arrogant and activist federal judiciary.”
Unfortunately, all of these comments about judicial activism are wrong.