Don’t Fear the Pistol-Packing Pentecostal (For Being a Pistol-Packing Pentecostal)



10 comments
By Matt Sutton

It is true. I have been unfaithful. While my ultimate loyalties are to this blog, I have been on occasion posting elsewhere. Here is what I promise will be my last word on Sarah Palin (unless she and McCain actually win).

Sarah Palin has problems. A lot of them. Nevertheless, we have nothing to fear from her faith. Ever since John McCain announced that the pistol-packing, moose-dressing, beehive-sporting hockey mom from Alaska was his vice presidential nominee, journalists, bloggers, Democrats and even the cast of Saturday Night Live have all been in a fury. Does Palin speak in tongues? Does she believe that the battle of Armageddon is imminent? Does she believe in casting out demons? Does she talk to God? Does she believe the Rapture is coming?

The answer to all of these questions is probably yes. But so what?

The rest of the article is here, over at the History News Network.


10 comments:

Anonymous at: October 20, 2008 at 12:12 PM said...

ok, but can we really separate her support for a constitutional ban on gay marriage and her opposition to Roe v. Wade from her religious background? Abortion and gay marriage have, in many ways, become *the* defining issues for a lot of religious conservatives. We can dress Palin's political stances up in secular garb, but that doesn't make their roots any less pious.

Edward J Blum at: October 20, 2008 at 2:05 PM said...

Sutton's taking a lot of heat for this essay at HNN. I'm surprised by some of it - that his work is too much focused on the present. Every single article at HNN these days is on contemporary issues, and at least Sutton gives it some historical context.

Anonymous at: October 20, 2008 at 3:59 PM said...

there are only 3 comments on this on HNN, and only two of those say the essay is too presentist. That's a lot of heat?

Paul Harvey at: October 20, 2008 at 4:30 PM said...

Matt: I'm hurt (sniff sniff). How could you do this to me (sniff, sniff . . . ).

Actually, the piece is as good as the comments on HNN are stupid and asinine (par for the course for commentors over there). Don't people have better things to do with their lives than project their unhappiness onto some moderately-toned piece posted on the internet?

Edward J Blum at: October 20, 2008 at 4:33 PM said...

I'm taking a lot of heat for my comments about the comments about Sutton. - anonymous

Matt Sutton at: October 20, 2008 at 4:50 PM said...

Thanks Paul and Ed for your comments, and for not being afraid to use your names. I can stand to take a little criticism for entering the political fray, even from the folks at HNN who apparently need to work on their reading comprehension skills.

Anonymous #1: regarding "can we really separate her support for a constitutional ban on gay marriage and her opposition to Roe v. Wade from her religious background?"

I think we can, and should. There is no doubt that one's religious belief influences his/her politics. But at the same time, we cannot predict on the basis of belief how someone will govern. If we could, Catholic politicians would all support the ban on abortion. The point of my piece is that Palin has given us plenty of insight into her political views (including her view on abortion), which should be the foundation of the debate. It is unfair, however, to assume that because she is of a particular religious persuasion, we can predict how she will govern.

John G. Turner at: October 20, 2008 at 9:07 PM said...

Matt, I like how your piece divorces theological beliefs from political positions (yes, they can inform policies but usually don't). You are completely on target on the pragmatism of politicians, religious and otherwise.

Ralph Luker at: October 21, 2008 at 12:50 AM said...

"... we can predict how she will govern." Heaven forbid!

rjc at: October 21, 2008 at 10:07 AM said...

Jason Bivins approaches the Palin/religion/politics issue from a different angle over at the Immanent Frame blog. It's worth taking a look at. I think he's got a great perspective here.

http://www.ssrc.org/blogs/immanent_frame/2008/10/21/a-speck-a-fleck-and-voila-a-governor/

Jason Bivins at: October 23, 2008 at 11:19 AM said...

Hey, at least one person read it! Thanks for the good word, rjc.

newer post older post