home
RSS
My Take: 'Personhood' failure shows myth of Christian takeover
A poster opposing the so-called personhood amendment, officially called Proposition 26, in Mississippi.
November 9th, 2011
08:41 PM ET

My Take: 'Personhood' failure shows myth of Christian takeover

Editor's Note: Stephen Prothero, a Boston University religion scholar and author of "God is Not One: The Eight Rival Religions that Run the World," is a regular CNN Belief Blog contributor.

By Stephen Prothero, Special to CNN

(CNN) - On Wednesday, my students and I discussed Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris. Like other atheism books, this is a rant against the unreasonableness of religion. In that sense, at least, it is timeless.

But it derives much of its urgency from its claim that the Christian Right is taking over contemporary American politics.

As I was preparing for class, I learned that Mississippi’s voters had rejected the so-called “Personhood Amendment,” which would have outlawed abortion in the state by affirming as a matter of law that human life begins at conception.

Which leads me back to Harris’s fear that the Christian Right is overrunning the nation. This fear finds its mirror image in the fear of the Christian Right that the nation is being taken over by secular humanists.

These two views, while diametrically opposed, are strangely symbiotic. Together they fuel a culture war on which each side depends for both its identity and its mission. (Where would Jerry Falwell be without secular humanism? Where would Sam Harris be without the Moral Majority?)

But both fears are just that: fears. Or, to put it another way, if conservative Christians cannot pass an anti-abortion amendment to the state constitution in Mississippi, where can they pass one?

Granted, this amendment was particularly extreme. It would likely have outlawed not only abortion but also the morning-after pill, and with no exceptions in either case for rape. Even the Roman Catholic Church and some national right-to-life groups thought it was going too far.

Still, this ballot initiative went down to a double-digit defeat, failing by a 16-point margin in a state that has been described as the buckle of the Bible Belt.

So what is the lesson here? To me, what Mississippi’s voters are telling us is that the New Atheists and the Christian Right both have it wrong. No, the country is not being overrun by crazy Christians. But neither is it being overrun by secular humanists.

The fact of the matter is that most Americans are in the middle on controversial questions such as abortion. Those that now “represent” us in Washington, both on the left and on the right, don’t actually represent us in the sense of mirroring our views.

Iif we had assigned 12 random Americans to the so-called super-committee charged with dealing with the budget deficit by November 23, our chances of a compromise agreement would have been much greater than the current mix of 6 congressional Democrats and 6 congressional Republicans.

In One Nation After All, Boston College professor Alan Wolfe argued that the United States isn’t as polarized as we imagine, at least not outside of Washington, D.C. Yesterday Mississippi’s voters said basically the same thing.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Stephen Prothero.

- CNN Belief Blog contributor

Filed under: Abortion • Atheism • Culture wars • Mississippi • Politics

soundoff (177 Responses)
  1. Mike Kendall

    I can't believe the stupidity I hear from the CNN comentators like this guy. He is a person who believes in everything and stands for nothing. Clearly he doesn't have any real opinions or convictions.

    December 2, 2011 at 10:25 am |
  2. Sir Craig

    Well, I tried posting a decent argument, but it seems CNN has made a complete hash of these comment sections. Nice job.

    December 2, 2011 at 8:40 am |
  3. Rob

    "Actually, faith is believing in something greater than yourself."

    This was a response to someone who asserted that faith is belief in something without proof. It's sad that some people like to redefine terms when arguing, but in fact faith means belief without proof... not necessarily belief in something greater than oneself.

    To prove my point, here's what an online dictionary has to say:

    * confidence or trust in a person or thing
    * belief that is not based on proof
    * belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion
    * belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.
    * a system of religious belief
    * the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.
    * the observance of this obligation; fidelity to one's promise, oath, allegiance, etc.
    * Christian Theology: the trust in God and in His promises as made through Christ and the Scriptures by which humans are justified or saved.

    Note that the sense of "belief in something greater than oneself" (re)definition only approximates the religious definitions given above (item 3 and later), but actually means something slightly different. (The whole "greater than oneself" bit is something you hear a lot as a justification for why 12-step programs are not an endorsement of religion - supposedly, this doesn't have to be God or even a god, just something you view as a greater being or force.) There's a reason you won't find the "belief in something greater than oneself" definition for faith in mainstream dictionaries.

    Sorry, but the most sensible, concise, encompassing definition of "faith" as it's been used in this article and discussion is: belief in something for which you have no rational proof.

    December 1, 2011 at 4:10 pm |
1 2 3
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.