OPINION:
This past week, David French wrote in The New York Times that to “save conservatism from itself,” he is voting for Kamala Harris.
You heard that right. This man, who appears to fancy himself the evangelical conscience of America, just told you that to save conservatism, you should vote for the Marxism of Black Lives Matter, the misogyny of drag queens, the infanticide of Planned Parenthood, the racism of critical race theory, the sexual exploitation of your sons and daughters in the public schools and the wholesale trafficking of children at our southern border.
What Mr. French essentially said is as logical as telling you that to save your marriage, you need to get a divorce. In the words of George Orwell, “To safeguard the revolution,” we must “establish a dictatorship.” Mr. French might as well have come right out and told us that he believes that the only way to save Christianity is to bow to Satan.
This is the upside-down world of what Megan Basham calls the “Shepherds for Sale” in her New York Times bestseller by that name. It is the equivalent of Esau saying that to save his birthright, he’s willing to sell it all for a steaming hot mess of political porridge. It’s the Orwellian nonsense of doublespeak. It’s the delusion of “Animal Farm.” It’s akin to Gomer telling Hosea that because she wants to save her fidelity, she’s going to prostitute herself.
Robert A.J. Gagnon — an evangelical shepherd who, unlike Mr. French, has not sold his soul to George Soros — recently wrote that the reality of politics today is that when you vote for the party of Ms. Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, you are effectively voting for three irrefutable political imperatives.
First, a vote for Ms. Harris is a vote to “promote the destruction of a biology-based gender. [It’s a vote for] transgenderism, and all ’gender-queer’ ideologies” while at “codifying all dissenters as “hateful, ignorant bigots.”
Second, a vote for Ms. Harris is a vote to federalize the “taking of innocent prenatal human life … for the whole nine months of pregnancy” and even up to and after birth, in the case of botched abortions.
Third, a vote for Ms. Harris is a vote to “erode the constitutional safeguards of free speech and free exercise of religion.” It is also a vote “against [all] those who dissent from [the aforementioned] agendas.” These three objectives, Mr. Gagnon says, are the “chief idols of all Democrats and the raison d’etre for their Party.”
Mr. Gagnon concludes: “I am going to say here and now: No conservative and no Evangelical in his or her right mind could possibly vote for Harris/Walz, the most hard-left presidential ticket in history. [These “Evangelicals for Harris“] pretend to be concerned with private morality that has no public policy consequences while supporting a regime that imposes public compliance with an extreme-left sexual agenda in law and judicial decisions, amounting to nothing less than state-sponsored child abuse. [This is inexcusable] on the part of any intelligent Christian.”
If you listen, you can hear the weeping and gnashing of teeth from the likes of Mr. French and his lemming hordes: “What about Trump?” they reflexively shout with sanctimonious smugness. “We would gladly give up America’s freedom to save America from itself. The rudeness of the Orange Man is just a bridge too far. We cannot cross it.”
Well, to all those parroting these platitudes, Mrs. Basham responds well in “Shepherds for Sale”: “Let’s be clear,” she says, “no one casts a ballot for Donald Trump because [of his bad behavior]. … The legal protection of [such] is not a feature of the Trump campaign’s platform. In contrast [Harris and Watz] promise voters that electing them [will result in codifying their favored evils into national law]. They make this part of their platform, and a significant number of voters [will] cast their ballots for them based on those promises. Given this, which vote is more morally compromising for the Christian?”
Back to Orwell: “The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. [It is] not interested in the good of others; [it is] interested solely in power, pure power. … One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. … The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.”
Yes, we do understand. “Evangelicals for Harris” such as Mr. French may be willing to sell their souls for the sake of Times Square’s popularity and the Beltway’s power. Still, we should pray to God that the rest of America remembers on Nov. 5 that these people are not shepherds but rather little more than wolves among the sheep.
• Everett Piper (dreverettpiper.com, @dreverettpiper), a columnist for The Washington Times, is a former university president and radio host. He is the author of “Not a Daycare: The Devastating Consequences of Abandoning Truth” (Regnery).
Please read our comment policy before commenting.