In this post we will complete our examination of Part 1 of Robert G. “Delegate Bob” Marshall new book, Reclaiming the Republic: How Christians and Other Conservatives Can Win Back America. Here is our progress thus far.
- First Post: We introduced the book.
- Second Post: We reviewed the prefatory material.
- Third Post: We summarized the first two chapters of Part 1 of Marshall’s book, Think Like the Founders.
In this post we will summarize the content of the last three chapters of Part 1 of Marshall’s book. Why group these three chapters together? They all relate to the subject of “tolerance.”
Chapter 3 – Judges Are Human Too Or Bigotry From The Bench
What is thinking like the Founders? Marshall never provides a succinct description. Instead, chapters 1 and two of Part 1 describes the checks and balances the Constitution places on the Federal Government’s judiciary branch. Why? Marshall begins chapter 3 with this title: “Judges Are Human Too Or Bigotry From The Bench.” People, even judges, abuse power.
Marshall illustrates the problem of human fallibility, the need for constitutional checks and balances, by focusing on Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Hugo Black, a one-time member of the KKK. In chapter 3 Marshall argues that because of his bigotry Black incorrectly argued for an interpretation of the First Amendment that has enable the Federal Government to wrongfully interfere with the free exercise of religion.
Chapter 4 – A Note About Tolerance Or The Stick With Which They Beat Us
In chapter 4, Marshall examines tolerance, that is, the behavior we exercise to avoid bigotry. What is a bigot?
Definition of bigot
: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
The definition suggests it is wrong to be inappropriately intolerant. What does appropriate tolerance looks like? What is appropriate tolerance? Marshall quotes Bishop Fulton J. Sheen.
Tolerance is an attitude of reasoned patience toward evil, and a forbearance that restrains us from showing anger or inflicting punishment. But what is the important than the definition is the field of its application. The important thing here is this: Tolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons. Tolerance applies to the erring. Intolerance to the error.
In Chapter 4 Marshall explains how advocates for the homosexual agenda confuse the tolerance of bad ideas and the intolerance of persons. As a result advocates for the homosexual agenda end up characterizing the tolerant as bigots because they are only willing to tolerate homosexuals, not affirm their behavior.
Chapter 5 – The Intolerance Of Those Advocating “Tolerance” Or Religious Freedom Slipping Away
In a relatively short time homosexual rights advocates have elevated same-sex “marriage” to a protected “right”. How did this happen? Using Madison Avenue tactics, Marshall argues that the homosexual lobby has convinced much of the American public that gay rights follow naturally upon the legitimate civil rights movement of the 1960s. The homosexual lobby has succeeded in selling the idea that homosexuality is like race, an immutable condition, not a behavioral choice.
What is at stake? Religious freedoms currently protected by the First Amendment. If the Federal Government elevates those engaging in LGBTQ behaviors to protected class like a racial minority, then the law will require Christians to affirm behavior that is in direct conflict with Biblical teachings.