WWCSLD? (What would C.S. Lewis Do?)

Well, the commenters on the big unsightly post from the left took umbredge with the fact that my book invokes the memory of the great C.S. Lewis:

Cadillac Christianists are running the show…and I’m sure C. S. Lewis would have been appalled.

I don’t know as I would say C.S. Lewis was a Republican, nor even a republican what with his being an Englishman and all.

However, J Crowley of Enter the Jabberwock posted the longest post:

TK: I think C.S. Lewis would actually be slightly appalled by the fundamentalist Christians in this country.

First of all, is it possible to be slighly appalled? As appalled means “To fill with consternation or dismay.” does that mean Lewis would only be on about a quarter of a tank?

The thing is, though, I think that fundamentalists in the U.S. just assume that he’d agree with them simply because he’s Christian.

No, we actually read his writings. It was Lewis who came up with the ultimate answer to the idea that Christ was merely “a good man” (Lord, liar, or lunatic). Lewis wrote Mere Christianity, the Narnia series. More to the point, where my Screwtape bears some similarity to Lewis’ can be found in “Screwtape Proposes a Toast” where Lewis takes on political correctness in his day:

Democracy is the word with which you must lead them by the nose. The good work which our philological experts have already done in the corruption of human language makes it unnecessary to warn you that they should never be allowed to give this word a clear and definable meaning. They won’t.

It will never occur to them that democracy is properly the name of a political system, even a system of voting, and that this has only the most remote and tenuous connection with what you are trying to sell them.

Nor of course must they ever be allowed to raise Aristotle’s question: whether “democratic behaviour” means the behaviour that democracies like or the behaviour that will preserve a democracy. For if they did, it could hardly fail to occur to them that these need not be the same.

You are to use the word purely as an incantation; if you like, purely for its selling power. It is a name they venerate. And of course it is connected with the political ideal that men should be equally treated. You then make a stealthy transition in their minds from this political ideal to a factual belief that all men are equal. Especially the man you are working on. As a result you can use the word democracy to sanction in his thought the most degrading (and also the least enjoyable) of human feelings. You can get him to practise, not only without shame but with a positive glow of self-approval, conduct which, if undefended by the magic word, would be universally derided.

Lewis was perhaps not a dyed in the wool, far right wing Conservative but he understood the importance of tradition and the danger of what we call political correctness. Indeed, no one who has suggested that C.S. Lewis would be furious with me has provided any quotes from his works, any type of understanding of his philosophy to explain how I’m doing a horrible injustice.

More to the point, the Screwtape Reports never had a point of accurately predicting what C.S. Lewis would think of political issues, only adapting the style of Lewis’ most well-read work to 21st Century American Democrats.

The person goes off to attack me for labeling the pro-abortion movement pro-abortion, accusing me of vastly simplifying the debate rather than following the example of our friends on the left who banty about terms like Wingnut as well as their popular moniker, “anti-choice”. The most neutral political word for pro-lifers is anti-abortion and the most logical conclusion is if someone’s opponents are anti-abortion, the opponents are then pro-abortion. The National Organization for Women and Planned Parenthood are not pleased when abortion rates drop and abortion doctors stop plying their deadly trade. They fear the name when there will be no abortions in America and will even keep unethical dangerous abortionists in business. Read Lime 5 or visit Real Choice to see examples.

Explain how they’re not pro-abortion when they oppose any reasonable legislation including parental notification/consent or even regulations require abortion clinics meet sanitary guidelines?

Andrea, however got in the best line of this whole exchange. Crowley wrote regarding embryos in fertility clinics:

I’m not seeing all these Republican women lining up to have them implanted and bring them to term.

Andrea replied:

Maybe you should start Operation Yellow Pacifier.

This, of course is a reference to Operation Yellow Elephant. Classic, she’s really getting the hang of this.

Trackbacked to TMH Bacon Bits and Basil’s Blog