Yglesias Award Nominee

“Do I worry about the negative costs, abuses and cultural consequences of unbridled recreational pot use? Of course I do. But when you get past all the ‘Rocky Mountain High’ jokes and look past all the cable-news caricatures, the legalized marijuana entrepreneurs here in my adopted home state are just like any other entrepreneurs: securing capital, paying taxes, complying with a thicket of regulations, taking risks and providing goods and services that ordinary people want and need. Including our grateful family, ” – Michelle Malkin.

Update from a reader:

I have to say, it is odd to see one person win the Malkin Award for crazy right-wing comments, and then have Michelle Malkin, whom the award is named after, win the Yglesias Award, given to those who offer commentary that goes against political type. It’s the little things that make life sweet.

Yglesias Award Nominee

“Changing the employee conduct policy to allow someone in a same-sex marriage who is a professed believer in Jesus Christ to work for us makes our policy more consistent with our practice on other divisive issues. It also allows us to treat all of our employees the same way: abstinence outside of marriage, and fidelity within marriage,” – Richard Stearns, president of World Vision U.S., one of the largest evangelical aid organizations in the world, in Christianity Today, evangelicalism’s flagship publication.

Yglesias Award Nominee

by Matthew Sitman

“Honestly, I think if I were in your situation, with what I take to be your beliefs and aspirations and attractions, the odds are that I’d end up seeking exactly what you’re seeking — a stable, long-term same-sex relationship. And I don’t think there’s anything in my political worldview that would deny that aspiration a place in society, or deny you the opportunity to pursue happiness. …

I don’t see a way for my church — and yours by baptism — to bless same-sex unions absent a true doctrinal revolution, which if it happened would essentially involve Catholicism becoming a very different kind of church and faith than the one that I understand it to be. (The issue isn’t just a matter of reinterpreting a few biblical passages; the conjugal, procreative view of marriage is woven into Christian doctrine in ways that would require truly radical revisionism to undo.) So the position of gay people who are raised Catholic or Christian, or feel drawn — or in your case, perhaps someday drawn back — to Christianity is, I expect, going to continue to be fraught and complicated and uniquely challenging, at least barring some sort of shift that I can’t conceive of at the moment.

This fraughtness will take (and already takes) various forms in a post-closet world:

There will be churches that bless same-sex unions, but they will have an at-best-uneasy relationship to their own scriptures and traditions; there will be gay Christians who attend more orthodox churches while maintaining relationships that conflict with their faith’s official teachings, and who live (like all of us, but more so than many) with unresolved tensions in their spiritual life; and there will be gay Christians who embrace some sort of celibate vocation, and try to carve out or revive (as various gay Christian writers are trying to do) forms of religious community that are specific to their situation.

If I were attracted to men and otherwise held exactly the same theological views, my beliefs would impel me toward the third option. But as I suggested at the beginning of this response, it’s entirely possible that under those circumstances my beliefs would bend or break, and I’d end up in a different situation, a different church, or simply end up lapsed, skeptical, secular.

What I’d want for society, though, is for all of those different possibilities to be available, and for them not to be necessarily set against each other: For the love and fidelity of gay couples to be respected, and for gay people to be free to pursue happiness the way most straights pursue it, but for the door to still be open to other ideas and possibilities as well,” – Ross Douthat, answering a question from a gay, lapsed-Catholic reader.

Yglesias Award Nominee

“Basic publishing ethics dictate that fake articles be printed in clearly different type fonts and column widths, be enclosed by borderlines and be identified prominently as advertising. By contrast, as native advertising is most often practiced – and as the Federal Trade Commission has very much noticed – publishers allow their advertisers to run content strikingly similar in look and style to the real editorial. The label “advertising” is almost never applied. Instead they use confusing wiggle words like “sponsored content” or, even more obscurely, “from around the web”. The result is not merely deceiving to readers, it bespeaks a conspiracy of deception among publishers, advertisers and their agencies,” – Bob Garfield, at the Guardian, the latest publication to embrace the unethical deception of “native advertizing.”

Garfield also has a good round-up of those outlets who have now embraced whoredom: The Economist. Forbes. The Atlantic. The Huffington Post. The Washington Post. Time Inc. The New York Times, and, most recently, Yahoo.

Yglesias Award Nominee

“There are several possible explanations for why Republicans would not denounce Nugent and his statement in unqualified terms. One is that they aren’t all that offended by what Nugent said. A second is Nugent is on their “team” and therefore needs to be treated with kid gloves. A third explanation is that they fear that in denouncing Nugent they will upset elements of the GOP base. Any of these explanations is an indictment,” – Pete Wehner, Commentary.

Yglesias Award Nominees

“We recognize that the scourge of AIDS has been devastating to the people of Uganda. Measures must be taken to encourage faithful marital love and to discourage sexual immorality of every type.  It is critical, however, that these measures be shaped in a just and Christian manner, and not in a punitive spirit. Harshness and excess must be avoided.  Those who experience homosexual desire and yield to it should not be singled out for extreme measures or for revulsion.  Homosexual persons, whether they struggle to live chastely or, alas, do not, are human beings. They are children of God made in His very image and likeness. They are our brothers and sisters.  Christ loves them as he loves all of us,” – the late Chuck Colson, Robert P. George, and Timothy George, in a 2009 letter to fellow Christians in Uganda. Mercifully, not all American Christians are aiding and abetting the anti-gay pogroms and violence and persecution now cresting in the developing world.

Yglesias Award Nominee

“One need not endorse same-sex marriage to believe that the rising tide of anti-gay legislation in other parts of the world is quite troubling, that gays deserve to be defended against persecution, and that the Christian church is one institution that might have some power, at least in some nations and in some circumstances, to make a positive difference. Quite apart from the moral merits of this approach, think about the witness it would signal to the world if Christians spoke out in defense of gays in Nigeria and elsewhere and why they deserve protection against imprisonment and violence” – Pete Wehner, Commentary.

Yglesias Award Nominee

“Part of it, I think — and I hate to say this, because these are my people — but I hate to say it, but it’s racial. If you go to town halls people say things like, ‘These people have different cultural customs than we do.’ And that’s code for race,” – a “Southern Republican lawmaker“, on opposition to immigration reform.