I recently found myself at an unnamed right-wing blog, engaged in a heated debate about evolution. Or, I should say, about creationism, because that's the theory that really needs to justify its existence, if you ask me.
If you haven't already guessed on which side of the divide I stand, it was the unpopular one. The defense was composed mainly of one scientific-sounding type called Ernesto, who was referred to variously, and not altogether respectfully, as "Ernie" and also "Moron". For the prosecution, there was one particularly virulent specimen who went around labeling everybody who disagreed with him "darwiniacs", as in, "typical darwiniac drivel" (in response to one of my comments). Then there was the guy who suggested we citizens take it into our own hands to punish adulterers by killing them. What could go wrong?
I'm also disillusioned with commenters' use of the Muslim bogeyman (as in, "The judge would never have pulled this stunt with Mohammedans"). There are aspects of Islamic practice that all thinking people should find, to say the least, troublesome. And the kid glove treatment that many on the left accord Islamists, but would never extend to a group not actually devoted to their extermination, beggars belief. But not every issue has to suffer a comparison with Islam. Some can, shockingly I know, actually be argued on their own merits.
Has it come down to this? Is the choice between a socialist dystopia under liberal rule, or becoming an irrelevant backwater under conservatives? All I know is, I see my erstwhile allies in a completely different light. Not all of my fellow travelers in the conservative movement are fighting for individual liberty and limited government. Some are pursuing values deeply inimical to these, and, in the process, rising to embody the ugliest caricatures of them conjured by the left.