The Mullah

There's a wonderful book review in the current tnr by Andrew Sullivan that has taught me something new about Daniel Lapin and his kind. The book under review is The Enemy at Home. Its author, Dinesh D'Souza, concludes that secular liberalism is likely to win the day in America, and argues that American Christians must respond by making common cause with (wait for it) Muslims. Yes, Muslims.

Men and women in the West who are still devoted to the life of faith should know that those closest to them in this world are Muslims

That's D'Souza writing about Islam, but couldn't it just as easily be Daniel Lapin writing about Christianity? Hasn't he ever essentially said "Jews who are still devoted to the life of faith should know that those closest to them in this world are Christians?" I'm sure he has.

Reading the review, and Sullivan's counter-arguments (and snark) I think I better understand Lap-dog's reasons for seeking a Jewish alliance with Christians. And what it may reveal about Lappy's own Judaism is really quite ugly: Money quote:

He does not seem especially interested in God. He writes nothing about his own faith, whatever it is. His interest is not in the metaphysics or the mysteries of religion, but in the uses of religion for social control. (Somewhere Machiavelli is smiling.) In the goal of maintaining patriarchy, banning divorce, outlawing homosexuality, and policing blasphemy, any orthodoxy will do. [Lapin's] religion, in a sense, is social conservatism. He is not going to let a minor matter such as the meanings of God get in the way of his religion.