As bloggers go, Allahu is pretty akbar, but apparently not quite akbar enough to get Newt Gingrich’s point about the long-term goal of evangelical Christians to convert everyone to Christianity. Gingrich said:

Anybody on the left who hopes that when people like Reverend Falwell disappear that the opportunity to convert all of America has gone with them fundamentally misunderstands why institutions like this were created.

To which Allah responded:

Does he mean “convert all of America” … to Christianity? All religions seek converts, but I’ve been assuming that the nonviolent ones, in modern times at least, try to limit themselves to people who are seeking spiritual fulfillment but haven’t found it yet. Supply meeting demand, in other words. I wasn’t aware that Christian conservatives had taken the entire body politic, seekers or not, as their quota.

To which I say: “reality, meet Seinfeld,” and “forest, meet trees.” Those easily offended by religious discussions are invited to skip the rest of this post.

Look, I have no doubt that Allah, an atheist (!), has no desire to go out and convert all his fellow Americans to atheism, Allah-worship, or any combination thereof. He probably figures, “Sure, all them silly religionists are full of crap, but as long as they’re not hurting anyone, who cares? Whatever floats their boat, etc.” And therefore, he’s equally perplexed that evangelical Christians cannot or will not exhibit the same “live and let live” charity in return.

Trouble is, the views are not symmetrical. It’s not as though anyone believes there is some perverse god named Atheos who deliberately hides in the shadows to make the world look as though no God existed, and then rewards everyone who rationally (albeit incorrectly) concludes that there is no God, and punishes everyone who irrationally (albeit correctly) concludes that there is one. From an atheist’s perspective, there is no perceived reward to atheism or punishment for failure to adhere to it. The only reward is the fleeting smugness of knowing you are right and 90% of the population is wrong.

Evangelical Christians enjoy that same smugness, of course, as do adherents to every other world view. However, that’s not the whole perceived benefit or punishment, nor even most of it. To them, the big prize is what happens after you die, with eternal bliss awaiting all who join the right religion and eternal suffering awaiting those who do not. It might be different if evangelicals believed in a universally loving God who offered a brief slap on the wrist to those who prayed to the wrong God (or no god) throughout their lives, and then let them in to heaven with everyone else. It might even be different if they believed in a vengeful but just God, who rewarded people for doing good things in life while punishing them (in proportion to their wrongdoing) for the bad. In that world, sincere atheists would probably even get a slight bonus, with that God would say “nice work, you did the right thing even though you thought no one was watching.” But they don’t believe that. Be the most moral guy on the planet, but guess the wrong God, and you’ll burn in hell forever, right alongside Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Gandhi. Be Charles Manson, but accept Jesus Christ on your death bed, and you’ll dine with 11 of the 12 apostles. In their world, everything - literally, everything - turns on whether you are or are not a Christian, and the right kind to boot.

Think of the Seinfeld episode in which Elaine dated a guy who turned out to be a Bible thumper who made no effort to convert her. Initially, she was mildly annoyed by all the God stuff and by his irrational perception that she was going to burn in hell for all eternity, but in the end, she was far more offended by the fact he displayed no interest in saving her from that horrible fate he thought she was going to endure.

I submit that to an evangelical Christian, worldwide religious “imperialism” is not only morally justifiable, but a moral imperative. If Gingrich was wrong to say what he said, his only error was in limiting his imperialism to the United States, when in fact he ought to be converting the entire (quadrilateral) world. Those who do not subscribe to this view can take some comfort, however, from the fact that even most conservative Christians in this country have allowed their theology to be corrupted enough by American culture to embrace religious liberty as well as religion, and therefore to general limit their efforts at conversion to lawful, non-coercive suasion. From a purely Christian, non-American perspective, however, it’s not even clear they should be so limited. If God doesn’t believe in religious freedom, why should we? If God punishes heresy as severely as most evangelical Christians believe he does, then the kindest, most caring thing we as a society could do for those heretics would be to impose lesser punishments of our own, making punishment swift and certain, while those lost souls are still capable of repenting and avoiding the much harsher punishment that awaits them on the other side.