So I’m reading around the web on the reaction to Brit Hume’s Tiger-should-convert comments, and I found this nonsense from some blogger I’ve never heard of in response to my column on Avatar:

I had written:

What would have been controversial is if — somehow — Cameron had made a movie in which the good guys accepted Jesus Christ into their hearts.

And in response this blogger at “The Patriot’s Quill” writes:

That a conservative Jew feels the need to pander to his conservative audience by proselytizing for Christianity is a quite remarkable testament to the failure of American conservatism to speak to an audience beyond the Christian pulpit. It should also dishearten those conservatives who cling to the improbable belief that Jews will soon begin deserting the Democratic party in large numbers for the GOP, and those who fear that the GOP is becoming a largely insular, regional party. No, Christianity is not a “regional” religion per se, but this brand of fundamentalist Christianity is largely relegated to the American South and has little hope of establishing itself in the more urban, industrialized, more culturally diverse and better educated regions of the nation.

Where this isn’t clichéd, it’s just dopey. There’s no proselytizing in that column and if you think there is, it’s a sign of your own insecurities not of my need to pander, never mind proselytize, to anyone.

If this guy wanted to whine about how I was buying into the standard conservative narrative about “Christophobia” and Christians being the only permissible victims in pop culture, that would be fair game. Many — but by no means all — liberals disagree with that line of argument, and that’s fine. But I think that the complaint is largely true — and that was the obvious point of that line.

The notion that I’m hawking Christianity here is just stupid, revealingly stupid. It’s almost as if saying anything in defense of Christians or even saying anything about Christians that isn’t objectively criticial counts as “proselytizing.” After all, plainly read, my comments in that column are neither in fact pro- nor anti-Christian.

Oh, one last point. Yes, I’m a conservative and I’m a Jew, but I’m not a “conservative Jew.” Indeed, many conservative Jews I know don’t even think I count as a Jew.

I don’t know if this guy thinks otherwise or was just a little sloppy. But take it for what it’s worth.

Update: From a reader:

Jonah,
The person whose e-mail you quoted (and who probably regards himself as one of the “better educated” people that he mentions) needs to study his American history more intently. Evangelical Christianity has always had a great appeal to the American urban areas and many of the most significant “revivals” have taken place in those parts of the country (i.e. NYC and Chicago in 1858-59). As historian George Marsden pointed out in his landmark 1980 book, Fundamentalism and American Culture, what we commonly call Christian Fundamentalism today first arose in the urban centers among the well-educated.
To cling to the outmoded idea that secularization with its accompanying values of higher education and culture sophistication (but just how truly “sophisticated” is modern American culture? — another debate) will necessarily lead to a weakening of evangelical Christianity’s attraction is not proven by the historical record.
Thanks for all you do!
A loyal reader and supporter,