CULTURAL REVOLUTIONSrnABORTION has been a part of thernAmerican national rehgion for severalrndecades, and in February a federal courtrnin Oregon decided that it was blasphemyrnto criticize the ritual sacrifice of unbornrnchildren. At issue was a pro-life websitern(“The Nuremberg Files”) featuring Western-rnstyle wanted posters for “physicians”rnwho made their living by practicing infanticide.rnIn the course of the trial, both sidesrnwrapped themselves up in the hallowedrnrobes of civil-rights marchers, but inrnawarding $107 million to Planned Parenthoodrnand other merchants of death,rnthe jurors made one thing clear: Civilrnrights, including the freedom of speechrnguaranteed by the First Amendment, arernrestricted to members of the establishedrnchurch and not to the surviving practitionersrnof the Christian faith. Perhapsrnthis judgment will persuade one or twornmembers of the pro-life movement torndrop their infantile invocations of DredrnScott, slavery, and segregation as the ultimaternevils. Perhaps they will even comernto realize that the murder of millions ofrninnocent children is a more seriousrncrime than incivility or prejudice or evenrnslavery.rnIn any event, it is too late in the day torndelude ourselves with fantasies aboutrnmoral restoration. What we regard asrnmoral truth (about abortion and divorce,rnfor example) is, by and large, an expressionrnof an explicitly Christian moralit}’rnthat is accepted by a small number ofrnnon-Christians. Pagan societies may regardrnabortion as unpleasant or tasteless,rnbut few of them would take the troublernto criminalize the murder of childrenrnwho cannot defend themselves. Ofrncourse, pagan Rome did not give specialrnprivileges to abortionists who violatedrnthe highest principle of their profession.rnThat step forward was left to the post-rnChristian—or rather, anti-Christian —rngovernments of Europe and NorthrnAmerica.rnIf we are no longer free to use “Wanted”rnposters as a political satire againstrnthose we regard as murderers, the obviousrnconsequence is that we are no longerrnfree to describe abortion as murder.rnChristians had better let this fact sink in:rnThe United States is not their countryrnanymore, and the leaders of the so-calledrnChristian right could do nothing tornchange things, even if they wanted to.rnwhich they don’t, any more than policemenrnwant crime to go away or environmentalrnregulators want to clean up pollution.rnCive them your money, if itrnmakes you feel better (that is all theyrnwant, in any case), but rid yourself of therndelusion that the people who voted forrnBill Clinton are ever going to give us ourrncountr)’ back. They won’t.rnPaul Weyrich has belatedly come tornagree with us on this point, though it isrnhighly unlikely that any Washingtonrnconservative will ever understand whatrnwe are up against. They will always findrnsigns of hope, whenever Abe Rosenthalrnsays something sensible or Hollywoodrnproduces a “wholesome” lying moviernabout Moses. The response of the Christianrnright to The Prince of Egypt shouldrnreally have been the last straw for anyonernwho takes these latter-day Elmer Gantrysrnand Father Coughlins seriously.rnSo long as Christians continue tornthink of themselves as in the mainstreamrnor as a “silent majority,” they will be incapablernof resisting this anti-Christianrnregime, even in their private lives. Asrnlong as Christian activists continue to fallrninto the trap of endorsing films producedrnby anti-Christian studios like Disney andrnDreamworks, they will be turning overrnthe consciences and characters of Americanrnchildren to Herod and his friends.rn— Thomas FlemingrnHYPOCRISY, the Due de La Rochefoucauldrntold us, is the tribute whichrnvice pays to virtue. Tributes of this kindrnhave been flowing lately from the membersrnof the United States Senate and thernmainstream press who clamored forrnsome sort of censure of President WilliamrnJefferson Clinton, or who scrambled,rnfor a while, to produce a “finding ofrnfact” which would have declared whatrnbad things the President had done. All ofrnthis was in the sure knowledge that a twothirdsrnmajorit)’ of the Senate didn’t havernthe courage to reach the obvious (if politicallyrnincorrect) conclusion of the Housernmanagers and a majorit}’ of the House ofrnRepresentatives that the President hadrncommitted impeachable offenses.rnBy the end of the Senate “trial,” nornone denied that the President had failedrnto tell the truth, the whole truth, andrnnothing but the truth regarding his relationshiprnwith “that woman,” Ms. l,ewinsky,rnor regarding what he said to potentialrnwitnesses in grand jury proceedings,rnand no one denied that Mr. Clinton hadrnattempted to mislead investigators, norrnthat he was instrumental in getting othersrnto furnish false testimony or concealrnevidence. The House managers arguedrncogently that this conduct constitutedrnthe serial commission of felonies, andrnthat such felonies were clearly the sort ofrn”high crimes and misdemeanors” thatrnthe Framers believed ought to result inrnimpeachment and removal.rnBut so popular was William JeffersonrnClinton, and so successful was the WliiternHouse in presenting the President’s prosecutionrnas merely being about privaternerotic pleasures, that removing a felonrnfrom the highest office in the land was allrnbut unthinkable. A scant few days afterrnthe failed removal of Mr. Clinton, arncredible allegation from the womanrnknown as “Jane Doe #5” that he had assaultedrnand raped her when he was attorneyrngeneral of Arkansas appeared torncause little public stir even though it wasrnpublished in a long article on the WallrnStreet journal editorial page, followed byrna front-page story in the WashingtonrnPost, and then a prime-time half-hour onrnNBC.rnThe miracle is that the impeachmentrnproceedings got as far as they did. For arnfew weeks, inspired by the House managersrnand their extraordinarily courageousrnleader, Henry Hyde, there wasrnsome serious consideration of the intentionsrnof the Framers and—mirabile dictarn—a consensus among both scholarsrnand politicians that the original understandingrnof the Constitution ought tornguide House and Senate proceedings.rnIn this age of postmodern legal thoughtrnthat produced a William Jefferson Clintonrn—where one can struggle over whatrnthe meaning of the word “is” is—this wasrnat least small comfort for the friends ofrnthe ride of law and the friends of commonrnsense.rnIf there are no final victories in history,rnor if lost causes are the only ones worthrnfighting for, or if political development isrnbest regarded as an ongoing conversationrnthat never stops, then those of us whornwanted this President cashiered did notrnstruggle completely in vain. We failed inrnour short-term goal, of course, but thosernwho persisted in their plan to keep thernFirst Felon in office were forced to ac-rn6/CHRONICLESrnrnrn