Now this has somewhat triggered people who support gun control if not an outright ban. In her piece she gives data supporting her new stance. One can refute her data and her conclusions, but some chose a different route. Some are looking elsewhere and that elsewhere is Leah's religious conversion. It's been a very common card to pull among secularists/non-believers/humanists/atheists (whatever you call them nowadays) to run down an opposing party's credentials or aesthetics. Here's that rundown:
1. Is the person fat?
2. Did the person graduate from a tier-1 university?
3. Is the person religious?
4. Does the person have well-fitting clothes?
5. Is that person white?
6. Is that person a man?
Now Leah is not fat. She graduated from Yale at the undergraduate level. I don't believe she's fashionable but she is religious. Religious. She's ethnically Jewish and she's a female.
But being a graduate of Yale and a former atheist won't get her off the hook though. There are those who see her religious conversion as a detriment to clear thinking. See below.
I believe the thinking goes if Leah was still an non-believer she would've supported gun control or bans. This is how the atheistic world measures their counterparts. If you believe in one form of hokus pokus then you're susceptible to believe in another.
Atheists should just have a banner saying: "If you're a Christian your thoughts may not be taken seriously even if your written or oral arguments do not mention your faith."
The left and the secular world will find something that they don't like about you in order to dismiss you.
When Richard Spencer showed up on national media he took some leftists by surprise because he didn't fit what the left thinks of a white supremacist: though white, he was well-dressed and well-spoken.
When Ryan T. Anderson was the hot topic among the same-sex "marriage" MSM chatter some couldn't dismiss him outright. One opposer acknowledged Anderson's fine academic credentials with nodding to his public speaking abilities, saying, and I paraphrase, "Though you may have stellar degrees .... ".
Same thing with Ted Cruz when he was slaying leftists. Cruz is a non-white, Ivy League graduate and attorney. But they did go after his kids where one political cartoonist portrayed them monkeys being "pulled" by their father.
Though not having a first-rate academic CV, the left was a bit confused by Marco Rubio. He's Cuban but is well-spoken and not fat. His suits are decent fitting.
Leftists and secularists will judge you on these things because it's what they want for their kids or what they are themselves. DC, NYC, Chicago, LA etc., if you can fit in aesthetically, as well as CV-wise, in those cities then the humanists are left scratching their heads. "How can a well-dressed, well-spoken and well-educated person be a hold stances that go against the current leftist beliefs let alone be religious?"
You know, being on the "right side of history" and a being "Bright" - all that good stuff.
