Washington Post reporter Sally Quinn took a shot at Sarah Palin’s Christian beliefs Tuesday in her “On Faith” column in response to the recent release of Palin’s new book, “Going Rogue”.
According to the description on the Washington Post website, the column “On Faith” is designed to “to carry on a fruitful, intriguing, and above all constructive conversation about the things that matter most.” The website states: “And so, in a time of extremism…how can people engage in a conversation about faith and its implications in a way that sheds light rather than generates heat? At The Washington Post and Newsweek, we believe the first step is conversation-intelligent, informed, eclectic, respectful conversation….”
Yet after quoting Palin’s commitment to follow God’s path for her life, Quinn asks a barrage of accusatory questions about HIs plan for Palin. These questions referenced Palin’s life happenings and personal reactions recorded in her book, including such queries as: “Did God plan for her daughter Bristol to get pregnant while she was a teenager? Why was she then not thrilled?”
Quinn goes on to criticize Palin for expressing her feelings regarding conflicts and controversies experienced during the McCain/Palin campaign. Ms. Quinn writes, “She has used this book and all of her Christian charity to do nothing but settle scores” and “You would think that God would ask of her to live her life as an example to others of a compassionate, loving, caring person.” Such comments imply that Palin is uncompassionate and unloving, and therefore not an example to follow. These negative overgeneralizations are rooted in judgment and brimming with hypocrisy.
I have to ask why. Does Quinn believe that her questions contribute to a respectful faith conversation that sheds light rather than generating heat as promised in the column’s description? Are her comments really meant to be constructive in nature? Surely the Washington Post would not tolerate the furtherance of political motives hidden under the guise of faith. Quinn admitted she was confused – about Palin’s faith, clearly, and perhaps also about her own column’s mission. Or was she just going rogue?