Blackwasp19, when I first read your comment a couple of days ago, my thoughts were very similar to what The Modern Gal ended up writing. I guess what I'm thinking, the more I ponder this, is that no matter how ideologically clear an institution is, it will still be filled with people who disagree with one another. I saw that plainly at Calvin College, where the Young Republicans were a ridiculously strong organization, but where most of my professors (at least in the humanities where I took most of my courses) were openly liberal. My point is that you will never find someone to invite to commencement that everyone agrees with. And part of what education is all about is challenging people, and encouraging debate. The interesting question is where to draw the line. An atheist speaking to graduates at Calvin College? A KKK leader speaking at the commencement at an historically black university? Clearly, there are lines, and common sense. I just don't think Notre Dame came anywhere close to crossing that line.

Regarding how I think having Bush at Calvin reinforced stereotypes, I think the stereotypes are pretty basic: Christians are all Republicans; Christians might be pro-life when it comes to abortion but they're just fine with sending people off to die in unjust wars; Christians talk about helping others, but when it gets down to it, they're greedy and want to keep their hard-earned money to themselves and in their churches and private schools, rather than paying more taxes to help those with less money, education and opportunity. You might think that by bringing this up I'm reinforcing stereotypes, but many non-Christians have told me how amazed and relieved they are to find out where I stand on these matters. The stereotypes are alive and well; being quiet about them only reinforces them. 

The Modern Gal, thanks for doing my job for me! :) I know you were actually speaking for you, not me, but you summed up where I stand quite nicely. If Obama was planning to go in there and try to convince people to give up their pro-life stance, that would be a big problem, but he's obviously not going to do that, just like Bush didn't come to Calvin to convince people that God wants us to fight for freedom in Iraq. (Ack! I can hardly type that!) It seems to me that generally, when people feel uncomfortable listening to someone who disagrees with them, it's because they're less sure of their own stance than they'd like to be, and they don't want more seeds of doubt to be planted.

Mark, good question. I guess referencing "my own inconsistencies" in the headline was doubly fitting. In some ways, maybe I am trying to move past that tension. Or maybe I'm trying to reframe it. The problem isn't that I disagree with many Christians on many issues (even though I do, and much of what I hear Christians proclaiming doesn't line up with my understanding of Jesus, at all). The problem lies with how that majority is able to make more noise, so those are the voices non-believers end up hearing most clearly. I don't believe it's a fair representation. Ultimately, I want everyone to be more open-minded about what it means for someone to be a Christian. There is no such thing as a "normal" Christian. (Just curious—do you think I should give up my recurring Christians Against Christians theme?)