The thing I don’t understand about Pat Robertson’s Haiti comments
I assume you’ve already heard Pat Robertson blame the people of Haiti for the earthquake:
It seems that years ago the Haitians wanted to be free of French colonialists, so they “got together” and swore a nationwide pact with the Devil, and the Devil agreed, saying: “Okay, it’s a deal.” And sure enough, the Devil tricked the French into leaving Haiti. Everything worked out, right? Wrong. This week the Devil sent an earthquake to punish the descendants of the Haitians who made a pact with him years ago. Or maybe God sent the earthquake, to punish the Devil. In any case, Robertson’s point is: it’s bad when nation-states enter into legally binding agreements with Satan.
Let’s set aside whether or not Pat Robertson’s earthquake theory is true (how would I know? I’m not a theologian). My question is: isn’t it a little gauche to propose it the day after the earthquake?
If Pat Robertson’s theory is true and Haitians have only themselves to blame for the earthquake, why not just table that discussion? Maybe for a week. Or a month. Or at least until the death toll is calculated, so you’ll know exactly how much blood is on the hands of those Satan-loving Haitians.
It just seems like Robertson’s theory would be more likely to gain a respectful hearing on, say, the one-year anniversary of the earthquake, rather than the one-day anniversary.
It reminds me of the aftermath of 9/11, when Robertson (with Jerry Falwell) went on TV and blamed the terror attacks on pagans and lesbians and the ACLU:
This was two days after the attacks. And again, maybe Robertson’s theory was correct– maybe God did allow 9/11 because Americans were becoming too secular and weren’t discriminating against gays enough. How would I know? I’m not St. Thomas Aquinas. In fact, since I have no interest in religion, I don’t think it’s my place to weigh in on God’s and/or Satan’s rationales for causing earthquakes and terror attacks. (Or floods or epidemics or the continued good health of certain televangelists for that matter.)
My only point is: If you want people to believe your theory, why not wait until emotions have cooled before proposing it? Trumpeting your theory in the immediate aftermath of the trauma seems a little masochistic– almost as if you enjoy rubbing people’s noses in their own misfortune.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Conceding How would I know, I’m not Hildegard of Bingen, I’m guessing that armageddonoidal televangelists like to strike while the blood is still flowing and the survivors still keening because it makes it seem like God twittered them first right after the disaster.
“Armageddonoidal” for the win.
In response to another comment. See in context »Mr. Rees,
The answer is simple, more people will pay attention to these comments the day after the disaster than at some other time. For example, I doubt you would have put this posting together had Mr. Robertson postponed making his rather – how shall I put it – ill-considered comments.
Do you really think that Pat Robertson believes in “theories”? No, he believes in notoriety and wisely understands that he will get much more buzz making a comment right after a newsworthy event than any later. After all, wasn’t it Jesus who said, “There’s no such thing as bad publicity”?
I agree with your point about poor timing but I think Robertson’s statement also raises another important question, namely, if nations can make pacts with the Devil, might it not be in our, the U.S.’s, interest to negotiate such a deal? Perhaps we could get our economy revitalized in exchange for becoming accursed. And if the consequence is a devastating earthquake 200 years from now, it might be worth considering. I mean who knows, in two centuries maybe our descendants will have figured out how to make everything quake-proof. I’m just saying it’s worth looking into.
I like the way you think, Lewis! Why aren’t you running FEMA?
In response to another comment. See in context »Damn, man. I guess “sensitivity” and “respecting people’s grief” aren’t heavenly virtues, and if they are, they were conveniently left out of the NKJ translation. I’m not WILLIAM TYNALE or anything, but it seems like these televangelists are sincerely perverting whatever good opinion anyone had of god’s Chosen. And besides..since homosexuals aren’t “God’s Best” (thank you, smirking, blathering Joel Osteen), we have only to assume that God’s Best consist of affluent, politically and religiously influential caucasian american males, must we also deduce that out of the entire republic of Haiti, not one of them has made the cut to be considered “God’s Best.” It’s their own damn fault for having fought for their freedom after being enslaved, of course. I’m sure the ACLU was involved in THAT act.