From the wonderful Media Research Center comes this exchange on CNN's Inside Politics regarding Attorney General John Ashcroft's recent speech to the National Association of Religious Broadcasters:

Judy Woodruff: "Attorney General John Ashcroft, Margaret, yesterday described in a speech, the war on terrorism in religious terms. He talked about how it's grounded in faith in God. Is this appropriate language for the Attorney General?"

Margaret Carlson (of Time): "...[Ashcroft] has a history of using his bully pulpit, as Attorney General, as a pulpit. He has prayer sessions every morning in his office. He doesn't agree, apparently, with pluralism, that he believes that there is one form of religion ... and it should be practiced as an official matter of state."

How about Carlson's command of the English language? Apparently neither the ability to think nor speak is necessary to give commentary on CNN. And what a curious definition of pluralism, this notion that diversity means people can't talk about their faith. What does Carlson expect him to do -- hold a Buddhist chanting session every Wednesday, just to offset all the Jesus talk? The man's not a Unitarian, for crying out loud.

Somehow we've developed this belief that not talking about God in public is the neutral position. But there is, of course, no neutral position. There either is a God, or there is not. Not talking about God in our government, schools, and entertainment media (and, truth be told, in many of our churches), is akin to declaring that he doesn't exist. If that's the position that Carlson and others want to take, then they should have the by-God guts to say so.

Claiming that allowing him into those spheres somehow violates "pluralism," on the other hand, is just plain dishonest. Their vision of pluralism is a state in which all uncomfortable views (on God, abortion, evolution, etc.) have been shunted aside in favor of the neutral, "objective" views. But that's the opposite of pluralism. Pluralism, in other words, means affording people to space to espouse their beliefs, no matter how wrongheaded we think they are. As long as Ashcroft is upholding the Constitution, pluralism means you just have to live with his voluntary prayer meetings.

But pluralism is the last thing Carlson and her ilk have in mind. It's a convenient catch-phrase, akin to the university notion of "multiculturalism," in which people look different, but think, speak, and vote the same way.