Christianity Today Interviews Condoleezza Rice

Condoleezza Rice is a fascinating figure. Having previously reviewed Leslie Montgomery’s book about the faith of Secretary Rice, I was glad to see Sarah Pulliam Bailey of Christianity Today post a good interview with Ms. Rice on her recent book, Extraordinary, Ordinary People: A Memoir of Family. From Mongomery’s book, I already knew that Rice had an extraordinary family. She was raised in the deep south during the days of segregation, and saw the hostilities erupt first-hand on more than one occasion. Yet she never seems to have succumbed to bitterness or to lose her faith in God.
Here’s an excerpt of the CT Interview:
How does your understanding of religion help you deal with the interplay between religion and foreign policy?
RICE: “It helps to have both a historical and theological understanding of the children of Abraham and the relationships between Muslims, Jews, and Christians. I personally think that Israel is remarkable. It would not exist but for the toughness of the people and the grace of God. Yet Jerusalem is a place where the great religions don’t so much come together; they clash there. You suddenly realize the extent to which man will go to use God for his own purposes rather than the other way around. That for me is the most terrifying thing about the combination of religion and politics, because that is really when man is trying to use God for his own purposes. That’s why I don’t see any conflict with being Christian and wanting to see a Jewish state, being Christian and believing there can be a Palestinian state, because the state is the state. When you start to try to infuse it with God’s purpose you almost always get in trouble.”
To her credit, Bailey doesn’t shy away from the issue of abortion in her interview — an issue on which I find Ms. Rice to be sadly incoherent. Rice says:

“I cannot imagine why one would be in favor of partial birth abortion. I also can’t imagine why one would take these decisions out of the hands of the family. We all understand that this is not something to be taken lightly.”

The first two sentences seem mutually contradictory: If partial birth abortion ought to be opposed by all, then how can the decision be “left with the family”? If a man regularly beat his wife, would anyone think the propriety of such actions are better “left with the family”? In my view, the libertarian pro-choice position such as Rice’s is fatally flawed.
Read the whole interview.