A reader writes:

As much as I've enjoyed your blog (stopping by several times a day over the last 5 or so years) I'm taking a lengthy break from reading you. I'm fatigued by your inability to accept that honest disagreement is possible. In the last year it seems that those who reach a different conclusion on difficult issues are liars, torturers, "Christianists," (although in the case of John McCain and NR I believe you decided they weren't Christians). This is all beneath you or, at least, too overbearing for me such that I find myself uncomfortable standing with you even on issues where we share general agreement. I'll be back, I suppose, but not any time soon.

On the question of torture, I'm afraid I do believe that the president is a demonstrable liar and that, on such a profound question, there can be no compromise. I have never questioned John McCain's faith and never would. What I do question is whether a defense of torture is compatible with even the most minimal level of Christian faith. I doubt the Senator disagrees and has fought a tough battle. On the deployment of religion as a partisan political matter, I feel just as strongly. But I have no window into others' souls; and we all have to live with our own consciences on this. My criticisms are on the basis of principles - limited government, secular politics, free speech, individual freedom, and competent, accountable war-making. The cynicism of the current Republican leadership and its acolytes on all these fronts is something I find repellent. Hence my passion. If it's too much, you're welcome to read someone else. But I have to write what I believe - or not write at all.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.