Showing posts with label religion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label religion. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Silliness in the Bitterroot

There is always an ample supply of silly (and slightly scary) rhetoric coming from the Root that provides me with hours of free entertainment, without tuning in to FauxNews. A couple of recent articles have been especially interesting (and alarming).

From 1/12/2010:

In a guest editorial, Dan Tomlinson asserts that global warming must be a hoax because... Ya, I could not determine how he came to this conclusion. The letter is an attack on scientists and the manufactured "hysteria surrounding 'human caused global warming.'" He finishes by throwing his hands up, citing scripture, and blaming human sin for the world's problems.

In a follow up...

Ornithologists harvest Mr. Tomlinson's brain, so that we can further our understanding of the crazed conservative religious loon. Family members consented because, quote: "He was finished with it anyway."

From 1/15/2010

In an article that must be read to appreciate the complete lunacy of an anarchical conservative group in the Root, a group of "extremely concerned Ravalli County citizens" presented a petition and questionnaire to county officials.

A couple of highlights from the questionnaire:

• To “absolutely prohibit” any governmental effort to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms, including restrictions on the kinds of weapons a person can possess, including fully automatic or silenced weapons.

• Prohibiting mandatory vaccinations.

• Prohibiting entrance into the county by all employees of the federal Environmental Protection Agency., which the group says is not a Constitutional arm of the federal government. “Much of the so-called support for environmental regulations is based upon the dubious assumption that there is such a phenomenon as global warming, when, in fact, the majority of scientists globally agree that we are not experiencing global warming,” the questionnaire read.

• Requiring the sheriff to form and command a county militia composed of able-bodied citizens 18 and older. “Women must serve, but not in a combat capacity unless the men are in danger of being overrun. It is understood that it is the sheriff’s duty to supervise the training of the militia for a minimum of three weeks every year,” the questionnaire stated.

Members of the group are easily identifiable. Look for sickly men accessorized in holstered shotguns with optional silencer, railing against the EPA and the "manufactured global warming hoax", and trailed closely by meek women carrying extra loads of ammunition.

In a startling follow up...

Liberals and conservatives unite (see comments) in an impromptu gathering in downtown Hamilton, condemning the fringe conservative group, breaking into a spontaneous rendition of Kumbaya, and wishing death upon the Bitterrooter's common enemy: the wolf.

Thursday, December 25, 2008

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

The Spirit of Christmas

The holiday season is a time when friends and family gather together to visit, feast, and exchange gifts with one another. It is also a faith-filled time where religious communities reunite to rekindle their spiritual beliefs. It is truly a joyous season filled with family and religious tradition. But I must agree with Ms. Shigley, that my least favorite holiday tradition is the "annual list of grievances fellow Christians lob around under the pretext of ‘keeping Christ in Christmas.’”

One is not apt to miss this annual appeal from a few conservative Christians. They profess that Christmas is under assault by the government, corporations, and an increasingly secular society. They are vocal and their anger screams across the print (Ross, Quinn, Craft, Williams, USA Today). This is unfortunate because it doesn't represent the majority of Christians and it is not in the spirit of Christmas.

The spirit of Christmas has nothing to do with "Happy Holidays" signs, nativity scenes, or keeping Christianity front and center during the holiday season. Jesus was not born to this world to win a popularity contest. Jesus was born and lived to teach us compassion, to be good neighbors, and to be good stewards of the Earth and its denizens. He led by example and asks us to do the same. This is the spirit of Christmas. No more.

Like Ms. Shigley, I “don’t care if there is – or isn’t – a crèche in front of a grocery store." I would rather “keep Christ in Christmas by marveling at the vulnerable beginning of a tiny child who came to free oppressed, and bring good news to the world.” And of course, try to do my part to live the spirit of Christmas every day.

Merry Christmas! Happy Hanukkah! Happy Kwanzaa! Happy New Year! - in other words, Happy Holidays!

...and a Merry Christmas to You too!

Bitterroot Star -- Letters to the Editor (12/24/08)

1st Amendment - State/Religion/God

Dear Editor,

It doesn't come to my surprise that the majority of Americans can't decipher the word God from religion. God IS NOT a religion. God is a Supernatural Being. Religion is a faith in God - religions being Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc. Faith is your church - be Catholic, Mormon, Methodist, Baptist, etc.

Christmas is a Holy Day in the eyes of Christians. The government made it a Federal Holiday. The manger or nativity is where Jesus was born. IT IS NOT A RELIGION. Christmas is the day we celebrate Jesus birth, just like you celebrating your birth. You Atheist need to get it right before you blast the Christians for having Jesus manger, a Christmas tree, songs or a menorah for the Jewish celebration. IT IS NOT A HOLIDAY TREE.

I am deeply offended by these remarks that as a Christian, I have to justify why the majority of the world celebrates Christmas. Before you uniformed who don't know how to use a dictionary, read it for the definitions of God, and religion before you blast and put lawsuits against Christians - that erect crosses, mangers, 10 commandments (laws), and anything else that DOES NOT SYMBOLIZE RELIGION.

Why is it that the MINORITY RULES THE MAJORITY? Maybe I should put a lawsuit against the Atheist for mental stress and anguish for them telling me and all Christians God is a farce and Christmas is stupid, and that having the manger is a violation of the first amendment against State and Religion.

The idea of saying Happy Holidays, instead of Merry Christmas, tells me you're a wimp! I say very loud MERRY, MERRY CHRISTMAS to all Christians and Atheists!

Randall Ross
Stevensville

Editor's Note: The above letter, including the heading, is printed exactly as submitted.
---------------

The hate is strong with this one.

It's hard to find any of the "Christmas Spirit" in Mr. Ross's letter. Plus, his civics may be a little rusty. The Constitution was set up to make sure the rights of the minority were protected from the will of the majority. The power sharing amongst the three branches of government is but one example. Also, history tells us that many of America's immigrants that colonized the prenatal States and those that came later fled starvation, ethnic, religious, and/or government persecution only to receive similar treatment from those that came before them. This is important to remember when thinking about asserting one's will upon those that are not like-minded.

May I add also that the "wimp" accusation is always a strong reasoning technique when trying to prove a point.

Merry Christmas, Mr. Ross.

Thursday, November 6, 2008

Kalispell Pastor's "Abomination" Message

kcfw -- Pastor and Politics

A pastor in Kalispell, MT, has put a sign outside his church that says, "USA... One Abomination Under God" as a reaction to the election. Pastor Clint Theline said that because "we still have free speech" that he needs to "tell people that the nation is going in the wrong direction." He believes that voting for Obama "brings abomination to America, like more support for abortion, homosexuality, and more secular conversation in schools."

You're kidding? Secular conversation in schools? No way! Thanks for bringing this to my attention, Pastor Theline. America, listen up! There is no greater threat to our children than secular talk! (Give me a break!)

Pastor Theline reasons that "God never calls us to unite with the wicked, so this is what's happening in America."

He claims he wasn't referring to Obama as being wicked, but instead is referring to the left. Now... that sounds like one-sided political talk coming from a church leader. Not good, Clint! With the aid of his sign, I'm guessing he'll be getting a visit from the IRS.

Being a person of faith, I find this kind of talk offensive and a misrepresentation of the majority of church-goers in this nation. There may be differences of opinion on how the government should legislate on abortion and same-sex marriage; there may also be a difference of opinion as to which party represents 'Christian morals'; but in the end, faith groups should be apolitical oasises of peace, love, and tolerance. It's sad to hear this kind of talk coming from a Christian leader, because it represents us as no better than any other fundamentalist religious group in the world. It's been said before and I believe it. The way to peace is education and understanding, not hate and intolerance. Maybe the good pastor from Kalispell could use a brush-up.

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

Survey Says... Christians are More Level Headed Than The Picture Their Preachers Paint

USA Today--Survey: More have dropped dogma for spirituality
USA Today--Evangelical leader Dobson accuses Obama of 'distorting' Bible

A survey of U.S. adults conducted by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life shows that the majority of Americans practice good common sense in their faith instead of simply being members of the church rank and file. In the survey "78% say there are 'absolute standards of right and wrong,' but only 29% rely on their religion to delineate these standards. The majority (52%) turn to 'practical experience and common sense,' with 9% relying on philosophy and reason, and 5% on scientific information." This is positive news and counter to what we see on TV and print media where conservative religious leaders paint a black and white picture of what it is to be a good Christian. It makes you wonder how much of the religious rhetoric coming from evangelical leaders is simply a means to garner political influence and power, because a miniscule 14% of those surveyed, including only 28% of evangelicals, say religion is the "main influence in their political thinking." Today, James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, took exception with Obama's Pro-Choice stance on abortion by saying, "Obama is trying to govern by the 'lowest common denominator of morality,' labeling it 'a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution." Come on, Dobson! We're smarter than that. The only "fruitcake" here is the one preaching from the pulpit.

The survey also showed:

  • 50% of those surveyed say "homosexuality is a way of life that should be accepted by society."
  • 68% say "there's more than one true way to interpret the teachings of my religion."
  • 70%, including a majority of all major Christian and non-Christian groups except Mormons, say "many religions can lead to eternal life."

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

"Lord Save Us From Your Followers" Book Review & Discussion (4 of 4)

Creationism: check reason at the door

I was walking home with my daughter the other day when I bumped into a neighbor I had only met briefly in our comings and goings. Let’s call him Jeff. Jeff and I exchanged pleasantries as usual but this time he stopped and asked what I did for a living. I told him and then asked the same of him. He said he was retired but was active in leading a Sunday scripture study with some other Christians from the valley. He gave me the usual “What it is to be Christian” pamphlet. We talked some more and one thing led to another and we started talking faith and religion. He expressed some displeasure with other Christian sects because they were not based as strongly on the Bible as he felt was necessary. We talked some more and he told me his son was a chemist. Jeff said he believed in a young earth but his son believed in an old earth. I asked him what he meant by this. Jeff explained that the world is only 7000 years old. In other words, Jeff believes in the creation story in Genesis and the timeline set by the Bible. His son, the chemist, believes the age calculated by science, which is 4.5 billion years (consequently he probably believes in evolution also). I told Jeff that I shared the same beliefs as his son but that it didn’t hamper my faith life because there is always room for God. I explained, “Science will never disprove the existence of God just as we will never prove He exists.” Jeff is a good guy. We don’t agree on how old or young the Earth is or on how we got here, but I respect someone who is willing to share his faith. I just wish I could understand why people like Jeff check reason at the door when it comes to their faith.

As I said in the previous post in this series, one of the more intriguing interviews Dan Merchant included in his book was that with former Republican Senator from Pennsylvania Rick Santorum. Santorum promotes the agenda of the Religious Right. He opposes abortion, same-sex marriage, and supports the teaching of Intelligent Design in public schools. Right off the bat I took exception with the fact that he used Europe as an example of what’s wrong with faith in the world. He claims that Europe is an “advanced stage of the problem.” The problem being there is an “increased secularization of the world. Faith is being replaced with the hard realities of science and materialism.” His support for this statement probably comes from the fact that about 20% of Western Europeans attend weekly church services, less than half that of North Americans. But does this make Europe a den of evil, Rick? They also tend to be more open to same-sex couples and abortion than Americans, which probably adds fuel to his animosity towards Europeans. Santorum says he believes in a “God of faith, of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob – [Who is] also the God of reason, the God of philosophers.” But that it “takes more faith to believe the theory of evolution than it does to believe we were made by a divine being.” I’m sorry Rick, but most people find it easier to believe in something tangible or based on sound rational thinking than something shrouded in mystery. I have a fairly strong faith in the existence of God, but it would sure help if He’d wrap me on the shoulder one day and say, “Dude, it’s Me. What’s up?”

Santorum supports Intelligent Design. In 2001, he tried unsuccessfully to insert language into “No Child Left Behind” that would have sought to promote the teaching of intelligent design in public schools. Intelligent Design claims, “certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.” I just shake my head every time I hear the subject of Intelligent Design because there is really a lack of intelligence behind Intelligent Design. Intelligent Design is merely an attempt to skirt separation of Church and State and bring creationism into the classroom. And the sad thing is supporters claim it is a scientific theory; a theory that cannot be tested by experiment, does not generate any predictions, and proposes no new hypotheses of its own. Intelligent Design is not a science. It is a joke.

Creationists have a clear misunderstanding of how science works. Science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge through observation and experimentation to explain natural phenomena. Scientists use a process called the scientific method to test hypotheses (educated guesses). Experiments are performed that will either lend support or refute a hypothesis. Once enough evidence is gathered to support a hypothesis, the results are shared in peer-reviewed journals for further validation. A hypothesis that does not lend itself to experimentation can never be validated and will never be accepted by the scientific community as a truth. Intelligent Design has this problem. How do you provide experimental evidence of an intelligent cause? You can’t. Game Over.

Creationists misinterpret the terminology used in science, like theory in the theory of evolution. In layman terms, a theory is something that is a mere guess, but in scientific terms, a theory is something proven and generally accepted as true. True, like gravity.

Creationists struggle juggling Genesis and Evolution. Christians grow up with the story of Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden. It is a wonderful tale of love, betrayal, and loss with the hope of someday reentering paradise. But it is just that, a tale. The Book of Genesis is a symbolic text (most Christians would agree). You can’t take it literally. Genesis was written 2500+ years ago to explain Earth’s and humanity’s origins to a people that had a far less understanding of the world they lived in then we do today. It provided comfort and knowledge that they weren’t alone. Since then, we’ve learned that the world is not flat, the Earth is not the center of the universe, the world is much older than the Bible says, we are made up of cells, life originated in the sea, chimps may be our distant cousins, there may be life on Mars, and cloning takes the fun out of passing on your genes. We learned this in school, in classes like earth science, life science, geology, biology, chemistry, physics, and astronomy. It makes sense and supporting evidence has piled up over the years. But there is no assault on a supreme being by science. There is still room for God. What is to say that He made Adam and Eve, two paramecia fluttering around in a primordial soup on distant planet in another solar system billions of years before Earth even came into existence (but then he wouldn’t need Adam AND Eve, Adam (or Eve) would’ve been enough… because he’d simply divide, making a copy of himself, because he’s a single cell organism… never mind)? Why can’t the Lord be a primal mover, a higher being who simply set things in motion? Both explanations take into account the knowledge we’ve gained in the last 2500 years. The phrase “created… in His image” (Genesis 1:27) just paints a different picture of Him. Why can’t God be a paramecium? It would show He has a sense of humor.

So, why is it that creationists throw reason and their education out the door, conclude the Earth is only 7000 years old and dinosaur bones are just an elaborate hoax? Because… “that’s what the Bible says.” Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

To conclude, science has no agenda against the faithful or God. Scientists merely seek to explain the unexplainable, to learn more about the world we live in and the laws that govern it. It is a tedious, detail conscious profession in which you fail more than you succeed. This is what Einstein meant when he said, “No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.” In a way, we are all scientists, as long as we still have a curiosity of the unknown. Intelligent Design is not science. It is fiction. And it does not belong in the science classroom. Creationists need to step up to the plate, open up their minds, and evolve a little.

Monday, June 9, 2008

"Lord Save Us From Your Followers" Book Review & Discussion (3 of 4)

Abortion

One of the more intriguing interviews Dan Merchant included in his book was that with former Republican Senator from Pennsylvania Rick Santorum. Santorum, along with Senator Sam Brownback (KS-R), were voices for Christian conservative causes like abortion, same-sex marriage, and intelligent design versus evolution. Santorum is a self described Compassionate Conservative. In an op-ed piece published in November of 2005, he said, “Compassionate Conservatism relies on… a focused government to achieve noble purposes through definable objectives which offers hope to all.” It sounds noble, but this talk comes from the same man that tried to insert language into “No Child Left Behind” that would have sought to promote the teaching of intelligent design in public schools. Santorum lost reelection to Democratic candidate Bob Casey, Jr. in 2006. Santorum left much to be desired during the interview, for reasons I will go into during the discussion on Creationism, but I gleaned some respect for Santorum from his comments on abortion.

He states, “Let’s have a real discussion about the moral and worldly consequences [of abortion] instead of just saying, ‘Well, God says we can’t do this’ and just lay down the law. We have to engage people and help them think through the consequences.”

Yes, I say! Absolutely! That’s what I am trying to accomplish. We must be cerebral in our discussion on abortion, not just spout biblical verse and shout, “Abortion is murder!” I love enthusiasm, but I hate blind faith.

Let’s start the discussion about the moral and worldly consequences of abortion Santorum was referring to. Two points:

First, a human life begins at conception, when sperm meets egg. This produces a cell containing 23 sets of chromosomes, a cell that will divide and differentiate to form every cell in the human body. There is no disagreement with this fact, even between religious fundamentalists and scientists.

Second, in the eyes of the law, an embryo will never have the same rights as the mother. It is impractical to put mother and embryo on equal footing under the law.

This is an unsettling reality. Moral thinking tells us abortion is wrong. Unfortunately, it’s not enough to simply say “abortion is wrong, so it should be illegal” because the consequence of overturning Roe are daunting. Where are you sending women seeking abortions? What happens to the babies from unwanted pregnancies? History tells us women will seek abortions despite the law often in unsanitary conditions performed by people less than professional. Women should never be forced into dark back alley procedures. And the products of unwanted pregnancies should be placed in loving homes with people who can feed, nurture, and care for the child. The feds cannot provide this, no more than religious organizations. Until these problems can be resolved, abortion will remain legal.

I have a problem with the Pro-Life stance on abortion because it doesn't offer solutions to the problems listed above. Pro-Lifers are merely trying to force their agenda on others. It is as restrictive as the opposite stance, and I'm not referring to Pro-Choice. The opposite stance to Pro-Life is a birth ban, where conception is prevented. Funny? Imagine a society where everyone is strung out on contraceptives and it is against the law to have children. This could be a plot for a sci-fi novel. Scary, isn’t it? But is it any scarier than a society where you can be brutally raped and impregnated and the state mandates that you deliver the baby? Pro-Choice is the more moderate stance. It puts the decision to give birth in the hands of every American woman instead of the hands of the state. It supports the woman’s power to choose. It empowers people instead of restricting them. Abortion will remain legal.

I’m not sure if Santorum would agree with this string of reasoning, but I respect him for at least opening the door for discussion. It is short sighted to make or change a law without understanding the consequences of the action. We must not be blinded by our faith.

Wednesday, June 4, 2008

"Lord Save Us From Your Followers" Book Review & Discussion (2 of 4)

Homosexuality: What’s up with the gay bashing?

Chapter 12: The Confessional Booth is the most inspirational chapter in Dan Merchant’s book “Lord Save Us From Your Followers.” It shows us the best in people when the worst was expected. Merchant set up a confessional booth in the middle of Gay Pride Northwest festivities in Portland, OR and confessed his and the Church’s sins against gays and lesbians to whoever entered the booth. He shared that in the past, “I have been offended by homosexuals, I have made fun of them, I have mocked them, I have judged them, I have been disgusted by them, I have made myself feel superior to them, I have ignored their pains, I have contributed to their pain. I have forgotten that their sin is no worse than my sin. I have forgotten that any homosexual is just like me – a child of God.” One could have expected this list of grievances to raise the ire of the mainly gay and lesbian participants, but the opposite occurred. It incited sympathy, thankfulness, tears, and sharing of experiences. It brought forth real emotional healing without anyone attempting to say, “I’m right and you’re wrong.”

Merchant went out of his way not to get drawn into the argument of I’m right and your wrong because that was not the point of his book, to take sides on the wedge issue of homosexuality. In opening this discussion, however, I must cross that line, jump into the fray because I want to dismiss a few arguments made by people regarding homosexuals. In doing this I risk making the same mistake Merchant made in his confession by generalizing a group and passing judgment on them. Merchant’s friend, Tony Kriz, made a good point when he said, “If you love somebody we go out of our way to learn the best of who they are. And when you caricature someone you’re saying, ‘I don’t care enough to actually know you.'” Let us try and remember that we are all brothers and sisters in Christ and that I am speaking to incite discussion, not wrath. So, into the fray…

First off, if you are uncomfortable with homosexuality because “it’s not what I’m used to” or “it’s not how I was raised”, that’s fine, but that’s your problem, not theirs. Because you see it as “icky” simply means you haven’t matured much past fifth grade sex-ed when saying vagina made the room snicker. It’s time to grow up and open your mind. Why shouldn’t gay and lesbian couples have the right to be married in the eyes of the law and be able to share in spousal benefits that straight married couples enjoy? A gay couple’s want to marry does not infringe on our rights and does not despoil the institution of marriage. Marriage is a sign of love and an outward symbol of two people’s devotion to each other. It has nothing to do with the sexual orientation. And besides, with the divorce rate around 50%, why shouldn’t homosexuals get a crack at marriage? Obviously straight couples haven’t figured out the secret to marriage bliss. I have faith that the nation’s attitude regarding same sex marriage is beginning to change.

The argument “homosexuality is not natural” doesn’t hold water. If you are simply referring to the fact that it is impossible to conceive a child homosexually, then you are correct (unless you’re a worm, but then you’d be hermaphroditic, so… nevermind). If, though, you mean that male plus female equals natural coupling, well, then you’re wrong. There are many examples of animals in nature that perform homosexual acts (whales, apes, birds) whether it be for the reason of exhibiting dominance, in the absence of the opposite sex, or as a form of adolescent play. And if it happens in nature, guess what, it’s natural.

I’m not a child of the 60’s, but I agree with the statement, “Make Love, Not War.” I think it’s a very powerful positive Christ-like statement. I would put it right up there with the Golden Rule, treat others as you wish to be treated, and John 8:7, let he who hath not sinned cast the first stone. We must remember that it is not our responsibility to pass judgment on other’s sins, something our outspoken religious leaders have forgotten. None of us is anointed by God to condemn homosexuals, our brothers and sisters in Christ. We should all try to be more open and loving of our neighbor. Then at day’s end maybe we can say we’ve earned the title of Christian.

The gauntlet has been thrown down. The floor is open for comment. Peace out, Man!

Tuesday, June 3, 2008

"Lord Save Us From Your Followers" Book Review & Discussion (1 of 4)

Dan Merchant’s book “Lord Save Us From Your Followers” is a wonderful read. If you struggle with your faith because of the unChrist-like acts of fellow Christians, if you think you know everything about your Christian faith, or if you just like books that make you think, this is the book for you. Dan Merchant, an acknowledged Christian, interviews well known personalities like Al Franken, Michael Reagan, and Rick Santorum about the 'wedge' issues of the day (homosexuality, abortion, intelligent design, etc.) and uses humor to take the edge off the discussion. Don’t make the mistake in thinking that the title of the book is an attack on Christian faith. That is far from the truth. Merchant simply wants to try and answer the question, why is the gospel of love dividing America? Merchant is even handed with his narration and interviews and portrays individuals in the culture war for whom they are. I would recommend this book to anyone who is engaged or enraged about some issue in the Christian religion and is willing to spend a day digesting "Lord Save Us From Your Followers.”

There, that is my review of Merchant’s book. It is one of many positive reviews you can find in on-line blogs. As a matter of fact, I can’t find one bad review on-line. It speaks to the impressive job Merchant did in presenting the material. Unfortunately, I also can’t find any discussion of the ‘wedge’ issues presented in this book accompanying the reviews. Now you can go directly to the official website to participate, but as a blogger, to read the book, give a review, and then not enter into the discussion does Merchant’s book a disservice. Come on! Why is the gospel of love dividing America? ‘I like the book’ is not good enough. Enter the discussion.

Starting tomorrow and over the next week I’ll provide three topics for discussion: Homosexuality, Abortion, Creationism. I’ll present my arguments and leave the floor open for comment.

A few ground rules, though… To have a rational conversation about the issues being presented you can’t simply cite scripture. The Bible is an excellent reference tool but open to interpretation and we are here to discuss issues not scripture interpretation. Try and keep your comments succinct. My arguments may seem long winded but I need to fill the screen and it’s sometimes necessary to needle people to get a response.