Archive for November, 2005

War Against Christmas, Or Just Good Manners?

Wednesday, November 30th, 2005

Michelle Goldberg has an excellent article at Salon titled How the secular humanist grinch didn’t steal Christmas. She describes the history of the mythical war against Christmas going back to Henry Ford’s anti-semitic rants, the John Birch Society’s warnings about the forces of the UN in department stores, and now Bill O’Reilly’s “Christmas Under Siege” segments. She assures us that the war on Christmas is no more real today than it was 80 years ago, but the myth lives:

As the holidays approach, the right is making ever more fevered preparations to thwart this ostensible conspiracy. Last week, the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights launched a short-lived boycott of Wal-Mart, charging the megastore with “insulting Christians by effectively banning Christmas.” The American Family Association called for a Thanksgiving-weekend boycott of Target because of the chain’s purported refusal to use the phrase “Merry Christmas” in its advertising…

Despite Johnson’s lamentations, one can in fact offer Christmas greetings without legal counsel…

In fact, there is no war on Christmas. What there is, rather, is a burgeoning myth of a war on Christmas, assembled out of old reactionary tropes, urban legends, exaggerated anecdotes and increasingly organized hostility to the American Civil Liberties Union.

(more…)

Some Software Updates

Monday, November 28th, 2005

Per a suggestion from Lara, I’m trying the Wordpress plug-in Spam Karma 2 to automatically filter out spam comments while hopefully letting all of your comments through without manual moderation. I’ll be checking up on it to make sure it doesn’t hold up legitimate comments, but if you have any problems, drop me an email at bob [at] iamachristiantoo [dot] org.

I’ve also upgraded to a newer version of Wordpress, and in the process had to re-create my template. I’m still tweaking it to get it back to where it was, but if you notice any glitches, let me know.

Ten Things I’m Thankful For This Thanksgiving

Thursday, November 24th, 2005

This Thanksgiving*, a few bloggy things I am thankful for…

  1. the “mark all comments as spam” button in the Wordpress comment moderation panel
  2. commenters that agree with me, so I don’t start going fetal
  3. commenters that disagree with me, so I don’t start thinking I know what I’m talking about
  4. Andy Borowitz, The Onion and Monty Python, so we don’t have to be so bloody serious all the time
  5. my high school English teachers who drilled into me the difference between its and it’s, who’s and whose, and lose and loose
  6. my Mom, for making me take typing class in the 7th grade
  7. laptops and wireless, so I can blog while laying lying on the couch
  8. not needing to know any more html, css, php or sql than I do already (which ain’t much)
  9. Google, Firefox, Linux and Wordpress, all of which are free
  10. the 37,532 visits since I began blogging a bit less than a year ago

Here’s to giving thanks, and gorging ourselves on way too much food! Have a good Thanksgiving.

*For readers outside the U.S. — a charming U.S. holiday to commemorate a feast shared by the Pilgrims and Native Americans in 17th Century Massachusetts. The Native Americans are still kicking themselves for that.

The IRS Goes After All Saints Church

Tuesday, November 22nd, 2005

I’ve been remiss in not blogging about the IRS/All Saints’ controversy, especially since All Saints Church is in my backyard. The LA Times broke the story of the IRS investigation into a decidedly anti-war sermon delivered at All Saints by the Rev. George Regas a couple days before the 2004 elections. The LA Times followed up the next day about conservatives joining All Saints in objecting to the IRS investigation. (A pdf with the sermon in question is here.) Regas ultimately gave his side of the story in an opinion piece in the LA Times. Just this past Sunday, the Pasadena Star-News had an article with the latest at All Saints.

The Christian blogosphere, left, right and center, has been abuzz about it. Dwight, Camassia, and Hugo all see it as political intimidation against a liberal church (as do I). Hugo speaks with authority on the subject, since he heard the original sermon and criticized it at the time. Mark D. Roberts, pastor at Irvine Presbyterian, has a 12-post series on the topic criticizing the All Saints sermon but with a certain ambivalence towards the IRS.
(more…)

Jimmy Carter: Our Endangered Values

Monday, November 21st, 2005

Early this year, God’s Politics by Jim Wallis was the first of its kind: an authentically Christian yet unabashedly liberal manifesto. Wallis’s book gave us a new vocabulary: religion as “personal, but never private”, the conservatives’ Jesus as “pro-war, pro-rich and only pro-American”, and liberals under the sway of “secular fundamentalists”.

God’s Politics put progressive Christians on the map, and more importantly, sold well, ensuring that a new wave of progressive Christian books would get the green light from publishers. Two of those books have arrived: Our Endangered Values: America’s Moral Crisis by Jimmy Carter, and How the Republicans Stole Christmas by Bill Press. I’ve just finished Jimmy Carter’s book, and Bill Press’s book is next on my list.

Jimmy Carter is arguably this country’s greatest ex-President. The Carter Center is best known as an international election monitor, but it also sponsors programs to work for peace, sustainable development, human rights and health care around the world. Of course he is also an evangelical Christian and a Sunday school teacher in his Baptist church in Plains, Georgia. The motivation for his good works is his devout Christian faith.
(more…)

Republicans on Iraq: Empty Rhetoric

Saturday, November 19th, 2005

The Republicans’ rhetoric in reaction to Congressman John Murtha’s bold truth-telling conceals an utter lack of logic. They are trying to play on Americans’ emotions, while acting as through we have no brains. It’s, um, how can I put it, dishonest and reprehensible.

Here are the arguments I heard tonight during the House debate on the Hunter Resolution from the Republicans, and why they are empty:

We must support the troops. Apparently, our military personnel are very fragile, and if we debate U.S. policy regarding the Iraq war, we will hurt their feelings.

Now I have the utmost respect for the men and women in our armed forces. In fact, I have so much respect for them that I believe they understand and accept that the U.S. is a democracy with a loyal opposition. I respect their intellect, and their ability to understand that Americans are questioning our policy, but aren’t questioning our soldiers. This “don’t hurt the troops’ feelings” argument is condescending. They deserve more respect than that. What they really deserve is to be taken out of harm’s way.
(more…)

Who Would Jesus Torture?

Tuesday, November 15th, 2005

From Working for Change:

Christians of strong religious faith and sound moral conscience often end up in disagreement. Human affairs are a messy business, unfortunately, and even at the best of times we only see through a glass, darkly.

It is hard for that reason to call Christians to a universal standard of behavior. At this moment, however, we cannot afford to dilute the message of Jesus into meaningless ambiguity. There are certain acts that a follower of Jesus simply cannot accept. Here is one: A Christian cannot justify the torture of a human being.

[...] Christians must oppose torture under any circumstances. Consider this: Who would Jesus torture? I cannot imagine Jesus finding a single “exemption” that would justify such an abuse of any individual made in God’s image.

Though I bristle whenever I hear someone refer to the United States as a Christian nation — it is such a loaded phrase — many in the Muslim world see us as such. How tragic it would be for Muslims to identify the message and mission of Jesus with torture and terror. We must not allow that to happen.

(more…)

Looking for Answers

Monday, November 14th, 2005

Several days ago, I attended the funeral of my stepbrother, Rod. (There seems to be a lot of that going around these days.) 56 years old. Survived by his wife, four grown children, three grandchildren, a large extended family and many, many friends.

Esophageal cancer.

56 years old.

It makes no sense.

From a song by blues guitarist Susan Tedeschi:
(more…)

Borowitz: Theory of Dumb Design

Monday, November 14th, 2005

From Andy Borowitz:

THEORY OF DUMB DESIGN MAY EXPLAIN PAT ROBERTSON
Televangelist’s Brain, Mouth Elude Other Theories, Experts Say

Out of the controversial debate pitting the theory of evolution against the theory of intelligent design has emerged a new theory, dumb design, which some experts believe may explain the televangelist Pat Robertson.

The theory of dumb design holds that human beings were designed by a superior being, but one who mysteriously designed certain humans in a particularly dumb way.

Enter Rev. Robertson, whom many experts in the theory of dumb design are calling “Exhibit A” in their effort to prove that the theory holds water.

“If you take a look at Pat Robertson’s brain and mouth, and how they work or do not work in concert, you have a fairly persuasive argument that the theory of dumb design is valid,” said Dr. Davis Logsdon of the University of Minnesota, one of the leading advocates of the dumb design theory.

The theory of dumb design began to gain traction in August, when Rev. Robertson called upon the U.S. to assassinate Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez.

And last week, when Rev. Robertson warned the people of Dover, Pennsylvania, that God would strike them with natural disasters after they removed school board members who favored teaching creationism, the theory of dumb design seemed to achieve critical mass.

But even an adherent of dumb design like Dr. Logsdon warns against putting too much stock in the theory, adding, “No one theory could possible explain all the things Pat Robertson says.”

Response to Mohler re: Homosexuality, Pt 3

Monday, November 7th, 2005

See here and here for my first two responses to Albert Mohler’s columns on homosexuality here, here and here.

From an address by James Shannon on July 13, 1855:

In deciding the question, whether slavery be a moral wrong, I premise that I hold it as an axiom, that THE Bible is the only infallible standard of moral truth and human duty. Not desiring impiously to presume to be wiser than God–to condemn what he has not condemned, or to justify what he has not justified–I repudiate, as the quintessence of infidelity, the sentiment, that men are able by the light of Nature, by any power of intellect, or by any feeling “away down in the heart,” to prove that to be wrong which the Bible sanctions.

[...] All who are well informed on the subject know, that, if the Bible sanctions any thing, it sanctions slaveholding. [emphasis in the original]

(more…)

Response to Mohler re: Homosexuality, Pt 2

Sunday, November 6th, 2005

In an odd bit of symmetry, I’ve realized it will take me three posts to address Albert Mohler’s columns on homosexuality here, here and here. In the first post I point out Mohler’s picking and choosing among sins to take his stand. In this post I’ll address why lifelong monogamous relationships between gays aren’t a sin at all.

What disturbs me about Mohler’s approach in his columns is that he leaves gays out of the discussion entirely. He quotes various historians, sociologists, and theologians from both sides of the debate, but ignores the personal reality of gay Christians altogether. His is an academic, theological argument that seems to discount that gays themselves have any relevance to the subject at all.

Keeping the discussion biblically grounded, let’s consider Christ’s second commandment:

‘Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?’ He said to him, ‘”You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.” This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.’

(more…)

Mohler Anti-Gay Rant

Saturday, November 5th, 2005

Al Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, has a rant against gays that spans three of his columns on the SBC Baptist Press here, here and here. This is hate-filled stuff, and not hate-the-sin-but-love-the-sinner type hate, but good old-fashioned bigotry type hate.

Mohler weaves a long narrative negating all of the moral advances regarding gays achieved over the last 100 years, but for him it all seems to boil down to biblical inerrancy. Somehow I thought Jesus’ message was all about compassion and love, but apparently for Mohler there is something greater than that — biblical authority based on a literal reading of Scripture. So here’s the crux:

The broader context of Paul’s rejection of homosexuality [in Romans 1:22-27] is clear: Homosexuality is a rebellion against God’s sovereign intention in creation, a gross perversion of God’s good and perfect plan for His created order. What Paul makes clear is that homosexuality is a dramatic sign of rebellion against God and His intention. Those about whom Paul writes have worshipped the creature rather than the Creator. Thus, men and women have forfeited the natural complementarity of God’s intention for heterosexual marriage and have turned to members of their own sex, burning with a desire which in itself is degrading and dishonorable.

The logical progression in Romans 1 is undeniable. Paul shifts immediately from his description of rebellion against God as Creator to an identification of homosexuality — among both men and women — as the first and most evident sign of a society upon which God has turned His judgment.

(more…)

DeLay Aide: Christian Right “Wackos”

Thursday, November 3rd, 2005

I’ve often wondered whether conservative Christian views are sincerely shared by Republican operatives on Capitol Hill, or merely tolerated. The answer is neither — conservative Christians are held in contempt, at least by a one-time aide to Tom Delay, Michael Scanlon. From a Salon piece on Jack Abramoff and his business partner Scanlon:

Consider one memo highlighted in a Capitol Hill hearing Wednesday that Scanlon, a former aide to Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, sent the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana to describe his strategy for protecting the tribe’s gambling business. In plain terms, Scanlon confessed the source code of recent Republican electoral victories: target religious conservatives, distract everyone else, and then railroad through complex initiatives.

“The wackos get their information through the Christian right, Christian radio, mail, the internet and telephone trees,” Scanlon wrote in the memo, which was read into the public record at a hearing of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. “Simply put, we want to bring out the wackos to vote against something and make sure the rest of the public lets the whole thing slip past them.” The brilliance of this strategy was twofold: Not only would most voters not know about an initiative to protect Coushatta gambling revenues, but religious “wackos” could be tricked into supporting gambling at the Coushatta casino even as they thought they were opposing it.

(more…)

The California Propositions

Thursday, November 3rd, 2005

There has been a lot of press lately on the dysfunctional initiative process in California. It has become a way for special interests to bypass the compromise and negotiation required in the legislature by going directly to voters, sometimes with disastrous results.

Last year, Kevin Drum at Political Animal had the definitive argument for voting no on pretty much all initiatives. After a well-thought-out enumeration of three reasons propositions no longer work, he summarizes:

The bottom line is that I think ballot initiatives do more harm than good these days. The process is mostly limited to use by wealthy interests that can afford expensive signature gathering campaigns and million-dollar ad buys, the results — locked in stone for all time — are increasingly reactionary, and they contribute to keeping the California legislature in a permanent state of infantilism since they control fewer and fewer important issues as time goes by.

The only real answer to this on my end is to vote no on everything and urge everyone else to do the same. My hope — undoubtedly vain — is that if enough people feel this way it will become almost impossible to get anything passed. And when that happens, special interests will give up and go back to bribing legislators, just like in the old days.

(more…)