Tag Archives: politics

Morals in Politics

Seemingly based on the Libertarian Party's political quiz, this Moral Politics quiz plots your position on a map whose axes are moral order (x) and moral rules (y). Like any such quiz, it oversimplifies matters, but it's entertaining none the less. I like that I score as the party-less centrist I am. (HT:I Am a Christian Too) Continue reading

Some People

Somestimes I just have to scratch my head and say, "Huh?"

I mean, contrast the Unspace (moderate/conservative Christian who sings the church choir) on the Dobson attack against Spongebob vs.crazy Funky Dung’s defensive take that there is a homosexual conspiracy that needs to be fought and the criminals killed, by implication I guess. (Read this for more on this kind of pathology logically extended…)

Do I or did I ever believe that there’s homosexual conspiracy? Did I ever imply that the criminals ( I assume he means homosexuals and their co-conspirators) be killed? Would I ever suggest such a thing?!?

No. I merely suggested that people should dig through caches and archives in search of the evidence Dr. Dobson spoke of. If it’s there, that’s news. If it’s not there, it’s still news. Apparently, it’s there. That doesn’t mean I think their’s some kind of conspiracy (a pink scare, if you will). It does mean that WAFF has some explaining to do.

Now who’s the paranoid? BTW I won’t be linking to this bizarre critic of mine. "I just find his prattling about the nuances of his fantasy belief system to be really uninteresting."

State of the Union Address Applause

I decided to steer clear of fisking the President’s address. I’m trying to get out
of the pundit game. There are more than enough pundits in the blogosphere who are
far more qualified than I. That’s not to say that I don’t talk about politics from
time to time, but right now I’m more interested in learning more about my faith.

Anyhow, my focus for analyzing the State of the Union Address was applause. There
was certainly plenty of it. In a speech that lasted roughly 60 minutes, the President
was interrupted about 65 times for an approximate total of 17 minutes of applause.
That’s more than a quarter of the air time!

Continue reading

Militant Secular Fundamentalism?

Today The Revealer points to this review over at Reason Online, wherein Chris Lehmann, of New York Magazine, has little nice to say about The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason, by Sam Harris. It would seem Mr. Harris possesses an unusually single-minded (dogmatic?) devotion to casting all religious thought in an eerie, monochromatic light. Lehmann writes:

Never mind … that militantly atheist movements like Soviet and Khmer Rouge communism-as well as volkish pagan ones like Nazism and Tutsi supremacy-stand behind some of the worst mass violence of the past century. Harris believes religious belief is the single greatest threat to the survival of the human species. Religious faith is not merely a maladaptive superstition, Harris writes; it is the ‘common enemy’ for all reasonable people concerned with the preservation of the world as we know it. All extant religious traditions, to him, are without exception ‘intellectually defunct and politically ruinous.’

I’ve long been a proponent of the idea (heh heh!) that ideas have consequences and that sometimes ideas can even kill. But this is not a viewpoint we’ve come to expect from secularism. Harris seems to promote a slightly more militant version of secularism than we’re used to. Lehmann goes on to say:

… Harris, as it happens, is only getting warmed up with the 9/11 scaremongering. He’s ready to roll up his sleeves and endorse pre-emptive assaults on both individual bad believers and dangerous Islamist regimes by any means necessary. In a world-class show of ‘this hurts me more than it hurts you’ disingenuousness, Harris makes it clear that the fault for this state of affairs resides entirely with the believers he thinks we may have to kill. ‘Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them.’

Full disclosure: I’ve not read Harris’ book. But sometimes the reviews are entertaining enough.