Archive for the ‘Different Perspectives’ Category:
Expelled vs Exposed!
Well, I dont want to steal to much of the thunder from these sites, but if you havent heard about Ben Stein’s presentation of the movie Expelled, it is creating some waves. Probably the largest reaction to it I have seen is the site Expelled Exposed, and it offers an opposing point of view regarding the material presented in Expelled. The whole issue is regarding the inclusion of intelligent design as an equal theory to the theory of evolution. Exposed claims that science operates on assumptions that can neither prove nor deny theological claims, and as such intelligent design theories have as much place in a science classroom as a geometry theorem in an Old English literature course. What are your thoughts?
Seven New Deadly Sins???
According to the Vatican, there are now seven more deadly sins. The first seven were updated due to the modern world being one of globalization where many modern practices were ambiguously sinful in the minds of Catholic followers. See the CNN interview here. The seven new sins are: Read more »
the allure of separation
It’d be nice to get away and stay away, wouldn’t it?
Definitely. That really sounds sweet right now. Some distance. Getting away. Running away. Why not?
Since the inception of the Christian church, movements within Christianity have advocated, at one time or another, a separation from society as a standing way of life. The corruption is rampant, they’ve basically said, and we must cut ourselves off to save ourselves, our children, our faith.
it’s not 2008 yet, is it??
Part of the downside of the 24-hour news cycle is that what wouldn’t pass for news 10 years ago passes for news now. The air, the pages, and the Web sites have to be filled with something.
I thought of this while noticing a recent article in the New York Times about the supposed “splintering” of evangelicals as it pertains to the 2008 presidential election, and cultural issues overall. I find the article to be a mixture of accurate understanding of history, yet also an ignorance of evangelicals overall.
This ignorance of understanding evangelicals happens a lot in the media, and it’s nothing new. Other religious groups no doubt experience this as well, the attempt by various media outlets to effectively label and fit the values of people into 250 words or less. It was in 1993 that a Washington Post reporter labeled evangelicals as “poor, uneducated, and easy to command.” Other labels have not been this insipid, but labels regardless abound.
(And before you prepare to comment, I recognize that evangelicals label folks just as much as anyone else.)
Dane Cook on Atheism
OK, so my wife and I were browsing youtube for some entertainment (we’re cheap and don’t have cable) when we decided to look for some Dane Cook. We came across this video (ironically) at the same time that I was having an interesting conversation on de-Conversion on a post called “Where was God on 9/11.” I won’t lie, the conversation had a me a little perturbed to have my Christian beliefs dismissed so quickly as illogical, silly, “twisted,” “pathetic,” etc. I don’t care if you disagree with my conclusions, that’s fine! But to be so quickly dismissed and labeled was more than a little frustrating. It was kind of ironic that it is Christians that are often (rightfully) seen as judgmental or lacking empathy and understanding for the beliefs of others.
Anyway, considering that conversation, this video made me laugh hysterically. Dane Cook is irreverent, but hilarious, and he uses humor to make a really really good freaking point about atheism (or at least some versions of it) and the kind of assumptions we carry with our beliefs. It kind of puts the shoe on the other foot, so to speak. Holy crap… so funny… Enjoy!
(Disclaimer: The following video is meant to be humorous. It is not intended to make sweeping generalizations or disrespect anyone’s personal beliefs.)
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wts-dntnyh4]
american justice
I’ve sometimes heard that with respect to public figures, the established stereotype is far from how they actually are as a person. In American politics, there are few people as polarizing as Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas. Just mentioning his name may make you think of what you think about him. It certainly does to me. Liberals hate him. Many African Americans misunderstand him. But who is he?
Thomas recently wrote his memoirs titled My Grandfather’s Son, and also recently sat down for a fascinating interview with 60 Minutes. This is possibly his first interview of this depth he’s given since the U.S. Senate approved him to the Supreme Court.
He discusses many aspects of his life, including time spent studying at a Roman Catholic seminary. He later left the seminary due to how he perceived the school’s indifference to civil rights issues, but came back to his faith later in as an adult. I wish they had spent more time on this, but with so many other topics to consider in his life, it’s understandable.
I won’t spoil the rest of the interview, but it is an intriguing look at someone that so many carry opinions about, but few actually know. Regardless of how you feel about him, you will be better informed for watching this. See for yourself, and tell me what you think after watching it.
dta
It’s been about 50 years since the U.S. began printing ‘In God We Trust’ onto the currency. This occurred during the Eisenhower administration to further accentuate the difference between America and the then-Soviet Union. That form of communism suppressed religion a great deal. We wanted any advantage out there.
This Cold War relic has held on though, despite challenges that that this phrase violates separation of church and state. As a Christian, I admit I do not empathize well with those who oppose this. I am somewhat bemused by notions that this moves the U.S. toward being a theocracy. More abrasive defenders of this have argued the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. While that’s a good slogan, I’m not sure how much that helps foster reconcilation.
(Strangely enough, Protestants are commonly thought of as pushing for a theocracy, though world history shows that either Jews (Israel) or Roman Catholics have been in the habit of establishing theocracies, not Protestants. But no matter.)
Should we continue to carry this message on our currency? Does it even serve a purpose? An article here examines the history of this controversial phrase. Enjoy!
