Archive for the ‘Freedom of Religion’ 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?
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.)
“God Hates Fags” Church Sued for $11 Million!
Can I get an “Amen!”? These guys are probably what Jesus had in mind when he said, “I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness” (Matthew 7:23).
Some excerpts:
The father of a fallen Marine was awarded nearly $11 million Wednesday in damages by a jury that found leaders of a fundamentalist church had invaded the family’s privacy and inflicted emotional distress when they picketed the Marine’s funeral.
The jury first awarded $2.9 million in compensatory damages. It returned later in the afternoon with its decision to award $6 million in punitive damages for invasion of privacy and $2 million for causing emotional distress to the Marine’s father, Albert Snyder of York, Pa….Snyder’s suit named the church, its founder the Rev. Fred Phelps and his two daughters Shirley Phelps-Roper and Rebecca Phelps-Davis, 46. The jury began deliberating Tuesday after two days of testimony.
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]
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!
“your God don’t have to go home, but He can’t come here”
I was an evangelical Christian when I went off to college. I joined a nondenominational campus Christian group as a freshman, went to some Bible studies, and attended church most every Sunday morning along with sometimes participating in a weekly Wednesday night worship service.
And already you’re judging me.
It has long been asserted among evangelical Christian circles that Christian viewpoints are often disdained and/or ridiculed in most college classrooms by professors. I remember when I was as a sophomore in my Exploring Religions class, hearing the professor opine about how the Hebrew word for God in the first few chapters of Genesis is grammatically plural in some instances, so he questioned how Christians could possibly believe in only one God (nevermind respecting the grammatical subtleties of a dead language from another culture, or even the author’s possible intentions). In other words: anyone that still held onto the idea of the existence of only one God after learning this was perhaps an idiot. This was his dismissive attitude all semester exclusively toward Christianity. And so it goes for Christian beliefs on a fair number of campuses: evangelical Christians often perceive belittlement regarding what they believe is the truth from their respective campus community.
But it’s not just me saying this.
