House Chaplain Rev. Patrick Conroy
First up from the God Machine this week is an interesting controversy involving the chaplains for the U.S. House and U.S. Senate -- two religious leaders, whose salaries are paid by taxpayers.
Ordinarily, the congressional chaplains are rarely noteworthy. They deliver a prayer at the start of legislative sessions, but otherwise, are generally neither seen nor heard outside Capitol Hill. (James Madison insisted these positions are unconstitutional and should not exist.)
But this week, the chaplains raised questions about how they intend to spend Inauguration Day, in a story first brought to my attention by Faithful America.
Just before President Barack Obama's swearing in on Monday, a group of religious conservatives plans to hold a prayer breakfast featuring a number of anti-Obama conspiracy theorists. The Presidential Inaugural Prayer Breakfast -- billed as offering "prayer, worship, and reconciliation of the nation" -- will feature the editor of the birther site WorldNetDaily and minister and media mogul Pat Robertson, according its website. The organizers of the prayer breakfast also claim the House and Senate chaplains will speak at their event -- appearances that may conflict with the non-partisan nature of the chaplain job.
House Chaplain Rev. Patrick Conroy and Senate Chaplain Barry Black ... are listed under the "Prayer for the Nation" portion of Monday's event, just ahead of Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) and Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.). But featured speaker Joseph Farah, the WorldNetDaily editor, has drawn the most attention, given his website's regular assertions that President Obama was actually born in Kenya and allegations that he is "the first Muslim president." The event also features "messianic rabbi-pastor and author" Jonathan Cahn, who believes that there are signs of the apocalypse encrypted in Obama's communications.
As the week progressed, the story got a little strange. Right-wing organizers of the event said the Senate's Rev. Black, who's run into trouble like this before, had accepted their invitation, but the chaplain's office insisted he'd never agreed to participate. The House's Rev. Conroy, who's also billed as a member of the Presidential Inaugural Prayer Breakfast Committee, conceded that he will appear alongside the fringe activists and far-right lawmakers, but added he doesn't intend to "stay too long."
To be sure, if Bachmann, Birthers, and radical televangelists want to get together to hold a far-right event on Inauguration Day, that's their business. But as my friend Rob Boston at Americans United for Separation of Church and State explained, when taxpayer-financed chaplains, who are not supposed to take sides in political fights, participate in events like these, it's far more problematic.
Also from the God Machine this week:
* The benediction at President Obama's second inaugural will be delivered by the Rev. Luis Leon, pastor of St. John's Episcopal Church, dubbed "the church of presidents" because it's just a block and a half from the White House.
* Oh my: "The pastor of St. Aloysius Church in Springfield, Ill., has been granted a leave of absence after he called 911 in November from inside the church and told a police dispatcher that he needed help getting out of a pair of handcuffs." The priest, Tom Donovan, told the 911 operator he was "playing with" the handcuffs, and needed help "getting out." Donovan is perhaps best known for testifying to the Illinois legislature earlier this month in opposition to marriage equality (thanks to reader R.P. for the tip).
* Lawrence Wright has published a new book on Scientology which appears to be generating quite a bit of attention.
* A group of prominent evangelical leaders, including the National Association of Evangelicals and the public-policy arm of the Southern Baptist Convention, have launched the "I Was a Stranger" campaign in the hopes of encouraging policymakers in Washington to pass immigration reform.
Leave a Comment:
IF there is a "God", I wonder what He/She/It thinks about all these religions and their leaders.
Probably that all these religions need to get all their facts straightened out.
Religion: the manner in which the weak-minded face the fact of physical death. Also proof that Barnum was right: "there's a sucker born every minute."
This way to The Egress.
Have to chuckle about that TCinLA, but actually it is more than weak-minded and also other reasons.
they are all going to Hell!
Deb - by definition, if one is able to read all the biblical stories, or frankly the myths on which any religion is based and find them credible, they are "weak minded." Anybody with the ability to reason can see all the contradictions and just plain impossibilities in these mythical books. There is not one shred of empirical, falsifiable evidence for the existence of what religions refer to as god.
Craig,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWHNi2oHjvs
If there is a god, (assuming he's male) he would likely say they're missing the point (again).
I want one of you atheists to give me a solid argument against the idea that there is an Absolute moral law. Show me why you don't believe that.
Susan, You cannot assign gender to God. Traditionally we say He, but it means nothing "gender wise". OK? I hope you know what I mean. To call God "she" is equally absurd as He or It. God is "wholly Other".
I'm not an atheist, but some of the most moral people I know are atheists. Morality doesn't really have that much to do with religion. I know "religious" people who are some of the biggest hypocrites you could ever hate to meet.
Marco from Trapoja: This week n God is not meant to be a insult at all, but one about serious thought.
Karensc,#1.11
Good! Thanks for the response.
What is wrong with people who are hypocrites? You seem to think I would hate to meet them, and you are correct. But why do you think that? If, as you say, they are "religious hypocrites, what's the problem with them?
India, there isn't an absolute moral law because what we perceive as moral is a product of our social evolution.
For instance, an individual organism is well suited to avoid negative stimuli. You accidentally put your hand on a hot stove, it moves very quickly. The amazing thing is that your hand actually moves before the pain registers in your brain. How is this possible? It's possible because we don't have one nervous system. We actually have three. The central, the sympathetic, and the parasympathetic. In laymen's terms, these are reflexes.
Well, that works great for an individual organism, but what if a species lives in a group? The goal is always the survival of genes to pass on DNA to future generations. When a species lives in a group, the goal isn't the survival of the individual per se, but the survival of the group.
This is problematic. In order for the rest of the group to react to the negative stimuli of a member of that group, then it becomes necessary for others to detect it. And since evolution never managed to create telepathy, communication between individual organisms of the same species becomes necessary.
It should be noted that using group strategies for survival came late in evolutionary development. But you will see interesting differences between pack animals and similar solitary animals. For instance, foxes and dogs are fairly similar genetically, however dogs came from wolves, which are pack animals. One of the ways wolves communicate among each other is by snarling. Foxes don't have the facial muscle to snarl at all.
When it comes to human beings, our ability to communicate is hard wired into the emotional centers of our brains. For instance, it's very difficult to smile and be angry about something. Studies have also shown that even newborn babies are able to recognize a human smile.
Human beings are incredibly talented communicators. That fact that we're able to communicate using the written word is a skill that no other animal has ever developed. And language itself follows the same universal principles. This is why a Japanese child born in the United States will learn to speak perfect American English, and a British child born in China will learn to speak perfect Mandarin.
And it's this communication that has allowed us to detect negative stimuli of others within our group. But it goes deeper than language.
Suppose you're watching TV and you see one of those Save the Children commercials and you see a baby crying. Do you not feel an overwhelming desire to console it, despite that it's not your child? It does not have your genes. And yet every instinct inside you is telling you to comfort that child.
This isn't by accident. These instincts develop as part of our evolution. It is what defines our own humanity. These instincts developed in order to ensure our own survival.
The interesting thing is that we have a part of our brain that processes feelings of empathy. And as I said, this came late in the evolutionary process. It is the ability to mentally "put ourselves in other people's shoes". To know that others experience the world much as we do.
And as our understanding of this changes, so does our understanding of what is moral. For instance, our sense of animal cruelty is wholly different today than it was 1000 years ago. But we don't consider it cruel to smash a rock with a hammer or to cut down a tree. We don't consider this cruel because we know that trees and rocks can't suffer.
Therefore: there are no moral absolutes because morally has continually evolved.
Sorry to be so long-winded, but concision isn't my strong suit, and you asked a complex question.
I wanted to also note that our ability to understand empathy has to be learned.
Learning a language as a child is easy. The neural networks in your brain are making a ton of connections every day. But as we age, these connections become more difficult to develop. This is why it becomes much harder to learn a new language as an adult.
Empathy, as it turns out, is learned as well. We learn it from our parents, primarily our mothers. When a mother consoles her baby, and nurtures that baby, and cares for it, that baby is learning what it means to be loved. That baby will then grow up where it can teach it's own child to love.
We don't quite yet have a handle on the causes of most mental illnesses, but we do know the cause of psychopathy. Psychopaths are people who didn't have mothers that nurtured them. The mother didn't hold the baby to calm it down when it cried, didn't do much to care for it's well being, and didn't give that child love. As a result, those children do not have any ability at all to mentally "put themselves in other people's shoes". They have no sense of empathy. They don't understand that other human beings can suffer. To a psychopath, beating a human being with a hammer is the same as beating a rock with a hammer.
So since empathy is learned, and empathy is the basis of morality, and our sense of empathy is still developing, there is no universal moral standard.
No, Alva, morality did not evolve. Instincts do not explain morality. Reflexes, however refined by evolution, do not support your theory of morality. I think you're confusing the survival of the fittest with the survival of the nicest.
Our sense of empathy comes from our sense of something above us that says we shouldn't do this or that, whether we want to or not. It presses on us, and we often wish it didn't. Why would we have invented something which makes us so uncomfortable? Morality is the basis for empathy, not the other way around.
Your argument, in fact, shows me that you are much more of a believer in the moral Absolutes than most people!
Now, about that discussion we had on guns.............
India, of course morality evolved. Our sense of morality is a product of our minds. Or to be more exact, a product of our brains. And just like the rest of our body, our brain is an evolved organ.
Survival of the fittest, can in certain circumstances, mean the survival of the nicest. For instance, women will regularly practice a form of sexual selection when choosing a mate. Altruism is often considered a desirable thing to pass on to your children.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ofy6gNxeLk
The follow up vid (part 4) is where my point is made.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gORwMfSjmbQ
"Morality" indeed evolves. 150 years ago a church (the Southern Baptists) was founded on the "moral" principle that black slavery was "God's will." 500 years ago, it was "moral" to torture "herectics" on the racks, in fact someone who did so was considered to be doing "God's work."
I would have to disagree, and don't find it insulting at all. There is both arrogance and tolerance in believers and non-believers.
TC, true. As man has become more civilized, we have become more moral. It's not hard to find all kinds of horrific things in the bible. That's shouldn't be a surprise, parts of the old testament dates back some 4,000 years.
This is what Jefferson (rightly I believe) called our semi-barbarous ancestry. You will find passages in the bible that says it's morally justified to stone your own children to death for the crime of being unruly. It justifies putting fortune tellers to death. It says that if you beat your slave to death, the only way you're to be punished is by sacrificing an animal. It even states that (Leviticus 14:33-14:53) if you have a "leprosy infection of your house", what we today would call mildew, that you should take two sparrows, slay one in an earthen vessel, and squeeze the blood out of it like a horrific tube of toothpaste, and use the living bird as a kind of bird blood paint brush and splatter bird blood all over your house. You let the bird go, and if the mildew hasn't cleared up in 7 days, you gotta have your house destroyed.
This is hardly what one can call moral. These are bizarre rituals from a semi-barbarous ancestry. It has no more bearing on what we today understand as moral than any other dictum of animal sacrifice.
Interesting side note: the book of Leviticus is also where most of the bible's sexual morality comes from. It indeed tells us that it's immoral to have sexual relations with various members of your family, that you're to be put to death for bestiality, and that a man is not to lie with another man.
But the one thing that the bible does not mention once is female on female sex. That's right. Strictly speaking, the bible never mentions lesbian sex. Therefore, no one can site the bible for saying lesbian sexual relations, or even lesbian relations are immoral or against the "Word of God".
Re: Alva 1.15
Provide your links for how you "know" this, because from everything I've ever read about psychopathy and sociopathy, your statements are complete ROT!
Psychopathy and sociopathy are mental diseases just like autism and schizophrenia and it has NOTHING to do with parenting by either the mother or the father.
Child rearing is a learned behavior (no, we are not like other "instinctive" animals) and there are many many people who have never had the type of "mothering" you would consider suitable, but these children don't grow up to be psychopaths. Alternately, studies of psychopaths have shown no maternal neglect (other than from the psychopath who is looking for someone to blame for his/her behavior). Now that we know better, we can't blame mothers for "autism" any more although that was a pretty common tactic in the past too!
However, it is a common excuse for doing nothing - blame someone, and then you don't have to get involved to do anything - like support research into mental illnesses.
I like this 3 part video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgSjqbD3RCE&NR=1
Make sure to hear all 3. Try to keep an open mind.
Once, I know this because I studied Abnormal Psychology. In addition, I read a lot of scholarly psychiatric material. A good friend of mine is a secretary for a psychiatrist, and she gives me material from time to time from her office, and I just nerd out reading them.
There are genetic considerations when it comes to psychopathy. But if you have the genes for psychopathic behavior, you may not become one, if you grow up in a functional nurturing home.
Not all psychopaths are of the murderous Ted Bundy variety. Many become politicians. Some even become preachers. Look at Jim Jones, for example. He had numerous problems, including drug abuse, but the pathology of psychopathy seems to have been there as well.
I believe the jury is still out on what causes psychopathology in a person, but good nurturing can't hurt. Whether it helps or not is another question. I tend to doubt that it is curable.
Just What in the Hell ever happened to the separation of church and state ? Just Why in the Hell are the taxpayers Unknowingly paying for these strange child-abusing and anti-American weirdo's , they have No place within our political system especially when they are biased as to their views and being Paid for it ? Throw them out ! Just WHO in the Hell brought these weirdo's into the political system in the first place ? Eliminate them ! Send them back to their supposed non-profit organization ! I know that I do Not want to pay these weirdo's , they do not deserve it ! Under-cover gop/tp'er's do not deserve being payed by the taxpayers !
So ................. a little something from National Library of Medicine seems appropriate.
Religion hah , just what does that mean ? As I see it , it means nothing more than someone manipulating someone's perhaps many people's written word's and using them and manipulating these written words for their own personal justifications for nothing more than for them to use and hide behind and also to pry weak people's money and savings from their hands for their own personal benefits !
Do not believe in dogma in stone and dust
From men who lived and loved in ancient lands.
Do not believe what others claim you must,
For thus you leave your future in their hands.
Do not believe in gurus or the Church,
For their beliefs are based on guilt and greed.
The mirror of your mind, you alone must search,
For you alone can shape the life you lead.
Observe, deduce and ponder what is True,
For Truth consists of that which we conceive.
Awareness comes from what is True for you,
And we can each achieve what we believe.
If your Truth can advance the paths of Man,
Then follow it and live the best you can.
Alva,
I have taken those "abnormal psychology" courses too, and it was never the text that "blamed" anybody for mental diseases - it was always the professor who came up with the fact that it was "the mother's fault". I took one course way back when we were all told that "the gay" was the fault of the mothers. Now we look back and say how silly that was!!
Unfortunately, we are in the "witch doctor" phase of treating mental illnesses and even more unfortunately we are a society that would rather "punish" than help our fellow citizens - and that is one of the reasons why mental illnesses don't get the respect of our country and the dollars for research.
I know you are a firm believer that it is people, not guns, who kill. And I know you are against any gun controls. Are you also willing to do something to help the mentally ill who have committed these massive crimes NOT because they were "bad" people, but because they were sick? Or are you like one of my bosses who is a proud NRA member and who is also against spending money for medical research into mental illnesses?
Let me quote what he said to all of us last week during a "around the water cooler"" discussion about Obama's executive actions: When asked why he didn't believe in funding for the mentally ill, he said that killings by the mentally ill isn't "his problem" and he doesn't think he should pay for it. When reminded about Sandy Hook he said and I quote: "Sucks to be them! Not my problem, wasn't my gun!"
Sadly, I believe this is the belief of most of the almost 5 million members of the NRA....
India, you're quite right. Most pyschopaths aren't serial killers. The lion's share of them are petty thieves and drug addicts. Many are lawyers. Some are doctors. Some are politicians. Some of corporate executives. I was reading something about how they're planning to separate out psychopathy with sociopathy and anti-social personality disorder a little better in the DSM-5 when it comes out.
Once, I'm not blaming anyone for anything. My point is solely that one thing leads to another. If a child fits a certain genetic profile, and his not raised in the property nurturing environment, that could trigger psychopathy.
My understanding is that homosexuality is passed down from the mother. That it's a genetic. I read something about that some years ago.
We should put more money into researching mental illness, but don't think we don't already put a ton of money into it. Our problem is treating people for mental illness. With our lousy health care system in this country, the vast majority of the mentally ill never get treatment. That needs to change.
We also need to recognize that we have greater numbers of mental illness in this country than we should have (3 times more than other 1st world nations) because we are a cruel nation that accepts it as normal to have stark and vast levels of income inequality and poverty. I have no doubt that within a generation would could prevent most mental illness from ever developing if we had a better social safety net, raised the minimum wage, and taxed the rich.
If there's any blame to be had, it should be Republicans and Democrats, who have allowed our society to morph into such a cruel and heartless land. The "tough love" conservatives have turned into nothing more than sadists.
For some reason we don't think twice about the idea that someone with heart disease should get medical treatment. And we certainly don't look down on someone for having heart disease. Yet strangely, we do when it comes to mental illness. The more I learn about psychology, the more absurd that notion becomes. You can't cure depression by telling depression people to "get over it". You can't cure PTSD who have been traumatized on the battlefield by traumatizing them some more by not giving them a job or a means to support themselves when they come home. And you can't cure psychopathy, or the prevalence thereof, by ensuring the environment in which it is fostered, is perpetuated.
There is embracing "personal responsibility" and then there is embracing cruelty for cruelty's sake. We need to recognize that having the most prisoners in the world doesn't demonstrate that we have a functioning justice system, but that our society as a whole is so dysfunctional that rather than put the investment into making our citizenry valued members of society, we just lock them up behind bars. And while in prison, the only rehabilitation that goes on is that they learn to become better criminals.
I was struck by a piece Michael Moore did that was an extra from his film Sicko, where he went to Norway to see how they treat their prisoners. It seems that when you treat prisoners with dignity and respect, they behave like normal human beings. Who would have thunk it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4L6-0WRfSA
Alva: I agree with almost everything you say although I think you did not say enough about the genetic connection and the biological response to physical stimuli. I read a very interesting article in Discover Magazine recently about the release of the brain chemical (and I cannot remember the exact name) that causes bonding between individuals, especially between a mother and her offspring. The researcher was using mice. He found that more of the bonding chemical was released when he tickled the mice than when he just petted them.
As an ad on TV says, love is a chemical reaction. Life is a pattern of chemical reactions. Pattern is the operative word; in order for life to exist, the reactions have to take place in the right order. As life evolved the interactions of chemicals became more and more complex so that communication became more necessary and much of our biological processes are governed by messenger chemicals. It all comes down to the fact that life is a cooperative adventure, and what ever improves cooperation improves the chances that a life form will survive.
Biologically chemicals learned to cooperate by communicating within the cells and reacting to the immediate surroundings. Cells then learned to work together by communicating with one another for mutual benefit. On a biological level this communication takes place by means of chemicals. Once this concept of communicating and working together for mutual benefit got going it effectively went viral because it was very successful.
There is a myth abroad that "survival of the fittest" means that the biggest, meanest character on the block is going to be the one that survives. If that were really so, the world would be populated by 5 or 6 billion tyrannosaurus Rexes. Mankind is a small creature with small teeth and weak nails. We have survived because we live in troops; we are social animals. We are the most successful of the social animals because we are the best communicators. From at least the time of Aristotle, philosophers have said that Man is distinguished from the animals by reason and speech.
Although we now know that many animals and even plants have complex method of communication, none is as complex and as flexible as ours, and we have built on speech by inventing writing, printing, and now computers. Every time we add to our means of communication, our populations have increased.
So where does morality fit into all this chemistry? What we call morality or ethics are simply the rules that govern cooperative behavior. All social groups have rules. The groups that survive and thrive are the ones where the rules benefit the most members of the group because each member of the group is important to the survival of the group. Rules and communication make it all possible.
When someone becomes "mentally ill" he or she becomes incapable of communicating somewhere along the line. Sometimes the communication breakdown is biological; some chemical messenger is either not produced or it fails to communicate as it is supposed to. In the case of chemical addictions, an outside messenger chemical that mimics the body's chemical is introduced or a virus hijacks the cells communication system for its own purpose.
In other cases the breakdown is social. For some reason the individual is unable to communicate with other people. Usually this is an emotional breakdown although it can be intellectual as in not being able to recognize false communication as lies. Sometimes people simply have not learned the rules and many times there are arguments as to what the rules are or should be.
Does any of this have anything to do with "god?" Many modern cosmologists are saying that the universe is a place that is friendly to life. That life is inevitable in this universe. If life is a cooperative adventure that depends on rules and communication and the universe is so structured that life if inevitable, than the universe somehow favors cooperation, communication and rules. The idea that law and God are connected is as old as civilization. In the beginning there was the logos, the word. (Logos in Greek means more than just what "word" means in English. Logos means law.)
What I am trying to say is that there is something in the nature of the universe that favors cooperation, communication, and ordered, regulated behavior. In short we live in a moral universe.
I like what Martin Luther King Jr. said, "The arc of the universe always bends toward justice."
bfly, I largely agree, but I think you might be leaning a little more towards poetry than reality when it comes to the nature of the universe.
India and Alava loved your discussion. One note about lesbians not being discussed is a very simple reason for that. Because in essence, the bible is about men behaving very badly and basically like very primitive primates. But primitive primates worse than the Chimpanzee. That is what the bible is really getting at there and not that man is such a superior species.
Alva: I am a student of poetry, especially Shakespeare and Milton, but I am also a charter subscriber to Discover Magazine, and much of what I read about what is going on in scientific research seems to support the idea that community is at the heart of all creation. The reason that there is such a push to find life on other planets is that many scientists have concluded that the basic parameters of the universe make life not only possible but inevitable.
What we need is a discussion of the meaning of words, especially "god," "morality," "religion," and many more. What do these words refer to? What do they mean in terms of action in our lives? I am going to write to Rachael to suggest a weekly forum on language not just in religion but also in politics. We throw a lot of words around, but so often we have no real idea of what they mean.
They'll all be packing their firearms as the CA Representative told radio listeners this week.
As if any politician in the History of this nation has ever been genuinely "Pious" when they didn't have to be or when they could get away with picking someone else's pocket.
I read this earlier, had to close down my laptop and walk around the block. If this is 'Christianity' then I want no part of it. How dare these sanctimonious morons do this in 'God's name'. How dare they.
Mego,#4
This isn't Christianity.
As for the Obama signing at the WTC, that is patently absurd. He was talking about the building and the people of America, not the Apocalypse.
They can read anything they want into anything written, that doesn't make it true.
India, I think Christianity takes on all kinds of forms. I don't think it's a legitimate argument that if one Christian has a set of beliefs that are different from someone else's, that they can say with certainty that they are or aren't a Christian.
For instance, it wouldn't be correct for a Baptist to tell a Lutheran that they're not really a Christian. Just as it wouldn't be correct for a Presbyterian to tell a Methodist that they're not really a Christian.
Christianity has a lot of denominations and it takes on many different forms. And a lot of those denominations, sad to say, is quite ugly.
Alva, Christianity has only one form. To be a Christian is to follow Christ. To live your life as a Christian is to follow His teachings. It does not matter what denomination you are, if you follow Christ, no one could say of you that you were "ugly" or "evil". You are simply not a Christian. Christ never taught anything that could be mistaken as "ugly". If you call yourself a Baptist or a Catholic or a Lutheran and, for example, hate Black people, you are not a Christian. You are not just a bad Catholic, Lutheran or Baptist, but a non-Christian of that particular denomination.
You also, conversely, cannot call yourself a Christian simply because you are a decent, good hearted person. Christianity, by definition, is to believe in Christ and follow his teachings.
Alva, I should add that, having said what I did, we are all flawed humans and make bad judgments and do wrong things.
By "wrong" I do not mean you can throw acid in someone's face, knowing what the results would be of your actions, and then still regard yourself as a proper Christian.
Christians follow the Moral Law as much as possible. They strive to be kind and tolerant, and follow the teachings of Christ. They try hard to obey the Moral Law. The Bible says we all fall short of that, and heaven knows I do.
I fall short of that a lot. But I strive to obey the teachings of my faith.
Most of you are either on the east coast or mid west so probably won't read this as late as it is but....
While in boot camp and 18 months of special training, some of us guys got to know each other pretty well. I was amazed at the number of them that said there was no God. We had discussions and of course nobody was going to or even trying to change anybody's mind. It was interesting. What was more amazing was when the @!$%# hit the fan in Nam, some of those same "non-believers were praying just like the rest of us. It's much easier facing death if we know it's just the beginning. There is no such thing as an athiest on a battle field.
That's not entirely true.
Now for something entirely different.
Sigh. I'm an atheist who is uninterested in proving to anyone that god does not exist. Anyone demanding I do so is acting the tyrant, and that has no place in a free society of human beings.
I enjoy reading the absolutist opinions shared by believers about non-believers. It's wonderful how sure they are -- and perhaps they live a life needing that certainty. A few of us don't. We know the bible in and out -- thanks to childhoods spent under tough protestant indoctrination -- but we would never assert that our individual understanding is more valid than any other. That's not only chutzpah, it's irrational.
It's fine that groups of people share similar interpretations of a given book, that they come together as co-religionists. I don't say they're wrong.
I merely say they have no greater claim to righteousness or truth than I do. Nor do they, by virtue of their numbers or societal power or government tax-exempt status, have the right to impose their beliefs and practices on me.
Absolute morality? That which provides the greatest good and relieves the most suffering for the greatest number. The details of that will remain in dispute, even among people of good will, even among (gasp!) atheists like me. No one can hijack my mind, though, to make me believe what they want: I own my failures and my successes. I am responsible when I help or harm others in this society.
I am a member of a society whose civil regulations are mostly tolerable (in my case, Maryland's), and I'm willing to subject myself to that society to the extent I perceive it to be for the greater good of the greatest number. Speed limits are good; sales taxes are reasonable; income taxes are a useful means toward common goods (including cleaning up the Chesapeake! -- but I digress). Once I belonged to a religious community whose morality was to my adolescent mind both perverse and corrupted: Southern Baptists in Alabama in the 1950s-1960s. I left for good as a young teenager.
Scientific thinking is straightforward compared to religiosity: if a scientist cannot present sufficient objective evidence for the existence of "X", then it remains hypothetical at best. Every research scientist knows "one can never prove a negative." We don't try. And when someone says: "You have to prove to me that "Y" doesn't exist!", there is nothing to do but walk away. To first order, it doesn't matter to me that religious folks believe in a god. Why my disbelief is so offensive to them, though, does remain a mystery -- unless they realize that they have no chance to control my mind. So to second order, I stand back a bit from people who are so vocal about the rightness of their beliefs, a bit nervous about their motives.
Not here to persuade, just to explain. Religious folks sometimes forget that the existence of their particular version of god is neither obvious nor necessary to many of us. If your belief helps you get through the day, great. Acting as if your belief, however sincere, constitutes unquestionable fact -- that's just silly. And potentially dangerous.
Ciao, y'all.
I, for one, am heartily sick and tired of various flavors of Christianity, from good wittle wibewal Christians to hard-core Christo-Fascists pointing fingers at each other and indignantly exclaiming "You aren't real Christians." Theological Correctness is Theological Correctness (and therefore wrong), whatever flavor it is. A plague on all your houses! And for good measure, that applies to the entire Judeo-Christian-Islamic complex of religions!
Amen.
Perhaps in all their piety, these chaplains and their fellow travelers know something we all don't:
God, (at least theirs) is a Republican! -Kevo
Yeah, too bad ffor THEM (whether they realize it or not, that their 'god' is Satan. And Yeah, only makes sense he'd be a Republicant.
Or Mammon ...
If we are going to have a Chaplain, the we also need a Rabbi, an Imam, a Buddhist Monk, etc.
Or we should have none.
I am a Christian and I vote for none.
Re: #4 This is NOT "Christianity"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I agree that there should be no chaplain in either house of congress, let alone a paid one. If legislators want to pray before the session they could have a moment of silence.
All too often, this IS American Christianity in the 21st Century. At a minimum, this is one prominent face of American Christianity. Unfortunately.
Who was it who said:
" You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them."
Graychin,
Thanks and A-men!
I have always loved that passage.
Graychin...you forgot the first part of the quote: 'Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.' Yes.
James Madison was right.
Yes, Madison was right. We should abolish the offices, certainly stop paying them.
I totally agree. Want some budget cuts? You can start with these guys.
Amen! Well, I have no issue if they want a chaplain, but if they get paid, CONGRESS needs to all pitch in to pay them (out of THEIR OWN fat cat wallets!) Otherwise they need to 'elect' a chaplain' out of their ranks, with NO added pay.... and one on each side, IMO would be best... FROM THEIR OWN RANKS.
ETA: ALSO you would THINK that the REPUBLICANS would be all for CUTTING this "government waste"!!!
I don't mind the idea of counselors in the military .
in new frontiers in amazing priest stories...meet monsignor meth
initial story
Feds: Priest charged with selling meth
A prominent priest who served as pastor of St. Augustine's Cathedral parish in Bridgeport and was a close aide to then-Bishop Edward Egan was indicted on charges he was part of a drug ring that conspired to sell methamphetamine.
Msgr. Kevin Wallin of Waterbury was arrested on a criminal complaint Jan. 3 after a joint investigation by the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Connecticut State Police Statewide Narcotics Task Force.
Wallin, 61, resigned from his position at St. Augustine's, the main church of the Bridgeport diocese, in 2011, citing health and personal problems. He had previously served as pastor of St. Peter Parish in Danbury from 1996 to 2002, and was ordained to the priesthood in 1984.
Wallin was charged with six counts in the indictment Tuesday by a federal grand jury in Bridgeport and faces up to life in prison if he is convicted.
---------------
followup story
Sources: Cross-dressing meth priest liked sex in rectory
The Catholic priest busted for allegedly dealing crystal meth was suspended after church officials discovered he was a cross-dresser who was having sex in the rectory at Bridgeport's St. Augustine Cathedral.
Monsignor Kevin Wallin was relieved of his duties in May, but the Roman Catholic Diocese of Bridgeport had continued to pay him a stipend until his Jan. 3 arrest -- a day he was planning to fly to London on vacation.
Now dubbed "Msgr. Meth" by some, Wallin seemed to live a life that easily could have been ripped from the script of "Breaking Bad." At one point, Wallin was selling upwards of $9,000 of meth a week, according to his indictment.
In his post-priesthood, Wallin, 61, bought an adult specialty and video store in North Haven called Land of Oz that sells sex toys and X-rated DVDs. Investigators believe the shop helped him launder thousands of dollars in weekly profits.
http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Feds-Priest-charged-with-selling-meth-4200164.php
and
http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Sources-Cross-dressing-meth-priest-liked-sex-in-4203841.php
Oh rectory, ok never mind what I was going to say it all comes out in the end.
Russell Weisenheimer,
I guess you felt you had to post that. May I add that there are bad men everywhere and that a bad priest is not an indictment of either the Catholic church or God?
As we say every Sunday at mass, "Look not on our sins, but the faith of Your church."
I do apologize, I believe I misspelled your name.
Further proof that the Catholic Church is the greatest con-job in human history. The leader in suppressing both intellect and self-awareness.
india,
i don't "feel like" i have to post anything.....[not at all sure how to even process that concept], but i do enjoy posting stories here at "this week in god" every saturday that steve didn't get to that i think his readers might find of interest. [click on my name to see entries from previous weeks]
it wasn't posted to be anything other than an almost unbelievable story about one priest...no broader meaning [or offense] was intended.
OK.
I get touchy about my church. So many people love to malign it.
I worked for the Catholic Church for several years. I met dozens of really nice and dedicated priests and nuns. I met a few priests and nuns who were spectacular - great homilists, or great teachers, or unbelievably dedicating to working with the poor or other marginalized groups. I also met a few that were, frankly, jerks. And in my time working at the offices, I had a few situations where a priest or nun had a real issue, sometimes of a legal nature. Surely we are not suggesting that priests and nuns are always perfect. As a regular reader of this blog, I personally look forward to Russell's contributions to This Week in God because he does seem to find things that don't make it into the original post, and honestly, if he would have skipped Fr. Meth, I would have been disappointed in him, because the Fr. Meth story is spectacularly bad.
So thanks, Russell, for finding so much extra material for this weekly airing of the dirty laundry. I always look forward to your contributions.
I, too, appreciate Russell's TWiG contributions. Thanks Russell.
(And thank you to Benen & staff as well.)
Any organization can be corrupted , and some places are , and should be , held to higher standards , such as people serving the public , or godly institutions
most people can accept people making mistakes , but when it is covered up and institutionalized , the organization should be gutted and all held accountable , the overly righteous who are offended by its exposure are always part of the problem , if you do not deal with the minority who are creating problems , then the rest will be infected and effected eventually
AND the BIGGER they are, the more likely they are to have corrupt elements... and let's face it, the Catholic church is HUGE!
KT Kacer,
OK, the Catholic Church is huge and as such would be expected to have more bad apples than most, for that very reason. In no way am I saying these bad apples should not be singled out and punished. Of course they should.
No one is more offended by their actions than Catholics across the world!
It makes me sick to hear about things like that. But it doesn't make me want to leave the Church. That's all I am saying.
If we could agree about the existence and nature of Evil, we might agree that infiltrating the Body Of Christ would necessarily be one of its greatest goals. So I am not surprised to see it rear its ugly head in churches across the world.
India, did you get stuck in bold mode?
LOL, I guess. I have bad eyes. Sometimes I do that for emphasis. Sometimes, because I'm not computer savvy, I discover that when I continue to type it stays in the bold format. I am too lazy to undo it, and never bother. Sorry if it bothers you. I can see the bold type easier.
"Any organization can be corrupted"
Sometimes it seems that any organization will be corrupted!
and in yet another ongoing christian church sex scandal
A pastor known for promoting corporal punishment has been accused of physically abusing a woman for 25 years, beginning during her childhood.
The Rev. Larry Tomczak, an associate pastor at Bethel World Outreach Church near Brentwood, Tenn., was named in a Maryland lawsuit that was filed against leaders of Sovereign Grace Ministries, a denomination Tomczak helped found in the 1980s and later left.
The suit was originally filed in October by three alleged victims of abuse and was amended Friday (Jan. 11) to add five others. All eight were given pseudonyms.
It alleges that Tomczak, who lives in Franklin, Tenn., and other church leaders covered up sexual abuse in the denomination and at a Christian school in Gaithersburg, Md., in the 1980s and 1990s.
Tomczak also is accused of repeatedly assaulting a woman (who is given the pseudonym Carla Coe) with plastic and wooden sticks. The alleged abuse began when she was a child and lasted more than two decades. When the woman was an adult, the lawsuit claims, Tomczak beat her bare backside.
http://www.religionnews.com/2013/01/16/pastor-who-pushes-corporal-punishment-accused-of-abuse/
From the article: "As the week progressed, the story got a little strange[er]."
I suggest the writer simply add the letters "er" to the end of the sentence.
This is, after all, an article about far-right Republicans and religion - we expect "strange."
From everything we can extrapolate about God from the teachings of Jesus, we can easily and rightly conclude that God is a Democrat.
As a Democrat myself, I conclude that God is as tired of the lunatic fringe Republicans as I am. I think He may be taking notes on the GOP's inclination toward exclusivity, selfishness and greed.
People like Pat Robertson and the so called "pious" people involved in this "meeting of the minds" seem to think they have an edge on morality and will all go to Heaven when they die.
There will be some surprises.
What about The Buddha?
Patango, What, what about the Buddha? Not sure I understand the question.
Kinda reminds me of the Onion article shortly after 9-11-2001 http://www.theonion.com/articles/hijackers-surprised-to-find-selves-in-hell,1445/
There should be some MONDO surprises.... ALMOST tempts one to be the type of person who would be sent to hell, just to see their torment and shock/cries for mercy "But we thought that is what Your word said!!! (Ok, maybe not the greed, an theft... or the corruption, but hey, we hated fags! We looked down upon women and tried our damnedest to control them! We cheated trying our dirtiest tricks to try to usurp the will of the people! We were treasonous to our country, yeah, but.... in a 'good' way!))"
I think it will be both a horredous, albeit somewhat amusing sight.
Yeah the greedy "I got mine, I could give two damns less about the poor, they should not 'tread on me' taking my 'hard earned' $$!" Just... I do not see that going too far w/ God/Jesus.... I man how MANY passages in the New Testament did Jesus state we should AID the poor? How often did he show us that the crooked, cheating the poor should be both exposed and held in contempt? I recall him tearing up the 'market' at the temple because they had weighted their scales to cheat people....
The vitriol that comes from the "right" (the wrong), the only thing they can 'sorta' cling to is the 'abortion' debate. However, being a liberal, I have no issue with this being the law of the land (unless it were mandatory, like in China). Women miscarry... IMO this is God 'aborting' when the fetus would cause the mother's health to be compromised. Also God gave us free will, and while I do not think I would ever have an abortion, myself. I can talk to someone considering the same, but to forbid it, would be my exerting my will upon them, which I understand to be sin. Never mind I also see it as OFTEN (if not, perhaps, always) HEALTHCARE. Therefore it should not be legislated, or at best minimally to prevent murder (partial-birth when not needed to save life/health of the mother).
But really THAT is "all they got" and IMO that is dubious at BEST.
TOTAL disregard for the elderly (Kinda funny most of their support stems from those they frequently attack (SS and Medicare attacks when those programs still MAKING $$ each year, and may or MAY NOT be in 'some' trouble' SOMETIME in the next 20+ years... maybe.)
Their total disregard for the poor, and ill.
Their near hero worship of the rich and corrupt.
Their repeated attempts to yank rights from various minorities over the years... blacks, gays, women, Hispanics, ANYONE persecuted from another country that isn't 'popular' like say.... CUBA is.) American Indians, I know their are more... anyone not OLD white and MALE (ok, and 'Christian')
Their constant shrill cries of "MINE! MINE!!!" even when, in reality.... NOT theirs.
I LOVE too the jerks who want want want when it comes to disaster relief for THEIR districts, but who will not even feign support whenever a disaster hits, say NY, or any area that GIVES more than it TAKES (like most Democratic areas), but their areas that even not counting things like disaster relief, take more than they give in taxes CONSISTENTLY!
Yeah, God is a Democrat. Well.... probably in reality He's "Green Party", but hey... close. ;)
India, some years ago when I first read the entire Gospel, I came to the conclusion that Jesus, while he may not be a Democrat technically speaking, he was liberal. There's quite a lot of semi-socialist diatribes in there. Telling the rich to give to the poor, that they would have a easier time getting a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than getting into heaven, that the meek shall inherent the earth, that the first (the rich) shall be the last (ones in heaven) and the last (the poor) shall be the first (ones in heaven).
But there's a lot of nasty stuff in there too. What is moral about sending someone to a place of eternal never ending torture for a finite crime? And remember that some of those crimes are, by today's standards, quite bizarre, such as not being allowed to wear clothing made of more than one kind of material, or cutting the hair at your temples, or eating shellfish.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLqUvEsiUGA
This universe is young at 15 billion years and there are countless planets. By now, life must exist on many Goldilocks planets. Religion could be a tool for mutual respect and understanding, i.e. I respect your beliefs as being right for you, just as my beliefs are right for me. If we continue down this religious path of "my way or the highway; we're right and everyone else is wrong," then ironically this tool will lead to the destruction of humankind. Still, I have faith that on other planets "God's" experiments with intelligence are working, even if it seems to be failing miserably here on planet Earth. There's still time to salvage things, but as long as we allow hate-filled, judgmental people to set the religious stage, I'm afraid life as we know it here is in grave peril.
I thought he was a lieutenant by now .
Gizmockins,#11.5
I hate to break the news to you, but this is the only "Goldilocks" planet we have. If there are others, they are too far away to matter. I believe we need to work hard to improve what we've been given.
Hate-filled, judgmental people are not Christian. They shouldn't even call themselves that. Christ never taught people to hate, lie, or steal.
I could call myself an armadillo if I chose to, but I can never be one.
#11.8
Marco Rubio I presume?
And why are there poor people, because rich people do everything they can to keep the poor poor because the more rich people there are the harder it is to get a bigger share of wealth.
This is in reply to a post by India LeCarre -I read your post and I agree with what you wrote. It said what I would have written but I keep on writing and writing when I get very annoyed and passionate about something.
Sandy, Thank you very much. I needed that! I see that my faith is somewhat in the minority here.
Marco,
I am afraid I'm not familiar with her books. I have seen her on TV and find her a highly opinionated, right-wing extremist. So who was she talking about?
Since I am not one of the "all" who know.
Well, Marco and India, I'm not a Christian, but that doesn't make me "Godless". I worship in a Pagan faith. We don't sacrifice children and we don't have orgies. In my heart, my Goddess is just as powerful, all-knowing, and all-seeing as your God is to you. We have but one "commandment": "An' it harm none, do what thou will" Really, that's all the moral code anyone needs. I respect Jesus as a wise teacher, even though he is not of my faith. Like Christians, we all fall short of the ideals that our Gods and Goddesses have set for us. But ours is a religion with no fear, no threats, and no judgements. At the end of this life, my soul will return to my Guides and Teachers. Together, they and I together shall examine my past life, and determine whether my actions and experiences have advanced my soul in its path toward perfection. If it has, my soul shall move forward to another life and another set of learning objectives. If, not, my soul may be required to engage itself in another lifetime in order to achieve the goals my soul fell short on. There may be dangers, pain, and unhappiness in every life, as well as the joyful and good, but I accept them all as part of the learning experience. There is no Heaven or Hell.....each soul will experience both on the journey to be one with the Dieties.
I know that aetheists will find my beliefs to be unbelievable, just as they do all other religions. That's OK...my faith is sure enough that their disagreement does not bother me. And I'd feel the same about Christianity, except for one thing.
As for Christianity, all I can say is from Emperor Constatine up to recent times, the Bible has seldom gone anywhere unless it was accompanied by the sword. If one reads history, especially from the period 400 AD - 1700 AD, you will see that the Roman Church (and many Protestant religions after the Reformation) definitely did not "play well with other children" as they say. The Christian faiths (primarily the Roman Church) conspired with secular rulers to bring about the Inquisitions. This brought about the torture and death of thousands and thousands of men, women, and children (mostly women) who were innocent of anything except that they may have followed some of the "old ways" of Paganism. Like what? Healing their families and neighbors with natural remedies; walking in the woods at night; being a self-assured, assertive woman; dancing; being "too close" to another woman. Whole cities in southern France were anniliated to the last person. In one city in Germany, 400 women were burned to death as "witches" on a single day.
How many died in Europe during this period? The Christian apologists say "only" 50,000. Only???? Like killing 50,000 people is OK? Other less biased historical sources say anywhere from 2,000,000 to 9,000,000. Who knows? Quibbling with the numbers doesn't matter. No matter which numbers you use the fact is a lot of innocent people died at the hands of Christian religious despots. The Vatican refuses to acknowledge their responsibility for this theocide, and they refuse to allow access to their archieves so that impartial historical researchers can determine the precise number of people murdered. The Catholic Church "values each and every life?" When did the Vatican adopt this novel policy?
Therin lies the distrust and, Goddess forgive me, hatred that many people have for the Christian religion, and in particular the more vocal fundamentalist wings of both Protestant and Catholic Christianity. These radicals have never enjoyed being "one among many." They want it all. These people are crafty; they preach Jesus when they want to appear to be loving, caring, and accepting. That's fine...Jesus truly did preach these values and did many other wonderful things. But then the Old Testament comes out...and the pretty mask comes off. If God was a mortal man and did all the things he did in the Old Testament, history would record him as one of the most despicable tyrants of all time.
A church near me (a fundamentalist one, no less) had this message on the large sign next to the road. "We are called upon to be witnesses, not lawyers or judges." Therein is the truth as I believe Jesus himself would have said. Christians may feel free to damn me to hell as a Pagan and a lesbian in their churches and homes. They may politely ask to share information about their faith with me (and politely accept it when I decline) but when they attempt to use the coercive power of government, law, and the courts to circumvent the Constitution and bend my actions and beliefs to their will, I begin to smell the burning flesh af all those innocents wafting over the miles and years from Europe. I see the men and women hanged right here in the New World in places like Salem, Mass. There is nothing that says "This will never happen". If one wishes to know what religious fanatics are capable of, we can start at 9/11 and move forward to Afghanistan.
"Never Again the Burning Times".
Oh, and by the way, Marco :"What have you ever done for the rich so they would have a reason to do something for you?"
For 4 years I stood guard in the dark, the snow, and the cold over a bunch of B-52s loaded with nuclear weapons. I did this so that the "rich" would not have to turn their money over to the Kremlin. 'nuff said.
Re: Marco #11.8
Nonsense. If it wasn't for the poor, the rich wouldn't be rich in the first place. The poor are poor because the rich stole their wealth from them. So long as capitalism exists, poverty will be perpetuated.
By the way, Ann Coulter is a TROLL.
Patango, What, what about the Buddha? Not sure I understand the question.
Your statement excludes any other enlightened masters or spirituality , there is more to this world than just the western version of GOD and JESUS , especially in america where all faiths are welcomed , the democrats included
India LeCarre
I hate to break the news to you, but this is the only "Goldilocks" planet we have.
The universe is eternal , just like we are , along with our father / mother /god , it all goes forever , so I would imagine that worlds go forever also
They may not be recognizable to the limits of our human eyes is all
Patango, thanks for the response. I certainly do not exclude the Buddha and other enlightened beings. I've read a great deal about Buddhism and learned from it.
Sorry, Patango, but the universe is finite. It is running down, out of energy, and one day will be no more. That is a scientific fact. Did you know that light follows the curvature of the universe? We can't know what is beyond that as light will not go there.
But let's not confuse infinity with eternity. God is eternal. God existed before the universe and will exist after all the lights go out and time has ended forever. Because we were created in the image of God, we, too, are eternal.
St. Augustine, in his Confessions, has many interesting things to say about time and eternity.
India, for light to follow the curvature of the universe, the universe would have to be curved. It's not. If memory serves, the universe is flat and continually expanding. It is increasing the rate at which it is expanding. Eventually (in about a billion years), the speed at which the universe is expanding will be so fast that we won't be able to detect other galaxies anymore.
What you may be referring to is that gravity bends the space time continuum. So, if you shine light past something that has a lot of gravity (like a pulsar), then the light that shines past that gravity bends. And you get a kind of look down through the fishbowl type effect.
Perhaps curvature is the wrong word. Perhaps parameters is what I should have used. I heard a scientist say this, as he was talking about the finite universe, that he knew it was finite and, unless I mistook him, a closed system wherein light would not penetrate . I remember that, as I found it fascinating.
I know that gravity bends the space time continuum. Yes. That was not what he was discussing, however.
I would love to know what we could see out beyond this universe. We are just a tiny spiral galaxy orbiting around a small, second rate star, and yet.......
we know. We think. We are self conscious creatures. How amazing.
What if we alone can see this and know about this? Would no one know if we did not?
And you just answered your own FINITE response , man has not found where the universe stops , if he did , then your FINITE response would apply
Infinity : (symbol: ∞) refers to something without any limit, and is a concept relevant in a number of fields, predominantly mathematics and physics. The English word infinity derives from Latin infinitas, which can be translated as "unboundedness", itself derived from the Greek word apeiros, meaning "endless".
Eternity : (or forever) is endless time. In philosophy and mathematics, an infinite duration is also called sempiternity, or everlasting. Eternity is an important concept in many religions, where the immortality of God (or the gods) is said to endure eternally. Some, such as Aristotle, would say the same about the natural cosmos in regard to both past and future eternal duration, and like the eternal Platonic Forms, immutability was considered essential.[1]
There really is no difference , that is just your mind playing deflection
Humans have limited eyes or vision by choice imo , we have limited them so we can experience this world , we do not see like God , that should be obvious , especially for anyone who has studied the Buddha as you have , so what you are referring to is the limits of what the human eye can see , not the infinite that god perceives
For all we know Jupiter is populated with beings , our limited human minds just do not have the ability to see or experience them , but the same can be said about many living things in our own world
And politicizing god is wrong . it does not matter if a dem or gop is doing it , and is exactly why the founding fathers addressed the issue in our constitution
Pat, we sort of have found the edge of the universe. Keep in mind that if you look at a star that's 5 million light years away, the light that you're seeing it with is 5 million years old. We can't see all the way back to the Big Bang, because at a certain point, the entire universe is an opaque mass of super hot plasma.
PATANGO, Gee, thanks for clarifying those definitions for me. I really need more dictionaries in my home library. I only have three. (OK, one is Spanish and one French). But one is in English!
I forgot, make that 4; my husband has one in Russian. His major was Slavic languages.
Wait, make that 6 dictionaries. I have a really large French one as well as the small French one and I just saw a Polish one of my husband's. We used to have a Greek one, but I don't see it now.
Going out to breakfast is a treat, an indulgence. I only do it on a rare vacation. Maybe these fine Chaplains simply got sick of oatmeal, and Joseph Farah promised them eggs benedict. The one fella even said he wasn't staying long, maybe he bails when Marques Bachmann hogs the lox, and Roy lights up a Blunt...
maybe i'm cynical, but i can honestly say, 'amen!' to these kinds of idiotic exercizes. i didn't appreciate it back when the gipper and falwell burst onto the scene, but all but the most impervious blockheads can detect the scents of hypocrisy, mendacity, and yes, lunacy. pour it on! the ranker and the sillier, the better. each day, these kinds of 'religions' slip further into irrelevance as more and more individuals become embarassed to admit they have any connection with them.
Good grief! Dante's circle of hell reserved for the pontificating pious sinners is going to be so full that there won't be any room for the rest of us sinners. It is going to be SRO.
Were HITLER & HIMMLER "Good Shepherds"?
Have you every thought about this problem.
One of the strongest images and allegory's of religion is that of a shepherd and his flock: David's PSALM 23: "The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want...."; the Pope carrys the curved shepherd's staff (as do many other religious figures) "Thy Rod and Thy Staff" and is the Shepherd of the flock of the Catholic faithful - as is a priest, pastor, minister faith leader, etc. to the members of his congregation.
Through time that analogy has always been extreme comforting & consoling, BUT have you every really considered it's reality and potentially it's hidden meanings?
Think of a shepherd and his flock.
What happens to the lamb of a shepherd? Lamb chops, leg of lamb - what's your pleasure?
What happens to the sheep of a shepherd's flock? Wool and then mutton chops and stew.
A shepherd KILLS HIS FLOCK or SELLS THEM TO SLAUGHTER. That's what his flock exists for - a supply of wool and a supply of food - DINNER.
So a shepherd, as a normal matter of course, "betrays" and slaughters the members of his flock. The flock which that he earlier protected and cared for all lives - lives that he is directly responsible for ending.
If that is the normal, expected out come of the true relationship between and shepherd and his flock - the only purpose for their existence to begin with - what is the real and true meaning and reality behind the consistent image of a religious shepherd and the flock of his followers?
If we can find mysterious, misinterpreted and questionable (but extraordinarily rewarding both financially, in publicity, in power and in determining the nature of US support for Israel) "end of days" manipulations & meanings in books of the Bible and related writings, THEN:
What is the true and unrevealed hidden meaning of a betraying shepherd and the flock he betrays?
Are we to be delivered FROM something or TO something?? Why was the image of a betraying shepherd (a necessary means & method of physical and economic survival) and his doomed flock placed in our belief writings?
Now, will you ever look at the concept of the GOOD SHEPHERD the same way again?
There is NO "GOOD" SHEPHERD.
Excellent!
Re: #15
As with any analogy, you can take it only so far and then it is no longer applicable.
A good shepherd watches over and protects each of the sheep in the flock. If one is lost, the shepherd goes out and finds it.
Period.
I personally like the idea that I am cared for by my Shepherd.
If you don't find that this analogy has any meaning to you, fine.
of course the "good shepherd" goes after the "lost" lamb. it's just good economics. if you keep losing your flock you could starve or have to find other work, possibly involving heavy lifting.
In the intellectual realm, the sheep have low IQ's and the Shepard has the High IQ. The High IQ's keep the low iq's from going astray. And if one tries to escape, it's sacraficed to keep the others in line. Quite a dictatorship.
In the Adam and Eve story, the snake told the truth, Eve did not die as gad had said she would.
Eating from the tree of knowledge, gad said, would make us as smart as the gads.
So instead of "dying the death" that gad foretold, he kicked Adam and Eve out of the garden, and cursed women. Weirdly the first thing Adam and Eve then did was look at their "things" and cover them up.....
As I, right now, look at the moon and sun in the sky at the same time, I wonder, how it is that no religion explains what the sun is (a star) or isn't (gad), or explain the phases of the moon, or how many days are in a year, dinosaurs, dreams, motivation,.
And wasn't Jesus the Lamb of God. God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son to die a terrible death on the cross so that we could all be saved from eternal hell fire. Hardly a benevolent god.
Jesus did preach a more humane and modern god and at least according to some Christian theology Jesus brought Grace into the world. Too bad organized religions so often distort the message for their own power games.
"If god is god than he is perfect; all the rest is but the wrethed lies of poets" from the Heracles by Euripides. We might add and the lies of politicians. Religions may have all begun to explain Mankind's relationship to the ultimate, but what passes for religion in the world today nearly always is the handmaiden of power politics, and that goes for Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and even to some extent Budism. As institutions, there is not a one of them that is not drenched in blood, and frequently in sperm. And actually this is not a modern problem. Emperors and kings began hijacking religion to butress their power as soon as there were kingdoms and empires.
The fruit they ate gave them the ability to perceive this world , they willingly took part , and this world is not a pretty SIGHT , now the question might be ,
" HOW DO WE PROPERLY END WHAT WE ARE SEEING AND WITNESSING?"
because we are definitely seeing and experiencing it to this day
Ahhhhhh...I think you're reaching.
I thought the moral was if you don't "play" at life by the paternal rules , ostracized .
Some people are a lot more crass in their worship of Mammon than others.
The NYT article on Scientology is excellent. I remember Harlan Ellison telling me 20 years ago about sitting in a restaurant in the 50s with Hubbard, and Hubbard telling him that being an inventive writer was fun, but being able to invent a whole religion was where the real money was. How true, and not just with that charlatan, but all the other charlatans, con artists, liars, cheats, murderers, perverts, thieves, back alley assassins who play the "long con" of being The Good Shepherd while preparing their flocks for the great fleecing and the magnificent dinner (with the flock as main course). At his best as a writer, Hubbard never rose above "hackneyed." Every time I have met a Scientologist in Hollywood (and I've met more than I cared to), they have been either criminal predators or morons, nothing in between.
i wish more people would watch Elmer Gantry. saw it when i was much younger and it finally made TV. Burt Lancaster was brilliant and he nailed the part of the preacher.
if you haven't seen it, i highly recommend it. i don't know if it is on the playlists of any of the movie services. the fact that it is in black and white just improves the quality of the entire experience, after a few minutes you don't even notice that it's not in color.
Are you sure Elmer Gantry is in black and white? I seem to remember it in color. It will be shown on TCM on March 2, 2013 at 8:30 a.m. EST.
It is no doubt available on DVD on Amazon.
Burt Lancaster won an Oscar as best actor for 1960 for his role as Elmer Gantry.
TC in LA, #16
I do admire your moral outrage. Didn't you say you were an atheist? I thought you said something to that effect. Correct me if I'm wrong. I may be confusing you with someone else who said that.
The reason I mention this is that atheists are not standing on firm ground when they rail against things like criminal predators and con artists. Without God, where did Absolute Morality come from? You know, the one that makes us so furious when we see it being broken. This sense of outrage has to mean, IMO, that there is a moral law which, whether we believe in it or not, surely exists.
I don't need some external old man in a bedsheet to help me distinguish right from wrong, and given that the greatest criminals in history have mostly used religion to justify themselves, I don't think "religion" has much of a leg to stand on or an argument to make when it comes to "morality." Unless of course you're discussing the usual religious rule "do as I say and not as I do."
TC in LA,
Wow, you are angry. I am sorry about that. Nowhere in the Bible does Jesus say, "Do as I say and not as I do!" That is not Christianity.
You can't use religion to justify doing wrong! That isn't Christian or moral.
India: Do you think that without your belief in god you would have no moral principles?
Ninz,
No, when I was an atheist I still had moral principles. I was raised that way. I was taught, both by my parents, my education, and my environment to act in a certain way. I cannot say that I had the same sense of morality that I have now, nor the strongly held belief that there are Absolute Moral Laws. I would no more do things now that I did before I came to believe, than fly to the moon. I shudder to think of it! I see things very differently now.
Reason, not blind faith, tells me there are Absolute moral laws. There is, in other words, a "Law Giver" who gave humanity these moral laws. Reason tells me they did not evolve, nor did we invent them. Why would we invent something so uncomfortable? I personally would, at times, like to shoot a certain neighbour who drives me nuts. It is not the law or the threat of prison which keeps me thinking that would be very wrong. I just know it would be. No society I am aware of celebrates murder or indecency or cowardice or cheating. Why not? The moral law is universal, and Americans are quite quick to jump on those whom we feel violate it, all the while saying it doesn't exist!
Elmer Gantry was filmed in color, on stock from Eastman Kodak... However, most of the stills I have seen were in black and white... Both were common for films in that era (1960), especially dramas... For some reason, black and white was viewed as "more artistic".......
Good wittle boys and girls must never, ever get angry! Riiiiight. They are just supposed to get sanctimonious and self-righteous.
And the moral of the story is to never begin 'play time' unless you are absolutely certain you remember the safety word.
If there is a GOD- he/she would take the participants of this "prayer" breakfast to Heaven. On, second thought, maybe they would go the other way so GOD would not have to hear 'em.
If God takes these guys to heaven, I want to go to the other place. I am not really scared because no god that I could believe in would let any of these sons of Satan into any heaven He would preside over.
God is light and truth; Satan is the father of lies and king of hell where light never shines.
God has a better sense of humor than that. He'll let them get their punishment here on Earth. Can you imagine anything more delicious than these sanctimonious hacks getting to the Pearly Gates and being turned away?
Bflynch #18.1
Evil has many faces. Some wear the garments of the Church. What better place for Evil to want to infiltrate?
Faith in action means that the public is given a fair shot at having a good life, and working toward that end with those of little resources. It should have nothing to do with posturing or taking the side of any corporate driven party.
Sometimes I think that the conservatives are more atheists than the athiests. At least the athiests believe, or have faith in, the the human will to do well and make correct decisions. Pat R. and ilk have no faith in their God to choose the right man for the job of leading this nation - even when they prayed to him to put the right man in office. By refusing to accept God's choice, they refuse God and reject His lessons. I guess that's why they pray more to the Son. If I were God, I would go to athiest get togethers - at least I wouldn't be blamed for every little (or big) thing that went wrong on Earth.
Hi, Jontara -- an atheist here. Actually I don't believe or have faith that any human will do well and make correct decisions. I just expect (neither believe nor have faith) that humans will for the most part act as humans generally do, but I'm prepared for many exceptions to that generalization. As a result, it pays to try to understand humans, regardless. It may pay even to try to understand Republicons, though I haven't yet figured out why. Or if it's possible. (Do I have to watch Fixed Noise? Or enroll in the Glenn Beck University?)
I'm always amused when Pat R. and his allies say atheists hate god. How irrational would it be to hate something you don't think is real? Now *that* would be the height of ... silliness. This atheist hasn't had the energy to hate for decades.
Maybe it has been said, butt, might as well blame the atheists for not coming up with a Compelling secular ethic. And, that would be the healthier/smarter you and your community are, the more "good" you can do.
.
Too brief, I guess. Maybe you can't have an ethic without a 700,000 word preamble.
The secular "default" position on "good" would be, that which increases survival.
Luz -- Yep. That's the humanist default. A basic Occam's Razor position.
Never mind that they did not REALIZE that God sent 'signs' they were in the wrong by sending a HURRICANE to cut their convention short, theyby hurting Romney's chances at becoming President.... NOR do they see that SNDY was also sent to help SHOW that President Obama was indeed the man for the job (especially given the choices).
Now YOU KNOW that if some natural disaster had hit the DEMOCRATIC convention they'd have screamed it CONSTANTLY, or if that had caused President Obama to loose, say NY or even VA...
Funny how these occurrences are God interceding on their behalf WHEN IT BENEFITS THEM, or PUNISHING <whomever their current pariah is>, but when it HARMS them, it's nothing THEY did... just weather!
Either ALL OF IT is God interceding or His 'judgement' or NONE of it is. It's a weak mind who thinks otherwise... oh, I forgot, that's their middle name... "Weak-minded'
helena Vargas,
Funny you should mention "Occam's Razor" as I came to believe that the simplest explanation for the creation of the universe pointed to God! One God, in fact, not a committee. A committee would surely have screwed it up. LOL
Wouldn't Occam's Razor have us believe the Earth is the center of the universe?
Not any more.
This "prayer breakfast" sounds more like it's preceding a funeral than an inauguration. Given the speakers and the philosophical tone, that may well be the way the Republicans perceive this whole event.
Well said, mpguy. Well said.
This right-wing hatred for the President frightens me a great deal. Their prayer breakfast doesn't convince me otherwise. Let's keep the word funeral out of it.
Ever since Obama has tried to pass gun safety laws, these people have begun to scare me with their violent rhetoric and obvious loathing for the president.
Marco . . . The hatred for Bush and Cheney related to their policies, not to the individuals. Most people on the left thought that Bush was misguided and not terribly bright, but personally likeable. Cheney not so likeable, but the differences were over his world view and the way he went about things. It wasn't anywhere near as personal as the right's feelings about Obama. They hate HIM.
There was never a bunch of folks on the left buying guns and ammo, claiming that they wanted to use "Second Amendment remedies" to get what they wanted.
mpguy,
Right. I found Bush to be personally likeable. I still do, and especially the work he does with the cycling vets. I hated his policies and often felt he was a puppet for Cheney, whom I do see as an evil man. I think Bush simply wasn't qualified to be president. He made terrible mistakes.
The hatred for Obama is palpable, rabid, and growing. Yes, it scares me. And, yes, it is different.
No, Marco. I didn't even watch TV much, and didn't get MSNBC where we lived.
Nobody tells me what to think or feel.
I guess I'm with James Madison on this one. Why are we paying these guys?
God certainly works in strange and wonderful ways. A natural disaster is brought to punish evil... unless it is a drought in Texas. And when God brings superstorm Sandy to help Obama win the election it is not because he favors Obama over Romney, it is because he is punishing America for allowing abortion. God speaks to ME and conveniently tells me what I want to hear.
Well, I know that none of my taxes should be spent on this kind of crap for the entertainment of the obviously insane JesusHates™ and GodHates™ Products sellers. I personally don't have an issue at all with prayer, but these freaks always seem to pray for the death of someone they hate, which is wrong according to what their "religious" icon (the Jesus on the cross) taught.
and that is exactly why many of our early founders thought these things were just a bad idea , they knew the pat robertsons would show up eventually and
"nazi god "
it all
Patango, And here they are!
Hey Jesus, get off the cross I want to handcuff myself to it while I'm ball-gagged.. Say could you help me with this butt-plug and wetsuit? No, that's Michelle Bachman, it's this thing over here! Praise the Lord!! Oh yeah!!