Category: theological rant

Jim Gaffigan, a really funny guy, said this on Twitter recently:

I couldn’t agree any more.  Like a group of kids chasing around a ball with almost no ability to do something useful with it, the news outlets have started circling again around a church scandal.

If you haven’t heard about Bishop Eddie Long and the scandal there, good for you.  Because it is literally all allegation and hearsay at this point.  4 year olds that can’t catch up to the ball.

This is not really directed at Bishop Long (though it is frustrating if the allegations are true and another vitriolic right-winger was just a closeted gay man trying to deal with feelings of guilt and shame apart from the gospel…thats a different post.) so much as it is directed at the news media.

I know, you’ve got to fill up 24 hours worth of news.  And more people watch scandals.  But seriously, at what point do you start telling people whatever will keep them in front of the tube, regardless of the moral ramifications?

Does anyone there say “What if these allegations are false?  How much damage are we doing to this man’s life by running with the story just so we can keep up, instead of holding off until we know the facts?”  How much is this man’s reputation, his future ability to be employed, his relationship with his wife, his kids, worth?  Another Chase Credit Card commercial contract?

We’ve lost sight, as a culture, of the fact that business is supposed to benefit society.  Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC have devolved into a shouting match.  And nobody is benefiting.

Worst of all, we the people have bought it–Hook, line, and sinker.  We willingly sit and hear the rumor-peddling and slander that passes for the news, and worst of all, we go and repeat it, so that others will come and listen to us.

Capitalism only works with moral restraint. There has to be a higher standard for which you can’t be bought.  I’d propose that standard be the golden rule.  Put yourself in the shoes of the people in the story.  Do you have enough of the facts to run with it?  Would you want someone to tell the story with the same amount of facts, if you were the one with a name in the headline?  In the end, refusing to sell out will actually help you to be a part of the solution, and will actually end up being quite financially beneficial for you.

I’m not calling for a boycott.  But I do think you should stop watching the news, folks.  What good is it doing for you? When is the last time something on the news actually enriched your life?

I sat this past weekend and watched a panel of politicians not listen to each other.

They were talking about internet-flavored political hot button issues like municipal broadband and net neutrality. And one question (and it’s terrible answer) rang in my ears.  Regarding the current moratorium on municipal broadband in the state of NC, a particular liberal state politician was heavily against preventing local governments from providing free or low cost broadband to citizens.  The moderator then said, “Can you explain why those who are in favor of the moratorium are in favor of it?”

Brilliant question.  Here’s the answer that was given (all of the above and below are paraphrases, and that’s why I’ve left names out of it):

“Those who are in favor of the moratorium are doing so in an effort to help companies like Time Warner Cable and AT&T keep their current profits.”

Really?  You honestly think that conservative politicians who are voting for a moratorium (temporary halt so we can talk it over) on GOVERNMENT PROVIDED INTERNET are doing so because they want to help out AT&T and other “Big Business?”  There’s no possibility that they see a bit of a conflict of interest between a government providing the internet and the fact that the internet is what lots of people use to find out who to vote for and what is happening in the world?  It’s like a state run newspaper stand.  There’s no way those politicians with whom you disagree are looking out for something other than the profit margin for billion-dollar corporations?

I’m not trying to make a conservative point here (though I do side with the conservatives on this issue).  I’m making a far more basic point about the nature of debate and trust. (and one that applies in areas far outside of the realm of politics)

If you can’t clearly articulate the position of your opponent (in a way they would agree with), it shows me that you haven’t even been listening.  And I don’t trust people who don’t listen.

I’m far more OK with you understanding your opponent’s position and then intellectually defending why you disagree with it.  But to toss out a caricature that hardly represents your opponent’s views and then attack it is beyond loathsome, and it doesn’t do anybody any good in the long run.

If he had accurately presented the conservative position, I (as a conservative) would have been far more likely to actually engage in the dialogue.  As it is, I’ll just do my best to vote for somebody that is willing to listen.

It’s really funny for me when people who have never read the Bible expect it to be a book of philosophy. After all, multiple religions use it as their founding document. You’d expect it to be like those religions: systematic, sterile, high-brow philosophy. That’s what I expected.

Don’t get me wrong, there are some philosophical parts in there. And many philosophical points can be inferred from the stories, laws, and songs that are in the Bible. But there are these huge sections of the Bible that read like the gossip section of a trailer park periodical. People getting pregnant by their father, spiritual leaders legalizing prostitution and building strip clubs, 8-year olds assuming leadership of an entire country, lying, cheating, stealing, and embezzling. Prophets telling fart jokes. Not exactly Socrates, this book.

And sometimes these stories of wickedness are not even expressly called wicked. They just relate what happened, and move on without overtly condemning the actions. Kind of the opposite of how good, upstanding, religious folks tell stories of wickedness.

Yeah, the Bible is tough to fit in your box. It’s certainly not safe for kids to read, and above all, it’s not philosophy. It’s the story of God rescuing a broken people. Don’t look to it for philosophical ammunition, look to it to find a Jesus big enough to save even horribly wicked people like David, Abraham, Rahab, Paul, Jonah, Mary Magdalene, and you. The Bible is a mirror for your wicked heart, and mine.

Once you find all the philosophical ammunition to win a high brow debate, it might be too late to notice that all the guns are pointing at you.