Showing posts with label Religious fanatacism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Religious fanatacism. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 1, 2008

A Poet and Don't Even Know It


This article is awesome.

Hart Seely from Slate went through three Sarah Palin interviews, pulled a few statements verbatim from them, lumped them into stanzas and then called them poetry.

The concept seems pretty straight-forward, but the results are beautiful.

Keep in mind, this isn't just a cheap shot at Palin for not being the most informed or clear candidate. I think this same process could probably produce amazing results for any politician (or any person for that matter). But I do think that Sarah Palin has the ability to be a really prolific poet if she keeps at it.

Here is one of my favorites. Especially note the deft use of repetition in the first stanza and the intentional ambiguity of the last line.

Absolutely brilliant.


"Outside"

I am a Washington outsider.
I mean,
Look at where you are.
I'm a Washington outsider.

I do not have those allegiances
To the power brokers,
To the lobbyists.
We need someone like that.

(To C. Gibson, ABC News, Sept. 11, 2008)


Check out the article for more great hits like "On Good and Evil" and "Befoulers of the Verbiage."

Sunday, July 13, 2008

God Charged With Solicitation



Officials in Iowa City yesterday revealed that they would be seeking charges against God, the Eternal Father, for the inchoate offense of solicitation.

Though the news has been met with resistance from various theological and legal organizations, county officials insist that the crime, which they define as “any act which incites or induces another to commit a crime,” has been committed.

County Attorney Doug Schroeder claims that such solicitation is explicitly enshrined in the Bible, a book authored by God at the beginning of time and transcribed by mortals the following Tuesday. Though the original mortal conduits have long since passed away, Schroeder noted that the “existence of some troubling passages could lead to some pretty sticky legal issues for this God feller.”

Amongst other passages, Schroeder noted Deuteronomy 13:7-11, which reads “If your brother. . .or your son or daughter. . .or your most intimate friend, tries to secretly seduce you, saying ‘Let us go and serve other gods,’ . . . you must not consent. . . you must show him no pity, you must not spare him or conceal his guilt. No, you must kill him, your hand must strike the first blow in putting him to death and the hands of the rest of the people following. You must stone him to death, since he has tried to divert you from Yahweh your God. . .”

Critics are divided about how to attack Schroeder’s claim.

Some , like historian Andy Jenkins, claim that the case is simply one of misinterpretation. “What Schroeder doesn’t understand is that, through the ages, and through all the translations, the words have lost their original meaning. For example, stoning, in Biblical times, actually meant kisses. And death--this is kind of funny and counterintuitive-- actually meant ‘happy life.’ So you see, what the Bible really urged people to do was ‘kiss nonbelievers to happy life.’”

Others claim that, though the passage speaks for itself, and is indeed urging people to kill their fellow humans for their liberated, independent thoughts, they claim that Schroeder has unfairly picked passages that portray God in a singularly bad light while deliberately refraining from showing all the beautiful, heartwarming passages about not stoning the non-believers to death.

Schroeder responded, “Look, we just put a union leader in prison after a speech he made the other month. Now, he might have made all sorts of great claims about brotherhood and solidarity, but when he urged people to start bombing the factory and killing the scabs, he crossed the line and committed solicitation, plain and simple.”

When reached for comment, God scoffed at the allegations. While He has conceded that subject matter jurisdiction exists in the case, and that, being omniscient, He had received proper notice long before the complaint was filed, He contends that because his primary place of business is in Heaven, He is outside of personal jurisdiction as is outlined in the governing precedents of Interntational Shoe and its progeny.

“That’s just not true,” replied Schroeder, producing a well used Bible from beneath his desk. “It says right here in Mathew 8:20 that ‘where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.’”

“Now, because God acknowledged that those are his words, it seems to me that he is collaterally estopped from claiming otherwise. Assuming this is the case, and being well aware of the amount of churches and religious services in this state, we’re forced to conclude that these contacts are systematic and continuous enough to subject him to general jurisdiction in our courts.

In addition to his challenges personal jurisdiction of God has also offered the affirmative defense, little used in common law since Henry the VIII, of infallibility. Representatives for God said, “Though we don’t contest that the words alone might qualify as solicitation, we are arguing that in this case, God’s acts are excused by the ineffable and infallible nature of his being.”

The argument has been readily pushed in a number of Amicus Curiae submitted by such luminaries as, among others: Zeus, Loki (written in invisible ink), Ganesh, Thor, Apollo and Quetzalqoatl, the Feathered Serpent God of the Aztecs.

Again, Schroeder was incredulous. “I’ve heard that that one before,” said the seasoned County Attorney, chuckling and rubbing the stubble on his cheeks. “Good luck trying to convince the judges of that. The judges I know are pretty ineffable themselves.”

Though God is unemployed and qualifies for representation by a public defender, sources say that he will most likely represent Himself.

Monday, December 10, 2007

Who Does Not NOT Like Mike?



I often find it mildly embarrassing when there are no posts of any interest in between my weekly dart posts. Seeing as tonight is Monday night, I'll need to act fast to avoid this result. That's why I've decided to make a quick post tonight about. . .

Mike Huckabee.

Out of all of the Republican nominees, I've decided that Mike Huckabee is the one that I fear the most. He's good-natured, he's quick, he's really funny, he's skinny now, he's handsome, he's got executive experience, he's got a rock band, and he's extremely non-threatening when he talks about his radical religious beliefs.

He's also been a governor from a right-leaning state in the South (quasi South?) a fact that has proved helpful in exactly 4 of the last 4 elections.

And that's not all. In every poll that I've seen (one) that asks voters who they would "not NOT vote for," he's number out of all the candidates. That means that nobody really doesn't like him. That's for all the candidates, Democrats and Republicans alike. In politics, what more can you ask for? Somebody like Hillary is at a huge disadvantage because around 49% of the people in the nation say they would never vote for her. This is a statistic (even if I'm embellishing) that Clinton's supporters refuse to acknowledge.

But back to Huckabee. Considering all of these super-great things about Mike Huckabee, I find it not at all surprising that he's streaking to the front of the pack in Iowa. I just saw on Keith Olbermann he was sitting at about 32% in Iowa, well above his closest competitor. I also saw on Keith Olbermann that back about 15 years ago (1992, about the same year that Magic Johnson came out as HIV positive) that Mr. Huckabee seemed to be miffed as to why we weren't "isolating" people who were HIV positive. He used the word plague. When asked about this he claimed he didn't know how the diseases spread back then. Which is odd, because any 12 year old kid knew incredibly well how the disease was transmitted. Ryan White anyone?

So it wasn't to surprising today when I stumbled upon this article from the Arkansas Democrat Gazette (billed as Arkansas' Largest Newspaper!). In case you don't have time to read it all, here are a couple great lines from the speech that Huckabee recently gave to an audience of Baptist pastors:

"The reason we have so much government is because we have so much broken humanity," he said. "And the reason we have so much broken humanity is because sin reigns in the hearts and lives of human beings instead of the Savior."

"Government knows it does not have the answer, but it's arrogant and acts as though it does," Huckabee said. "Church does have the answer but will cowardly deny that it does and wonder when the world will be changed."

Now I'm all for pandering, but this is getting kind of creepy. Government doesn't have the answer but Church does? If we were watching this same speech coming from an Imam in Afghanistan we'd probably find it frightening. We'd wonder why things are so different over there from over here, where the separation of church and state is so firmly established.

So why don't we find it frightening when we hear one of our candidates speaking like this? I think the answer is pretty simple: he's funny, he's quick, he's handsome, and he seems non-threatening.

Which makes me all the more scared.

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Grassley Goes After Dodgy Prosperity Preachers


I missed this story when it first came out but was extremely pleased to find it while flipping through a Time magazine tonight. As faithful readers are aware, Cornucopia, The Horn of Plenty has long been both suspicious of and hostile to those unsavory characters known popularly as the "prosperity preachers." The idea that a shady, manipulative preacher can build gold houses, fly a private jet, and by some quirk of the system still qualify for a tax-exempt status strikes me as odd. Now I realize that there's actually a pretty good reason that it seems odd: it's probably illegal.

As of now, Republican Iowa Senator Charles Grassley, ranking member of the Senate Committee on Finance, has simply sent out some courteous little letters requesting tax and real estate records. But as the article in Time states, "the Senator has mused that the replies could lead to testimony under oath."

I have never been more proud of Senator Grassley than I am right now. Grassley explains himself below.

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Please Please Please Let This Happen


NY Times had a story about Christian Conservatives possibly making a third party effort if a pro-choicer like Guliani is nominated. A third party filling its ranks almost exclusively with disenchanted conservative Republicans? Dems win with 60% if this happens. Go James Dobson!

Sunday, August 12, 2007

Suffering Faithfully: A film review from the Landlocked Film Festival in Iowa City




Is it just me, or are we humans finally getting a little bit suspicious of this religion thing lately? There has been a rash of anti-religion books that were quite well received (both Cristopher Hitchen’s God is Not Great and Sam Harris’ Letter to a Christian Nation were on the NYT best-seller list), the movie Jesus Camp was nominated for an Academy Award last year (and, more importantly, had a successful run at the Bijou), and on a near-nightly basis Stephen Colbert offers up self-parodying explanations of his fervent belief in the inconsistencies of Catholicism.

In fact, as I write this, I’m watching a bitingly irreverent episode of South Park in which Stan is identified by the Scientologists as the Second coming of L. Ron Hubbard. In the episode, as the Grand Master explains the “real sacred truth” to Stan --that the emperor Xenu trapped frozen Thetan spirits on earth and they eventually inhabited the bodies of our primitive ancestors—a caption is displayed on the bottom of the screen that says “scientologists really believe this.”

As the heir to the Hubbard throne, Stan continues to write the story of scientology and notes innocently that “people shouldn’t have to pay money to be members.” At this point the Grand Master admits that scientology is a joke, derides his gullible followers for believing his lies, and calls Stan stupid for failing to see through the scam earlier.

Benny Hinn couldn’t have said it better himself. Who’s Benny Hinn? He’s one of the “prosperity preachers,” who stars, along with Gloria Copeland, Robert Tilton and Mike Murdock, in the new film Suffer the Children which was screened on Thursday and Friday during the Iowa City Landlocked Film Festival.

Do you remember that scene in Robin Hood Prince of Thieves when the Bishop of Hereford is greedily pocketing as much gold as he can before he ultimately falls through the stained glass window and dies in a terrifying explosion of blood and gems on the ground below? That’s kind of like Benny Hinn’s soul.

Mr. Hinn asks poor people for money. In return he, Benny, who has a special intimate relationship with God (we know this because he tells us so), will pray for them and they will be healed of various illnesses.

Naturally, lots of sick people want to take advantage of such an incredible offer (Wilma, take out a second mortgage on the house, the healin’ man’s in town), and cash flows like the Jordan River. It’s at this point that the film takes an unbelievable and shocking turn: it turns out many of these people (brace yourself) weren’t even healed.

What does Benny Hinn have to say for himself? Not his problem. He already prayed fervently for 10 seconds while holding a printout of hundreds of codes representing the people that sent him money. If THAT doesn’t work, well, then, he’s just plum out of ideas. Those silly invalids must have pissed off God by being the loathsome, sinful individuals that they are. There’s really no remedy for that.

And so the viewer is offered the primary conflict of the film: poor defenseless God-trusting citizens vs. big, bad God’s will-thwarting televangelists. The director, Trevor Glass, employs a wide array of tactics to frame the battle. There’s the comic—an animation of a preacher holding a sack with a dollar sign on it while preaching the Word; the tragic—a little blind boy who thinks God will cure him if he pays his money; and the tragicomic—the sick elderly woman who pays for a preacher to pray for her Powerball ticket to come through.

There are even Michael Moore-ish moments as we are offered some impressive helicopter shots of televangelists’ multi-million dollar compounds.

The most fun, however, comes while watching the footage of the preachers as they rant hysterically from their golden pulpits, which at times drew riotous laughter form the tiny audience in the Englert Theater. I can only imagine the kind of fun that Mr. Glass had in selecting the clips. So much buffoonery, so little time. In fact, there’s a rule in there for future documentarians: when trying to demonstrate the sleaziness of televangelists, nothing can really substitute for the televangelists themselves.

Though the audience spent a good deal of time howling at the clips, there were certainly times that the film lagged. For example, it seemed like a disproportionate amount of time was spent interviewing people who had sent Benny Hinn money and hadn’t received their instantaneous, magical convalescence. I considered this the “proof of fraud” section. Perhaps for those of us in the audience who needed to be convinced that Benny Hinn wasn’t actually a magical healer guy, this was helpful. For those of us who are skeptical of crazy wackos from the outset, the depth of this “investigation” seemed a tad unnecessary.

Some of the interviewees said things like “If these preachers can really heal people, why aren’t they in the cancer ward curing the sick?” Checkmate Mr. Hinn. Which led me to think, “If these preachers really can cure people, why aren’t they the joint rulers of the world?” Oh yeah, because they’re charlatan loons.

And I’d be thinking about a thought just like that when they’d display an image of a professional basketball stadium filled with tens of thousands of people hanging on Benny Hinn’s every word.

It’s a sobering image. One minute I’m feeling smug sitting in the theater laughing at the televangelist as he promises to spin gold from hay, the next I’m watching as thousands of people sing hallelujah when he wheels out a bail of hay. At one point my companion leaned over and asked, “Who are all these people?”

Who are they? They’re the victims of this charade and we get to meet them throughout the film. I’m pretty sure that we were supposed to sympathize with their plight, and to a certain extent, I did. They were old men with terminal illnesses or mothers with vegetative babies. It would take a heart of stone not to realize that these people had been unfairly taken advantage of.

But it’s tough not to notice that this kind of reaction is inherently condescending too. Poor, stupid people (sigh) they know not what they do. I get the impression that sometimes this is the reaction that the director is looking for. But it’s important to keep in mind that a lot of these people aren’t children; they are adults and they chose to do something monumentally stupid with their money. Is Benny Hinn really responsible for all this, or is something else at work?

And this is when, possibly unintentionally, the film transcends the bounds of a mere fraud documentary, and becomes a kind of case-study on the dangers of unquestioning belief. How could so many people so earnestly believe that this man was going to cure them through prayer? And they didn’t just believe, they believed so passionately that they were willing to throw down cold, hard cash to back it up. Economists, constantly claiming that consumers always act in their own best interest, would be pulling out their hair if they saw this film.

As I watched tale after tale of suffering and resentment, I was reminded this famous little quote from Kurt Vonnegut: “Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith, I consider a capacity for it terrifying and absolutely vile.”

Benny Hinn and others counted on this capacity to make their fortunes. If it were up to South Park creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker, I’d like to think that, as the credits rolled and the music reminded us to be sad, this would be the final caption of this film: “They really believe this.”

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

Farewell Falwell--Heart conditions are the wrath of a just God against the corpulent.


John McCain called him " a man of distinguished accomplishment who devoted his life to serving his faith and country."

If only Jerry Falwell could have replied, delusional, cocksure, foaming at the mouth, he probably would have said something like this: "AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals."

Man that guy was a fucking wacko.

Want more Falwell bigotry? Slate has a breakdown of some of the more outrageously hateful things that Falwell has said over the years.