So this sounds a little bit like a mock trial by ordeal to me. And people say history doesn't repeat itself!
The critique of Deltano's performance at Dominion High was conducted by the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States. It included criticism of his decision to demonstrate the ineffectiveness of condoms against HIV by dangling a cinderblock over a male student's genital area.
("Christian Sex-Ed Lesson Criticized"—via)
My favorite part of all this is that some sick self-righteous (I mean, "pious") bastard actually gets paid (from tax dollars) to threaten to crush teenagers' genitalia.
Labels: christianity, education, fud, history, religion, sham
This story about prison programs that are clearly (if not explicitly) designed to indoctrinate and convert inmates who - as the headline astutely points out - are a "captive audience" sickens me. If you want to know how Americans
should be reacting to this, just try this simple mental exercise. Read the article and make a few replacements:
- Replace "Christian" with "Muslim."
- Replace "Christianity" with "Islam."
- Replace "Christ" or "Jesus" with "Allah."
Now, tell me how the average American would react to such news. Imagine the outcry against the politicians who are lining up to support the current program if they supported the one in our mental exercise. That reaction (focus on it again) should be exactly the same as the reaction to the actual content of the article. Is it?
Labels: christianity, conservatism, islam, politics, religion, sham
Scott Adams argues that atheism is becoming more acceptable to the American public, but I think he's misreading the significance of a few bestselling books.
I think the hidden benefit of Islamic extremism is that it freed the atheists from their closets. The old mindset in the United States was that almost any religion was good, and atheism was bad. But since 9/11, atheism has moved above Islam in the rankings, at least in the minds of Christians and Jews in the United States.
(Scott Adams - The Dilbert Blog: Atheists: The New Gays)
I think if there has been a trend, it has been one of polarization. The religious in this country (and
others) have become a much more concerted voice than they used to be. To a
much lesser extent, atheists, too, have been asserting themselves in public discourse. This isn't one of those cases - like general politics - where I can claim to be a centrist. "Faith" is ruining the modern world. Perhaps it has always existed, but
why should it always have to?
Labels: atheism, christianity, islam, judaism, politics, religion
The recent case of Abdul Rahman, its development, its denouement and its epilogue made me think about a couple things:
How nominally strict laws cause very real suffering
Many laws are "on the books" even though they are known to be effectively unenforceable. The Texas sodomy laws were a perfect example of this phenomenon until they were struck down (PDF) by the Supreme Court. These laws often remain in effect for generations, unnoticed until they are enacted by sheer dumb luck. In most countries with a Muslim majority where apostasy laws exist, the laws are often in existence to meet with what is perceived to be adherence to strict Islamic law. However, most people do not have direct experience with the application of these often-harsh laws, nor do they expect to: when everyone you know is a Muslim, how often does apostasy occur?
Regardless of their inherent unfairness, which should be taken for granted, if apostasy laws are just posturing, where does the problem arise? In most cases, like in Abdul Rahman's case, these laws are enacted only after third parties with ulterior motives seek their application. Abdul Rahman's family reported him to the authorities years after his conversion, only when he sought custody of his children. In effect, the apostasy laws created a "nuclear option" that any aggrieved party could turn against a convert with no fear of comparable retaliation.
Conversion and Apostasy
Judaism, Christianity and Islam treat conversion and apostasy quite differently. And while making broad generalizations like this might be somewhat rash, the demographic trends in these three religions corresponds neatly with each one's treatment of converts and apostates.
Despite practicing the oldest of these three religions (by far), Jews are exponentially outnumbered by Christians and Muslims. The main reason for this is the active avoidance of proselytism and the extreme ease of apostasy. Compounding the problem, it is very difficult to
convert to Judaism: the requirements are both intellectually rigorous, and (for men) circumcision as an adult is physically daunting.
Because of a six-century head start, Christianity is the most widely practiced of these three religions. However, its rate of growth is slower than Islam's. While it is easy to become a Christian, it is equally easy to leave Christianity. It
wasn't always so easy.
Even though its adherents are
not as populous as Christianity's, Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world. It is both easy to convert to Islam and difficult to leave.
Labels: apostasy, christianity, conversion, islam, judaism, religion
Apparently there's
a trial in London pitting the "historians" Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh against the "novelist" Dan Brown. These "historians" allege that Dan Brown "stole" parts of the "story" from their
non-fiction "book"
Holy Blood, Holy Grail. Now, I might be "wrong" about this, but I always thought that if yours was a work of "history," then you didn't really have any claims over "historical fiction" that may be written based on your "work." You can't both claim that you have written a work of "non-fiction" and demand the protections of "fictional" writing's plagiarism rubric.
Labels: christianity, history, holy grail, religion
Everybody agrees that intelligent technological life is a much greater leap, but it might be instructive to consider who is laying down bets on at least looking for it. Among the financial angels of the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, or SETI, have been people like Paul Allen, the co-founder of Microsoft; the late Barney Oliver, William Hewlett and David Packard, leaders of Hewlett-Packard; Gordon Moore, the founder of Intel; and the novelist Arthur C. Clarke, who invented the idea of the communications satellite.
The smart money isn't always right, but this is certainly smart money.
(nytimes.com...space/19essa.html)
Earlier in this article, the author mentions that an "Intelligent Design" film was shown at the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History. Let me say that again: the
Smithsonian Museum of Natural History! I'm glad the article ends on a promising note for those who are excited at the prospect of extraterrestrial intelligent life out there, but I wonder if evangelists (and
Catholics) are seeing this as a sign of "liberal bias" in the media. On a sidenote, it's too bad that Catholics can now be considered as part of the Conservative Crusade for Christ, I mean the Republican party.
Labels: christianity, extraterrestrial life, intelligent design, religion, sham
