15 Comments:

There you go again, mocking creationists.

By  Joey de Vivre, at 5:57 PM  

I'm incurable.

By  Hammer, at 6:14 PM  

Best way to avoid real dialogue - make fun of it.

No seriously, I leave you guys alone now.

-mm

By  Anonymous, at 8:46 PM  

There is no real dialogue about the evolution. There is science on the one hand and anti-science on the other. In a sane world, intelligent design would be treated with the same respect as the idea that the sun travels around the earth.

By  Hammer, at 8:57 PM  

I'm sorry, this is kind of like a scab, I know I should just leave it alone, but I can't stop picking at it.

Creationists are insane. I don't think I'm reading into anything here. You believe that creationists are insane. You don't think that is, just a little, close minded? You don't think there is any place to have a conversation with a reasonable and rational creationist?

My guess is no - because you don't believe that a reasonable and rational creationist exits. And that is my point. You de-humanize those who disagree with you.
-mm

By  Anonymous, at 9:42 PM  

That's the culture of victimhood. Thanks for the fresh example. I won't agree that your belief system should be considered valid science, therefore I think you are less than human.

You're free to believe what you want to believe. You'll have all eternity to gloat in heaven. Cheers.

I'll grant you anything you want -- that the earth is 6,000 years old, that Noah had dinosaurs on his ark, and that the Bible is both literally true AND Adam and Eve were created both simultaneously and sequential. I'll grant you every miracle described in any part of the Bible as absolute truth. It's still not science. It's not testable. It's not measurable. It tells us nothing about our past, present, or future. It tells us nothing about how the world works.

You can believe all that, some of that, or none it without having any bearing on your sanity. But to call it science defies rationality. Belief, at its core, will always be the antithesis of science.

By  Hammer, at 9:56 PM  

Culture of victimhood? I really am not getting that. Maybe I should be clear - I am not a creationist. I think they are wrong. And I'm barely a Christian - I go to a hippy church in Saint Paul every now and then called House of Mercy. It is not evangelical. I don't bring any of this up because I feel you are attacking me.

I'm just... I'm just sick of it. I'd call myself a liberal progressive. I read a lot of blogs. I've been reading yours for awhile. And the tone, when it comes especially to Christians is so close minded and bigoted it makes me sick. Especially on this site Jambo is terribly guilty of this. But you're not much better, Hammer. You are mean. I think that Jambo's post on Luce is the perfect example of this. What was Luce's crime? Getting a little over excited about his place in the world. What is he accused of? Brainwashing kids and being deluded. This isn't helpful. It's nasty and mean spirited.
And I do know some creationists. They're good people. Bright, clever people. One is a math teacher. They get the scientific method. I mean, I am not able to argue their position, but I think it is a lot more complicated than you are ever willing to acknowledge.
Now, you are clearly losing your patience and starting to get pretty nasty with me so I will quit my - what's the guy with windmills? - quest and just get out of your way.

By  Anonymous, at 10:20 PM  

Ooh, I just got the culture of victimhood thing. It's brilliant. It's like a get out of jail free card. If anyone ever accuses you of anything - say attacking them or being mean or killing their pet - you just accuse them right back of being a 'victim'. No one wants to be a victim. So - bam - you win. That's beautiful. I mean it. Clever as hell.
Culture of victimhood - I am going start using that one.
And I won't even bother claiming that this will be my last post. Obviously I just can't quit you guys.

By  Anonymous, at 10:52 PM  

I hope this dialogue doesn't end, because it's really interesting. I'll weigh in, probably, at some point when I have some time. In the meantime, press on.

By  Anonymous, at 9:28 AM  

Jesus. You've called us nasty, mean and bigoted. You've called us hateful and closed-minded. You've compared us to Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh.

But I'm getting nasty with you. Is this a joke? Are you Hans Jensen? Are you Sasha Cohen?

By  Hammer, at 10:59 AM  

Culture of Victimhood! Culture of Victimhood!

No seriously. I am trying to challenge and criticize you, yes, because you (like many of our liberal blogging friends) claim a moral high road while doing the exact same thing as the people on the others side. That's it.

By  Anonymous, at 11:35 AM  

I figured TRR (a good friend of mine for whom I have a lot of respect) would weigh in eventually since he has in the past accused me of being overly critical of religious types. And MM I would invite you to not bail out on this discussion (or the blog in general) because I really do appreciate it when people take the time to comment even if they think I'm full of crap. I often post some insulting or provocative things but I don't try to be intentionally mean (except of course to KK, but she is a special case and a public figure with a big soapbox so I don't feel too guilty.) And I always try to make it a point to never personally insult anyone who takes the time to post their thoughts here.

There seem to be two different objections here, hostility to religion and dismissal of creationism. The creationism one is the easiest to address. I'm no PZ Myers but as laymen go I think my understanding of evolution and the time I have put into studying the issue is pretty substantial. I know the issue well enough to draw a conclusion based on factual evidence. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. It is one of the best tested and well supported theories in modern science. In the face of that it is incorrect to claim that my (our) rejection of creationism is bigotry or the result of closed mindedness. I have read a TON of arguments by creationists and NONE of them hold up. To reach a conclusion based on available evidence is not bigotry, it is the very definition of rationality. Creationists aren't insane, but their rejection of evolution and their belief is completely irrational.

The hostility to religion is a slightly harder issue since, yes, I am often hostile to religious views, tho I try not to be hostile to well meaning holders of those views. (That of course implies that I feel there are those who hold those views who are not well meaning. People who use religious belief to advance harmful and destruction social policies fall clearly into that camp.) It is a cliche' to say "Oh, some of my best friends are _______." But in a nation that is overwhelmingly Christian it is almost impossible to not have many Christian friends. Indeed a majority of my friends are Christian. But that does not mean I can not reject their beliefs without being a bigot or mean spirited. I think one of the things that makes this discussion difficult is that people of faith often think their beliefs should be in a special sphere where they are free of criticism, or at least that all criticism must be considered the result of bigotry or intolerance. To non believers like myself that is nonsensical. I have friends who believe in astrology but to say astrology is bunk is not considered bigotry. No one would think it odd if I were to reject the claim that the universe sprang forth from the forehead of Zeus. Why is it any more objectionable to say God did not create the heavens and the Earth? If a Jew rejects the claim that Jesus is the son of God and rose from the dead no one accuses him of being a closed minded bigot, why is it different if a nonbeliever says the same thing? And if that is what you believe, how is it wrong to say that teaching kids otherwise is filling their heads with falsehoods? Fundamentalists decry popular culture for leading kids away from what they believe is the truth, I think it is perfectly OK for nonbelievers to make the same claim about religious teaching.

A number of years ago I read the book Life of Pi which on the dust jacket said it was a story that would make you believe in God. It's a fantastic book that I thoroughly enjoyed but what it made me believe in was the power of metaphor. And on that level I am not at all hostile to religion or spirituality. A goodhearted attempt to understand the purpose of one's life thru theology has lead many many people to lead exemplary lives and do great good in the world. That morality and dedication is worthy of great respect but that is not the same as accepting at face value the 1001 patently ridiculous factual claims found in various holy books.

And as far as being closed minded, I am perfectly willing to reconsider all of this when something comes along to offer some proof that I am wrong. If Jesus were to "return" tomorrow I would be the first to say, "Whoops, time to rethink this whole no God thing." That said, if Jesus does come to town and is playing at the Fine Line and the Beatles are reincarnated and playing at First Ave. I still know which tickets I'm camping out for. Yeah yeah yeah.

By  Jambo, at 12:51 PM  

Ok. I can respect that. I really can. My only critique would then be that sometimes - if not often - if not all the time - your criticism and satire slides into mockery. And even a little mockery now and then isn't bad...

When I was at the UM several years ago the mall would occasionally fill up in the Spring with preachers. These guys were often obnoxious and unpleasant. One guy, a kid, probably 19 years old would stand underneath this tree and start telling everyone his version of the gospel. He was pretty consistent. And he said some ugly things. I wan't a fan. But one afternoon this group shows up with a videocamera. And they proceed to humiliate the guy. Mocking him, laughing at him and making an ass out themselves. As much as I didn't like the preacher, I hated these guys. They weren't trying to make any higher point. They were simply taking an easy target and giving themselves an excuse to be bullies.
Obviously you guys are not picking on street preachers (as far as I know) but...
My encouragement would be this. Criticize, yes. Satirize, absolutely. But don't slide into lazy mockery. Don't set up easy targets just so you can show how clever you are.
If for no other reason than it is ineffective. The people who agree with you will snicker. Those who don't will be offended and no minds will be changed. No conversations will be started. No one will, even for a moment, consider that there may be a different way of reading "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth".
Can I get an "amen"?
-mm

By  Anonymous, at 2:03 PM  

Interviewer: Are you a Mod or a Rocker?
George: I'm a mocker.

I'm not much of an "amen"er but I am willing to accept that there are likely times I descend into mockery. And I recognize that makes for unpersuasive arguments. Blogs are funny things, you post things that are more dismissive than you would say to someone in person but at the same time they let you vent on topics you are passionate about. And that leads to a confused purpose at times: is this a vehicle to persuade others or is it more personal than that, a place to fling out the raw stream of consciousness thought process. Consider this a hedge, I'll be more aware of how people will hear my remarks but I can't vow to never mock anyone. Some things almost beg to be mocked and I'm rarely strong enough to pass up the chance. But even then I like to think I am mocking a belief rather than the person holding it.

Preachers on the mall? Could it really be Brother Jed and Sister Cindy still going strong 20 years after I saw them at the U? I would not be a bit surprised. They were intentionally provocative, I remember Jed telling me that Jesus followed the Old Testament teachings and was clean shaven, any image to the contrary had been perpetuated by "homosexual Renaissance artists." I still have his signed book instructing me to "repent or perish."

By  Jambo, at 2:42 PM  

Well then, everybody sing “Kumbayah” and let’s have a group hug.
The point is agreed that we don’t mock, but sometimes our satire gets very very close to the line between satire and mockery. But the point must also be taken that the self righteous right wing christians (note the small “c”) are dangerous. When they leave the rest of us alone, they are fodder for bloggers like Jambo. When they try to legislate their beliefs, they become theocrats and should be called out by anyone with the slightest regard for the Constitution. What’s the difference between an Islamic theocrat and a Christian theocrat? I don’t care, they are both anathema.
When Michelle Bachman, for example, says that God told her to run, then that implies that "God don’t like Patty." That is rubbish!!!
The interesting thing is that the people in the Gospels that Jesus had the most difficulty with were the Pharisees. They weren’t “bad” people. Indeed, they were regular church (temple) goers. They were scholars. They were the church lawyers. Yet, they were so bound up with the Mosaic Law and so sure of themselves and self righteous that they ignored the true meaning of the law, to wit: Love your neighbor as yourself.
Like today’s right wing christians, they saw things only in black and white, and could not see life as it is in shades of gray. People who think that God tells them to run for office (or start a war) are delusional.
I happen to be a practicing Catholic (an American Catholic as I like to describe myself) and believe whole-heartedly that Jesus was the Son of God, conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary (I’m not sure about the fact that she remained so), who lived and was crucified for our sins, and now sits in heaven, and who will come again (I’m glad to see that my friend Jambo is willing to hedge his bets). But, there is not one iota of scientific or provable fact behind my belief. Faith is not belief based on evidence, nor is faith belief without doubt. Faith is belief in spite of doubt. And every day, my faith changes – I learn new things, or meet new people, and come to realize that I don’t have all the answers and never will until I discover the answer “in the fullness of time.” And no one can truthfully say that they know anything more than that. Faith is a journey, and folks like Michelle are stuck in a rest area someplace.
Anyway, I’d rather be complaining about all the faux republicans who have abandoned their Party’s traditional principles, and the Democrats who would rather be right than win.

By  Anonymous, at 4:26 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home