Friday, April 06, 2007
Twine: Jefferson is spinning in his grave
(One post, two topics, two threads. Two threads: Twine!)
Uno. The police and a school in Burlington Township, N.J., are catching major flack because of a terrorism safety drill and lockdown scenaraio that fundamentalist Christian groups, including Focus on the Family, are condemning as discriminatory.
One problem: Unless the police and school officials are just lying, which would be insane, no one ever said the mock terrorists were meant to depict "Christians."
The scenario did, apparently, depict "fundamentalists" who "don't believe in the separation of church and state" -- an actual threat to the state, in other words.
Christians make themselves guilty by association by associating themselves with those depicted in this drill.
And those who fuel and nurse such hatred of the traditional doctrine of the "wall of separation of church and state" in this country -- and I don't care that's it's not, strictly speaking, in the Constitution; it's part of our governmental heritigage -- such hatemongers will not get off lightly if someone actually acts out the terrorism pretended in New Jersey.
Unnecessary but prudent school apology here.
Unnecessary but prudent school and police joint apology here.
Read all about it from the only information source that makes me think Fox News actually is fair and balanced: Focus on the Family's CitizenLink.
Discuss.
----------
Two-o. EL and I got into it bigtime the other day over whether Thomas Jefferson, credited with popularizing the phrase "wall of separation of church and state" in a letter to Baptists, was a deist.
Well, yeah. And he really had some big problems with the Bible, too. But he seems to have tried to "follow" Jesus.
EL didn't buy it, so I had to do some actual manual file retrieval -- got a book down from a shelf and typed in a bunch of direct quotes from some of Jefferson's letters -- and it's all very interesting.
The thread at EL's place is here.
Discuss.
--ER
Uno. The police and a school in Burlington Township, N.J., are catching major flack because of a terrorism safety drill and lockdown scenaraio that fundamentalist Christian groups, including Focus on the Family, are condemning as discriminatory.
One problem: Unless the police and school officials are just lying, which would be insane, no one ever said the mock terrorists were meant to depict "Christians."
The scenario did, apparently, depict "fundamentalists" who "don't believe in the separation of church and state" -- an actual threat to the state, in other words.
Christians make themselves guilty by association by associating themselves with those depicted in this drill.
And those who fuel and nurse such hatred of the traditional doctrine of the "wall of separation of church and state" in this country -- and I don't care that's it's not, strictly speaking, in the Constitution; it's part of our governmental heritigage -- such hatemongers will not get off lightly if someone actually acts out the terrorism pretended in New Jersey.
Unnecessary but prudent school apology here.
Unnecessary but prudent school and police joint apology here.
Read all about it from the only information source that makes me think Fox News actually is fair and balanced: Focus on the Family's CitizenLink.
Discuss.
----------
Two-o. EL and I got into it bigtime the other day over whether Thomas Jefferson, credited with popularizing the phrase "wall of separation of church and state" in a letter to Baptists, was a deist.
Well, yeah. And he really had some big problems with the Bible, too. But he seems to have tried to "follow" Jesus.
EL didn't buy it, so I had to do some actual manual file retrieval -- got a book down from a shelf and typed in a bunch of direct quotes from some of Jefferson's letters -- and it's all very interesting.
The thread at EL's place is here.
Discuss.
--ER
Comments:
<< Home
I wonder why reducing the Bible to only Jesus' words (which I don't find necessary as I find a great deal of wisdom throughout the Bible) is so threatening to some?
The notion that Jefferson wasn't the sort of true Bible-believer like them - is that's what's threatening?
Or do some find looking at ONLY Jesus' words as being insufficient? Man, if I only had 46 pages to read, I'd think that Christians would think you could do worse than to have Jesus' actual teachings...
But then, perhaps not if you rely upon other biblical words and traditions for the bulk of your doctrine.
The notion that Jefferson wasn't the sort of true Bible-believer like them - is that's what's threatening?
Or do some find looking at ONLY Jesus' words as being insufficient? Man, if I only had 46 pages to read, I'd think that Christians would think you could do worse than to have Jesus' actual teachings...
But then, perhaps not if you rely upon other biblical words and traditions for the bulk of your doctrine.
Is a person what they themselves believe that they are? Or are they what they seem to be to those observing them? Here is what Jefferson thought he was:
"[The Jefferson Bible] is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus, very different from the Platonists, who call me infidel and themselves Christians and preachers of the gospel, while they draw all their characteristic dogmas from what its author never said nor saw."
---Jefferson in a letter to Charles Thomson 9 January 1816
We all (correction: those who think about it) sift and adopt and reject different elements of the Bible based on background, insights, understanding and levels of tolerance. Jefferson just took that a step further by cutting and pasteing up a Bible into a version that which he held to be true. We all, even the most ardent inerrantist, has such a bible in our heads whether we know it or not.
Jefferson believed that he was a Christian.
"[The Jefferson Bible] is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus, very different from the Platonists, who call me infidel and themselves Christians and preachers of the gospel, while they draw all their characteristic dogmas from what its author never said nor saw."
---Jefferson in a letter to Charles Thomson 9 January 1816
We all (correction: those who think about it) sift and adopt and reject different elements of the Bible based on background, insights, understanding and levels of tolerance. Jefferson just took that a step further by cutting and pasteing up a Bible into a version that which he held to be true. We all, even the most ardent inerrantist, has such a bible in our heads whether we know it or not.
Jefferson believed that he was a Christian.
# posted by 
: 10:45 AM
: 10:45 AM
Lest We Forget:::::::
As for Christian Terrorist, remember the fuckers that practiced their version of christianity on an April 19th in Oklahoma City as revenge for the deaths other armed christian warriors in WACO. Some of us, who walked in the blood of their victims, still understand that freakey christians can and will kill in the name of Jesus. So for all you sensitive types, CHILL mothers.
As for Christian Terrorist, remember the fuckers that practiced their version of christianity on an April 19th in Oklahoma City as revenge for the deaths other armed christian warriors in WACO. Some of us, who walked in the blood of their victims, still understand that freakey christians can and will kill in the name of Jesus. So for all you sensitive types, CHILL mothers.
# posted by : 11:08 AM
: 11:08 AM
As for Christian Terrorist...
I will add this. The most bloody wars are religious in nature. When your god says it is OK to go and kill, then your own moral controls are let loose. Christians did it in the crusades and inquisitions, they (we) are not exempt from this kind of terror.
I will add this. The most bloody wars are religious in nature. When your god says it is OK to go and kill, then your own moral controls are let loose. Christians did it in the crusades and inquisitions, they (we) are not exempt from this kind of terror.
Dan, re: "(they) rely upon other biblical words and traditions for the bulk of your doctrine."
Bingo.
Drlobojo: Jefferson self-identified as a Christian, he said he was a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus (as opposed to doctrines *about* Jesus), then he was a Christian.
And *that* is the major fault line between moderate- liberal and fundamentalist Christianity today: One side is generally trying to follow Jesus, and the other side is trying to follow the crowd around Jesus. They are not the same, and that is an generalization, but it's the way I see it.
Drlobojo: That is a perfectly acceptable and appropriate use of an F-bomb.
Never forget. Never forget.
Jim, re: "When your god says it is OK to go and kill, then your own moral controls are let loose."
Hmm. The Old Testament is replete with such depictions of God, which is another reason to take it seriously, but not literally.
When your God says it's OK to condemn others, but your Jesus says we're mandated to love others, there's a big disconnect there. Which is it?
Rather than "What would Jesus do?" my question for the fundamentalists is: "What the hell have you done with Jesus?"
Bingo.
Drlobojo: Jefferson self-identified as a Christian, he said he was a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus (as opposed to doctrines *about* Jesus), then he was a Christian.
And *that* is the major fault line between moderate- liberal and fundamentalist Christianity today: One side is generally trying to follow Jesus, and the other side is trying to follow the crowd around Jesus. They are not the same, and that is an generalization, but it's the way I see it.
Drlobojo: That is a perfectly acceptable and appropriate use of an F-bomb.
Never forget. Never forget.
Jim, re: "When your god says it is OK to go and kill, then your own moral controls are let loose."
Hmm. The Old Testament is replete with such depictions of God, which is another reason to take it seriously, but not literally.
When your God says it's OK to condemn others, but your Jesus says we're mandated to love others, there's a big disconnect there. Which is it?
Rather than "What would Jesus do?" my question for the fundamentalists is: "What the hell have you done with Jesus?"
Someone's gonna have to back me on this one, but doesn't the quote at Monticello (y'know; Jeff's house) describe its erstwhile resident as being violently opposed to all forms of "tyranny over the minds of men"?
This is often interpreted as a statement of his views on organized religion, but I'm not a hundred per cent on this.
This is often interpreted as a statement of his views on organized religion, but I'm not a hundred per cent on this.
Well, Jefferson *was* a Unitarian, and I think they've always been pretty low key, tyranny-over-minds-wise.
rich bachelor, that quote is also on his Memorial in D.C.
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
This to is engraved there:
"Almighty God hath created the mind free…All attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens…are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion…No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship or ministry or shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion. I know but one code of morality for men whether acting singly or collectively."
---Taken from a letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush, September 23, 1800.
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
This to is engraved there:
"Almighty God hath created the mind free…All attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens…are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion…No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship or ministry or shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion. I know but one code of morality for men whether acting singly or collectively."
---Taken from a letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush, September 23, 1800.
# posted by : 3:58 PM
: 3:58 PM
As to issue (1) - the only domestic terrorism in US history to kill people was perpetrated by right-wing, anti-government, self-identified Christians. So, the school district was using history as a guide to action.
As to (2), sorry, ER, but what's to discuss? Jefferson was a deist, he had ideas both strange and typically American about religion, and so what? How is any of this a problem to anyone with more than a third grade education? I'm sorry, EL, but the jury's in & you're out.
As to (2), sorry, ER, but what's to discuss? Jefferson was a deist, he had ideas both strange and typically American about religion, and so what? How is any of this a problem to anyone with more than a third grade education? I'm sorry, EL, but the jury's in & you're out.
Oooooh, we can discuss the wonderful heritage Tho. Jefferson left us, why he is the bestest founding father 'cause he was a child of the Enlightenment as well as a man of faith, we could talk about how our hearts AND minds were touched the first time we sat, and thought, and watched so many different stripes of people at the Jefferson Memorial, you know, stuff like that. :-)
And, ah, I'm pretty sure there has been lefty and anarchist terrorism in this country, just not the extent of the OKC boming.
Alexander Berkman comes immediately to mind, mainly because I saw a TV special on Emma Goldman awhile back.
That's why extemism sucks: Because it sucks!
That's why extemism sucks: Because it sucks!
Of course, then there's the state-sanctioned terrorism of the United States government itself. See "Trail of Tears." Hell, see "American Indians" in general.
Lefty anarchist, yes, but 80 to 100 years ago.
Terrorism against the Indians is a three headed coin. American Indians were adept in terrorist techniquesthemselves. Everytime you the US military attacking Indians you will find Indians helping them fight Indians. It was not a clean dichotomy.
But let's not forget the largest Religious based massacre in America up to the OKC bombing. That was the Mountain Meadows massacre of an Arkansas emigrant's wagon train by the Utah Mormon militia and their allies the Piaute Indians in 1857. There were 140 people killed +/-. OKC was 168.
Post a Comment
Terrorism against the Indians is a three headed coin. American Indians were adept in terrorist techniquesthemselves. Everytime you the US military attacking Indians you will find Indians helping them fight Indians. It was not a clean dichotomy.
But let's not forget the largest Religious based massacre in America up to the OKC bombing. That was the Mountain Meadows massacre of an Arkansas emigrant's wagon train by the Utah Mormon militia and their allies the Piaute Indians in 1857. There were 140 people killed +/-. OKC was 168.
# posted by : 1:05 PM
: 1:05 PM << Home
