I was reading an article about the pope's visit to America, and was pleased to see that it was positive.  I'm excited about this opportunity for American Catholics to see and hear the pope address them directly.  It doesn't happen every day, you know. 
But this article, well, it was funny.  Because it was humming along just fine until the very last paragraph.  Here it is:

Soprano Kathleen Battle has been enlisted to sing "The Lord's Prayer" - a decision the White House defended as appropriate despite the overt insertion of religion into a public event. "I think we've struck the right balance," Perino said. "Many people across America and across the world say that prayer in order to provide themselves comfort and confidence in getting their day started."

Notice anything funny there?  Because to me, it looks like we're debating whether we should sing a song that mentions God when we're hosting the freaking Pope.  Does it matter if it's a "public event?"  We put God on our money, and we have prayer before the sessions of Congress.  This doesn't rise beyond that level of public acknowledgment of God.
I believe the courts have determined that the use of "God" on our money is defensible from a standpoint that it is not an endorsement by the state of a particular religion, but is merely in this day and age a reflection of our shared traditions and history.  If our mottos were coined today I'm sure they would sound something like the Obama campaign rhetoric, but fortunately they were laid down in a time when men were able to speak openly in a public forum of their faith and its influence on their decisions.
May my grandchildren see the end of political correctness, I pray. 

Keep watching this Pope, my friends.  That includes you who aren't religious, and you who are primarily concerned with other things.  He may surprise you.  Suffice it to say that he can explain better than most of us why we believe what we believe about life, death, and what comes after.

Viva il Papa!

I found this interesting article on National Review, and thought I'd share it.  I enjoy the fact that Islam is still being preserved from criticism, even much deserved criticism.  It seems that no progress has been made since the riots following the pope's call to reason at Regensburg. 
Threaten enough people and I guess you get your way.  Perhaps when Christians begin to cut off the heads of their detractors they will be afforded the same deference.  I doubt that very much, for it often seems that anti-Christian sentiment is the last acceptable bigotry.  Is it because we are "the Establishment" religion?  Perhaps so.  Europeans are increasingly godless and it has ever been the fashion of the American societal elite to ape Europe.   Give him enough time, and the common man begins to ape the ape in a bid for the appearance of sophistication. 
The other week I had the occasion to attempt a dialogue with another Voxer who had made it very clear that she didn't like my particular religion.  She trotted out the usual litany of abuses committed by my Church over the years, but focused primarily on the sexual abuse scandal among the clergy.  When I offered a counterpoint to her views, I was unfortunately met with "The Wall."  That is, the "this is my personal view and I don't want to be criticized for it" wall.  Now, I would hope that anyone who reads my piddling excuse for a blog would understand my frustration.  Anything I post in public I understand to be open to criticism.  Especially if I post something critical to another person's beliefs.  Sometimes, I border on the insulting.  I'd hate to be labeled a troll, but there is a point at which letting an accusation or a misconception stand is tantamount to agreement.  So it seems I am constantly stepping on the toes of liberals, atheists, global warming nuts and even Protestants.
It's all quite frustrating, because at the end of the day the Internet just isn't real.  The victories I might win are easily ignored.  The points I make are suspect because the conversation begins with me as an intruder on a particular person's public space (which makes no sense to me...the Internet is hardly private).  So what is the point of it all?
Well, I still believe that we can carry our principles with us even when we are completely anonymous.  I feel that the anonymity allows us to engage in debate devoid of the usual obfuscations of personal pride and ego.  Rhetorical tactics can still be used to great effect, but the debate can be essentially neutral without lacking substance.
What we say on the Internet actually is real and it matters.  I still believe that relativism is the thing that will doom us to half-witted expressions of banal tolerance for even the worst sorts of offenses.   And so I suppose I am going to continue feeling awkward and unpopular amongst my many anonymous Internet acquaintances.
Whose commentary, as always, I welcome.

The Evolution of Religious Bigotry

Courage without consequence.

By Jonah Goldberg

I just watched Fitna, a 17-minute film by Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders. 

Released on the Internet last week, Fitna juxtaposes verses from the Koran with images from the world of jihad. Heads cut off, bodies blown apart, gays executed, toddlers taught to denounce Jews as “apes and pigs,” protesters holding up signs reading “God Bless Hitler” and “Freedom go to Hell” — these are among the powerful images from Fitna, Arabic for “strife” or “ordeal.”

Predictably, various Muslim governments have condemned the film. Half the Jordanian parliament voted to sever ties with the Netherlands. Egypt’s grand imam threatened “severe” consequences if the Dutch didn’t ban the film.

Meanwhile, European and U.N. leaders are going through the usual theatrical hand-wringing, heaping anger on Wilders for sowing “hatred.”

Me? I keep thinking about Jesus fish.

During a 1991 visit to Istanbul, a buddy and I found ourselves in a small restaurant, drinking, dancing, and singing with a bunch of middle-class Turkish businessmen, mostly shop owners. It was a hilariously joyful evening, even though they spoke little English and we spoke considerably less Turkish.

At the end of the night, after imbibing unquantifiable quantities of raki, an ouzo-like Turkish liqueur, one of the men gave me a worn-out business card. On the back, he’d scribbled an image. It was little more than a curlicue, but he seemed intent on showing it to me (and nobody else). It was, I realized, a Jesus fish.

It was an eye-opening moment for me, though obviously trivial compared with the experiences of others. Here in this cosmopolitan and self-styled European city, this fellow felt the need to surreptitiously clue me in that he was a Christian just like me (or so he thought).

Traditionally, the fish pictogram conjures the miracle of the loaves and fishes as well as the Greek word IXΘΥΣ, which means fish and also is an acronym for “Jesus Christ, God’s Son, Savior.” Christians persecuted by the Romans used to draw the Jesus fish in the dirt as a way to tip off fellow Christians that they weren’t alone.

In America, these fish appear mostly on cars. Recently, however, it seems Jesus fish have become outnumbered by Darwin fish. No doubt you’ve seen these, too. The fish is “updated” with little feet on the bottom, and “IXΘΥΣ” or “Jesus” is replaced with either “Darwin” or “Evolve.”

I find Darwin fish offensive. First, there’s the smugness. The undeniable message: Those Jesus fish people are less evolved, less sophisticated than we Darwin fishers.

The hypocrisy is even more glaring. Darwin fish are often stuck next to bumper stickers promoting tolerance or admonishing that “hate is not a family value.” But the whole point of the Darwin fish is intolerance; similar mockery of a cherished symbol would rightly be condemned as bigoted if aimed at blacks or women or, yes, Muslims.

As Christopher Caldwell once observed in the Weekly Standard, Darwin fish flout the agreed-on etiquette of identity politics. “Namely: It’s acceptable to assert identity and abhorrent to attack it. A plaque with ‘Shalom’ written inside a Star of David would hardly attract notice; a plaque with ‘Usury’ written inside the same symbol would be an outrage.”

But it’s the false bravado of the Darwin fish that grates the most. Like so much other Christian-baiting in American popular culture, sporting your Darwin fish is a way to speak truth to power on the cheap, to show courage without consequence.

Whatever the faults of Fitna, it ain’t no Darwin fish.

Wilders’ film could easily get him killed. It picks up the work of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh, who was murdered in 2004 by a jihadi for criticizing Islam.

Fitna is provocative, but it has good reason to provoke. A cancer of violence, bigotry, and cruelty is metastasizing within the Islamic world.

It’s fine for Muslim moderates to say they aren’t part of the cancer; and that some have, in response to the film, is a positive sign. But more often, diagnosing or even observing this cancer — in film, book or cartoon — is dubbed “intolerant,” while calls for violence, censorship, and even murder are treated as understandable, if regrettable, expressions of anger.

It’s not that secular progressives support Muslim religious fanatics, it’s that they reserve their passion and scorn for religious Christians who are neither fanatical nor violent.

The Darwin fish ostensibly symbolizes the superiority of progressive-minded science over backward-looking faith. I think this is a false juxtaposition, but I would have a lot more respect for the folks who believe it if they aimed their brave contempt for religion at those who might behead them for it.

Book shows Pope is not infallible

Agencies in Rome
Wednesday April 18, 2007
The Guardian

Pope Benedict XVI's new book sold more than 50,000 copies on its first day on sale Monday - the pontiff's 80th birthday - said the Italian publisher Rizzoli, which has decided on another printing.

In Jesus of Nazareth, Benedict's first book as pontiff, the German-born theologian offers a personal meditation on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, and criticises capitalism's exploitation of the poor and the absence of God in Marxism. Rizzoli said yesterday the new edition would bring the printing to 420,000 copies. The 448-page book was published in German, Italian and Polish. An English-language edition is due on May 15 and translations are planned for 16 other languages.

Yesterday, however, Catholic bloggers took up the Pope's invitation to criticise his work by pointing out that he wrongly identifies a US theologian. In a paragraph citing books about Jesus, he identifies John Meier, a professor at Notre Dame University, Indiana, as a member of the Jesuit order of Catholic priests. Mr Meier is not a Jesuit but a priest of the New York diocese.

"The Pope is not infallible - there's a little mistake in his last book," Italian journalist Sandro Magister said in his blog Settimo Cielo (Seventh Heaven).

The Pope, who began writing the book before his election in 2005, said in the introduction that his portrayal of Jesus was his personal view and not official Roman Catholic teaching. "Therefore, everyone is free to contradict me," he wrote.

Double post!

My Post Piracy continues.  The victim this time is memtony, who probably didn't realize what a crook I was when he added me to his neighborhood.  Live and learn, new friend.

Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: 1.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 2.97

Authoritarian
Left		Right
Libertarian

Quite an interesting find from http://politicalcompass.org/index.

But what does it mean?  According to the site I am clustered near Jacques Chirac.  Pope Benedict is about where I am as far as "authoritarian" scores, but Left where I am Right. 
I am sort of dismayed.  George Bush is way higher than me in authoritarian!  I am sure that is only Bush Bias.

Did you know if you go the Hobbit Name Generator and type in "George Bush" it gives his name as Squinty of Simpleton?  Don't believe me?  Try it and find out.

KFC turns to the pope for help promoting new fish product

Not only is KFC now selling fish, but the fast-food giant wants Pope Benedict XVI to give his seal of approval to the company's new pollack filet in time for Lent.

"People can enjoy the flavor of the new Fish Snacker any day of the week, but we believe it will be especially popular on Fridays," James O'Reilly, the company's top marketer says in a press release. "It's perfect for an on-the-go lunch or any time of the day when you need a quick snack but don't want to sacrifice taste."

It's not every day that a major corporation uses the spirtual leader of some 1 billion people to get attention for a new product.

"The company has turned to Pope Benedict XVI, beseeching him to bestow his Papal blessing for this innovative new menu item," the press release says. "Vatican officials confirmed they received KFC's request, and the company is hopeful to get the Pope's blessing this Lenten season."