… “In God We Trust” on the back. See This is NOT a Counterfeit Bill at Yahoo News. I’ve always found the idea of putting “In God We Trust” on our currency to be mildly blasphemous. In our money is precisely where we trust God the least. And that’s in our personal finances. When we come to national finances, putting God’s name somewhere in there is false advertising, or in the biblical sense, taking God’s name in vain. Or so it seems to me.
Category: Politics
-
Media Distrust
Gallup reports that U. S. Distrust in Media Hits New High. Unfortunately, I suspect this distrust does not reflect a dismay at the amount of inaccurate information and a desire to get accurate information whatever the cost. I suspect that it’s more because of the large number of partisans who think their party, candidate, or favorite issue is not getting favorable treatment.
I too distrust the media, but my problem is that our journalists are trying for balance rather than for accuracy. The way they try to produce balance is by calling on people from both sides of any particular issue and having them argue. Since they have representatives of both sides, the reporting must be fair. No? In my view, most issues have more than two sides, and often having a Republican and a Democrat provide commentary doesn’t even cover two sides.
Evaluations of media fairness frequently involve counting positive and negative stories about a candidate or issue, and if the counts are right, then the coverage is fair.
There are several problems with this. One candidate or the other might be providing more fodder for negative stories than the other. If one candidate has more scandal is it to be expected that the media will manage to somehow keep the reporting equal? The problem here is that people can’t agree on just what is a real scandal.
That’s why I’d rather have the journalists themselves evaluate what they’re presenting and give their reasons and evidence. This is one of the reasons I like organizations like Politifact. I frequently disagree with their rating of a story, but they generally provide enough information such as the source of studies, details, additional context and so forth, for me to make at least a preliminary judgment, and pointers to information if I think I need to find more.
I think that our entire approach to media fairness should be scrapped. Identify biases, go in depth, and provide references. TV and radio programs can provide such references through their web sites. Over time I suspect the internet will adjust for bias by allowing people to select their own range of stories and opinion shows. That’s how I get my news already.
-
Thinking about 9-11
I appreciated the contribution of Bob Cornwall, who calls on us to make this a time of building bridges. One of the most disastrous wounds that result from this event is the combination of our fear, anger, hatred, and desire for revenge. I don’t mean to diminish the impact of the evil act of hatred itself, but it is critical that we don’t partake of that evil by becoming hateful ourselves. We can take necessary actions for justice and for our own security without doing so.
The act itself was evil, but what we do about it, and what we become as a result is up to us, not to the terrorists.
I was impressed with Bob Cornwall’s call to build bridges. We desperately need more bridge building.
-
Defensive Christianity
I’ve seen a great number of words from Christians here in America recently, some of them coming from Facebook or Twitter, some in blog posts, some in words spoken directly to me, or on Television or the Radio. I’m not going to cite specific sources, because I’m not writing about what some particular person said. Rather, I’m writing about an atmosphere.The atmosphere is one of defensiveness, reflecting a Christianity that is on the defensive. Sometimes this refers to the church as a whole losing ground or being in danger. Sometimes it refers to one’s personal position or standing with God. Sometimes it refers to personal safety. At other times it’s about the course our nation is taking.
Now I want to be clear that I’m talking about American Christianity here. I would hate for my brothers and sisters in places where they are truly threatened to think I’m talking about them.
We American Christians live in a land of plenty. Yes, we’ve had some times that have been harder than usual, but we’re still doing well financially when compared to the vast majority of people on this planet. We also live in a nation where we are in the majority. Now I know many will question this by asking how many true Christians there are as opposed to just nominal Christians. My response to that is simply to point out that we tend to claim all those who identify themselves as Christians when we want to emphasize the strength of Christianity. Should we be permitted to change the definition in another context so we can call ourselves a minority?
By defensive, I don’t mean that we actively defend our faith. I think apologetics is a good discipline. We should be able to give an answer for our faith.
What I mean is that we live our Christian lives in a state of fear. We’re afraid that our young people will learn something in college that will make them lose their faith. We’re afraid that a book that teaches something heretical will lead us (or someone we call “weaker”) astray. We’re afraid that a Mormon president might make heretics of us all, or that a liberal Christian as president will change the face of the country. We’re afraid that the language in party platforms or the content of political speeches will make or break our lives here.
We think that the results of this upcoming election may bring disaster and that we have to get desperate and persuade all our friends and relatives to vote the same way we do, because if the right person doesn’t win, our country is finished. We think we need to pray for God to make things go the right way, lest the wrong person get into power.
The sum of all our fears makes us seem, and indeed be, defensive. We do not witness to the God who rules in the kingdoms of men (Daniel 4:17) because we aren’t really sure that he does. We think that the issue depends on us: our prayers, our actions, our votes, our words.
It doesn’t depend on us.
I’m not suggesting that we don’t pray. We need to pray, but we need to pray especially that God will work in us (more on prayer).
I’m not suggesting that we don’t act. We need to act regularly. I’d suggest that Matthew 25:31-46 and related passages as a guide to our actions.
I’m not suggesting that we don’t speak. Let our words be a witness to the One we belong to.
I’m not suggesting that we don’t vote. I plan to vote. I hope you do too. In my view it’s a duty and a privilege. But God’s kingdom doesn’t depend on it.
But what about our rights? Shouldn’t we be defending our civil rights, our freedom of religion?
Yes, again, but remember that God’s kingdom doesn’t depend on our civil rights. In fact, some of Christianity’s greatest moments have been under persecution when church members had no rights at all.
And if we remember that, we might also remember to defend everyone’s rights. We might add to “doing to others what we would have them to do us” something new: Defending the rights of others as we would hope they would defend ours. Whose rights might those be?
Perhaps it would be a group of Muslims who want to build a mosque in “your” community.
Perhaps it would be the atheist child who doesn’t want to be made a participant in your prayers in a public place.
Perhaps it would be that person who has been singled out by security because he looks like a terrorist.
Our willingness to see people in each of these groups given less rights than we have is a sign of defensive Christianity.
A confident Christian would welcome Muslim neighbors and enter into dialogue with them, welcoming the opportunity to be a witness by demonstrating the love of Jesus.
A confident Christian would be more concerned with the discomfort of the atheist child than he would be with his desire to do things his own way. After all, he can pray just about anywhere.
A confident Christian would realize that the right thing to do is to defend the rights of the person who looks different than he is.
I pray for the day when I will truly be a confident Christian, when I will truly desire the well-being of others more than I do my own (Philippians 2:4). I’m praying, not that God will bring about one outcome or another in the election, but that no matter what happens I will learn to live the kingdom of God more and more fully every day.
I am praying that God will change me so my confidence is in God and not in myself. That’s the only way I can give up defensiveness and truly be defended.
-
Mother Jones on Failing Schools
I have the same sort of ambivalence on evaluating school performance as I do regarding church performance. A “by the numbers” approach keeps people from (successfully) making excuses, but it may not measure what you actually want to measure.
In the case of schools, as I see it, the problem is that education is not simply passing on a body of facts or procedures to students. If you do just that, you may make somebody functional in low-end jobs, but they won’t push beyond that. At the same time, if a school does not pass on a body of facts it cannot be successful either. Facts, initiative, thinking, understanding, enthusiasm, function, art, and so forth, all describe some of the desirable results of education. And only a small portion of that is measurable through testing.
Thus I was fascinated to read Everything You’ve Heard About Failing Schools is Wrong by Kristina Rizga in Mother Jones. Rizga has committed an act of journalism, something that is very rare in our media. She spent time actually learning what was going on in a school. Is everything she says going to point in the right direction? Not necessarily. But it does point out some of the problems of standardized testing as the sole measure of school (and student) performance.
I’m not sure how we accomplish it, but somehow we need both high expectations and ample scope for creativity in the classroom. What will make that happen? I’m not sure. But the current system isn’t really doing it. We need measures of success if we’re going to spend public money, but at the same time, we need those measures to function properly, and I don’t think we’ve succeeded in making them work even marginally.
There’s definitely more to it than just stuffing our kids’ heads with certain facts … but there can’t be less.
-
Neil Armstrong Dies at 82
The first man to set foot on the moon has died at the age of 82 (source). At the time of that first mission to the moon we didn’t have television, and we went to a friend’s place to watch the pictures.
I was already a supporter of the space program (and back then very much involved in astronomy). I no longer have a telescope, but I’m still a strong supporter of the space program. I think we generally underestimate the value of doing basic science and pushing the boundaries of discovery and of the technology we have. The space program does both and I think it’s worth every cent.
-
Primary and Local Voting (Ramblings)
I headed out to the polls today to vote in the primary. Since I’m registered independent, it was a short ballot, but nonetheless an important one.
One of the things that bothers me in the discussion of politics is the extremely limited discussion of local campaigns and issues. The information available is always limited, and very few people seem to want to discuss it. My wife and I scour the web and then we each report our results to the other. But we both find the lack of information annoying.
When the issues are only local, the turnout is also generally fairly low. Yet a great deal of the things that impact our lives are decided by these local bodies chosen by a tiny minority of the voters, many of whom are poorly informed.
It was interesting to note that the local elections here got pretty dirty as well. We had a candidate for county commission in our district who had a DUI on his record from when he’d been quite young, and someone mailed out flyers to make sure we were all aware of it. Our race for Public Defender got pretty tense as well, with accusations and counter-accusations. Why on earth is a public defender elected in any case?
As I approached the polling place, there was a forest of signs.
Is there some purpose to all these signs? Are people supposedly still making up there minds at this point? I suppose they are. And if they make up their minds based on these signs or the waving people at the polling place, could that be regarded as an informed vote?
Some people speak and act as though the only important issue is the election of the president. But our constitutional system doesn’t give the president absolute power. What about congress?
All our votes are important. The performace of our current government is the result of a Democratic president a Republican House of Representatives and a Democratic (but not filibuster proof) Senate. When you go to the polls you need to consider the performance of all those elements.
I hope the people of this country will give serious consideration to their votes for people at all levels of government.
-
Demonstrating Statistical Deception
Wesley Elsberry nails it in this post. He also mentions the great book How to Lie with Statistics, which everyone should read.
-
On Moderating a Political Discussion
One of the great joys of being a publisher is that I’m able to meet and work with some very intelligent and interesting people. As the election comes up, I find that my company, Energion Publications, has two authors who have written books for our new politics category, one a progressive and one a conservative. What does this suggest? Let’s have an election related discussion!Of course I have commercial goals for this discussion, so let’s get those out of the way. I’d love to sell books by these two men. You can find out more about that on Energion.net. In addition, as these are the only two books in the politics category, I’m anxious to discover new authors who will write new books to fulfill the mission of this category. Note that while the current two books focus on American issues, that is not a requirement for this category.
Having gotten that out of the way, let me get back to the fun. This is my personal post on how I’ll moderate this particular discussion. The two authors are progressive Bob Cornwall, who is a Disciples of Christ pastor and the author of Faith in the Public Square, and Elgin Hushbeck, Jr., an engineer, Christian apologist, and author of Preserving Democracy. Elgin blogs at bobcornwall.com and Elgin blogs at hushbeck.com/blog.
I’m excited about this discussion because I know that both of these men are committed Christians who are passionate about their political positions, but are also willing to discuss them in a civil manner. I edited both of their political books (as well as several others for each), and I know that they will hold many contrasting positions. It’s rare that we get to see civil discussions of widely differing points of view.
My role will be to propose questions. Each Saturday I will propose a question to both men. The question will be posted on Energion.net. They will post their answers on the following Wednesday and then each will respond to the post written by the other. I will post links to their responses over on Energion.net. I certainly have enough questions to ask them, but I’d really love to hear from any readers. Either comment or email me with things you would like to see discussed.
Is anyone welcome to get involved? Are you kidding? This is the blogosphere! Not only are comments permitted on either Elgin’s or Bob’s blogs, they are also permitted on Energion.net. There are reasonable rules for civil behavior in all these locations. In addition, however, we would welcome more bloggers to post on the questions raised, and provided the posts remain reasonably civil, I will link to those as well, also from Energion.net. So get ready to get involved.
My plan is to stick primarily with issues and policy. There is plenty of discussion going on about ads and the process. These are valid points to discuss. I’ve certainly seen plenty of ads that I think could bear serious examination and critique. But that takes time, so we’ll generally avoid it, and concentrate on specific policy issues.
So send me your questions and I’ll pick one for each week. Then get involved in the resulting discussion.
