The Ark and The Dove

Why You Probably Aren't Voting for Obama

via Pewsitter...

Deal W. Hudson has a guest column over at Catholic Online about why most Catholics aren't swooning at Obama rallies (although the thought of him being president does make some of us faint).

The Force as Anti-Christ

There's a pretty embarrassing video on YouTube of a man who alleges to be a Christian protesting some kind of Star Wars event.
My hope is that the guy isn't for real, although there's a good possibility that he is.
Apparently, he's very upset that people are more into Star Wars than Jesus, even though the prior is fiction and the latter is a historical figure.
That, I can kind of see. Most of us probably know more about our hobbies than our religion. It's always a difficult challenge to balance recreation with spiritual growth.
Then the guy starts suggesting that Star Wars fans are doomed to Hell, essentially drudging up 16th Century, puritanical, iconoclastic arguments against drama...and you can only feel bad for the guy, and kind of chuckle at the nervous humor it generates. Whoever is holding the camera kind of goads him on, as it rapidly becomes clear that the Star Wars geeks are reveling in finding someone even weirder than they are. The Christian protester seems to miss out on the idea that Star Wars is ultimately about repentance rather than telekinesis.

It kind of reminds me of this crazy clip where some Christian group tries to argue that Voltron and the Transformers will lead kids to devil worship. What they kind of miss is that the evil is practiced by the bad guys. Maybe someone should point out the Biblical stories about the magicians of Egypt and the Witch of Endor.

The Oscarzzzzzz...

Zzzz...

Oh, I'm sorry. I appear to have fallen asleep.
I don't know what happened. I had been trying to watch the Oscars...

I suppose it's a bit unfair of me to say they were boring, since I decided to leave Isabel's apartment after the first musical number...and never bothered to turn them on when I got home.

From the little taste I had, however, I was not impressed.

The computer generated opening sequence was actually kind of fun. Any sequence that involves transformers and lightsabers is going to do okay in my book...but an opening sequence alone does not make for a fun night of awards ceremonies.

Jon Stewart is always funny when he is mocking Hollywood to its face, but then things inevitably turned  political without the slightest association to movies. I suddenly felt like I was watching the Democratic National Convention. Yawn.
Then, the opening awards were all for boring categories with pretty boring speeches. Yawn, yawn.

Next, the first musical number was a totally lame piece from that Disney movie with the fairy tale princess...but the song had very little entertainment value out of context...especially if, like me, you never saw the movie from which it came because you are (like me) a man's man who spent $20 to watch giant killer robots punch each other in the face instead of watching girls sing about cleaning toilets.

Yawn.

By the time I left, both Jon Stewart and George Clooney had explicitly complained about how long the ceremony runs. If the presenters of the show don't even want to sit through the whole thing, then why the heck should I?

Ultimately, it became necessary to leave before the soporific effects of the Oscars could impair my driving.

How fortunate for America that the writers' strike was resolved in time for this ceremony...

Zzzzz....

The Koran Controversy (Again)

This time, via Pewsitter...

Here's a link to a blog on the philological theorist arguing that the Koran is derived from Christian lectionaries.

I Got Yer Civic Engagement Right Here, Buddy

As you've probably noticed from previous posts, I have been dealing with teaching the compulsory civic engagement component here at the University of Maryland in my own special way.

On the topic of being "civically engaged," I stumbled upon an article at Touchstone (via Pewsitter) that tries to tackle Charles Hitchens' assertion that religion is inherently bad and leads to bad citizenship.

According to this article:

Civic engagement—reading the newspaper and voting, for example—and   participation in voluntary associations also increase with frequent church   attendance. For every one voluntary association—like a civic club or   PTO—among the non-religious, there are 2.4 such associations among those   who attend religious services more than once per week.

Thus, Smith concludes: “Religious involvement is associated with, and   probably promotes, civic engagement. . . . Those participating in a faith community   are more likely to vote, belong to voluntary associations, and carry out altruistic   acts than the nonreligious.”

So, essentially, it sounds like Maryland is trying to beef up the secular civic engagement to turn the tide.
(I can tell you now, however, that the only students who seem interested in civic engagement are the ones who were already involved before they got here.)

As I said in a civic engagement focus group, it seems to me like the University of Maryland could use its money more efficiently by helping groups that are already civically engaged, rather than dumping money in programs that try to force students to become engaged.

Bill Clinton's Straw Man Argument on Abortion

via Pewsitter.com (via Mom)...

Some Pro-life protesters apparently annoyed Bill Clinton at a Billary rally. I don't know what they did to get his attention (something tells me that it wasn't exactly civil discourse), but his response to them exposed how absolutely relentless the Clintons are in demonizing the pro-life movement.

To paraphrase, Clinton argues that if pro-lifers were really pro-life, they'd be seeking to put every mother and doctor who participated in an abortion in jail. He then says the only reason they don't seek this publicly is because it would alienate anyone who would support them. He follows up by saying that the Clintons have done more to save babies lives than anyone in the so-called pro-life movement.

I've heard this line of argument before from NARAL representatives, and it either displays a tremendous ignorance on the part of the pro-choice movement or a willingness to completely and flagrantly misrepresent an opposing view in order to pander to a political base. I can't think of a single conversation with anyone in the pro-life movement that advocated prosecuting people who were involved in abortions. We aren't seeking punitive justice; we're seeking the preservation of future lives.

Apparently, Bill Clinton can't imagine a world where criminals are granted mercy...or in which grandfather clauses grant clemency to those who were involved in abortion at a time when they were legal. Does anyone really think that pro-lifers would protest an abortion ban that included a grandfather clause?

What is most perplexing from a logical standpoint is that he argues: "You do not say X, but I think you should say X; therefore, I will treat you as if you say X while at the same time claiming you are a hypocrite for not saying it. I will tell everyone why you are wrong for saying the things that I say you are not saying even though I think it would be wrong for you to say them"

It requires quite a bit of double-think (if not triple think) to get one's head around that one.

I also find it absolutely hilarious (Hillarious?) that pro-choicers always take credit for the reduction in abortions without sharing any of it with the pro-life movement. It seems to me that the Clintons would do better to say, "I see your point of view, and we'd like to find a mutual common ground from which to work." Instead, Bill draws lines in the sand and denies his opposition any political will or effect.

A Safe Sex Mindset

Yesterday, on the way to daily Mass, I had to cross paths with several of University of Maryland's finest.
The one seemed to be instructing the other on the importance of proper usage of barrier contraceptives since, and I paraphrase, "Some of the crazy girls actually want to get pregnant."

Ah, romance is alive and well here in College Park, and sexual freedom has indeed bestowed a special grace on women!

This got me thinking about contraceptives and what they do to women, and it occurred to me that there is strong comparison between the safe sex mindset and many eating disorders. I don't say this to lessen the impact or horror of a bona fide eating disorder, but to increase the disgust we should feel towards a safe sex mindset.

They both essentially aim at the same goal: to take a natural process of the body and separate the pleasurable good from its biological consequences. When a person looks at a fatty food and says, "I want the pleasure of eating that food, but not the consequences of consuming its fat and then having to exercise to burn off that fat" it is essentially the same mentality as the person who says "I want the pleasure of sex, but not the consequences of having a baby and then having to care for it."

Both come from an attitude that believes: "If I engage in this activity, than the consequences might cost me some other thing I want." A person with an eating disorder believes that their appearance is important to their success; a loss of that appearance could cause them to fail somehow, if only in thinking it will cost them respect among their peers. I'm sure there are other more complex reasons behind eating disorders as well, but I think it's safe to assume that this motivates at least some people. Likewise, the fear of pregnancy often stems from a belief that a baby will obliterate all of one's plans for the future.

An eating disorder comes with more immediate (but not necessarily visibly apparent) health risks. You can die of a heart attack as a direct result of undernourishment. But it seems to me that contraceptives bring just as many if not more lethal health risks in the form of venereal disease. These young men were talking about condoms merely as contraceptives, not as safeguards against disease. And we all know that there are a myriad of diseases that a condom will not protect against...and just as many ways for unmarried couples to engage in sexual activities for which they will not think or bother to use protection.
I remember at that great Catholic institution, La Salle University, the Honors Program had a safe sex presentation in which we were told to remember to always use plastic wrap to create an "oral dam" if we wanted to engage in some of these other activities. How many college students do you really think are going to say, "Wait, honey, not without the plastic wrap!"

And, tragically, both eating disorders and premarital sex can, in the long run, end up obliterating the very future they were meant to preserve and protect in ways other than bodily disease. The emotional stress, shame, feelings of humiliation, and even the possible loss of reputation that can follow are also real results that can shatter one's success.

Overcoming these obstacles won't be through a process of simply denying the shame or trying to reverse cultural assumptions about human sexuality. They will only be overcome through reconciliation, which is hard to find in a barren, secular world devoid of faith.

Colbert vs. Dr. Zimbardo

via my sister...

Essentially, Colbert lays the theological smackdown on Dr. Zimbardo, author of the Lucifer Effect. Incidentally, Dr. Zimbardo looks a whole lot like the Evil One with that crazy van dyke he's sporting.

The video is a classic example of how academics should not base their arguments on phenomena outside their knowledge base. Zimbardo (at least in the edited version of this clip) tries to base his argument on the mythology of Lucifer, but completely distorts the theological underpinnings of the Fall of the Angels.

While Colbert at first plays the absurd conformist, he sets the evil-genius Zimbardo straight on Catholic theology of evil. (He does have a bit of a potty mouth in the end...)

Clinton Campaigns at a Catholic University

via Mom...

Hillary strutted her stuff at St. Mary's, a Catholic University in Texas.

Archbishop Jose H. Gomez wisely denounced her position on abortion, and the university president publicly distanced himself from the event, which was coordinated by a student group on campus.

I wonder if she received communion while she was there (she did in South Africa).

Lenten Penance

Isabel and I signed up for a dance class.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not about to issue some typical macho-type complaint about being dragged to the dance floor.
I actually don't mind dancing, and I certainly wouldn't mind looking less like a fool when I do it.
The problem with dance class lies elsewhere.

For instance, the yelling.
The dance instructor yells at us.
A lot.
Shame is her primary pedagogical tool.
It might have been better for me if I had taken this class while working on my dissertation, if only to make my director look like a lobotomized lamb on nyquil by comparison.

Next is the touching.
As many of you know, I am not known for my overwhelming embrace of public affection. I'd prefer giving the head nod of peace over pumping the flesh of various and sundry Mass-goers of questionable sanitation practices.
There is a lot of touching in this class...and not just with your partner. In fact, almost none of it is with your partner because the instructor sets up the men in rows and forces the women to descend a humiliating cattle chute of dance fever.

I touched more women last Tuesday than I think I've touched in my entire life. Women of all shapes, sizes, complexions, and ages. Despite the puerile, prep-school boy wish-fulfillment that such an endeavour would seem to embody, I derived no such pleasure from it in reality.

The really creepy thing is that you know there are men showing up for precisely the reason that young women are forced to touch them...you can tell which fellas they are by their beetly stance, vacant stare, and complete lack of reluctance to touch strange women.

And now a week has passed...and I have all day to contemplate the orthopedic nightmare to come this evening.

Hopefully, the ensuing mortification will burn off some of that ham sandwich that I was tricked into eating last Friday...