December 7, 2009 | 4:18 pm

Ebert: New Agers as bad as those imbecile Creationists

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Follow me on

So it’s come to this?

Roger Ebert—yes, that Ebert—argues that New Agers and Creationists shouldn’t be president. What does the film critic think the two have in common? Intellectual incompetence. WARNING: Ebert’s blog post is full of high-minded snobbery:

New Age beliefs are the Creationism of the Progressives. I move in circles where most people would find it absurd to believe that humans didn’t evolve from prehistoric ancestors, yet many of these same people quite happily believe in astrology, psychics, reincarnation, the Tarot deck, the i Ching, and sooth-saying. Palmistry and phrenology have pretty much blown over.

(skip)

It’s not my purpose today to argue the equal absurdity of Creationism and New Age beliefs (no, not even though the tenets of astrology were formed when astrologers knew piss-all about the planets). Those debates have been pretty much settled to the satisfaction of both sides, which agree with themselves.

I adamantly support the right of any candidate to profess any faith, or none. And in the separate case of their New Age or Creationism beliefs, I emphasize my words “should not” rather than “can not” be President. If a candidate professes the story of Creation as an ancient legend or symbol, as so many do of Adam and Eve, that is quite understandable and has long precedent.

It is in the specific cases of those with literal belief in the scientific truth and application of such beliefs that I raise a red flag. We live in the harrowing early years of a century when the nation must compete in a new way, and this battle will be fought on the grounds of science defined by the traditional Scientific Method. We can have no patience with a chief executive who professes the value of ancient superstitions in the forming of policy.

My only purpose today is to state early and often that if a Presidential candidate believes early humans used saddles to ride on the backs of dinosaurs, as they are depicted at the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, that candidate should not be elected President.

Thanks for the link, Dennis.

December 7, 2009 | 2:53 pm

Seriously, students, Undie Run is done

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

I mentioned this summer that UCLA had killed Undie Run before the fall quarter even began. It was a preemptive strike when students were away and unable to defend the short-lived tradition.

As a current student, I just received this email, jointly signed by the dean of students and the chief of police. It makes me proud:

Dear Students:

This is a reminder that the unofficial tradition of Undie Run at UCLA ended last year in response to health and safety concerns, damage to property, an increase in violent incidents involving non-UCLA participants and complaints from neighbors.  However, rumors have been circulating that some students are planning to conduct the run this week.

Please be advised that UCPD officers will be out in force, together with Student Affairs officers.  We are taking this issue very seriously and will be closely monitoring the campus and the surrounding neighborhood for violations of law or the UCLA Student Conduct Code.

The safety of our campus and our students is top priority here.  Please do your part to keep UCLA safe for all of us.

Sincerely,

Robert J. Naples
Associate Vice Chancellor and Dean of Students

James Herren
Chief of Police, UCPD

I don’t have the time, or really the interest, to actually see what happens at midnight on Wednesday, but I can only imagine it will be more troublesome than Undie Run was. And if it isn’t, give it a few more quarters.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

December 7, 2009 | 12:08 pm

Washington Times, cultism and global warming

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Ted Olsen had a great Twitter update with a link to this editorial last week. It said: “WTimes calls global warming a form of cultism.’ Well, I suppose they’d know ...”

That’s because the conservative paper, which has a great religion reporter, was founded by Unification Church founder Sun Myung Moon and has been subsidized by the Moonies for decades. Here’s an excerpt from the well-written, if misguided, editorial:

Global warming was an academic Ponzi scheme. Its leading proponents were mini-Madoffs, peddling a vision of global catastrophe to gullible activists, bureaucrats and policymakers. The vision was so vast, the fear it inspired so pervasive, that it seized popular imagination, aided ably by hucksters like former Vice President Al Gore and his science-fiction feature film “An Inconvenient Truth.” But like any Ponzi scheme, global warming only worked if everyone kept investing and no one looked at the books. Once the truth came out - of manipulated findings, phony data, rigged peer-review processes and intimidation of skeptics - the scheme began to collapse.

Yet even as the edifice comes down, the adherents of the orthodoxy say that there is nothing to see, that this is all a distraction from the business at hand, that there is still no time to lose, full steam (or solar power) ahead. But it is far too late for that. The veil has been pierced, the myth revealed, the scales have fallen from the people’s eyes. The pagan priests are fleeing the temple, their sacred idols are being pulled down, their holy works renounced. Their god, finally, is dead.

And the rest.

3 Comments — Leave your comment

December 6, 2009 | 3:57 pm

SoCal Episcopals elect lesbian bishop

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

The big religious news out of Southern California this weekend is the Episcopal Church’s election of an openly lesbian bishop. The Rev. Canon Mary D. Glasspool will be the Diocese of Los Angeles’ bishop suffragan:

“I’m very excited about the future of the whole Episcopal Church and I see the Diocese of Los Angeles leading the way into that future. But for just for this moment, let me say again, thank you, and thanks be to our loving and supporting God, a surprising God,” Glasspool told delegates to the diocese’s annual convention just after they elected her on the seventh balloting for one of two open suffragan, or assistant, bishop positions.

Referring to the current church season of Advent, a time of anticipation of the birth of Christ, Glasspool said, “This is my 56th Advent and I think I finally know the meaning of the word ‘wait.’ ” The delegates laughed. Glasspool is the church’s first openly gay priest to win election to the ranks of bishops since the controversial elevation of the Rev. V. Gene Robinson in 2003.

Larry Stammer writes that his was an emotional moment for many involved. But it’s an understatement to refer to Robinson’s 2003 election as controversial. Though the riff goes back much farther, his election was schismatic. And Glasspool’s was greeted with warnings from the Archbishop of Canterbury:

The fragile unity of the church will be further imperilled by Canon Glasspool’s election – the second of an openly gay bishop in the US Episcopal Church.

It confirmed fears among evangelicals in the 70-million strong Anglican Communion that crucial votes at last summer’s General Convention of the Episcopal Church had in effect ended the moratorium on gay bishops.

The Archbishop of Canterbury and a majority of the other 38 Anglican primates had requested a moratorium on gay bishops and same-sex blessings in an attempt to prevent the Communion from splitting between evangelicals and liberals.

The Rev Rod Thomas, of the conservative evangelical group Reform, said he was “deeply ashamed” that Canon Glasspool, 55, who has lived with her partner Becki Sander since 1988, hads been elected as assistant bishop in the diocese of Los Angeles.

He said that a schism was “absolutely inevitable”.

Read more here.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

December 6, 2009 | 2:15 pm

Idol worship and the NFL

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Photo: ESPN.com

Though the world, and specifically my wife, mourn for Tim Tebow, yesterday was a great day in college football. Almost certainly the best of a fairly weak season.

Now, I don’t believe if football gods. But Gregg Easterbook does. And he’s thanking them for the blessing of the Saints and blaming them for the curse of Bill Belichick.

He writes for ESPN.com:

Mortal, didst thou doubt the existence of the football gods? Didst thou lack faith? A week ago, the Patriots led the Jets 31-14 with 30 seconds remaining in the game. Bill Belichick had his starters still on the field; Tom Brady threw deep to Randy Moss—Belichick was desperately trying to run up the score in order to taunt the Jets organization. The football gods exact vengeance for this sort of thing. Monday night in New Orleans, the Patriots were punished.

Dost thou doubt still? See below for a full pantheon of the football gods, by name. Defy them at your peril!

The football gods are also a creative force: They brought us the 2009 New Orleans Saints.

At which point Easterbrook drops the shtick and just analyzes why this has been a great NFL season. Read the rest here and rejoice.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

December 2, 2009 | 3:03 pm

Should Tiger’s sins be publicly atoned?

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Tiger Woods today posted on his Website an apology—opening line: “I have let my family down and I regret those transgressions with all of my hear”—without admitting what he was apologizing for. Not much mystery there though: Us Weekly published this story about an alleged 31-month affair he had with an LA cocktail waitress.

Tiger went on to say:

But no matter how intense curiosity about public figures can be, there is an important and deep principle at stake which is the right to some simple, human measure of privacy. I realize there are some who don’t share my view on that. But for me, the virtue of privacy is one that must be protected in matters that are intimate and within one’s own family. Personal sins should not require press releases and problems within a family shouldn’t have to mean public confessions.

Really? Why not? You are the sporting world’s first billionaire, with a squeaky clean image and a livelihood, while obviously built on your talent, that has been buoyed by the fact that golfers and sports fans in general love you. And every move you have made over the past week has been nothing but shady.

Sadly, I don’t think most Americans expect celebrity athletes to be faithful. Remember the coverage of Steve McNair’s murder that referred to his mistress as his girlfriend? But they do expect sports stars to be honest with them. Not sure which the bigger sin—Woods’ or the American sportsfans’—but both should be publicly atoned for.

4 Comments — Leave your comment

December 2, 2009 | 1:55 pm

DC moves to legalize gay marriage

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

The District of Columbia is looking to join the ranks of Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont. Tuesday night the District Council passed a bill to legalize gay marriage by an 11-2 margin:

The most vocal opposition came from the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington. Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl has warned that legalizing same-sex marriage would force the church’s social services arm to scale back its efforts in the city.

The law, as passed Tuesday, would not make churches perform same-sex marriage ceremonies, but it would require employers doing business with the city, including churches, to provide health benefits for married same-sex couples.

Church officials said that providing those benefits would violate their religious beliefs.

“We really don’t want to be in a position where we’re being asked to abandon one part of our faith to be able to live out the other part,” said Susan Gibbs, an archdiocese spokeswoman. “Our goal is to be able to provide the same level of services, but we have to be true to our faith.”

I wouldn’t expect the Catholic Church to support such a measure. But, based on our experience in California, where the church got much less attention for its opposition than Mormons, it’s interesting to see them front and center.

1 Comments — Leave your comment

December 1, 2009 | 4:20 pm

Putting the Swiss ban on minarets in context

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

A minaret in Israel

I’ve seen a lot of discussion about the Swiss vote Sunday to ban the building of minarets, the towers above mosques from which the call to prayer goes out.

The New York Times led its story with “In a vote that displayed a widespread anxiety about Islam and undermined the country’s reputation for religious tolerance.”

And Muslims throughout the world have been aghast.

I don’t doubt that the vote reflected underlying xenophobia. But Dan Murphy, of the Christian Science Monitor, puts the vote in perspective and asks how Muslim countries treat churches.

Obviously, it depends on the Muslim country. Saudi Arabia aside, the record still isn’t good:

Indonesia. In a state with large minority populations of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and animists, the US State department reported in 2009 that at least 9 churches – and 12 mosques associated with the Ahmadiyya Islamic sect (which mainstream Muslim groups consider heretical) – were forced shut by violence or intimidation from community groups, and that a number of churches and Hindu temples have struggled to receive official permits in recent years. The Indonesian government has on a number of occasions stepped in to prevent church construction, largely over fears that it would stoke sectarian violence. But religious practice, by and large, is freer in Indonesia than most other Muslim majority states.

Murphy also discusses Egypt, Saudia Arabia and Pakistan. Read it here.

12 Comments — Leave your comment

December 1, 2009 | 3:54 pm

Crunchy Con rides into the sunset

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

We’ve all been there: Saying our goodbyes to newspapering but promising to still be around for journalism. Now it’s Rod Dreher’s turn. The Crunchy Con is leaving the Dallas Morning News. What now? He’ll become director of publications for the John Templeton Foundation.

More from his Beliefnet blog:

My primary job there will be to create and edit an online magazine called Big Questions Online. It’s going to be a philosophically-oriented magazine that explores fundamental questions arising from science, religion, the free market and public ethics/morality—Templeton’s four big areas of focus. I’m tremendously excited about this opportunity to bring the great work Templeton does to the reading public, and to put together a webzine that’s intellectually diverse, lively and relevant to our public debates.

Readers may recall that I was a Templeton-Cambridge journalism fellow this past summer. That was my introduction to the work of the foundation. The two weeks I spent in June in Cambridge were among the most rewarding of my life. I heard from scholars and scientists—some religious, some atheist—who made me think hard and think differently about moral and philosophical questions. I’ll never forget that afternoon session with Dame Gillian Beer, who spoke about how the Victorians interpreted Darwin’s findings through the various lenses of popular culture. Similarly, John Gray’s presentation of how the Enlightenment shapes the New Atheism and its blind spots offered another perspective on how the pursuit of knowledge is conditioned by culture. I wrote to my friend Gary Rosen at Templeton telling him that I was amazed and impressed by the great work the foundation does, and that more people ought to know about it. As providence would have it, I’m now going to be in a position to make that happen, and to enrich the public conversation about important issues and questions of our time. While eating cheesesteak.

Not long ago, I went to the bookshelf where I keep the books I read for my Templeton Cambridge project (on Traditional Chinese Medicine and its metaphysical-religious basis), trying to find a quote for a column I was writing. I stood there looking at the spines of those books, and remembered how intellectually refreshed I was from that experience. And now I’m being offered the chance to do that sort of thing for a living.

No doubt the Templeton-Cambridge fellowship is a great one. During my newspapering days, I had hoped to find the right science and religion topic to pitch. Guess I missed my window ...

Dreher will keep blogging—“for at least a while”—but no longer as the Crunchy Con.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

December 1, 2009 | 3:39 pm

Shabbat Shalom, Hammer style

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Getting to this video followed a fairly circuitous path, so here goes.

I noticed tonight that a friend at JTA had as his gchat status “wolverine,” which made me think of the Jewverine (like Wolverine but with menorahs for claws). A friend, then, saw me looking at the post I wrote in May about Jewverine, and asked if I liked “Hebrew Hammer.” To which I answered, “Obviously.”

In reality, I really like the first half of the movie. This is probably my favorite scene. Warning: It ends with some holiness and then a big f-bomb.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

December 1, 2009 | 4:45 am

Williams fined for U.S. Open tirade

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Remember that tirade Serena Williams got busted for at the U.S. Open? You know, the one where she disagreed with the line judge and said, “I swear to God, I’m f—-ing going to take this f—-ing ball and shove it down your f——ing throat, you hear that? I swear to God.”

Well, Williams, who is, after all, a Jehovah’s Witness, got what was coming to her: A record $82,500 fine and probation.

More from the AP:

Grand Slam administrator Bill Babcock’s ruling was released Monday, and he said Williams faces a “probationary period” at tennis’ four major championships in 2010 and 2011. If she has another “major offense” at a Grand Slam tournament in that time, the fine would increase to $175,000 and she would be barred from the following U.S. Open.

“But if she does not have another offense in the next two years, the suspension is lifted,” Babcock said in a telephone interview from London.

He said Williams is handing over $82,500 right now to the Grand Slam committee, already far more than the previous highest fine for a Grand Slam offense. In 1995, Jeff Tarango stormed off the court at Wimbledon and accused the chair umpire of showing favoritism to certain players in exchange for their friendship. Tarango was fined a total of $43,756, which was reduced to $28,256 on appeal, and barred from Wimbledon the next year.

Williams’ tirade also raised an interesting question about what Jehovah’s Witnesses and other religious folks think about cussing. More here.

4 Comments — Leave your comment