This is a big part of the reason why we live in a bubble in this country.
To post this comment click here:
Otherwise click cancel.
But I would never put Fox News & the Economist in the same category, because the latter represents some serious journalism, whereas the former - well I hear there's a ban on the "j" word there. Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.
Much of What You Need to Know About the MSM
to
Much of What You Need to Know About Us
It's the age old argument right - Is the media a reflection of "our" tastes or is it driving it. I think the former. Currently reading A Reliable Wife by Robert Goolrick
~Ryan.
And no, I didn't get it from the newsstand, and haven't subscribed for 25 years. I see it in doctor's offices, and it's dreck. Yr. Obedient Servant, Peter Porcupine, Republican
If you use the cliff-notes version, is Mass only 25 minutes?
Further, the article about "Talibanistan" is in the issue, just not on the cover, it is not like the reporting is being hidden from the American audience. It may look bad when given a quick glance and there are certainly a lot of issues with the condition of the fourth estate, but this seems to be a convenient target more than it seems to be the proof of our problems.
One can frame the argument at this point in a number of ways, but time, context, specific words and the intended reader(s) are of paramount importance. This is perhaps one of our greatest problems today. It is like the gun control issue; on the one hand we have the Bradys, Soros' and Feinsteins preaching collective 2nd Amendment right, and on the other, The Lotts, Levins, and NRA's preaching the individual right. What was the intent of the writers, and how does one intrepret the language based on common usage at the writing?
I have taught scripture for many years, and I can tell you that to teach it requires study far beyond simply believing what one is told. To understand scriptural intent is to go back to the scriptural roots, original texts in Hebrew, Greek and Latin. It is to further take the written word in those languages, and interpret it not as we would in modern usage, but in the context of the time of writing, and the people to whom it was written.
Please understand I agree the "fundies" are out there. I regularly encounter them, and engage them in lucid conversation that makes them very uncomfortable in their interpretations. When Paul admonished Timothy to study the scripture, his final phrase in that verse is the telling one -- "CORRECTLY HANDLING the Word of Truth." The Chump
Best, Chuck The Chump
One thing to keep in mind - there are MANY denominations which would be called Fundamentalist - the Amish come to mind - who abhor politics.
Too many secular people use the word 'fundamentalist' to refer to religious people who are active in the social conservative mevement. Really, it means a person who lives thier life on a Scriptural basis, using the literal word of the bible as a 'foundation' for their beliefs. this may or may not include political activism.
I personally belong to a mainstream, rather than fundamentalist, church and am probably more active in conservative politics than most of the fundametalists I know. For example, I work with one VERY fundamentalist woman (she regards me as virtually irreligious because I read horoscopes) who voted for Deval.
It isn't that simple, and broad brushes rarely paint corners. Yr. Obedient Servant, Peter Porcupine, Republican
So are you going to sit there and tell us that you are capable of telling us from a historical and liturgical perspective what the various translations of the bible are supposed to mean? Given the number of internal inconsistencies, and the number of selections made for what is supposed to be in the bible? I'm sorry, but your chutzpah is a bit boring.
*"Der Mann Ohne Eigenshaften" refers to a man who does not have characteristics that distinguish him from other men. A subtle but real distinction.
First, I have entirely NO intent of discussing the "various translations" of the Bible, whatever the vagaries! There are 66-odd 'Books" in the popularly recognized Bible, excluding the books of the Apocrypha (extra points to raj, ONLY! if you can name them without going online or looking in the library!). They were written between approximately 1500 BC and 95 AD. We could argue about the former date, but in reality to little avail -- some of us don't date back to the ooze ....
Most of those in the Old Testament were written in the fundamental (surely, raj, you can define that for us)Hebrew language. There are extant many surviving scrolls of these, ranging from complete texts of Isaiah to the texturally incomplete scrolls discovered in the 1940's in a cave (commonly called the "Dead Sea Scrolls"). Variants in the local language account for some of the Old Testament texts being written in an Aramaic version of fundamental Hebrew (actually only root-related to Hebrew), used by many of those in the rather more elite classes. Daniel, for example, and his captor, Neb-the-Babylonian, both wrote and spoke in this variant.
Many of the New Testament texts were written in Greek. Some of the texts were written in Latin, and translated into Greek or Hebrew, or in a few cases, Aramaic. These translations typically occurred through about 170 AD, or therabouts. While other texts were written in various translations, most were not authoratative.
When I refer to translations, both from a historical AND liturgical perspective, I refer to those which, after a TREMENDOUS amount of study and evaluation, involving comparison among the various texts and evolution, survive to resemble the original. Over the centuries, to further complicate the task, various scribes created problems by misinterpreting the texts or words; much of this appears in the kjv, which is the text used by many of the fundamentalists, and which causes us great consternation.
Typically, when we encounter new information regarding textual meaning and intent, it confirms current interpretation. Frankly, scriptural text has been subjected to FAR more validation and confirmation exercise than any other written word. Human limitation will not denigrate Inspired Word, but it will obscure it (1Cor.13,9), if that is the intent.
Try to understand that, in order to teach, you need to be qualified to the extent demanded by Paul of his disciple Timothy (2Tim2:15).
Spending a lifetime helps one come close, but miss the mark rather widely. If you want to intelligently ask your question, go study for a few decades and come back, my friend . . .
K-12 are controlled by local school districts, and what is taught, and how it is taught, are rigidly controlled by the local school boards. As a result, as has been noticed in more than a few instances, when the bible is taught as literature, it is nothing more than proselytizing. No "comparative" about it except to disparage other religions. No mention of the fact that myth of the "death and resurrection of the god" (Mithras, Osiris, Jesus, among others) was a well-known artifact of middle-eastern religions. No mention of the fact that the god of the bible actually has at least three personalities. No mention of the many contradictions in the bible itself. No mention of the fact that the Noah's Arc myth was actually an ancient Chaldean legend, updated slightly. Nothing of any of these things.
Teaching the bible as literature in k-12 has the same cachet as teaching pseudo-"intelligent design" as a counter-construct to evolution in science class. It is the camel's nose under the tent. It is nothing more than proseletyzing. It's a request for taxpayer sponsorship of religion, pure and simple. Nothing more, nothing less.
On the subject matter of the article, I have no use for American media. I go to foreign media--we have a continuing subscription to Der Speigel's download service. They have a very interesting article this week about the duplicity of the American mercenary industry. They may translate the article for their English language service.
I have a next to zero understanding of the Koran so I am sure I am missing things when I read bin Laden's fatwas, just like the average guy in Kuwait probably doesn't understand what John Winthrop was referring to when he said he wanted to build a city on a hill in the new world.
Is it the camel's nose under the tent? Maybe. But its a risk I think we have to take. somewhere over the rainbow
But religion says nothing of why these people or any social mover was sucessful. Rather, it was a sum of their tactics, personalities, political ties, access to funds and power brokers, luck of timing that got the work done. None of these things are illuminated by reading the bible. Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.
But, what you will find is that the sheep aren't interested in your superiour knowledge over what is in the bible, what is the context, or your superiour knowlege of how they were translated. The sheep are only interested in what their chosen shepherds choose to tell them. It has nothing to do with religion, it has everything to do with establishments of religion and until people are able to distinguish between the two, you're going to have battles between anhaengers of the various establishments of religion.
Pardon my misspellings. We have just transitioned to Germany from Boston. Aside from the jet lag, I'm trying to transliterate among three languages.
there is nothing preventing kids from being exposed to the bible. They only need open the book--and the book is available all over--and start reading. That's what I did.
I don't see any value in having the kids be proselytized to and graded by teachers who have an agenda. That is the danger--and it is a very real one, whether or not you wish to recognize it.
In German public schools that are equivalent to K-12 in the US, various establishments of religion are permitted to offer religion classes in classrooms in the public schools during class periods designated therefor, which may be attended by the students if the students and parents so select. The instructors are selected and paid by the various establishments of religion. And any grades that they my receive are not reflected in their official transcript.
I would have no problem with having that option in US public schools. But the danger of proselytizing by teachers and school boards who have an agenda is too great in the US to make it practical. There have been reports that some school districts, primarily in the US South, have actually been using the bible as a history book. And the fact that the student in the Kearny NJ public school system is being villified for having outed his proselytizing teacher, rather than the teacher being villified, is more than enough evidence that "teaching the bible" in k-12 is quite problemmatic.
And beside the point if there is a way to teach tolerance of LGBT people without advocating for specific political policies there is a way to teach the Bible and other religious texts without advocating that they are true. I am attending a non-denominational highly rated university right now that teaches the Bible since its an essential component of Western literature, thought, and society. No one can deny that, the whole Western tradition of ethics, morality, even latter day concepts like human and civil rights derive indirectly from the Bible.
As one of our illustrious University presidents once said "Word soon spread around the country that the University of Chicago was a school where Jewish professors taught Catholic theology to atheists" and believe me that happens all the time and its a great thing :)
...the fact is that one's selection of the establishment of religion with which one wishes to enjoy the communal relationship is a choice.
There are denominations, such as the Unitarian Universalists (UUs) and United Church of Christ, who are quite accepting of gay people. On the other hand, there are other denominations, such as the Southern Baptists, who, if Rev. Mohler's recent outburst is to be believed, would play God to allow for eugenics to eliminate gay people.
It is one's choice of establishment of religion that is of interest.
If humans really chose thier religion, as children we would be exposed equally to all religious views, the good and the bad, the rational and the kooky, then, at the age of certain intellectual maturity, we would choose which belief set (or disbelief set) that best fits us with out coercion from family and community.
Religion is a choice. Let me get this straight: Democrats protest war, Republicans protest health care?
Was there an agenda there? Most certainly
Quite frankly, the demise of public education in the USofA will come from two directions. One, evilution--the christianists (the nattering nabobs of negativism) hate evilution, in large part because it undermines their belief that they are unique, created in gawd's image, when there is ever more evidence that they are not. At least the christianist cretins have embraced the Big Bang theory, in large part because it seems to comport with their creationist myth. It doesn't of course, but they believe it does.
And, two, homosexuality. The christianists want to be able to bash homosexuals. Physically and mentally. As far as I can tell, the public schools teaching of "don't hit the fag--at least not while in school" is a bit of a reaction to the 7th circuit court of appeals decision in the Jamie Nabozny case. You can do a google search for the text of the opinion as well as I can, Ms. Porkupine, in the unlikely case that you're interested.
As far as I'm concerned, eliminate public education in the USofA. It would be a tremendous reduction in our property taxes on our hovel in Wellesley, A rough calculation suggests that the property taxes in Wellesley is on the order of twenty times the property taxes on our "manse" in Germany, considering the value of the property.
And the food is better here in Germany.
Heh heh. Typos are funny.
:-) Chuck The Chump
I eschew French.
j/k
Wait -- wha? Follow me.
The Cliff's Notes book is shaped like the Talibanistan head. Same angle, same approximate location on the cover. Additionally, the Talibanistan head has vertical dark shading, and the cover has nearly vertical dark stripes.
Is Time comparing teaching The Bible in US schools with cultural and religious beliefs of the Tailban?
On the topic of MSM I do believe that NPR has hit a new low: I think I just heard an ad on WBUR for "America's Next Top Model"...groan...it's as dispiriting as the seeing the WalMart ads on PBS during the Tavis Smiley show (on the rare occasion I see it at 12am).
I hope BMG'ers know about TomPaine.com and CommonDreams.org among other NonMSM sources
Oh, and the judges comments are possibly even worse. One example:
Twiggy: It's the first photograph that I've seen of you [click the link above to see the photo] where you actually look like a fashion model. (later) She doesn't look like a model to me, but I happen to like this photograph. Miss J: I think you look absolutely wonderful. Extension of the neck.
Miss J: I think you look absolutely wonderful. Extension of the neck.
Via feministing.
There is nothing sexier than a model in high heals with her brains splattered against the wall. Let me get this straight: Democrats protest war, Republicans protest health care?
Just to let you know, I long ago came to the conclusion that PBS (TV) and NPR (radio) in the US are nothing but a couple of whores, shilling for money from their corporate sponsors. That's why we don't contribute to them.
You would be amazed at the documentaries that we see over here in Germany over cable TV, even at 4AM in the morning (jet lag, you know). Documentaries about global warming, science (BR-Alpha has a program "Galileo" that is very sophisticated non-dumbed down science) and even programs about life in Nepal, including yaks. None of these programs make their way to the USofA.
PBS's Nova was the only thing that came close to what we see over here on numerous cable channels, but Nova was obviously centered around the interests of its corporate sponsors.
And, yes, I'm well aware of TomPaine.com and CommonDreams.org. My spouse is something of a lefty, and I print out articles for him from those sites and elsewhere (truthdig.com, thenation.com) almost daily. Actually, in a strange twist of fate, I have moved far more left than he ever was, and he far more right than I, over the many years that we have been together.
Orthogonal to this, regarding "top model," it may be of interest to you that there is an article in the current issue of the German news magazine Der Spiegel (which puts Time, Newsweek, etc. to shame) has an article about a fashion model who has a prosthetic leg. The article is actually about prostheses, and it is absolutely fascinating. If they do an English translation, I'll post the link (they do have an English language service on their website http://www.spiegel.d... )
As a Person of the Year I must confess that TIME has been pretty crappy lately, but its new format could prove interesting, they have recruited a lot of talent from other publications Peter Beinart has a new political-foreign policy column and an econ professor from my college (U Chicago) also has his own column and I know personally he knows his stuff. But the example that an important news topic such as us losing Afghanistan because of Iraq can be overshadowed by the ongoing domestic culture war is an example that they have a long way to go.
That said as well the cover article on learning the Bible was very good, and although I will admit my Christian bias, I do believe it is vital that the Bible is taught in public schools as a central foundation to Western social and cultural thought. A friend of mine here at Chicago took an advanced Shakespeare class and was the only student who got a Biblical allusion made in the play, the other students had they known their Bible would have gotten more out of Shakespeare knowing it, and I am sure there are thousands of examples where this is true. In my own humanities courses we have been reading religious texts, Augustine and Genesis to name a few, and it has not in my view or those of my secular peers offended anyone. The same argument could also be made for the religious texts of a lot of other major religions, certainly current events in the West-Islam dichotomy mandate teaching the Koran as well.
I have hope for Time but my first newsmagazine source is the Economist which is practically required reading here at Chicago.
