O Gentle Reader:

A word, if you please. The blog forecast for these parts is calling for light and variable attention, with intermittent posting for the foreseeable future. IOW: for a while, I don’t know how long, this is definitely not going to be the place to come to every day for new content.

I’m spending most of my online time these days studying various graphics tutorials and attempting to learn some new skillz. Concerning the blog, I’m planning to change WP themes somewhere down the line, plus revamp the blogroll and tweak the site in other ways.

What this all means is: my interests are leading me in directions other than here at present. For the foreseeable future, posting will be intermittent at best. Just sayin’.

Still, since you took the time to stop in, it’d be nice if I had a little something to offer…

(Oop — Apparently I’m channelling my mother again; she of the eternally vast supplies of 5-year-old freeze-dried banana bread and glacial permafrost masquerading as ice cream, all of which she felt obligated to keep on hand for whenever somebody stopped by and of course needed to be offered ‘a little something’ with their coffee. Thanks, Mom.)

So here’s links to the most interesting stuff I’ve read in the past couple days. All of it fairly fresh and not too stale. Best of all: no freezer burn! Enjoy..

~~~

Digby studies in detail the story of the supposedly expectorated-upon (or at least -near) Joshua Sparling, and why the right clings so desperately to the long-debunked myth of returning soldiers being spat on by lefties. It’s a powerful meme that feeds the righties’ need to paint the left as betrayers from within.

Media Matters joins in today with a call for the NYT to investigate Joshua Sparling’s rapidly expanding account of his supposedly shameful treatment by anti-war protesters in DC over the weekend. That would be the shameful treatment that was apparently witnessed by NO ONE except Sparling.

UPDATE 1: More Spittle

UPDATE 2: Civil Freeper counter-protesters:

UPDATE 3: Now Sparling says “They tried to kill me”. –more updates from Digby, including video of Sparling’s appearance on Hannity & Colmes.

UPDATE 4: Now Sparling says he didn’t spit back. What does the NYT reporter have to say about all these discrepancies?

UPDATE 5: MNObserver and the Wege have more, including pictures.

~~~

More mythology : Carpetbagger Report names five conservative myths about ‘Emboldening’ the enemy.

~~~

Avedon smacks around Dinesh D’Souza, and as always, does it so well: “I wish people would understand that enjoying a life of affluence doesn’t make you an American patriot. Appreciating that America’s liberal culture and its liberal style of government are what make it possible to achieve a reasonably comfortable life would help. But these are the things that the Osama bin Ladens and Ayatollah Khomeinis and Richard Bruce Cheneys and George Walker Bushes hate about America, which is why the latter have been trying to get rid of them - with your help, Dinesh.”

~~~

Also via Avedon, Mark Schmitt at Tapped asks:”But can we please, please banish from discourse the idea that people who earn much more money do so because they work so much harder?” Yes, please. Anyone who believes it has no idea how hard other people work and how much they get paid for it. CEOs do not work harder than coal miners or nurses, for example. People go to college to get good jobs, which are called “good jobs” not just because they pay better (they don’t, always), but because they are good jobs - less physically demanding, less dangerous, less demoralizing, less gruelling, and frequently far more emotionally rewarding. Working in a lab is not as demanding as working in a diner. College professors are treated better by their employers than are hotel maids and fry-cooks. If people were really paid by how hard their jobs are to actually do, day in and day out, even the unemployed would be paid better than big corporate CEOs. ”

~~~

Join the troops. Stop the escalation. –Watch the new video from VoteVets.

~~~

Roy Edroso at alicublog explains How Bullshit Works

~~~

Still Standing …Technically –Sadly, No!’s gutbustingly funny deconstruction of the gutbustingly funny Michelle Malkin.

~~~

Via Jessica Crispin, Neil Gaiman is interviewed in the winter issue of Rain Taxi.

~~~

Also via Jessica, Michael Pollan, author of The Botany of Desire and The Omnivore’s Dilemma, has an article in the NYT today:

Unhappy Meals.

~~~

This just in: (even more cool stuff spotted by Jessica) for all of you Pan’s Labyrinth fans with newfound interest in the Spanish Civil War:

A traveling exhibition called “Correspondents in the Spanish Civil War 1936-1939″ focuses on journalists like George Orwell and Antoine de Saint-Exupéry who changed the way that wars are covered.

~~~

If you want to see the videos that are the primary source of hilarity at my house these days, go to YTMND and do a search for “Turkish Star Wars”. …aka “Dünyayı Kurtaran Adam”
There are several videos; the one to watch is the “training” montage, complete with the styrofoam rocks (that explode!)

~~~

Speaking of all things Star Wars, go take a look (via Boing Boing):

Star Wars space battle re-enacted with hands.

~~~

Lance Mannion: The Day My High School Invaded Iraq

~~~

There. That oughta hold ya for a little while at least. Come on back next week; maybe I’ll have another post put up by then –but I’m not promising.

Posted: January 30th, 2007 under General, Meta, Spanish Civil War, Wingnut Mythology, Wingnuttia.
Comments: 3

BREAKING:  Minnesota’s Republican Senator Norm Coleman resigns in favor of a safer line of work. 

Former Senator Coleman poses with advertising prop for his new shoe store.

Sez Norm:   “Here’s a tip for you fellas:  chicks dig guys with big shoes, if you know what I mean, huh-huh.”

~

 

Posted: January 25th, 2007 under General, Norm Coleman.
Comments: 2

Word to Michele “Hot Lips” Bachmann:

You’re in a world o’ hurt now, missy.

[ADDED] And not only with Pickles Laura…

Umm, and not only with Joe, either…

Hissy fits all around, I’ll bet.   Oh George, you little minx!

Posted: January 24th, 2007 under General, George W Bush, Michele Bachmann, Skanktimonious.
Comments: none

(No, not goatse. Whattaya think this is — Norwegianity?)

The relationship between me and good movies is always one of feast or famine. Either it’s limitless desolation, population: Adam Sandler, or it’s an orgy at Pedro Almodovar’s house. Never anything in between.

Case in point: here I am, coming off of a dry spell that seemed decades long, when I didn’t see anything worthy of more than a half-hearted ‘Yeah, I guess it was okay’, then all of a sudden within the span of 48 hours seeing not one but TWO true actual mindblowing really no kidding spectacular instant classics of film-making genius.

(Paging Mal Valour: I’m running low on laudatory blurbwords. Get me two dozen superlatives, STAT!)

(pictured: Clive Owen and Claire-Hope Ashitey are caught in the crossfire of a Fallujah-like battle between British Homeland Security forces, anti-government commandos and rebellious detainees in an immigrant detention camp in the year 2027.)

Children of Men, directed by Alfonso Cuarón

How can a movie that’s so bleak be so exhilarating? It must be due to a combination of virtuoso cinematography, meticulous, absolutely convincing details of set design and set decoration, at least two amazing sequences shot in single extended takes, the pacing of an action-thriller yet with depth of characterization that lets the players’ humanity shine through…

I dunno, but whatever it was this film had me alternately gasping in shock, gnawing my knuckles, and choked up getting all verklempt. Beautiful performances by everyone, but perhaps especially Michael Caine and Clive Owen.

Do not miss this one. If nothing else, you will never hear the silly line “Pull my finger” the same way ever again.

[ADDED]:  I loved the soundtrack instantly, and (through the resourceful graces of my offspring) am listening to it as I write this.  Thanks, guys.
In keeping with the movie’s visual theme of the familiar mutated in unexpected ways, the soundtrack  features Deep Purple, King Crimson, and Donovan alongside Roots Manuva, Spaceape and the Libertines.  My most favoritest cuts are a trance-inducing cover of the Beatles’  “Tomorrow Never Knows” with vocal by Junior Parker; a rehearsal track version of “Bring On the Lucie (Freeda Peeple)”  from  John Lennon’s 1973 album “Mindgames”; and my absolute favorite:  Jarvis Cocker singing  “C*nts Are Still Running the World.”  (You know it MUST be special if I can recommend a song with that word in the lyrics)[ /ADDED] 

~~~~~

(pictured: The Pale Man, one of many creatures encountered by 10 year old heroine Ofelia in “Pan’s Labyrinth”. Disturbing, but not the most monstrous entity by far of all that she will meet.)

Pan’s Labyrinth, directed by Guillermo del Toro

ooops; gotta run. Work awaits. I’ll update this later in the morning as my workday permits.

[ADDED]:  It wasn’t reading about the fantasy, CGI elements that made me eager to see this movie.  I heard early on, too, about how violent it was, and how filled with disturbing imagery. Anyone who knows me knows I am the last person on earth to ever seek out horror films, even the sans - gore, psychological terror variety.  “Hostel”, “Texas Chainsaw Massacre”, any of the “Saw” oeuvre; in short: about 80% of the inventory at Blockbuster, none of it holds even the tiniest iota of appeal.  Don’t even think about trying to get me to watch one of these. Tild don’t play dat.

No, for me the hook in Pan’s Labyrinth is the setting:  rural Spain, 1944.  My hobby and my pleasure has been to study Franco-era Spain for the past 15 years; probably longer.   Especially the post-civil war, WWII and post-WWII years:  1939 through about 1951.   There is so little material available to us in popular culture about that particular time and place,  for a starting reference point we almost need to depend on a single widely - known literary source and its film adaptation:  Hemingway’s “For Whom the Bell Tolls“.  

That 1940 novel was set during the civil war, in 1937.  The main characters are Loyalist (Republican) guerilla fighters inthe mountains of northwestern Spain, ambushing  and attacking the Franco-led Nationalist insurgents. The source material about this time period makes constant allusions to the levels of enmity, of sheer blood-feud hatred between the two factions; by all accounts it was extraordinary.  It’s not a construct of the novel, but a fact that hideous atrocities were committed, by both sides.  When FWTBT ends, the civil war is still raging. 

What we never read about or tend to forget is what happened after the Republicans lost and the civil war ended. What happened was the hunting down and execution of the losing-side, godless liberal commie Republicans, and this mass extermination continued for years after Franco’s ‘victory’ in 1939.  There were retaliation killings; thousands of ‘Republican traitors’  were rounded up, propped against walls and shot, then dumped in mass graves or otherwise disappeared by the victorious Fascists.  Yet pockets of resistance remained, in the mountains and elsewhere. 

I can almost see you scratching your heads in puzzlement, wondering why the decidedly un-bloodthirsty-minded Me should be so interested in this bloodthirsty era.   The answer to that is: I’ve read a lot about it , but somehow never dwelled on the violence. I always read about the brutality but then let it float right past and out of my brain entirely.   No more. Pan’s Labyrinth brought the blood-drenched aspects of that conflict finally to life for me, and I doubt I will ever be able to disappear that imagery from my mind.          

As Pan’s Labyrinth begins, Ofelia and her pregnant mother arrive at the remote military outpost where Ofelia’s stepfather the Captain leads the Francoist forces in efforts to wipe out the resistance fighters — think of them as the same band from For Whom the Bell Tolls, seven  years later — holed up in the mountains.
      
…And that’s all of the plot I’m going to reveal. [ /ADDED]

Posted: January 22nd, 2007 under Cinema, General.
Comments: 1

 Wow.  That Senator Barbara Boxer is certainly a terrible person.  Just look how she attacks and ridicules that sweet little Condi Rice!

From the transcript of last Thursday’s Senate hearings:   

SENATOR BARBARA BOXER: The Military Times published a poll which found that only 35 percent of military members approved of the way President Bush is handling this war, and only 38 percent thought there should be more troops.

So from where I sit, Madame Secretary, you are not listening to the American people. You are not listening to the military. You are not listening to the bipartisan voices from the Senate. You are not listening to the Iraq Study Group. Only you know who you are listening to, and you wonder why there is a dark cloud of skepticism and pessimism over this nation. I think people are right to be skeptical after listening to some of the things that have been said by your administration.

For example, October 19th ‘05, you came before this committee to discuss, in your words, how we assure victory in Iraq, and you said the following. In answer to Senator Feingold, “I have no doubt that as the Iraqi security forces get better — and they are getting better and are holding territory, and they are doing the things with minimal help — we are going to be able to bring down the level of our forces. I have no doubt” — I want to reiterate — “I have no doubt that that’s going to happen in a reasonable time frame.” You had no doubt, not a doubt. And last night, the president’s announcement of an escalation is a total rebuke of your confident pronouncement.

Now, the issue is who pays the price, who pays the price? I’m not going to pay a personal price. My kids are too old, and my grandchild is too young. You’re not going to pay a particular price, as I understand it, within immediate family. So who pays the price? The American military and their families, and I just want to bring us back to that fact.

[...]

SENATOR BARBARA BOXER:  So who pays the price? Not me. Not you. These are the people who pay the price.

So I want to ask you, since this administration has been so clear about how this has been coalition and a coalition. You’ve already said that we don’t have anybody else escalating their presence at this time. Is that correct? (No audible reply.) That is correct.

Have you seen the recent news that the British are going to bringing home thousands of troops in the near future?

SECRETARY OF STATE CONDOLEEZZA RICE: I have seen the stories about what the British are going to do. I’ll wait for a confirmation from the British government about what they’re going to do.

SENATOR BARBARA BOXER: Okay. I would ask unanimous consent to place into the record the article from today that announces that that’s what they’re going to do, is bring home thousands of troops. And I want to point out to the American people: we are all alone. We are all alone. There’s no other country standing with us in this escalation. And if you look at this coalition, the closest to us — we’ve got about 130(,000), 140,000 troops. I don’t have the exact number. The Brits had 7,200. They’re going to be announcing they’re bringing home, as I understand it, more than 3,000 of those. The next biggest coalition member is Poland, with 900, and after that Australia, with 300. No one is joining us in this surge.

Do you have an estimate of the number of casualties we expect from this surge?

SECRETARY OF STATE CONDOLEEZZA RICE: No, Senator, I don’t think there’s any way to give you such an estimate.

SENATOR BARBARA BOXER: Has the president — because he said expect more sacrifice, he must know.

SECRETARY OF STATE CONDOLEEZZA RICE: Senator, I don’t think that any of us have a number that — of expected casualties. I think that people understand that there is going to be violence for some time in Iraq and that there will be more casualties.

And let me just say, you know, I fully understand the sacrifice that the American people are making, and especially the sacrifice that our soldiers are making, men and women in uniform. I visit them. I know what they’re going through. I talk to their families. I see it.

I could never — and I can never — do anything to replace any of those lost men and women in uniform, or the diplomats, some of whom –

SENATOR BARBARA BOXER: Madame Secretary, please, I know you feel terrible about it. That’s not the point. I was making the case as to who pays the price for your decisions. And the fact that this administration would move forward with this escalation with no clue as to the further price that we’re going to pay militarily — we certainly know the numbers, billions of dollars, that we can’t spend here in this country. I find really appalling that there’s not even enough time taken to figure out what the casualties would be. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Posted: January 16th, 2007 under Feminism, General.
Comments: none

Reading the blogs this week — especially since Wednesday — has been tough sledding. Nothing I’ve read in the past four days has caused me to crack a smile until today when I went to Alicublog.

Thanks, Roy — I needed that!

~~~

ST. RUDY: Alright, men, I know you’ve been poisoned by a culture of dependency. For too long you depended on running water, electricity, and civic order. But now those of you who have boots will pull yourselves up by the bootstraps, and those that don’t have boots will wake up and smell the coffee. In fact you’ll all wake up and smell the coffee!

In the absence of water to make actual coffee, ST. RUDY has BERNIE KERIK spray the room with Demeter’s “Fresh Coffee” scent.

ST. RUDY: Today we’re going to sweep the streets! Where’s that kid I sent for brooms?

IRAQI 1: Pardon, oh lisping one, that was my nephew, Achmed. I saw him just now outside the window, dying in a hail of gunfire.

ST. RUDY: Your nephew died a hero, sir. We’ll carve his name into a memorial sometime in 2016. Alright, who wants to go get the brooms?

Nobody moves.

ST. RUDY: Listen, people, those orange jumpsuits aren’t going to pay for themselves! Would you rather sit here all morning and read articles from City Journal out loud?

One man raises his hand.

IRAQI 2: I would be happy to go, sir, if I could have American soldiers to protect me.

ST. RUDY: Soldiers to protect you! I suppose you’d like food stamps, too!

IRAQI 1: (his mouth watering) You have stamps made out of food? Allah be praised!

The Iraqis rush ST. RUDY, who is protected by KERIK and others with tasers.

ST. RUDY: I was wrong about you people! You’re not capable of self-reliance! To hell with you, I’m going to Somalia — I understand a lot of the problems there are caused by black people!

[Roy Edroso, Alicublog]

Posted: January 13th, 2007 under General, Iraq, Rudy Giuliani.
Comments: none

Gas prices here in the Twin Cities, as of 8 AM today:

Wow. When was the last time the price of unleaded fell below 2 bucks a gallon?

(Click image to embiggen)

Hmmm. This chart shows the last time Twin Cities gas prices dipped below 2 dollars, to 1.96/gal was on November 30th, 2005.

What was going on in the world on November 30, 2005?

Well, there was this.

Do you suppose it means anything?

Posted: January 10th, 2007 under General, George W Bush.
Comments: none

This is a keen idea. Via the wonderful Watermark via the fabulous Fetch Me My Axe (soon to be added to the blogroll) it’s an Introduce Yourself post, where readers of this blog can reveal a little something about themselves in the comments.

As SB put it: Consider this an invitation to introduce yourselves, to me and to each other. If you have a website or a blog, point us to it.

Whatever you want to talk about — go right ahead. This isn’t a formal type deal. There aren’t any tests or pop quizzes and you won’t be graded on your responses.

Another thing this isn’t is data mining, or link harvesting, or anything having to do with commerce. It’s just conversation. Blurt out whatever comes to mind; I know it’s gonna be fascinating.

SB and belledame222 came up with some great get-the-ball -rolling questions, a couple of which I’ll borrow, and add a question of my own. Don’t answer if you don’t feel like it; they’re just a way to break the ice and prime the pump.

*What kind of politics/worldview did your parentals/primary caregivers have? To what degree do you share that worldview/those politics? What else shaped your current worldview, and (more or less), what is that?

* What do you do that you consider creative? Is it easy, or difficult for you?

*Have you reconsidered an opinion or political stance that you held earlier in your life? If so, what triggered the change?

I’ll answer these questions myself as we get rolling, and I’ll leave this post up at the top of the page for a while and then put a link to it over in the sidebar.

This is your chance to expound, rant or reminisce. Have at it, folks.

(Flounder) Oh boy is this great! (/Flounder)

Posted: January 9th, 2007 under General, Introductions.
Comments: 4

Rox said this yesterday and I’m repeating it today.  We don’t say some things often enough:

For Nancy

By Roxanne

I’ve printed this before and thought today’s historic moment would be a good time for a repeat. Things sure have changed in my short 44 years on the planet. But, sadly, not nearly enough.

If you’re female and…

…you can vote, thank a feminist.

…you get paid as much as men doing the same job, thank a feminist.

…you went to college instead of being expected to quit after high school so your brothers could go because “You’ll just get married anyway”, thank a feminist.

…you can apply for any job, not just “women’s work”, thank a feminist.

…you can get or give birth control information without going to jail, thank a feminist.

…your doctor, lawyer, pastor judge or legislator is a woman, thank a feminist.

…you play an organized sport, thank a feminist.

…you can wear slacks without being excommunicated from your church or run out of town, thank a feminist.

…your boss isn’t allowed to pressure you to sleep with him, thank a feminist.

…you get raped and the trial isn’t about your hemline or your previous boyfriends, thank a feminist.

…you start a small business and can get a loan using only your name and credit history, thank a feminist.

…you are on trial and are allowed to testify in your own defense, thank a feminist.

…you own property that is solely yours, thank a feminist.

…you have the right to your own salary even if you are married or have a male relative, thank a feminist.

…you get custody of your children following divorce or separation, thank a feminist.

…you get a voice in the raising and care of your children instead of them being completely controlled by the husband/father, thank a feminist.

…your husband beats you and it is illegal and the police stop him instead of lecturing you on better wifely behavior, thank a feminist.

…you are granted a degree after attending college instead of a certificate of completion, thank a feminist.

…you can breastfeed your baby discreetly in a public place and not be arrested, thank a feminist.

…you marry and your civil human rights do not disappear into your husband’s rights, thank a feminist.

…you have the right to refuse sex with a diseased husband [or just "husband"], thank a feminist.

…you have the right to keep your medical records confidential from the men in your family, thank a feminist.

…you have the right to read the books you want, thank a feminist.

…you can testify in court about crimes or wrongs your husband has committed, thank a feminist.

…you can choose to be a mother or not a mother in your own time not at the dictates of a husband or rapist, thank a feminist.

…you can look forward to a lifespan of 80 years instead of dying in your 20s from unlimited childbirth, thank a feminist.

…you can see yourself as a full, adult human being instead of a minor who needs to be controlled by a man, thank a feminist.

–Author unknown

 

Posted: January 5th, 2007 under Feminism, General, Nancy Pelosi.
Comments: 1

So how were your family gatherings over the holidays?   

Here’s all you need to know about mine:  My sister and her husband inhabit the same time warp/Bizarro World as Digby’s relatives.  In other words, the Cloud Cuckoo Land they live in is primarily political, not religious, so any painful lulls in the conversation at our Christmas/New Year’s get together at my sister’s house weren’t brought on by strictly religious insanity per se, but by the new copy of  Billo’s latest magnum opus Culture Warrior displayed prominently under the Christmas tree   …and the knowledge that it wasn’t a gag gift. 

Other families experience faith-based warfare, not only during  the holidays but all year round.  Case in point:

      
From the mailbag of retired Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong:

Monika from Toronto writes:
“My husband and I really enjoyed Sins of Scripture. We were both raised Catholic and now belong to what you so accurately refer to as the Church Alumni Association. My family consists of Polish immigrants, so they are what I call ‘fundamentalist Catholics.’ Think Irish Catholic…it is that sort of fervor and dedication to the Church and the belief that the Catholic Church is the only true Church. The Poles are not different.

We are now facing a dilemma. We did not get married in a Catholic Church, which you can imagine caused a lot of grief. We have ‘lost’ some family members as a result, who are no longer speaking to us. We just had our first baby, and the pressure is on to have him baptized immediately.

We have gently told my family that there will be no baptism. They are beside themselves. It is one thing to deny ourselves the Kingdom of Heaven they say but to cast our own child into the pit of hell because of our own sin and stupidity, well, it is unforgivable in their eyes. Friends of my father have urged him to ‘take the matter into his own hands,’ by which I think they mean to simply baptize our son without our consent. My father turns a bright red/purple with rage when the topic comes up and I fear he is going to give himself a heart attack…at which point I feel intense guilt and think maybe I should just give the man peace of mind that his grandson will not wind up in hell for all of eternity. I think it is absolutely absurd that anyone would characterize the perfect loving God I experience as this scary monster throwing unbaptized children into hell, or even purgatory, which are concepts I don’t believe in anyway…you get the point, this is why I ‘dropped out’ in the first place.

So, I come to you with a request. Since we do not have the wealth of theological knowledge to back up our feelings about God, and they (the fundamentalist Catholics) have the backing of the Pope, the Bishops and the ‘Church,’ my husband and I often stutter out a bunch of ‘We believe,’statements which just irritate the fundamentalist Catholics even more because, in their eyes, it does not matter what ‘we believe,’ it matters what ‘the Church’ thinks.

Can you advise us on how we can gently help my fundamentalist Catholic family members to respect our decision? We really need your help on this because I’m afraid we are about to lose more family members and, instead of losing them, we would really like to live in harmony and mutual respect with them. “

Dear Monika,
Thank you for your letter. There are two things operating in your letter that need to be separated before I can respond to your questions.

Your family issues seem to rotate around religious questions, but they are also issues of immaturity and control, authority and rebellion, your own individuation and your place as individuated people in a controlling family structure. Your family’s inability to allow you to make your own decisions about your life and your child and their apparent need to threaten you with hell, guilt and even your father’s physical health are symptoms of your family’s dysfunction. Your inability to escape their clutches, because you have to choose between being controlled by your family and losing your family, indicates that you have not yet achieved the level of emotional separation that maturity requires. These issues need to be looked at by a competent family counselor or therapist.

There are no theological books that will help you because theological knowledge never meets emotional issues. You have to decide whether the price of having your family’s love is worth compromising your integrity. That is a terrible choice, but inside the dynamics of your family that is the choice you must make. Given these dynamics, if you bow to your family’s wishes now, you may be certain that another issue will arise in the future that requires the same bending to their will. So whether you fight this battle now or later is the issue you face.

Try to understand that your family has itself been so bruised by their religious upbringing that they are also scared. They are acting out of emotional fear because they have made peace with a controlling religious mentality that they believe and have been taught gives them security and the promise of heavenly reward. When you stand against their values, you force them to examine those values, which apparently they are not able to do. So their chains simply rattle and their fear increases.

What will be the result in your life - in your child’s life - if you declare your independence of this emotional tyranny now? What will be the result in your life - or your child’s life - if you do not? Is it better to make your stand now or later? What will it do to your relationship to bide your time until your parents die?

None of these decisions are about religion. In this instance, religion is simply being used to perform family emotional violence. No matter how you decide, all of you will bear scars. Someday we might recognize that religion is consistently used by people as a weapon of human distortion. That is a long way from John’s statement about Jesus’ purpose to be the one who brings life and brings it abundantly.

I wish you well.

– John Shelby Spong

As always, I present excerpts from the writings of Bishop Spong to counter the pervasive voices of Dobson, Falwell, Robertson and other Christofascists who have dominated the airwaves and print media over the past 30 years.

Even now, as cracks appear in the mighty fundamentalist evangelical monolith, and as evangelicals’ fear-  and hatred- stoked stranglehold on American hearts and minds is weakening, Dobson et al. persist in asking us to believe that they have ownership rights to the title “people of faith”.   Show them that they don’t.

Read more about:

John Shelby Spong

Progressive Christianity

Read a transcript from 2002:

Spong vs. Bill O’Reilly

~

Posted: January 3rd, 2007 under General, John Shelby Spong, Religion.
Comments: 2