Translation splits

A fascinating look at all the different biblical translations around what is a fairly simple benign quote from Jesus.  I'd like to see what they were originally translated from to see if that affected the difference.

The bible and evolution

Having a great deal of familiarity with the evolution vs. intelligent design argument, it was refreshing to see some new points about why evolution isn't in contrast to biblical ideals and where intelligent design isn't solving problems.

Modern cults

An excellent and accurate interview about cults.  I discussed the issue with a friend who grew up in one who found an enormous amount about it both interesting and accurate, especially with regard to the disconnection and circular thinking.

If someone will quit talking to you because you're not in their club or because you quit going to meetings, they're not your friend.  They're a tool.

Vatican: climate change is cheaper to fix now

Not often accused to be the most forward-thinking organization, the Catholic church stands up against CO2 emissions.

Buddhism in popular media

An episode of an excellent Batman animated movie from a few years ago tackles many topics in Buddhism and Philosophy including women's role in religion, justice and non-violence, suffering and attachment.  Written by Brian Azzarello.

Interfaith relations in 2010: Mosque near ground zero

A mosque two blocks from ground zero would be a fantastic way to promote healing and understanding 10 years after the 9/11 attacks and would be a huge statement to the world that as well as a clear statement that the US is not at war with Islam in the Middle East.

Instead, the opposite has been pushed.

Even though Timothy McVeigh was Christian, a long list of people of Muslim belief were killed in the 9/11 attacks, and our country has its own violent Christian fringe terrorists, Christian Pastor Terry Jones still describes Islam as "a violent and oppressive religion" (source).

The issue has become a lightning rod for drawing political favor by Newt Gingrich:

"Gingrich said that he would push for legislation to prevent states from adopting sharia law even though none are proposing it and there is no likely prospect of it happening" (source).

That said, does Islam need to make a better statement to its opponents?  Has the news just not covered Islam's attempt to heal the divide created by the hijackers?  Has there been such an effort?

Update:

• Article on one of the people behind the mosque, Daisy Khan, who sees it as a healing effort.
• A good contrasting article comparing the building of a convent near Auschwitz.  This brings up an obvious question: if centers of worship too close to places of mass death is insensitive, what distance from lower Manhattan is acceptable?  What about St Paul's just across the street from ground zero, built well before the towers?

Update 2: 

• Olbermann makes some interesting points, especially about how businesses around Ground Zero have floundered.  Unfortunately he starts with a comparison with the Nazis, which is a little too Glenn Beck for my taste.

Searching for why gay marriage is wrong

Whatever your side on an issue, accepting the status quo is always dangerous.  Ignoring your opposition is myopic and the equivalent of keeping your fingers lodged firmly in your ears while singing.  As such, the search for strong arguments why members of the left should oppose gay marriage has begun.  This is not a static article: it will be updated with better opposition.

The best argument so far is that gay marriage is a political wedge that will always energize the Right against the Left.  It seems if you want to lose elections, just talk about gay marriage.

Other arguments have not been very compelling:

• Voters have consistently voted against it - ("against the will of the people") I have little doubt that if there was a vote to keep slavery legal in the South, that wouldn't make it something you should advocate.  Part of the problem of democracy has always been preventing the majority from bullying the minority.
• Most religious groups opposite it - same problem as above group; many religious groups also favor it.  Even if the majority is in favor of something, that doesn't make it right or wrong.
• Courts should not decide this issue, the people should (source: Brian S. Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage) - counter example: Brown vs. Board of Education; courts decided against discrimination, few on the left thought this was a bad idea then or now.
  
• Marriage is for children - this may have been true 100 years ago but clearly isn't accurate now. 
  
• Bad for families and children - research on this isn't compelling.
  
• Its unnatural - sounds too much like the argument against interracial marriage.
• Slippery slope - people will marry animals or inanimate objects.  This is easily addressed since there's a fallacy named for this.
• Fundamental change to social institutions should happen slowly - the left loves equality and feels changes since the 50s have been for the better.
• Gay people are fundamentally unequal - This is probably the weakest argument given some of the greatest thinkers in history.  A few examples include Da Vinci, Wittgenstein, Francis Bacon, the greatest American poet (Whitman) and a math genius who probably had a lot to do with winning World War II for the Allies (Alan Turing).

Stronger arguments involve attacking bad arguments by the left:

• What is really advocated?  This is a tough one.  Lefty groups should be clear why they do or do not support polygamy, which is not an unthinkable next step.  The focus now is on equality in the eyes of the state, but those advocating for gay marriage are tacitly suggesting a definition of marriage as only between two people while they dismiss a definition that excludes same-sex marriage.  Two women who love the same man may wish for the same equality.  Are there polygamous Leonardo Da Vinci's?  Is one necessary to give group its rights?
• The Left is advocating marriage by disparaging it.  One of the frequent tactics is to point out that if famous morons can get married and divorced at the drop of a hat, Marriage isn't so sacred after all.  This makes for good late-night monologues but is ultimately self-defeating.  Its like arguing that voting is meaningless to avoid giving advocating women's suffrage.
• Anyone who doesn't want gay marriage is a bigot.  If your beliefs do include marriage only as a union between a man and a woman, that does not make you a Nazi.  Bigotry is a "person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices" (source), which is something anyone can be if they don't consider contrasting positions.
• Hospital policies against non-family members during possible end-of-life moments. This is a problem with legal issues / hospital policies.  You should be able to decide you want or don't want at your side when you're dying.  Marriage is connected to this but not the only solution.
• There is enough war and death in the world without telling people they can't love each other.  A meaningless emotional argument, it is similar to the hospital argument in that its both true and obvious, but marriage is not and was never a permission to love.  On the other hand, taken together they represent a legal challenge to a long list of other anti-gay laws that may represent a challenge to one's right to love someone of the same sex.  If the state allows union, it will be forced to contend with many other issues of equality and equal protection.

Note: This article was edited on 9/31/2010 for clarity and adding the "stronger arguments" section and the bit about gays as fundamentally unequal.

Elephant in the Vatican

In an article on how the Pope Benedict claims that the "world ignores Christians in Mideast," the Associated Press drops the ball in several places:

1. Doesn't note the sensation that this is an attempt to distract about one injustice by pointing out another.
2. Didn't make the link that maybe the Vatican shares some blame in not handling its own problems.
3. It also glosses over the terrible possibility that people completely unrelated to the failures of the biggest Christian church may be suffering for it.

Note that it may also be true that the Vatican just does things from time to time and the press should report on that.

Millstone milestone

Finally, the Vatican prosecutor of clerical abuse says what the pope should have said over a year ago: the culprits are going to hell.  Whether or not you're Catholic, believe in hell, or believe abusive priests or those that covered up for them are going to hell, its nice to hear someone of Catholic faith underline one of the things that draws people to religion in the first place: a flawless celestial justice system.

In addition, "[The prosecutor] drew on a passage in St. Mark's Gospel saying those who harm children would be better off tying a millstone to their neck and throwing themselves into the sea." 

Although suicide may not be the best solution for sick people to solve their problems, it felt like someone found the right words to a bitter society.

Modern Christians

Some interesting criticism on recent American Christianity: Ten Ways Christians Tend to Fail at Being Christian.  While many of the concerns are left-leaning, it would be interesting to know what other Christians think of them. (thanks Silver)

Scientology abuse

Many people are very familiar with the Catholic church's abuse scandal, but fewer are aware of similar charges in Scientology.  Additionally, while the Mormon church was attacked as bigoted for its support of California's prop 8, Scientology was also a supporter, despite their sponsorship by many of the Hollywood elite, usually seen as very left-leaning.  Just as with the Catholic church, even very famous members are leaving.

Hopefully greater transparency will come about in both Catholic and Scientology organizations to bring about better accountability by members who break the law.  Unfortunately, its likely both will become more insular and resistant to public scrutiny.