Sunday, March 18, 2007

Sunday Burst of Weirdness

Possibly more snark than weirdness, but hey, I'm feeling snarky today.

:: The Right Wing has begun its latest project: taking Gandhi down a peg or two. Gandhi. Oy.

Oddly, the people who hold Gandhi as "the most overrated man of the 20th century" (I'd pick Reagan, personally) are probably people who claim that the teachings of Jesus should be universally followed. But not the Jesus stuff about loving your neighbors, forgiveness, charity to the poor, and all that. Rather, the Jesus stuff about shunning gays and Spreading Love Through Widespread Use of Incendiary Devices. You know, "Action Figure" Jesus. The one who conveniently fits into the cockpit of their toy bombers (sold separately, of course) with the crosses painted on the fuselage.

:: Apparently there are a number of words which, when encrypted using Rot-13, turn into other words. That's pretty cool. I especially like that the Rot-13 of tang is gnat, or tang spelled backwards!

:: OK, I'm going to assume that the Garrison Keillor article that occasioned this vehement response is an example of a satiric joke that was so poorly executed that it wasn't recognized as a joke at all. I'm not the world's biggest Keillor fan, but I have to think he's more enlightened than that. Hoo-boy.

:: A three-way tie on Jeopardy!. That's interesting. Which brings to mind that I always find it kind of funny when an episode of The Price is Right ends in a double overbid at the showcases, in which case nobody wins anything. Whenever that happens, you can just feel the show deflate on the air.

:: OK, everybody's probably already seen this, but I just saw it the first time the other day: ROFLCAT. We had a good time with this one in our household (skipping past the non-PG ones).


Anonymous said...

I am compelled to add:

Jesus didn't "shun" anyone. In fact, his critics main complaint was that he spent his time with the sinners of the day, and not hanging with the high and mighty.

I would refine the position to be, "Homosexuality is wrong and we Christians should not practice it" and ALSO, "We should love and value homosexuals, just as we should love and value everyone." One could suggest that "love" might well include "respect their rights to do as they please".

I can certainly understand why non-Christians think Christians are supposed to "shun" gays. That's what Christians seem to be doing these days, and people can hardly be blamed for concluding that this is what Christianity teaches.

It really does fill me with sadness in a profound way.

Kelly Sedinger said...

I'd refine the position as, "Forget what the Bible says about homosexuality", personally. I see no more reason to take that stuff seriously than all the laws in Leviticus that nobody practices.

Anonymous said...

Oh, I don't want you to get the impression I was telling YOU what to believe, I was making more clear what I believe the Bible teaches. Just in case it sounded that way.

There are many, many reasons why Leviticus is studied as history and the New Testament is studied as a guide to living. I won't bore you (likely as not with your voracious reading appetite you've seen it before) but if I wasn't going to take the Bible seriously then I wouldn't see the point of being a Christian. Might as well fine or make up something that suits me.

Roger Owen Green said...

But I LOVE the OT laws in Leeviticus and Deuteronomy. But it does put a lie to the literalists - I don't think we cut off the hand of a woman who gets into defending her husband from another man and in doing so grabs the other man's gentals. Do we? (Deut 25).