Showing posts with label religion and society. Show all posts
Showing posts with label religion and society. Show all posts
Monday, March 24, 2008
Dog prays at Japanese Zen temple
I just thought this was really cool and I wanted to share. Click on the title to see the article!
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Chinese media: 'crush' Tibet protests
Notice? We are only hearing from the "Chinese media". Apparently, they are using videos of the violence to post photos of rioters on TV. People are then supposed to turn in their friends and family members. Doesn't that sound like a good time?
China is officially an atheist country. Your loyalty is supposed to be towards the State, not some "non-existent" deity or religion. Tibet, with a government that is officially "Tibetan Buddhist", which is a distinct form of Buddhism which evolved specifically in Tibet, is considered "feudal" and "medieval" by the "progressive" Chinese. From the Chinese point of view, they are helping Tibet. Tibet has tons of mineral resources on their land that would be just going to waste (from the Chinese point of view) if they were left to their own devices. The Chinese want to utilize those resources, and, in return, they want to "modernize" Tibet. Of course, Tibet didn't really agree that that needed modernization, any more than the Native Americans in this country did, but that is besides the point.
It is important, too, to realize that even though China is officially atheist, there are several religions that are practiced there, including Confucianism, Ancestor worship, Taoism, Buddhism, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, Indigenous religions, and new religious movements such as Xiantianism and Falun Gong. There are also the remnants of Heaven Worship, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism. With so much religious diversity, it is easy to see why the government may want to remain officially atheist.
The overwhelming attitude, though, is Confucsianism, with its emphasis on social order and personal responsibility to maintain it. Chaos is abhorrent and embarrassing, and China is no doubt mortified over the current conflict in Tibet. Under Confucsianism, the individual's responsibility is to maintain a peaceful and harmonious society. Hence, actions taken by the Chinese governement which may seem horrendous to us, may be accepted as necessary to maintain order to most Chinese. It is always important to realize that different people have different value systems.
China is officially an atheist country. Your loyalty is supposed to be towards the State, not some "non-existent" deity or religion. Tibet, with a government that is officially "Tibetan Buddhist", which is a distinct form of Buddhism which evolved specifically in Tibet, is considered "feudal" and "medieval" by the "progressive" Chinese. From the Chinese point of view, they are helping Tibet. Tibet has tons of mineral resources on their land that would be just going to waste (from the Chinese point of view) if they were left to their own devices. The Chinese want to utilize those resources, and, in return, they want to "modernize" Tibet. Of course, Tibet didn't really agree that that needed modernization, any more than the Native Americans in this country did, but that is besides the point.
It is important, too, to realize that even though China is officially atheist, there are several religions that are practiced there, including Confucianism, Ancestor worship, Taoism, Buddhism, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, Indigenous religions, and new religious movements such as Xiantianism and Falun Gong. There are also the remnants of Heaven Worship, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism. With so much religious diversity, it is easy to see why the government may want to remain officially atheist.
The overwhelming attitude, though, is Confucsianism, with its emphasis on social order and personal responsibility to maintain it. Chaos is abhorrent and embarrassing, and China is no doubt mortified over the current conflict in Tibet. Under Confucsianism, the individual's responsibility is to maintain a peaceful and harmonious society. Hence, actions taken by the Chinese governement which may seem horrendous to us, may be accepted as necessary to maintain order to most Chinese. It is always important to realize that different people have different value systems.
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Early Lent puts fasting on fast track
The author uses the fact that Easter falls unusually early this year to make a statement about the rich cultural diversity of
Here are the people who are quoted: Rev. Ken Fong, senior pastor of Evergreen Baptist Church-L.A, Rev. Guillermo Garcia, pastor of St. Gertrude Catholic Church in Bell Gardens, Rev. Mark Nakagawa, senior pastor of the one of the oldest Japanese American churches in California, Rev. Charles G. Robertson Jr., pastor of Wilshire Presbyterian Church (who does not celebrate Lent, by the way), Gailen L. Reevers, pastor of Lincoln Memorial United Church of Christ in the Crenshaw district. (The people who live in
I liked this story because it says something about so many different things. Not only did it tell me something about the tradition of Lent in Christianity, (which I would not have know about had it not been for my time here at SU) but it also showed me how the sharing of that tradition crosses cultural boundaries in a highly diverse area such as Los Angeles.
Saturday, February 9, 2008
Bishop fined in gay discrimination case
This is an example of a power struggle between religion & secular government. The gay-rights issue is only the latest incarnation of it.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Dispute Over Salary Survey of Christian Ministries
Jack Siegel, a Chicago lawyer, says that "Mr. Dehler is playing the role of “armchair compensation expert” and may be condemning Christian leaders for perfectly acceptable pay levels given their workload and successes". I don't know. Is $465,000 in combined compensation a little much? I wonder what the Office Coordinator makes?
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Articles Of Faith: Media's portrayal of religion skews to the right
Here is one of my pet peeves. This article, which can be accessed by clicking the link above, is about how conservative right-wing Christians get TONS more media attention that the group that actually comprises MOST American Christians. That group is the moderate - progressive Christians.
One of the first things that I had to come to grips with when I came to work in the Chapel of this liberal Northeastern private university was that I had to throw out the prejudices that I had against Christians. The people that I now work for and with are nearly all Christians, and in this environment, it is not the "don't talk about religion" environment of a corporation. Religion is everywhere, and everyone here has to deal with it all the time.
When I first saw my job posted, I saw that it was one that I am immanently qualified for, except for the fact that it was for a Protestant ministry. Instead of just dismissing the experience out of hand, I went right to the Protestant minister and said, "Hi, I am extremely qualified for the job that you posted, but you have to know right off, I am a Lesbian Pagan."
"Fine", he responded, "we don't discriminate on the basis of religion." He didn't even mention the "Lesbian" part of my declaration, because, as I was eventually to discover, the Protestant ministry here has a very high percentage of LGBT people as active members.
Far from the being the judgmental, Bible-thumping lunatics that are normally portrayed in the media, the Christians that I am surrounded by are caring, supportive, and emotionally available. There is always food here to share, people are always willing to help, or to offer rides, or just listen when I am having a rough day. And, the best thing yet, is that everyone knows that I am a Pagan, everyone knows that I am a Lesbian, everyone knows my partner, and everyone treats us both with all the honor and respect that they would treat anyone else.
While the media has told me one thing, my own observations have told me something else entirely. It is easy to see why many LGBT people as well as many Pagans believe that there is only one kind of Christian, and that is the late Jerry Falwell. In reality, that is no more true than the belief that all Muslims are crazed suicide bombers waiting for the next opportunity to blow up a bunch of college students in a cafe.
One of the first things that I had to come to grips with when I came to work in the Chapel of this liberal Northeastern private university was that I had to throw out the prejudices that I had against Christians. The people that I now work for and with are nearly all Christians, and in this environment, it is not the "don't talk about religion" environment of a corporation. Religion is everywhere, and everyone here has to deal with it all the time.
When I first saw my job posted, I saw that it was one that I am immanently qualified for, except for the fact that it was for a Protestant ministry. Instead of just dismissing the experience out of hand, I went right to the Protestant minister and said, "Hi, I am extremely qualified for the job that you posted, but you have to know right off, I am a Lesbian Pagan."
"Fine", he responded, "we don't discriminate on the basis of religion." He didn't even mention the "Lesbian" part of my declaration, because, as I was eventually to discover, the Protestant ministry here has a very high percentage of LGBT people as active members.
Far from the being the judgmental, Bible-thumping lunatics that are normally portrayed in the media, the Christians that I am surrounded by are caring, supportive, and emotionally available. There is always food here to share, people are always willing to help, or to offer rides, or just listen when I am having a rough day. And, the best thing yet, is that everyone knows that I am a Pagan, everyone knows that I am a Lesbian, everyone knows my partner, and everyone treats us both with all the honor and respect that they would treat anyone else.
While the media has told me one thing, my own observations have told me something else entirely. It is easy to see why many LGBT people as well as many Pagans believe that there is only one kind of Christian, and that is the late Jerry Falwell. In reality, that is no more true than the belief that all Muslims are crazed suicide bombers waiting for the next opportunity to blow up a bunch of college students in a cafe.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Al-Qaida likely to attack US, intel says
As always, click on the title to see the referenced article.
I have spent a long time... many, many hours, trying to figure out what could or would be the possible benefit for "terrorist" groups to blow up innocent people, whether that be in the U.S., Iraq, Israel, or anywhere else, for that matter. Really, what are those folks trying to prove? "Do what we want or we will blow you up?" Does that make any sense? "Those people" (you decide for yourself who "those people" are) "are nothing but a bunch of violent, religious fanatics." Hardly. That logic doesn't make any sense, either.
I have finally come to a conclusion. My conclusion is, Terrorism, and, by that I mean suicide bombers, planes flown into big buildings, anything like that, is a Fund Raiser, in much the same way that some religious groups do mission/service trips.
For example, one of the way a church in this country may choose to raise funds is by doing some sort of "good work", like sending a group of people to New Orleans to help with clean up, for example. Before the actual trip takes place, the church may bring it up during collections or even by a direct mailing campaign to get people to contribute to this mission. This is how the trip is funded, and most of the money collected will probably go to the cost of the trip itself. While folks are down there working, there are pictures taken, and, usually, a minister will go with them. Then when they all get back, the pictures, which are pictures of people everyone knows from the congregation, dressed in hazmat suits shoveling muck in ruined houses, are published in the church bulletins, news letters, direct mailings, and anything else where the church can ask people for more money. This shows the people with the wallets what good work their church actually does, makes them feel good, and makes them want to be a part of that by contributing more money.
There is nothing wrong with this. This is how non-profit fundraising works, whether it is a religious organization, a charitable organization, or saving the whales. They ask their donors for money to do specific things, then they show their donors what they did, so that their donors will be more inclined to donate.
I am thinking, at this point, that we can view "al-Qaida", and similar groups, as "non-profit organizations". I think they are collecting money from donors, and then, when they pull off these big, deadly explosions and it makes lots of press, then their donors are more likely to donate again.
Now, I am not saying that blowing up people is morally the same as feeding hungry children. It is not. However, one of the Five Pillars of Islam is Zakah, or "alms-giving", and the amount given is based on the giver's wealth. So, my guess is that people who donate to terrorism see some benefit to themselves. Obviously, large numbers of very poor, oppressed, depressed people are going to feel angry at U.S. apparent affluence and conspicuous consumption. It is the rule in non-profit fundraising that the most amount of money comes from large numbers of small donations.
How about wealthy people, though? Who, among the world's wealthiest people, could benefit the most from a destabilization of the U.S. economy? This is a question that I don't have an answer for, but I would guess it has something to do with oil production. I am a religious scholar, not a macro-economist, and I will be the first to admit it.
However, I would be interested in hearing from people who ARE macro-economists. The bottom line here is this: In all things, follow the money.
I have spent a long time... many, many hours, trying to figure out what could or would be the possible benefit for "terrorist" groups to blow up innocent people, whether that be in the U.S., Iraq, Israel, or anywhere else, for that matter. Really, what are those folks trying to prove? "Do what we want or we will blow you up?" Does that make any sense? "Those people" (you decide for yourself who "those people" are) "are nothing but a bunch of violent, religious fanatics." Hardly. That logic doesn't make any sense, either.
I have finally come to a conclusion. My conclusion is, Terrorism, and, by that I mean suicide bombers, planes flown into big buildings, anything like that, is a Fund Raiser, in much the same way that some religious groups do mission/service trips.
For example, one of the way a church in this country may choose to raise funds is by doing some sort of "good work", like sending a group of people to New Orleans to help with clean up, for example. Before the actual trip takes place, the church may bring it up during collections or even by a direct mailing campaign to get people to contribute to this mission. This is how the trip is funded, and most of the money collected will probably go to the cost of the trip itself. While folks are down there working, there are pictures taken, and, usually, a minister will go with them. Then when they all get back, the pictures, which are pictures of people everyone knows from the congregation, dressed in hazmat suits shoveling muck in ruined houses, are published in the church bulletins, news letters, direct mailings, and anything else where the church can ask people for more money. This shows the people with the wallets what good work their church actually does, makes them feel good, and makes them want to be a part of that by contributing more money.
There is nothing wrong with this. This is how non-profit fundraising works, whether it is a religious organization, a charitable organization, or saving the whales. They ask their donors for money to do specific things, then they show their donors what they did, so that their donors will be more inclined to donate.
I am thinking, at this point, that we can view "al-Qaida", and similar groups, as "non-profit organizations". I think they are collecting money from donors, and then, when they pull off these big, deadly explosions and it makes lots of press, then their donors are more likely to donate again.
Now, I am not saying that blowing up people is morally the same as feeding hungry children. It is not. However, one of the Five Pillars of Islam is Zakah, or "alms-giving", and the amount given is based on the giver's wealth. So, my guess is that people who donate to terrorism see some benefit to themselves. Obviously, large numbers of very poor, oppressed, depressed people are going to feel angry at U.S. apparent affluence and conspicuous consumption. It is the rule in non-profit fundraising that the most amount of money comes from large numbers of small donations.
How about wealthy people, though? Who, among the world's wealthiest people, could benefit the most from a destabilization of the U.S. economy? This is a question that I don't have an answer for, but I would guess it has something to do with oil production. I am a religious scholar, not a macro-economist, and I will be the first to admit it.
However, I would be interested in hearing from people who ARE macro-economists. The bottom line here is this: In all things, follow the money.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
BRITISH MUSEUM MAKES IMPORTANT BREAKTHROUGH IN BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGY
In case you are new to Blogger technology, you can find the original article by clicking on the title above.
This is exciting stuff! The passage in the Tanakh (which most people in this country call the Old Testament) that is referenced here is:
"When Jerusalem was taken, all the officials of the king of Babylon came and sat in the middle gate: Nergal-sharezer, Samgar-nebo, Sarsechim the Rabsaris, Nergal-sharezer the Rabmag, with all the rest of the officials of the king of Babylon." (This is from the New Revised Standard Version, Angicized Edition). "Sarsechim" is the name, and "Rabsaris" is the title "Chief Officer" or, alternatively "Chief of Eunuchs". The event to which is refers is the story of the fall of Jerusalem's first Jewish Temple, commonly called Solomon's Temple.
It is very unusual to find ANY new direct sources for this period, and pretty much, scholars that work on that period spend their time studying over and over the same material.
What is cool about Jewish scripture though (aka, Old Testament), is that the ancient Jews were EXTREMELY careful about the accuracy of the copies. The Dead Sea Scrolls included much older copies of many of the books, and these copies are virtually identical to newer copies, even when separated in age by hundred of years.
The only thing is, most people read these books as "religious texts" rather than "historic documents" (contrary to what they may claim). Reading them as historic documents, in my mind, is MUCH more exciting than as religious texts. The story they tell is amazing
This is exciting stuff! The passage in the Tanakh (which most people in this country call the Old Testament) that is referenced here is:
"When Jerusalem was taken, all the officials of the king of Babylon came and sat in the middle gate: Nergal-sharezer, Samgar-nebo, Sarsechim the Rabsaris, Nergal-sharezer the Rabmag, with all the rest of the officials of the king of Babylon." (This is from the New Revised Standard Version, Angicized Edition). "Sarsechim" is the name, and "Rabsaris" is the title "Chief Officer" or, alternatively "Chief of Eunuchs". The event to which is refers is the story of the fall of Jerusalem's first Jewish Temple, commonly called Solomon's Temple.
It is very unusual to find ANY new direct sources for this period, and pretty much, scholars that work on that period spend their time studying over and over the same material.
What is cool about Jewish scripture though (aka, Old Testament), is that the ancient Jews were EXTREMELY careful about the accuracy of the copies. The Dead Sea Scrolls included much older copies of many of the books, and these copies are virtually identical to newer copies, even when separated in age by hundred of years.
The only thing is, most people read these books as "religious texts" rather than "historic documents" (contrary to what they may claim). Reading them as historic documents, in my mind, is MUCH more exciting than as religious texts. The story they tell is amazing
Friday, July 13, 2007
Couple accused of using drugs and witchcraft to lure teen into sexual relationship
This is an interesting article published by one of Fox's local channels. First of all, the article makes the statement that the couple was "accused of using sex and drugs and the Wicca religion to lure a 15-year-old girl into a world of seduction." What, may I ask, is a "world of seduction"? Sounds pretty lurid, doesn't it? Secondly, the words "sex", "drugs" and "Wicca" are all strung together as though they are somehow related. Third, since according to the article, "She (the victim) was a willing participant, if you will,". Since this quote comes from a representative of the Santa Maria Police Dept., apparently it was the journalist who decided to use the word "victim" to describe the 15 year old. It is important to keep in mind here, the POSSIBLE crimes committed were sex with a minor and illegal drug use. Wicca is a religion and protected by the First Amendment.
"She was lured into this couple's grasp through the Wicca religion and utilizing ceremonial witchcraft and drugs -- both marijuana and Ecstacy -- to lower her inhibitions." I, somehow, don't think one would ever see a statement like "She was lured into the couple's grasp through the Christian religion utilizing intense prayer and drugs", although, I am sure, that this has occurred at least once. Furthermore, Wicca and/or ceremonial magick are not any more or less useful in "luring" than intense prayer would be.
Finally, I want to mention that the couple was arrested at their apartment near an elementary school. Nice. Since 15 year olds do not attend elementary school, and since California is very over crowded, and it is hard NOT to be near SOME elementary school or another, this clearly intended to make an association between Wicca and child pornography. Again... nice.
In all fairness, I actually found this article on ReligionNewsBlog.com, (http://www.religionnewsblog.com/18729/wicca-4) which includes in handy readiness notes explaining Wicca to an uninformed reader. However, I think that it is interesting that the BLOG is acting in a more responsible fashion than a Fox News "journalist".
"She was lured into this couple's grasp through the Wicca religion and utilizing ceremonial witchcraft and drugs -- both marijuana and Ecstacy -- to lower her inhibitions." I, somehow, don't think one would ever see a statement like "She was lured into the couple's grasp through the Christian religion utilizing intense prayer and drugs", although, I am sure, that this has occurred at least once. Furthermore, Wicca and/or ceremonial magick are not any more or less useful in "luring" than intense prayer would be.
Finally, I want to mention that the couple was arrested at their apartment near an elementary school. Nice. Since 15 year olds do not attend elementary school, and since California is very over crowded, and it is hard NOT to be near SOME elementary school or another, this clearly intended to make an association between Wicca and child pornography. Again... nice.
In all fairness, I actually found this article on ReligionNewsBlog.com, (http://www.religionnewsblog.com/18729/wicca-4) which includes in handy readiness notes explaining Wicca to an uninformed reader. However, I think that it is interesting that the BLOG is acting in a more responsible fashion than a Fox News "journalist".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
