Sunday, August 02, 2009
Sunday Reflection: Linda Richman's Coffee Talk part 1
This is Mr. CL and since I am a "celebrity luvr," I channeled Linda Richman and she informed me through the spirit world that she is still vibrant and has much more to say, particularly as to Sunday Reflections. She conveyed to me that what follows are her comments and do not reflect or imply the views of Judge Jeffrey C. Manske. Her comments follow (forgive me any misspellings because it is hard to type by candlelight and while in the presence of a medium):
"First of all, I want to say Welcome to Coffee Talk. I'm Linda Richman. (Applause) Since entering the spirit world . . . Wait, I'm getting emotional, I'm getting a little verklempt. Talk amongst yourselves. I'll give you a topic. The topic is Christopher Hitchen's 'God is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.' On page 48 of his book, he writes: 'In the recent division in the Anglican Church over homosexuality and ordination, several bishops made the fatuous point that homosexuality is unnatural because it does not occur in other species. Leave aside the fundamental absurdity of this assertion: are humans part of "nature" or not? Or, if they chance to be homosexual, are they created in God's image or not? Leave aside the well-attested fact that numberless kinds of birds and mammals and primates do engage in homosexual play. Who are the clerics to interpret nature? . . . Homosexuality is present in all societies, and its incidence would appear to be a part of human "design." On page 52, Mr. Hitchen's states, 'By all means--for all I care--let a priest sworn to celibacy be a promiscuous homosexual. . . . By all means let anyone who believes in creationism instruct his fellows during lunch break. But the conscription of the unprotected child for these purposes is something that even the most dedicated secularist can safely describe as sin.' Discuss, I'm sure you're comments will be like buttah."
Comments:
<< Home
L.R.,
I'm thrilled that you have kept your leftist and non traditional leanings. Remember, people who need people are the luckiest people in the world. Why don't you bring me flowers anymore? Can't we get back to the way we were? Please do all you can to keep our planet Evergreen. What kind of fool writes a column like this? Go back to your TV show.
---Barbra Streisand
I'm thrilled that you have kept your leftist and non traditional leanings. Remember, people who need people are the luckiest people in the world. Why don't you bring me flowers anymore? Can't we get back to the way we were? Please do all you can to keep our planet Evergreen. What kind of fool writes a column like this? Go back to your TV show.
---Barbra Streisand
# posted by 
: 8:40 AM
: 8:40 AM
Hitchens' obsession with tearing down anyone with faith is tiresome and trite. I'm sympathetic to some of his arguments, but the vitriol turns me off.
# posted by : 9:13 AM
: 9:13 AM
I can't believe somebody as smart as Hitchens (however misguided he has become) would actually believe that gay people try to "convert" children. I mean, really: has any of us EVER seen that happen?
I have lots of gay friends, and . . . well, it's just ridiculous. They would be offended to think that some people think that about gay people.
As for trying to convert children: part of me has I a distaste for that, too, and it does actually happen.
I have lots of gay friends, and . . . well, it's just ridiculous. They would be offended to think that some people think that about gay people.
As for trying to convert children: part of me has I a distaste for that, too, and it does actually happen.
# posted by : 1:59 PM
: 1:59 PM
Sorry, I meant "trying to convert children to Christianity" or to a religious belief in my last comment.
# posted by : 2:00 PM
: 2:00 PM
It's a matter of morality what someone does with there personal life. If you choose a church, choose one that matches your morality.
# posted by : 10:47 PM
: 10:47 PM
This "Linda Richman"-- who is she? The Wikipedia article claims that she is not real, yet she can be channeled by a man who really luvs Celebrities. How is that? Everybody knows that you can only achieve the effect of "channeling" through the Resurrection Stone, and then only if you really luvd you some celebrities while the given celebrity was alive.
My comment on the issue:
I believe that a book somewhat like the one you describe quoted my great fellow Brit Douglas Adams in a totally out-of-context way for his introduction. He made the quote sound like a statement that there is no God, whereas it was a somewhat sarcastic line from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. I believe that same book featured a hyperintelligent shade of blue as a sentient being, intergalactic travel, a two-headed, three-armed ex-President of the Galaxy, and a suicidal robot that inspired a Radiohead song. How's that for research?
Although I myself may be an evil figure of evilocity and evilness and worship of evil (at least according to some fundamentalists I know, I actually wasn't aware that I was anything but a Christian until then! Who knew?), I have no respect for people who make their living yelling at people of faith.
My comment on the issue:
I believe that a book somewhat like the one you describe quoted my great fellow Brit Douglas Adams in a totally out-of-context way for his introduction. He made the quote sound like a statement that there is no God, whereas it was a somewhat sarcastic line from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. I believe that same book featured a hyperintelligent shade of blue as a sentient being, intergalactic travel, a two-headed, three-armed ex-President of the Galaxy, and a suicidal robot that inspired a Radiohead song. How's that for research?
Although I myself may be an evil figure of evilocity and evilness and worship of evil (at least according to some fundamentalists I know, I actually wasn't aware that I was anything but a Christian until then! Who knew?), I have no respect for people who make their living yelling at people of faith.
# posted by : 11:24 PM
: 11:24 PM 
Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, and others from the New Atheist Movement really are the mirror image of the Religious Right. This is particularly true of the last two.
Hitchens gives a delightful interview and is sophisticated enough to know exactly what to write to drive sales of his books.
As for the issue of homosexuality, the Bible never mentions it. It mentions homosexual sex acts in certain contexts, and then, in the Old Testament, it mentions only sex acts between men.
The whole concept of homosexuality is a modern construct entirely dependant upon the Enlightenment, psychology, and other modern, and now, post-modern ideas of personhood.
The real issue for civil society and for faith groups, particularly Christian, Jewish, and Muslim faith groups, is how do we read the text and how does our reading of the text influence the parameters of civil society and discourse. And should it influence the parameters of said discourse?
The real rupture in Protestant Churches, of the moderate to liberal variety, is the unrealized truth by liberals and convservatives, that traditional Protestant ways of reading the Bible do not seem to work anymore.
To make the case for "Scripture alone" or "Faith alone" is not plausible if it ever was.
So, where does the idea or lens, if you will, of Tradition fit and how does authority relate to Tradition and how Tradition is employed by fallible individuals and Churches who seek to know more about the Author?
Hitchens gives a delightful interview and is sophisticated enough to know exactly what to write to drive sales of his books.
As for the issue of homosexuality, the Bible never mentions it. It mentions homosexual sex acts in certain contexts, and then, in the Old Testament, it mentions only sex acts between men.
The whole concept of homosexuality is a modern construct entirely dependant upon the Enlightenment, psychology, and other modern, and now, post-modern ideas of personhood.
The real issue for civil society and for faith groups, particularly Christian, Jewish, and Muslim faith groups, is how do we read the text and how does our reading of the text influence the parameters of civil society and discourse. And should it influence the parameters of said discourse?
The real rupture in Protestant Churches, of the moderate to liberal variety, is the unrealized truth by liberals and convservatives, that traditional Protestant ways of reading the Bible do not seem to work anymore.
To make the case for "Scripture alone" or "Faith alone" is not plausible if it ever was.
So, where does the idea or lens, if you will, of Tradition fit and how does authority relate to Tradition and how Tradition is employed by fallible individuals and Churches who seek to know more about the Author?
Also, did anyone hear that Mike Meyers is making a movie about Keith Moon and is slated to play the lead role?
Two excellent posts Scott! Anyone care to address his well thought out comments in his 1st post. Thanks for your comments and analysis. It gives us a lot to ponder. Check out musingsfromaneccentric.blogspot.com
Post a Comment
<< Home
