I told you yesterday that it was amazing that a religious crank could serve an adoring audience with 55 radio stations, all pumping out Grade A Prime lunacy. It was a bit depressing that all an old fool needs to do is babble about God and the Bible and people will throw money at him.
But then I'd also pointed out that another phony, Rick Warren, had suffered a major financial shortfall of almost a million dollars, and was begging for more donations. That makes you feel a little better, right? Stupidity is not a smooth road to riches, at least.
Despair some more, people. Warren put out his call, and his flock of sheep answered with donations adding up to $2.4 million over one weekend. And he's bragging that most of these were small donations from many people, not the largesse of a few rich individuals, and calling it a "miracle".
It's a bit ironic that initially he'd said the shortfall was due to a poor economy and people having little to give. It's revolting that he would then proceed to put the bite on the financially stressed members of his congregation, and that they'd then dredge up more of their money to hand over to the Saddleback simpleton. It wasn't a miracle: a better word would be a fleecing.
- Log in to post comments
I refer you to a copy of the (now rather old) equation sequence covering that phenomenon.
I thought that shortfall was due to a lost lawsuit ?
And how do we know he really made 2.4 million? Did he claim that?
I guess he would say that...:-)
Well, ya know, I don't know what's more disturbing, that he asked them to pay, or that, if his claim is correct, so many actually did !
Most of the other copies I was finding weren't even as well set out as that one. However, I did find a very new copy where some arty pictures have been added.
It is a sad commentary that people who supply cheap and easy answers to essentially meaningless questions can reap such largess. It disgusts me that there is such power and money in simply telling people what they want to hear. Give me a dose of reality over pie-in-the-sky dreams any day. That is worth more than money.
All this without the threat of Jesus calling him home. Impressive.
No, it was Rod Parsley scam that lost a lawsuit and begged for more tithes.
Saddening. More fool them.
Seems pretty clear who owns the saddle and whose backs it goes on.
Ah, my bad ! Thanks for the correction...
T. rex does both, and gets a good snack as a result. An evolutionary strategy which clearly involves deceptive trickery, but somehow more honest then Warren or Parsley or these other shites…
Urge to kill... RISING!
This is the wrong place for you then mate.Seek help.
Oh, I dunno. I could murder some bacon right now.
Maybe it's just me, but when twits like this set such a low bar for what they'd call a miracle (in this case, brainwashed and credulous followers giving money when prompted) they are effectively neutering their god.
Dig deep, folks. Let's fill up the plate. We need your offerings to prop up an impoverished omnipotent deity who needs our help. And just maybe we will put new tires on the Rev's Porsche.
To Warren's credit, at least he isn't claiming God will "recall him" if he doesn't raise the cash...
Well, I take solace in the fact that it's only 120,000 people, if each donated $20. That's less than one-tenth of one percent of the population that believes in Rick Warren so devoutly that they'd give to him when he asked them. But it's not much solace, due to the probability that many of those 120,000 people didn't have $20 to give. And it's sickening that Mr. Warren essentially became a bum off the street, begging for "just a little pocket change" and get what he wanted and more...while he could at least give a dollar to all of those real bums on the street, who beg for money out of true necessity every day, but he'll ignore them, or tell them to get a job, or try and proselytize them in exchange for his "largesse".
He calls this a miracle. I call it a tragedy.
It'd be more likely to be a real miracle if Warren woke up one day to find a big crate full of gold at the end of his bed, magically called into existence right there by God. Ordinary people giving money is hardly miraculous. -_-
Not at all surprising, as we recall someone in the original thread forecast this very outcome (It's a miracle!). We've seen this happen time and time again, from the mega-churches on down to rented storefront churches with a dozen members, and half of those are unemployed.
We recall one story, back around 2000 - 2001 where it had come out that a married minister had been using church funds (tithes and offerings) to buy his girlfriend a swanky townhouse. When the wife found out, she torched (or attempted to) the townhouse. The minister went to jail for fraud. When the con man/philanderer/minister was released from prison, he was welcomed back, with open arms, by the congregation.
Unbelievable.
We guess it just proves, that evolution, and in this case human evolution, does not always move in a forward progressive direction, as it's quite clear that a subspecies of human, Homo Stupidius is rapidly spreading and may eventually replace the rest of us.
$2.4 million, eh? I wonder what that amount of money could have done for the food banks of Lake Forest. Or the after school programs of Orange County. But it's all going to the tax-exempt church instead. Guess Warren really knew what he was doing when "God" called him to minister in what just so happened to be one of the wealthiest cities in California.
Dear Mr. Warren,
Why not encourage your flock to keep the money and do something "christian" with it themselves. For instance, why not tell them to just give that 20 dollars to a homeless person? Or invest it for their, or their children's, future? Must it all pass through your coffers? As I recall, Jesus did not care much for the money changers in the temple. In fact, he busted the place up Hulk style. Just a thought...
Yes. We only use squid on people, set goats on fire and attack polls.
There is hope. If I had any inkling whatsoever to attend a church, this would be the one.
I wonder what people are praying for there?
"Urge to kill... RISING!
This is the wrong place for you then mate.Seek help."
Relax everyone, it's just a Simpsons quote.
stptrck75:
Been a while since we've cracked open a bible, but we recall that somewhere in the Old Testament, there's a passage about taking a cyclical approach to paying tithes. It said that tithes should be paid to the church in the first two years, but in the third year, believers should pay their tithes to the community -- or something like that.
Anyone familiar with this?
I think I just threw up a little in my mouth.
I don't see what the difference is between this and Reverend Ike. Of course, he was far more up front about what he wanted the money for. Hell, even the Bhagwan wasn't exactly coy about wanting another Rolls. Rick Warren follows in a long line of what's known in the parlance as "shearing the sheep", just that pleading poverty has become au courant.
Legion @25,
You're probably correct. They do tend to cover all their greedy bases.
Speaking of money and religion, Rick Warren should invest in more real estate. That's what the mormons do, and then they abuse the existing tax laws to earn money off the real estate. A case in point is the billions-of-dollars mall they're building in Salt Lake City. An ex-mormon explained it this way:
So what can you say about people like that? You can laugh or you can cry... Or you can do what I did and make up a nursery rhyme about it:
Baa, baa, slack-jawed sheep
My coffers can you fill?
Yes sir, yes sir,
$2.4 M. in the till.
Some for our pastor,
Some to praise his name,
And some for the anti-gay
political campaign...
There is one simple solution to this. Put taxes on donations to irrational and destructive enterprises like churches and make the taxes proportional to the estimated damage these institutions are inflicting (including direct damage to public mental health, indirect damage due to mass reduced ability to make critical rational desicions, corrections for the fact that religion is removing focus and money from really urgent matters etc). Make the taxes retroactive at least some hundered years. It is just fair that these people should clean up after themselves.
Simpsons quote?
Oh, well in that case....
And I thought I knew them all, my kid watches the stuff 24/7 :-)
Wikipedia seems to be saying that there was a c.7–year cyclic system under Mosaic law, apparently based on some babbling in the babble, but I must admit I failed to followed it.
So when they say atheism is just another fundamentalist religion, does that mean we should be able to pull these kinds of scams too?
-- "It wasn't a miracle: a better word would be a fleecing."
It's pretty obvious that what Warren really means is "It's a miracle that so many people are still so dumb as to keep falling for this."
Praise the Lord and pass the checkbook!
@Credo Absurdum...genius!
Back in the day, miracles fed poor people with loaves and fishes, and supplied wine for wedding feasts for people who couldn't afford it.
These modern miracles seem to accomplish just the opposite. Pretty crappy miracle, actually. God as P.T. Barnum?
What's the opposite of miracle?
I think the Catholic Church does this much better because they make it much more personal. If I do something bad, it's my own sin. If I do something good, all praise to God. They've got you coming and going.
There's an epistemic analogue too, which dates at least to Descartes.
Under this model, you can confidently predict exactly what God is like and what he would do (without any evidence at all) except when dealing with nasty disconfirming evidence (such as the problem of evil).
In those cases, you piously observe that God's ways are too mysterious for mere mortals to discern. So suffering might be part of God's inscrutable plan after all.
Ken Miller does this repeatedly in the latter half of _Finding Darwin's God_ and never seems to even notice the contradiction. It drives me nuts.
Prof. Myers, you should show up ol' whiny Warren. I'll bet if you posted a plea (which, naturally, would be better written than his) for cold, hard cash, you'd get more than that paltry $2.4 million.
debacle?
I can see Mr. Warren do a face-palm now:
"Dang.. here I am, spent all that time writing that STUPID book in order to make some money, while all I had to do was simply ASK for it!"
Expect more pleas for money from Mr. Warren in the near future!
He asked for money? Shouldn't he have prayed for money? You're showing a lack of faith there Rick.
When it comes to pledging money, these guys are like mob-style debt collectors. My great grandma used to donate money to Oral Roberts. When she passed away, Oral Roberts's lackies started calling my grandparents demanding that she owed them money. According to my grandpa they were quite aggressive on the phone and one time threatened to to take them to court--on what charges I don't know. It took three phone calls in which my grandparents explained she was dead and Roberts's ministry weren't left any money that they finally gave up.
With stupidity like this, I fear for the future of the human race.
Anything can be a miracle if you are enough of an imbecile to be bemused by it.
Take for instance the fact that a banana fits into Ray Comfort's hand. Duh... ITS A MIRACLE!!!! GODDIDIT GODDIDIT GODDIDIT!!!
First it's necessary to convince Them that certain rituals, such as eating babies and setting goats on fire, are key aspects of Teh Aethiset's belief. Along with, of course, tithing (lots!), sex (more!!), and bacon (never enough!!1!).
It might be necessary to re-evaluate certain secondary rituals, such as torturing kittens and donating to charities. For some reason those really upset Them. Given the decentralised structure and tendency for infighting (just like between the dead-goof-nailed-to-a-tree cults) this might present a problem. With enough wars this hiccup will be solved.
I suppose Teh Dawkins Kult might pull it off first. However, it'd be a real coup if one of the lady-lead cults (such as those in the poll (excluding Little Poopyhead Pee Zed in a dress)) gains first recognition, and more importantly, tax empt status…
RBDC:
We've always thought of miracles as god-magic, but the online Etymology Dictionary defines a miracle as an "object of wonder."
Warren has proved Albert Einstein right again: "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
The Portland examiner is reporting that with all that money good ol' Rick is only feeding 400 hungry people. The cost of loaves and fishes has sure gone up!
In this case, scam.
@38
Craptacle ?
To succeed in the religion business, a person has to be a moron, he must be full of shit, and he can't have any moral values at all.
Ancient history but US Congress stepped in to help Bro. Warren with the Clergy Housing Allowance Clarification Act of 2002. Warren can deduct his entire salary on the second house he buys and therefore pay no income taxes. Sweet.
Just another sniny toave the Country seems to be full of them.
Sad, but what's even worse is that many folks who didn't give will think it's miraculous that he got the (by his account) 2.4 million. This will likely lead them to send money as a way of 'buying into' the miracle.
Here's what I got for the group today:
Political Humor:
http://thetimchannel.wordpress.com/2010/01/03/credit-card-reform-in-act…
Fancy New Tech (not flying car..yet):
http://thetimchannel.wordpress.com/2010/01/03/nikon-coolpix-s1000pj/
Well, he's shearing the sheep alright.
Be afraid when he decides he wants mutton for dinner....
Taking the Online Etymology Dictionary's definition of miracle as an “object of wonder” and inverting it, suggested synonyms for an “object of derision” include: buffoon, butt, jestee, joke, laughingstock, mock, mockery, object of ridicule, plaything, and target.
taking action
reality
accomplishment
Hugh Kramer wrote a nursery rhyme for the occasion:
Baa, baa, slack-jawed sheep
My coffers can you fill?
Yes sir, yes sir,
$2.4 M. in the till.
Some for our pastor,
Some to praise his name,
And some for the anti-gay
political campaign…
(via the Friendly Atheist)
What's the opposite of miracle?
a Tragicle, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-vhyqx_Duc
Cthulu says I am too thin to eat and It commands you to fatten me up by making large donations to me in dollars, Euros, gold or precious stones. Once I have received $2.4 million (or equivalent value) then the Tentacled One promises to immediately devour Rick Warren with relish and a fine Chianti.
Come on - you can't pass up on an opportunity like this.
Damn, didn't see that nursery rhyme posted earlier.
@ #57
Posted by: Stardrake Author Profile Page | January 3, 2010 12:34 PM
"Be afraid when he decides he wants mutton for dinner...."
I was under the impression that these folks all preferred lamb chops.
The Portland examiner is reporting that with all that money good ol' Rick is only feeding 400 hungry people. The cost of loaves and fishes has sure gone up!
That seems super inefficient. My local QFC working with the food bank informs me that every dollar I spend in donations helps feed five people. I think it must be the cumulative dollars of everybody or maybe they give two ramen packets per person, but still, even the Feed a Family bags run from 5 dollars to 15 dollars.
For 2.5 million, you could take 50,000 people out to Ruth's Chris and feed them a mildly spendy three course steak dinner.
Assuming a budget of 250 dollars, you could feed 10,000 persons/families as long as that would allow. (About a month depending on what you eat.)
At only 400 people, the average person should be getting 6250 minus whatever administration would be needed to disburse that. That's not an insignificant amount. (And might feed 400 families for a year, or pay rent for half a year to a year.)
You could also employ 50 people for a year at my current wages.
Somehow I doubt much of this is happening. Maybe Rick is employing a handful of people off this money, but I bet most of it is making its way to his pockets. Also, dunno about this shortfall the church is in, but it's not like the church doesn't have assets they could sell off if they were in trouble. I'm deeply suspicious that the shortfall Warren was worried about was either in his salary from the church or a personal expense of his family's. OR if he's so worried about the church, why doesn't he invest more of his own income? He's gotta mega best seller with the Crap Driven Life--a book my ex-boyfriend's mother bought for him and which I read to much hilarity.
Drives me crazy when people don't get the disconnect between their prosperity preachers and the pleas for money. ie....if you do what God says, then God will bless you with material riches. And then, suddenly Prosperity Preacher is weeping over the podium begging his flock to give him money. Seriously? What happened to God blessing you, arsewipe? By your logic, you must not be doing what God says.
I cannot sympathize with folks who voluntarily part with their money by giving it to these "religious leaders."
I do decry the charlatans who promise cures with the purchase of bogus medicines.
But the folks who willingly purchase goods or services which they know to be shady - or at least suspect that the deal is too good to be real, the folks who voluntarily give away their money to organizations which offer generic "rewards" or promise vague and clearly unobtainable results - I have no sympathy for them whatsoever. And the fastest way to reduce the influence of these religious charlatans is to remove the tax-exempt status of all religions. But, given the politician's pandering to these "bases" of bloc voters controlled by their pastors, it will be a cold day in Hell before any tax reforms are enacted.
To become a millionaire you only need to convince 1 million people to give you a dollar.
Just put a dolla' in the box!
- Cartman
I've a truckload of precious stones 'round the back I don't know what to do with. Gold's in a bit of short supply but there's a couple of spare ingots I can toss in; maybe only a tonne or two (sorry!). Anyways, send me your co-ordinates and I'll arrange my speciality, a precision airdrop, truck and all. You'll still be rather thin—two-dimensional actually—but ready to wrap around the babbles and feed The Great Ones. Or the dragons, whoever gets there first.
p.s. An annoying problem this time of year is the slaves in the mines keep freezing to death. (I keep telling them all they need to do is work harder and longer and they'll stay warm, but for some strange reason, they keep dying.) So I'm looking to buy several dozen new mindless drudges for this new year. I'll look into getting a supply from Saddleback, as it seems they've got plenty. Does anyone have experience with this model?
You don't have to be an atheist to hate Rick Warren.
Rick Warren: Arch-fiend and Heretic(absolutedominion.blogspot.com)
How do you do comic sans?
Use the style attribute of HTML tags to specify the font, eg:
<blockquote style="font-family:'Comic Sans MS'">creationist quote goes here</blockquote>
... or put that style specifier into a paragraph (p) tag or span tag etc.
:)
Most disgusting is the tax-exempt aspect. He acknowledges the tough economy, asks people in hard times for money, knowing that they have already paid taxes on their pittances, and that he will never have to. All of the good that could be done with church tax money, and uncle sam will never see a penny of it. Still, I have no frigging choice in my tax dollars going toward some bullshit faith-based initiative or other.
These people are some of the lowest form of humans, preying on the weak and feeble-minded.
#25 Legion
In reply to your query about tithing. This is going to be a LONG message. If you don't like it, jump to the next.
Note that I am simply using the information available from the first 5 books of the Bible, as is. I am not arguing about textural criticism, authorship, etc. etc. I am taking the writings as they stand to see how things would have worked, if they had been tried.
This is my understanding. I freely acknowledge that it has nothing to do with what many churches do today.
There are a huge number of misunderstandings about the Torah and the Old Covenant. Before you can understand the answer to your question the key thing is to remember that the Old Covenant was a legal agreement between YHWH and the physical nation of Israel (the 12 tribes). According to the Bible, this ended with the death of one of those contracted to the Old Covenant - God in the person of Jesus Christ.
Thus, the Old Covenant and everything that goes along with it is dead and buried and has no application today (other than as a lesson to learn from). If only some of these churches could understand that, everyone would be better off (except, it would appear, some of the ministers).
In the Old Covenant God promised He would make the Israelites a special nation. He would set them at the top of the nations, He would bless them physically and would give them a long life to enjoy it. (And of course, the reverse. He would curse them if they rejected Him.)
And that was it. Physical blessings for a physical nation. A long life and a happy one. But nothing after. No life after death. No punishment after death. Only the grave, "sheol".
In return, the nation had to do something. The nation as a whole had to turn away from other gods and do what God told them to do. Notice again this was the Nation. Individuals did not come into this except as being part of the Nation of God. [There were a handful of the prophets and individuals such as Moses where God dealt in a different way - they were forerunners of the New Covenant which was to be made by INDIVIDUALS, one on one with God. But this is not important in understanding the Old Covenant].
The nation failed almost immediately which is one of the lessons of the Old Covenant. Hence the physical blessings rarely came to the nation of Israel - or Israel + Judah after they split.
Having set the background, where did tithing come in?
Every year the people had to pay a tithe (10%) of their increase. Thus, if they had a really good year with bumper crops then they would pay more but they could afford more! And they kept the 9/10ths of the more. They were required to save another tenth of their increase so they could travel to and rejoice at the Festivals God gave them. Holiday money to buy whatever they wanted to eat and drink. This was purely for them and their families to eat (Steaks? Fine. Bacon? Sorry, bacon not fine but smoked, cured, thinly sliced beef would have been great!) and drink (wine definitely encouraged) and to rejoice before God but not to the extent of debauchery. They were free to share with others and this was encouraged. But it was primarily for those who had worked hard and earned it. This was NOT a "tax" paid to the government. It was for you but people were reminded to help others who were less fortunate - the widows, orphans, foreigners who had attached themselves to the nation but had no land of their own.
Lastly, every third year people paid a further tenth which was to help and support the widows, orphans, strangers who could not look after themselves. I suspect this was what was being referred to initially. Remember, this was all against the background of a nation being obedient to God and being blessed by Him above all other nations. Again, the people were told not to begrudge money that was going to help others.
There were 2 cycles of 3 years (with the social support tithe being paid on the third and sixth year). On the sixth year God promised extra blessings (primarily in agriculture). So much so that nobody would need to take a crop off the land on the 7th year. While it does not say, it would allow a cover crop to be grown (maybe the equivalent of rye grass/clover in the UK) and the land would be allowed to recover. Animals would continue to roam on the land and presumably there would be an extra number of lambs, calves etc. to go with the grain stored from the excess of the 6th year.
In the 7th year, all monetary debts would be cancelled and slaves would be released. (There is a lot about slavery in the Old Covenant that is not understood. Some of the standard practises of slavery from the deep South would never have been allowed).
Thinking about it as an annual rate of taxation and take an income (before tax/tithes) of 10,000 (dollar, pounds, shekels, whatever). I shall assume that you pay no tax (tithe) in the 7th year - you rely on the extra income from year 6.
Over a 7 year period:
1st tithe
5 oo 7 years you paid 10% of 10,000 = 5,000
6th year 10% of 20,000 = 2000
7th year 10% of nothing.
3rd tithe
1 oo 7 years you paid 10% of 10,000 = 1,000
2 oo 7 years 10% of 20,000 = 2,000
7th year 10% of nothing
Thus over a 7 year cycle, you pay 7,000 + 3,000 = 10,000 or the equivalent of one year's income or an annual rate of 14.3%. No extras. No state tax. No Value Added Tax. No property tax. No local sales tax. No duty on wine. A flat rate of under 15%.
In addition, you are required to save 10% of your increase for your holidays - generally 3 times a year, one of those being a minimum of 8 days (although it will be at one of several fixed places).
If you want to be picky, your deductions are 25% but 10% is for you and your family to enjoy and a further 5% is to help those who genuinely need support. (In addition, of course, they have gleaning rights which will help to provide a small income, based on how generous a major landowner was - and he was told he would be blessed further if he was generous!)
Note. This has absolutely NOTHING to do with how some fundamentalist churches act!!
If a minister tries to put emotional pressure on his congregation (like saying he feels suicidal because the church income is down) then get another minister who understands faith a bit better ...
@ Legion (#25) and blf (#33)
Israel observed three tithes:
1. The Priestly Tithe. This is the best known tithe, and this is what the scam, er, ministers are talking about when they say "ten percent of your income belongs to God."
This is, of course, a lie. This biblical tithe was given to the priests, but it wasn't a tenth of one's income, it was a tenth of one's harvest and newborn livestock. A candle-maker, for instance, would pay no tithe on his business.
2. The Festival Tithe. No one seems to remember this one. After the Israelites payed their Priestly Tithe, they were supposed to set aside am additional tenth of what remained. This was not given to the priests, however, but consumed by the families themselves, during Israel's religious festivals.
Since this doesn't profit the modern churches in any way, you don't hear this one preached very often.
3. The Poor Tithe. Every three years, Israel paid a tithe to "the priests, the poor, and the orphan." There's a bit of debate about this, but I think the evidence best supports the idea that this tithe replaced the priestly tithe every three years. The priests got a share, but not the whole thing, and it seemed to be left to the individual how to split the loot.
Since this would mean churches would experience a significant cut in income every three years, this is never preached.
Also, the land was not cultivated on the seventh year, so there would be no tithes then. This is also never mentioned.
So, I think, because this is complicated and the Bible is contradictory about this, that tithing looked like this:
Year 1: Priestly Tithe, Festival Tithe
Year 2: Priestly Tithe, Festival Tithe
Year 3: Poor Tithe, Festival Tithe
Year 4: Priestly Tithe, Festival Tithe
Year 5: Priestly Tithe, Festival Tithe
Year 6: Poor Tithe, Festival Tithe
Year 7: No Tithes
And then the cycle would repeat.
#73 and #74 crossed but are in close agreement. Our main disagreement is about whether or not the poor tithe replaces the priestly tithe on the 3rd and 6th years.
The priestly tithe (or first tithe) basically paid for the running of the Government of the nation which was done by the Levites. In return, the tribe of Levi had no land (which meant the other tribes had more).
#73
Sorry, I did not close the italics properly. Of the long para in italics, only the word more should have been! Ah well!!
@Alan B (#75)
The reason I think the third-year tithe replaced the priestly tithe is in Deuteronomy 26:
The language here isn't setting up a new tithe, it's discussing a tithe that already exists. But I fully admit that I could be wrong. People with far more knowledge than me disagree on how to read this.
The big point, though, is that tithing was never as simple as "give the church a tenth of your income."
#77 thomas.c.galvin
I agree. Tithing is also not commanded in the New Covenant (although giving as you are able and of your own free will is).
And I can see your point about whether the poor tithe replaces the priestly tithe. What I wrote is what I have understood - I may well be wrong.
Totally different subject:
You appear not to be registered (blank square next to your name)? Are you aware registration will be required very shortly? - see PZM's message on the Main page.
@Alan B (#78)
I'm logged in via Google, because TypePad is a cruel and vicious mistress, and I don't know how to appease her. When PZ flips the switch, I'll see if some of the suggestions in the other thread help.
Usually a link to George Carlin's religion routine is mandatory, but in this case Warren implied that the money was for fellow sheeple and not for god. He lied of course but hey, he might throw 2% at his sheeple then claim how much good the money has done and how god wants more to help even more sheeple.
Every mention of Rick Warren makes me sick as it reminds me of Obama's big "Fuck Youuuuu!" to LGBT people at his inauguration.
That blank square is actually an indication that he is logged in! It's the result of the ScienceBlogs or SixApart bods failing to upload to the relevant directory the rest of the account-identifying logos.
What you see instead of the missing image is browser dependent. It's typically either something like that image place-holder you're seeing or it's the alt text that was provided with the defective img tag, viz: "Author Profile Page" (which, ideally, would be an image link to said page).
Thanks, SEF. That's a relief. I'd hate to be denied my opportunity to snark on Warren's misinterpretation of levitical taxation. ;-)
Well, the Democrats have religionist homophobes in their ranks to cater to as well.
@Akira MacKenzie(#84)
I think that was more of an olive branch thing. Like Obama was saying "it's all right if you're a religionist homophobe, you're more than welcome to have a place at the table while I don't do any of the things I campaigned on."
What annoyed me was how Democrats felt they had to pander to religious voters the last election in order to shed the "secular" stereotype:
"Hey! We believe in God too! Jesus rocks; we just think he'd support national health care and poverty programs rather than the Irag War and the NRA... BUT JESUS ROCKS!!! So please vote for us blue-collar whites and minorities! Not all of us are urban, non-religious, intellectuals! Pleeeeease! We'll be your best friend and ignores those homos you hate so much."
I left the GOP to escape that sort of bullshit.
Gah! Proofreading! I must remember to proofread!
Forgive the dumb-assed spelling errors folks. I have this nasty tendency to submit before I spell/grammar check
@Akira MacKenzie
As did I. And I don't regret that decision; Obama is still light years better than McCain would have been. It's just that, compared to all the good he could have done, and that he promised to do, Obama seems like a disappointment.
Obama and the Dems need to realize that the GOP is never going to work with them, no matter how many principles they abandon. Look at how many compromises they made with health care, and look what it bought them in terms of Republican support: nothing.
I'm waiting for the day when we can finally tell the wackaloons that, sorry, the adults have work to do, and they're being distracting.
Fleecing is My favourite type of miracle.
http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/9931/newidiocyjesus.jpg
Rorschach,
I'm not sure of a lawsuit against Warren? I do know that one of his nut wing buds, Rod Parsley and his church in Ohio were sued for negligence arising from an incident involving a child recently.
Maybe it's just me but
sounds really sinister to me, just like
They are both creepy names.
"Saddleback" is the name of a pig breed (having a broad stripe - but across the shoulder more than the back). I think I've been told (many years/decades ago) that it's a rather nice one. I don't actually have any pigs myself though.
There's also http://www.saddlebacking.com/
PZ: It wasn't a miracle: a better word would be a fleecing.
8: Seems pretty clear who owns the saddle and whose backs it goes on.
15: And just maybe we will put new tires on the Rev's Porsche.
27: I don't see what the difference is between this and Reverend Ike.
30: Baa, baa, slack-jawed sheep
My coffers can you fill?
Yes sir, yes sir,
$2.4 M. in the till.
Some for our pastor….
41: "Dang.. here I am, spent all that time writing that STUPID book in order to make some money, while all I had to do was simply ASK for it!"
65: Maybe Rick is employing a handful of people off this money, but I bet most of it is making its way to his pockets.
67: To become a millionaire you only need to convince 1 million people to give you a dollar.
Pharyngula and many of its readers are as predictable (and as thoughtful) as a Sarah Palin speech.
Contempt and intolerance for those with whom they disagree? Check.
Sanctimonious focus on how they use evidence-based reasoning while their opponents don’t? Check.
Failure to employ evidence-based reasoning with respect to favored pre-conceived notions? Check.
According to numerous press reports (for example, here), on account of the success of his writing, Warren takes no salary from the church, repaid 25 years of salary, and gives away 90% of his income.
Ironically, one can readily criticize Warren and his church for their spending priorities (despite millions spent on such things as Katrina and tsunami relief along with various church programs), but the focus here is on false claims which perpetuate the local stereotype ("They're all crooks, I tell you!"), actual facts be damned.
The only remaining question seems to be whether this nonsense is predicated upon woeful ignorance or willful fabrication.
Robocop, do your homework. Warren runs the fucking Saddleback church! He doesn't need to take a salary to direct its operations. And just who do you think is buying up Warren's schlock?
What aratina said! Is a bar owner being generous by allowing free admission on ladies night? Catch a clue, futuristic bionic lawkeeper.
96: Robocop, do your homework.
Then kindly direct me to the evidence that Warren is stealing from the church.
And just who do you think is buying up Warren's schlock?
Saddleback is a big church, but since Warren has sold millions of books, members of his church can only be buying a tiny fraction of them.
Robocop, Warren is the church (8th largest in the USA with 20,000 in attendance weekly). He lives and breathes it. When people give to Saddleback Church, they effectively do business with Warren (he is the Baptist pope in that respect). No need to steal from something that is a part of you.
Question: Would the average person who purchased one of Warren's publications not willingly sit through a service at Saddleback Church if they could? Maybe you are right. Maybe hardly anyone that has attended, wants to attend, or is attending Saddleback Church has purchased a copy of one of Warren's publications. I doubt it but you could be right.
99: When people give to Saddleback Church, they effectively do business with Warren (he is the Baptist pope in that respect). No need to steal from something that is a part of you.
The common claim here is that the money Saddleback brings in will go to things like a Porsche for Warren (#15). I readily acknowledge that Warren has the leading role in deciding how the Saddleback Church spends the donations it takes in. But if your claim is that these expenditures were somehow illegal or were designed to benefit Warren directly and financially, I simply want to see some evidence of it before jumping on the Pharyngula bandwagon that equates Warren with Elmer Gantry.
Who paid for the Popemobile? Being the leader of a megachurch does have its perks. All part of the job, of course.
101: Being the leader of a megachurch does have its perks.
So what perks are you complaining about?
#82, #83
Sorry about the confusion - I was trying to be helpful (failed but the motive was OK). Some of the way the site is set up seems strange ...
That I was complaining about perks is an unWarrented assumption.
Yawn, Robocrock still doesn't get the hypocrisy of preachers. They should be poverty stricken. So poverty stricken they should find a real job and stop preaching nonsense. Nonsense like their imaginary deity exists and the babble isn't a work of fiction.
Why doesn't he make the books public???? Saddleback is usually described as nondenominational, but Warren is straight Southern Baptist, and tradition in Southern Baptist churches is for the entire membership to review and vote on the church budget at regular intervals. Most of the churchgoers I know would throw fits if they didn't have access to the ledgers - I've seen pretty epic fights break out at business meetings. I can understand that in a megachurch it might not be reasonable to let everyone weigh in on it, but the lack of transparency is incredibly disturbing. Not just because it's easy to hide things, but because even if they're being above board with all the money, it's a pretty honking huge chunk of hubris to think that a very select few leaders know best about how to spend the millions of dollars they take in and that everyone else should just trust them and pony up.
104: That I was complaining about perks is an unWarrented assumption.
So do you have specific complaints about Warren's personal finances or not?
105: Robocrock still doesn't get the hypocrisy of preachers.
Many are routinely hypocritical. I suspect that all sometimes are. But that is not to say that all (or even many) are intentionally out to fleech their parishioners or the public. My personal experience has been quite the opposite.
106: Why doesn't he make the books public?
Why do you assume they aren't?
Is your misunderstanding intentional?
Is your misunderstanding intentional?
Is your refusal to be specific about any wrongs Warren is said to have committed intentional?
If you claim some financial impropriety or lack of ethics, either Warren is receiving money he shouldn't be receiving or he's getting other benefits as a result of his position such that he can be accused of "feathering his own nest" with respect to the referenced appeal. If you have specific evidence of such malfeasance (or of some other wrong I'm not considering) I'd like to see it. Got any?
The clergy uniformly claim knowledge regarding an unknowable phenomenon to make money. They are either highly delusional or intend to fleece their parishoners, or both.
The basic point is not that Warren is doing anything illegal, but that he is a delusional asshole. Further, he is a delusional asshole who depends on the stupidity of the public for wealth. Saddleback Church is a part of the plan...whether he derives any actual wealth from that front is besides the fecking point. He derives ill-earned credibility from his appearance of charity and this sells books.
Robocrock still doesn't get the point. Those who claim that their imaginary deity exists and their fictional babble is true should not be asking for money like that. If they have money troubles, they should let the church die. It is a sign that their imaginary deity wants them to close up shop. Or, at the very least cut back on expenses. End of story.
Robocop doesn't understand metaphors when they are not in Teh Babble.
110: The clergy uniformly claim knowledge regarding an unknowable phenomenon to make money.
The clegy I know are paid (almost always small) salaries to serve their congregations based upon mutual consent.
They are either highly delusional or intend to fleece their parishoners, or both.
So no specific evidence then.
Got it.
111: Those who claim that their imaginary deity exists and their fictional babble is true should not be asking for money like that. If they have money troubles, they should let the church die. It is a sign that their imaginary deity wants them to close up shop. Or, at the very least cut back on expenses. End of story.
My local Red Cross had a budget shortfall at the end of the year. The organization asked donors to meet the shortfall. Warren did the exact same thing. End of story.
112: Robocop doesn't understand metaphors when they are not in Teh Babble.
In other words, you have no specific evidence of wrongdoing to offer.
Wrong. The Red Cross does not claim to have an inside track to the big sky daddy and does not fund initiatives to deny people of civil rights. The Red Cross and Saddleback have different directives.
Wrongdoing or illegal action? Has anyone accused Warren of doing something illegal? (None of what you listed in #95 do that by the way.) I think you are too wrapped up in law-speak or fundamentalism or something. Just about everything Warren does is wrongdoing in the moral and ethical sense.
115: The Red Cross and Saddleback have different directives.
Of course they do. But the claims I challenged were not related to the alleged inherent flaws of religion and religious organizations generally. I would simply like to see any evidence supporting the specific claims made here that Warren was or is involved in financial chicanery, particularly in light of published reports stating that Warren takes no salary on account of the success of his books, has repaid the salary he received over the years from his church, and gives 90% of his royalty income away (totalling many millions of dollars). If true, that strikes me as highly commendable even if one disagrees with his charitable choices. Accordingly, I am interested in any evidence of financial wrongdoing, especially in light of the number and vehemence of the claims here that Warren is (essentially) a crook.
Do you have any such evidence to offer?
Seeing that I am one of those people whose rights are being curtailed by the actions of Rick Warren, I do not find his acts of charity to be commendable. My problem with Warren is not if he is involved in financial fraud, it is because he uses his money to deny people their civil rights.
116: Has anyone accused Warren of doing something illegal? (None of what you listed in #95 do that by the way.)
The examples I listed in #95 do indeed allege or imply specific illegality and/or ethical impropriety relating to Warren and the money raised. If your claims are limited to your general views relating to religious organizations generally (including Saddleback Church) rather than to specific allegations of wrongdoing by Warren, I'll take your word for it. But, at a minimum, I think a fair reading of this thread suggests much more than that by many others.
They do not accuse Warren of doing anything illegal. Some wonder about the possibility of impropriety and others are purely metaphors that you didn't get (like the Porsche one). No wonder you couldn't answer how you would determine if a book you just cracked open was fiction or nonfiction; no wonder you said you would go to the "experts" whoever they might be.
Mine too.
118: Seeing that I am one of those people whose rights are being curtailed by the actions of Rick Warren, I do not find his acts of charity to be commendable. My problem with Warren is not if he is involved in financial fraud, it is because he uses his money to deny people their civil rights.
I disagree with some of his choices too, even while I applaud many of them (including millions of dollars for things such as Katrina and tsunami relief). I also think he was way too slow (and perhaps disingenuous) in distancing himself from and condemning the proposed Ugandan anti-gay legislation. But those issues are quite different from those I have been questioning in this thread.
120: Some wonder about the possibility of impropriety and others are purely metaphors that you didn't get (like the Porsche one).
I'm just sure the Rev. Ike reference and the claim that "I bet most of it is making its way to his pockets" weren't meant to imply any wrongdoing whatsoever on Warren's part, nosireebob.
975robocop, I have to say that I am rather uncomfortable with a church claiming tax-exempt status and then using its ministry to influence an election and overturn the rights of a minority. I have not seen the Red Cross do anything like this. I have not seen the Red Cross refuse to hire people because of some inate characteristic. I have not seen them try to influence legislation in foreign lands.
I have seen Pastor Warren dining with politicians and the powerful more than I have seen him dining with the poor and downtrodden. So, I ask you: Is Saddleback a church or a political action committee? I think it is something they must decide.
Robocrock, why are you being so stoopid? This has been going on for many threads now, which doesn't help your cause at all, as you appear very foolish. We aren't saying Warren is a crook, but considering that religion is a con, he is a con man. What part of that don't you understand? Maybe you don't understand that religion is a con game because you are a delusional believer too. You could change our minds with hard physical evidence, but you haven't presented anything conclusive to date.
When religion gets involved in politics and tries to influence legislation, it oversteps the bounds of the social contract. That is our second gripe. If Warren kept to his church, and didn't try to be a politcal force, he wouldn't be on the receiving end of our scorn. Why don't you complain to him about his political acts?
Robocop, there is nothing commendable about charity when it is tied to the harming of a population. To make the claim that even people who disagree with Warren should find his charity commendable is insane troll. Subsistence when tied to poison is a terrible concoction. It is possible to help people in need without turning the action political.
That is the essence of Warren's fraud. Not that he is lining his pocket. For a secular example of this, see Richard J Daley, mayor of Chicago from 1955 until his death in 1976. His aim was not to be rich but to weld power. Warren is the same type of power seeker.
123: I have to say that I am rather uncomfortable with a church claiming tax-exempt status and then using its ministry to influence an election and overturn the rights of a minority.
The IRS has very specific rules about what a charitable organization can and cannot do in the political arena. If there is evidence of Saddleback's having crossed any applicable line, I'd be interested in seeing that evidence.
I have seen Pastor Warren dining with politicians and the powerful more than I have seen him dining with the poor and downtrodden. So, I ask you: Is Saddleback a church or a political action committee?
Despite the obvious connection, Saddleback and Warren aren't synonymous. But you raise a fair question.
125: [T]here is nothing commendable about charity when it is tied to the harming of a population.
When an organization has multiple endeavors, it will always be open to this kind of criticism. My local United Way allows specific designations to try to get around this problem and to get some who would otherwise go somewhere else to give.
To make the claim that even people who disagree with Warren should find his charity commendable is insane troll.
I see nothing necessarily insane with commending his having given millions of dollars to causes I support despite my disagreements, sometimes very strong, with some of his other choices. But I acknowledge that reasonable people could differ on this.
His aim was not to be rich but to weld power. Warren is the same type of power seeker.
I haven't seen evidence to convince me of this, but it is surely a genuine risk.
I haven't seen evidence to convince me of this, but it is surely a genuine risk.
A man sees just what he wants to see and disregards the rest.
I said it before and I will say it again, a person who disagrees with Warren does not have to find Warren's charitable activities commendable.
And, yes, as the founder and leader of Saddleback, Warren is synonymous with his church.
127: A man sees just what he wants to see and disregards the rest.
Indeed.
Which applies to you as well as to me (as I'm sure Paul Simon would agree). It's one great song....
It's one great song....Yes it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hqdZ4AWSaI
It's one great song....Yes it is.
Thank you for the link. I remember watching that SNL episode live (I was in college at the time). And the 1981 S&G Concert in Central Park included The Boxer too. That concert was probably the most memorable I've ever attended (from a list that includes Dylan, McCartney, the Beach Boys, Rostropovich, Pavarotti, Domingo, Elton, Aretha, the Eagles, Chicago, Taylor, Stern, Dizzy, B.B., Kenton, Sinatra, Ronstadt, Valli, the Temptations, Raitt, Summer, the Spinners, Joel...).
It was quite an evening.
"Stern"?
Robocop, that concert would have been a blast. Lucky! Nothing I've been to would ever come close to that.
Robocop, you still have explained to me why I should commend Warren's charitable activities.
131: "Stern"?
Issac.
132: Robocop, that concert would have been a blast. Lucky!
Indeed. It's still a vivid memory almost three decades later. My wife and I arrived pretty early and walked past a car parked on a pathway in the Park while heading closer to the stage. The crowds ended up being much bigger than expected (duh!) and, while walking out, we saw that same car -- with all four tires flat and resting with it's chassis along the ground from people standing on it to try to get a better view.
133: [Y]ou still have[n't] explained to me why I should commend Warren's charitable activities.
As I noted, reasonable minds can differ on this. But I think a decision to give away 90% of one's income (totalling millions of dollars) in order to try to serve others, even if misguided at specific points, along with his having repaid all his salary over the years, is commendable. According to various press reports I've seen, he has donated millions to tsunami and Katrina relief, to fight AIDS in Africa and to various other worthwhile causes. That's a good thing overall, I think.
Rick Warren also has his fingers in the military pie. Jeff Sharlet (the author who also revealed the craziness behind the C-Street facade) has written about the plans of a few Americans to create a Christian military.
It's not charity if Warren ends up supporting activities within the military that result in soldiers being forced to pray, to attend Christian services, etc. Of course, we can't blame all this on Warren, but he is implicated, as are many other evangelicals. Here's a bit more from Jeff Sharlet:
136: It's not charity if Warren ends up supporting activities within the military that result in soldiers being forced to pray, to attend Christian services, etc. Of course, we can't blame all this on Warren, but he is implicated, as are many other evangelicals.
While the article you link offers much with which to be concerned, the extent of Warren's "implication" is (a) his having spoken to a group of officers (it is not claimed that the meeting was sanctioned or required), and (b) the (mis)use of themes from his book by two officers. That hardly makes Warren a bad guy in that story, especially in context.
Seeing that I am among those who are the target of Rick Warren's homophobia and that he spends his money on bills that curtails my rights, I am unable to be reasonable about His charity. And, frankly, it does not bother me to be unreasonable in your eyes. As for the AIDS prevention in Africa, he spends money on the worst form of prevention, abstinence. Before Rick Warren declared Uganda to be a purpose driven nation and started pushing his influence there, they stressed condom use.
Robocop, you have not shown how a person who disagrees with Warren can still admire his charity. And stressing how much money it is does not cut it.
Lynna, you are not being reasonable if you do not give Rick Warren the benefit of the doubt. And above all, we must be reasonable, even if your are the target of Rick Warren's ire.
Lynna and Janine, check out the news on Rhode Island.
Aratina, can you please be more specific?
138: Seeing that I am among those who are the target of Rick Warren's homophobia and that he spends his money on bills that curtails my rights, I am unable to be reasonable about His charity.
I'm aware of his support for Prop 8. What else do you have in mind here?
And, frankly, it does not bother me to be unreasonable in your eyes.
Since I stated -- three times -- that reasonable minds could differ on this point, your claim that I see you as unreasonable strikes me as odd.
I'm aware of his support for Prop 8. What else do you have in mind here?
Fuck! Isn't that enough!
Since I stated -- three times -- that reasonable minds could differ on this point, your claim that I see you as unreasonable strikes me as odd.
Because you said that even people who did not agree with Rick Warren can commend his charity. I cannot because his charity is tainted by poison. Fuck but you are dense.
Sorry Janine, I should have given more detail. Remember the thread Don't Die Gay in R.I.? The lawmakers there just handed the governor of Rhode Island his ass by overwhelmingly overriding his anti-gay veto. It is pleasing to see the wrongs righted.
I just read that. Applause to the RI legislature for being non-bigoted.
Thank you Aratina. I just found it.
It is a relief. But how sad is it that such relief can be felt for allowing people to act as responsible adult?
How long before Rick Warren tries to toss his political weight in Rhode Island? (Yes, I am needling the very reasonable Robocop.)
143: Isn't that enough!
It's perfectly understandable. But I thought your use of "curtails my rights" might be implying something more, so I asked.
Because you said that even people who did not agree with Rick Warren can commend his charity.
I think they can. When I was younger, I thought more like you. But as I've gotten older, I've taken the view that if everything and everyone that disagrees with me becomes anathema, I'll eventually be standing all by myself. Accordingly, I pay attention to intent more now than I once did. For example, when I think President Obama has erred seriously, I'm more likely (today) to give him the benefit of the doubt because I think he essentially means well. From a different perspective, I think it's foolish for me to expect people I accuse of being unreasonable, irrational, delusional or evil to work or make common cause with me at some future point. It's probably my biggest thought about the crowd at Pharyngula -- why would you ever expect those of us you see as worthy of contempt or even as being inferior (which, seemingly at least, is the vast majority of the public) to play ball with you? Ever?
Janine @139, Right. I should give Rick Warren the benefit of the doubt. The fact that his Purpose Driven Life book is snuck into Air Force classes, undercover so to speak, as the basis for an anti-suicide talk is not Warren's fault. Why does Lt. General Rod Bishop, commander Third Air Force, use Warren's book? Must be a coincidence. Note the conflation of "Darwinism" with Lenin and Stalin in the slide "What's the Big Idea." The "3 Levels of Purpose" slide bashes Darwin as well -- and all this info is straight out of Warren's book. It's not a misuse of Warren's book, it's exactly how Warren intended his book to be used.
Nor is it Warren's fault that a military helicopter is used to fly him around Rwanda on one of his many charitable trips there, trips in which one of the goals is to tout abstinence as opposed to condom use in AIDs prevention.
On the Fox News show Hannity & Colmes, Warren, flexed his Christian military muscles to offer a solution to the problems in the Middle East: the state-sponsored assassination by the U.S. of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Warren said that "the Bible says God puts government on Earth to punish evildoers," and then agreed with Sean Hannity that "we need to take him out."
In 2005, Warren told Fortune Magazine that "certain body parts are meant to fit together." This is known as the "Lego system proof" against homosexuality. In an interview with Larry King, Warren claimed to be "wired by God to like women." Janine may be tired of cutting Warren some slack when he comes up with crap like this, and then backs the concepts up with his "charitable" contributions.
But as I've gotten older, I've taken the view that if everything and everyone that disagrees with me becomes anathema, I'll eventually be standing all by myself.
Facepalm.
I disagree with everybody on different issues, that is not a problem. The problem comes, pay attention now, when that person actively works at curtailing my rights! DO YOU SEE THE FUCKING DIFFERENCE! That is what makes Rick Warren anathema.
Oh, gee, Rick Warren and and his followers think that I am evil. Well, I guess I must just roll.
Robocop, I would rather stand by myself than to stand with you. Fortunately, I do not have to stand by myself.
Thanks, aratina, for the heads-up on the Rhode Island vote! Yay!
No, you don't. If RC has been paying any attention, he would know that most of the regulars support each other. Minor things like sex, skin color, or sexual orientation don't mean anything. Major things like being a bigot does make a difference.
RC, you are considered a well meaning fool by many of us. Which means we are likely to consider the opposite of what you to be what is true. That comes with believing in imaginary deities.
Warren wants people like Janine to be killed. How does that make Warren in any way commendable? Quite likely Warren is nice to his mother and says "thank you" to the janitors cleaning the toilets at his church. He's also a raging homophobe who pushed hard for the Ugandan "kill the queers" law.
I said:
Perhaps I was too pithy.
Rick Warren asks his members for money to make up the "shortfall". This shortfall would not exist were it not for the "good work" of the Church doing things like preaching abstinence in Rwanda and "offering forgiveness" to those who have HIV.1 "Good work" like fighting to pass Proposition 8 in California.
Rick Warren directly benefits from his leadership of the church through having a pulpit to preach and be heard on whatever subject he likes, whether or not he is qualified. He attempts to remodel the world to match his beliefs.
Some of his methods are laudable (condom distribution, needle exchange) and some are reprehensible (advocacy of science rejection and teaching science rejection to children). All are based on his personal whims, tempered only by what he is called to account on. It only took him two weeks to decide that homosexuality should not carry the death penalty and that he could speak up about it.
Here's a bright line rule: if you are happy meddling in California politics, you should be happy speaking up about Ugandan politics. Warren gave them "Purpose Driven Lives"2 but then is oh so conflicted about meddling in their politics? It stretches credulity.
Whether you believe Rick Warren is doing the "right" thing or not, he decides what to do with the money that his congregation provides. His congregation is made up of the "volunteers", "pioneers", "missionaries" that do his bidding as he directs through his inspiration from God.
If you are carried around where you want to go on the backs of others because you can see better due to your higher position, how is that not like riding a horse?
Warren is a demigoddemagogue who claims a special ability to succeed based on his holiness and following of God's plan. For him to beg his members to make up a shortfall is either hypocrisy (if he doesn't believe), delusion (if he believes that God wants him to fleece his sheep), or damning (if Warren was special to God but has lost that favor).
1. http://www.rwandahealthcare.com/pages/about
2. http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080331/rick-warren-launches-purp…
149: Robocop, I would rather stand by myself than to stand with you.
Since I publicly opposed Prop 8 and voted against it, and since I publicly oppose creationism in all its forms, I suspect that your position in this regard is very short-sighted. If you won't ever stand with me (because I find some of what Warren does commendable and am a Christian?), the level of ideological conformity you're demanding is, I would suggest, inordinately high. Not very many people will make it into your circle of purity.
Perhaps more significantly, although I could be misreading you, your contempt for me and my ilk seems to drip from the page. A free society gives you that right, of course, but I'd also suggest that this is likely to be counterproductive. In my experience, the best way to overcome bigotry is to make connections at a personal level. That probably seems unfair to you and I agree. You are being oppressed yet are being asked to reach out to your oppressors. But love your enemies; do good to those that hate you is still good advice. You won't be making many connections, much less real relationships, if you refuse ever to stand with the vast majority of people -- those outside your very small circle of purity.
Good for you, you are more tolerant then Rick Warren. Such an accomplishment. As has been pointed out multiple times, I have good reason not to find the charity Rick Warren commendable. Refer to Lynna's very informative post at #148.
Let's toss out a hypothetical situation. Assume that David Duke ran a charitable organization that gave millions to poor people. Would that be enough to make his racism tolerable? It is for that reason that I do not care about Warren's charity. It has poison in it.
I would not stand with you not because you are a christian. It is I find to to be a condescending fool. I would rather be with the like of Scott Hatfield and Leigh Williams than with you.
You are so correct, because I rebuke you, I will rebuke most other people. The only circle of purity is in your own head, an explanation of why I would possibly reject such a reasonable person like you. I gave you my reasons but you would rather deal with your own construct of who I am.
I show contempt for people who oppress me and those for those who find some of their actions commendable. How intolerant of me.
I do not need to a free society to have that right. Being alive and sentient is enough.
Not everyone that is around me is a Rick Warren. I do not have to reject everyone around me out of hand.
And you continue to be condescending towards me. I have not made any talk about the fairness and unfairness of my condition in decades. I am not a waife, do not speak to me like I am a child.
I can and do try to reach out to people around me. But I have little sympathy for those who actively oppress people like me.
Hey, you maybe be a misogynist and homophobe and you want to see me harmed but let's talk. I am sure that there is some way I can convince you that as a human, I have equal status as you.
I have been threatened by queer bashers in the past, I would rather break bread with people who do not want to break my face.
Not everyone is a Rick Warren. Not everyone is like you in that you find Rick Warren to have some redemptive qualities. My options is not limited to people like Warren or people just like me. I do not have a purity test. I am not isolated and cut off.
But guess what. I do not need Rick Warren. And I do not need you. Fuck off you smug, small minded idiot. I am part of a world that is much larger then you, me and Rick Warren. My options are much larger. How dare you tell me how small my world is. Go find an other dyke who would like to play patty cake about the issue of Rick Warren.
155: Assume that David Duke ran a charitable organization that gave millions to poor people. Would that be enough to make his racism tolerable?
I reject the premise of the question in that I would likely find the charity commendable while being disgusted by the rascism.
It is I find to to be a condescending fool.
A man sees just what he wants to see and disregards the rest.
I show contempt for people who oppress me and those for those who find some of their actions commendable.
So essentially everyone, from President Obama on down, is the object of your contempt. It's not just a circle of purity; it's a circle of sanctimony.
Hey, you maybe be a misogynist and homophobe and you want to see me harmed but let's talk. I am sure that there is some way I can convince you that as a human, I have equal status as you.
I've seen it happen.
I have been threatened by queer bashers in the past, I would rather break bread with people who do not want to break my face.
You have already demonstrated that the universe of those you hold in contempt extends far, far beyond those who want to break your face.
Bored now...