Script boy!

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

Another insightful rant by Guest Blogger, Hoodathunk (Story Time), this time taking on political and religious hypocrisy.

‘Time for a rewrite, this scene just isn’t working.’  There’s an old

saying that the pen is mightier than the sword.  There is something even mightier — the eraser.  Or, in this age, White Out.  (It is called that because paper is white and ink comes in many colors but that’s another rant).  We are seeing a movement today aimed at rewriting history on many levels.  Modern history by portraying the actions of the previous administration as glorious and noble, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary.  And early American history so that the founding fathers who, almost to a man, were pretty much secular humanists according to the existing historical records which include reams of personal writings from all of them become staunch supporters of modern day Christianists.

This practice is not a new one, particularly when politics and Christianity mix.  Back some 1,500 years ago Christianity got its big leg up into the political arena when Constantine decided it would be a great idea to have a popular religion backing his political power.  He gathered up a bunch of bishops and scholars and tasked them with coming up with a codification of teachings that the general population could get behind and hence behind him.  So they vetted the existing writings, picked the ones they thought would work and came up with the beginnings of the Bible as we know it today.  They did this under God’s watchful eye, immersing themselves in holiness while they hung out as the Emperor’s guests.  (Did I mention they then tried to destroy all the existing copies of the writings they deemed unworthy?)

A modern analogy would be if the country’s top Republicans all gathered at GW’s ranch and decided just what Executive memos could be released to the public.  Whether Reagonism or Nixonian doctrine should be included so that everything would look nice and peachy for the public.  Obviously, these scholars would have no political agenda and would only publish the truth for posterity’s sake.  Sort of like Tom Ridge.  And one could also claim they would be divinely guided in their efforts because everyone knows God blesses America.  Fifteen hundred years from now people will be praying to the Divine Bush.  Scary thought.

Constantine and GW also share another little quirk.  Constantine said Jesus appeared to him in a cloud on his way to sacking Rome, encouraging him to do so.  GW skipped the cloud part about Iraq.  I have a bit of a problem with this sort of intervention.  If you talk to your cornflakes at breakfast, you would probably be considered eccentric or weird.  If the cornflakes talk back, you are crossing the line into neurosis.  If you go out and try to get people to do what the cornflakes tell you to do, you have gone over into full-blown psychosis.  But if you do it for political reasons, like taking over a country, you are some sort of saint or hero, at minimum very blessed.

I know this to be untrue.  My Malt-o-Meal told me that cornflakes are jealous liars.  They’re just mad because they aren’t the only breakfast cereal in the world anymore.

I know this to be untrue.  My Malt-o-meal told me that cornflakes are jealous liars.  They’re just mad because they aren’t the only breakfast cereal in the world anymore.
‘Time for a rewrite, this scene just isn’t working.’  There is an old saying that the pen is mightier than the sword.  There is something even mightier, the eraser.  Or, in this age, White Out.  (It is called that because paper is white and ink comes in many colors but that’s another rant).  We are seeing a movement today aimed at rewriting history on many levels.  Modern history by portraying the actions of the previous administration as glorious and noble, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary.  And early American history so that the founding fathers who, almost to a man, were pretty much secular humanists according to the existing historical records which include reams of personal writings from all of them become staunch supporters of modern day Christianists.
This practice is not a new one, particularly when politics and Christianity mix.  Back some 1,500 years ago Christianity got its big leg up into the political arena when Constantine decided it would be a great idea to have a popular religion backing his political power.  He gathered up a bunch of bishops and scholars and tasked them with coming up with a codification of teachings that the general population could get behind and hence behind him.  So they vetted the existing writings, picked the ones they thought would work and came up with the beginnings of the Bible as we know it today.  They did this under God’s watchful eye, immersing themselves in holiness while they hung out as the Emperor’s guests.  (Did I mention they then tried to destroy all the existing copies of the writings they deemed unworthy?)
A modern analogy would be if the country’s top Republicans all gathered at GW’s ranch and decided just what Executive memos could be released to the public.  Whether Reagonism or Nixonian doctrine should be included so that everything would look nice and peachy for the public.  Obviously, these scholars would have no political agenda and would only publish the truth for posterity’s sake.  Sort of like Tom Ridge.  And one could also claim they would be divinely guided in their efforts because everyone knows God blesses America.  Fifteen hundred years from now people will be praying to the Divine Bush.  Scary thought.
Constantine and GW also share another little quirk.  Constantine said Jesus appeared to him in a cloud on his way to sacking Rome, encouraging him to do so.  GW skipped the cloud part about Iraq.  I have a bit of a problem with this sort of intervention.  If you talk to your cornflakes at breakfast, you would probably be considered eccentric or weird.  If the cornflakes talk back, you are crossing the line into neurosis.  If you go out and try to get people to do what the cornflakes tell you to do, you have gone over into full-blown psychosis.  But if you do it for political reasons, like taking over a country, you are some sort of saint or hero, at minimum very blessed.

7 thoughts on “Script boy!

  1. On the topic of religious and political hypocrisy..
    Read this article from Wednesday post on Common Dreams:

    Why Is Universal Health Care ‘Un-American’?
    by Rev. Jim Rigby

    Just a few tastes..

    “If an infant is born to poor parents, would we be more ethical to give medicine to that child so he or she does not die prematurely of preventable diseases, or would we be more ethical if we let the child die screaming in his or her parent’s arms so we can keep more of our money?”

    “I can’t believe I am standing today in a Christian church defending the proposition that we should lessen the suffering of those who cannot afford health care in an economic system that often treats the poor as prey for the rich. I cannot believe there are Christians around this nation who are shouting that message down and waving guns in the air because they don’t want to hear it. But I learned along time ago that churches are strange places; charity is fine, but speaking of justice is heresy in many churches.
    The late Brazilian bishop Dom Hélder Câmara said it well: “When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a Communist.” Too often today in the United States, if you talk about helping the poor, they call you Christian, but if you actually try to do something to help the poor, they call you a socialist.”

    “It’s amazing to hear Christians who talk about the right to life as though it ends at birth. They believe every egg has a right to hatch, but as soon as you’re born, it’s dog eat dog. We may disagree on when life begins, but if the right to life means anything it means that every person (anyone who has finished the gestation period) has a right to life. And if there is a right to life there must be a right to the necessities of life. Like health care.”

  2. Excellent comment, muse. It makes me think of this cry of volunteerism, all the strong individualists who say they want to choose who to help, not be told.

    If this concept really worked, along with honest free market capitalism and competition and such, why are we forced into having the discussions we are having? If all of the damned independent Republican ideas are so effective, why are we in the shithole we are in?

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s