Surfin' USA

I mean, this is kinda funny. That's supposed to be Jesus, not John Kerry.

Nothing that I wouldn't have drawn in the margins of my copybook during religion class. I might have given it its own page. It's from a graphic novel (that means comics for adults) -type thingee that just earned its creator an arrest warrant from the European Union.

Yup. Here in the land of museums showing crucifixes in urine (you know) and calling such asininity art, arresting someone for such a thing would be so 17th century. We're so hip in the stodgy ol' US, it makes me puke sometimes. But Europe, which is far hipper than us, wants to nail this guy.

Now, in the old days, blasphemy was a real art form in Europe. Americans today don't even know what "cursing" is, and why it was considered so bad. The English used to swear by divine genitals, and an Italian friend once taught me how to call The Master of the Universe a pig. Now that's some imagination. But the fun might be over in the Old World.



I did get a few things out of religion class. (One of 'em was taught by Sister Miriam Paul. Nuns used to take male names, for reasons I don't want to think about. We just called her Gronk.)

Ironically, Jesus Himself, capital aitch, would not have been so upset about being mocked like this. In Matthew 16, He says,

"And whoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age, or in the age to come..."

The Son of Man is Jesus, of course. (Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is attributing the works of God to the Devil, or some say, to man.)


The reason for the EU arrest order is purely political, making a test case of Jesus. But if He was OK with it, what's the problem?

The real worry in Europe is the interpretations of Islam that dictate a death sentence for blaspheming the Prophet Mohammed, ala Salman Rushdie, author of The Satanic Verses. The title refers to a legend that Mohammed dictated some (discarded) verses of the Qur'an under the influence of you-know-who. Since Mohammed is seen as working under the influence of the Holy Spirit, well, see above.

Rushdie found himself on the receiving end of a religious decree calling for all good Muslims to do him in. He hid out for years, although these days he shows his face now and then.


The EU is trying to set a precedent, because their Muslim population is skyrocketing. What you can say and what you can't over there looks to be in for a major shakedown.


The United States has dealt with the problem of Jesus, at least: we decided we won't stop anyone from putting Him in pee, but it's probably a good idea that the government not contribute any money to help museums exhibit it.

In Europe, the erstwhile Mecca of Really Great Cursing, freedom of speech has been taken for granted. With its nascent EU and growing Muslim minority, it has just entered a new frontier.

The Faith Card

Re my consideration of the GOP's inability to resonate with Black America, except a bit among the religious-minded, Brother Daly comments:

And that is why the left is SO opposed to the Faith-Based Initiative and why they have revved up the "Separation of Church and State" crowd...

I don't know if they're thinking that far ahead, Jim. The left, which seems to be ideologically the same in both the US and Europe, appears to have a visceral hostility to Jerusalem, figuratively speaking (and literally, if you poke around the CUANAS blog this site links to).

But there definitely could be something there. I did a rough count of the votes of the Congressional Black Caucus on the Schiavo bill. Of those who voted, 12 were against, but 8 voted for it, including Harold Ford, Jr., Jesse Jackson, Jr., and the caucus chairman, Elijah Cummings.

It's too small a sample from which to draw any conclusions, but if Jim's right, the historical strength of Black Christian faith in America is nothing to be trifling with.

Addendum, 3/29: Rev. Jesse Jackson is lobbying Florida's Senate Black Caucus to cross party lines and provide the last few votes for a bill that would likely spare Terri Schiavo permanently. The chances for passage are slim, but the entry of Black faith into the national discussion is welcome, even if it is Jesse Jackson who starts it.

Athens or Jerusalem? Hurry Up Already, Pick One...

At the heart of the dilemma we find ourselves in these days is the conflict between reason and revelation, or as one great thinker put it, Athens and Jerusalem.

Plato believed morality, specifically justice, could be derived by the intellect, and The Republic set out to prove just that. He did a good job.

However, few of us have read Republic, and fewer of us each year read the Bible. Before we throw the baby out with the bathwater, it might be good to consider this passage from George Washington's 1796 Farewell Address:

Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens. The mere Politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them.

A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice?

And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

If we exile Jerusalem from our society, pitch the Ten Commandments into the dumpster, we may be very unpleasantly surprised at what we get. The results of the past fifty years are not promising.

For Her Own Good

It is Tuesday night, and the legal challenges by Terri Schiavo's parents are melting away. It has been four days since she has had any nourishment or water.

My best understanding of things is that they have no real chance of ultimately prevailing, and preserving her life. Even the conservative Catholic Supreme Court justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, who might be thought to be her best advocates, have made it a cornerstone of their judicial philosophies that not everything in our society is a matter for the Supreme Court. From what I know of their rulings on previous cases, that is their opinion here.

Even if her feeding tube were ordered reinserted, it seems to me certain that a court will eventually order it be pulled out again permanently. There is no purpose, no good to be found, in forcing her to repeat these past four days. It's time to pray that she has not suffered, does not suffer, and will not suffer as we wait for the end to come.

And for those who were certain she was incapable of suffering, I pray you were right.

Godspeed, Theresa Marie Schindler Schiavo. You go to a far better world than the one you leave.


Addendum, Wednesday Night: My buddy Patterico can take you the rest of the way. He's a brilliant attorney with impeccable credentials. Some people have a lot to answer for.

Compelling

Strange story in the morning paper I hadn't heard much about. Seems there's a "right to die" case down in Florida that's being compared to capital punishment, the war in Iraq, and all sorts of things.

But society asserts it has a compelling interest in continuing to execute (justice, deterrence, what have you). Iraq is a similar case.

What's missing for me in this whole thing is society's compelling interest in having Terri Schiavo die.

The facts about her condition are hard to discern, but she did not appear to be suffering. Even if she has the brain of a goldfish, I don't see the compelling need to pull her from her bowl and throw her to twitch and die on the floor. Where's PETA when you need them?

The law says this is supposed to be for her own good.

As Mr. Bumble observes in Oliver Twist: "If the law suppose that ... the law is a ass..."

Ward Churchill Told the Truth

Lost in all the "little Eichmann" hubbub was his charge that the US (read Clinton Administration)-led sanctions on Saddam caused the deaths of some 500,000 innocent Iraqis.

My favorite lefty, Alexander Cockburn, reported the following exchange:


In 1996, Madeleine Albright was asked the following question on CBS’ “60 Minutes” by Lesley Stahl: “We have heard that half a million children have died (in Iraq). I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And you know, is the price worth it?"

Albright infamously replied, “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price — we think the price is worth it.”


So for those who require unvarnished honesty from our leaders, instead of talking WMDs, George W. Bush should have told the American people and the world,

"It's true that the "containment" strategy toward Saddam is working. But the United States and Bill Clinton have killed a half million innocent children to do it, as our former Secretary of State has admitted. But I don't think it is worth it. For the sake of decency and justice, I propose we go into Iraq, kill only the guilty, and send a couple thousand of our own good sons and daughters to their deaths to show mankind just how sacred Americans hold decency and justice to be."

There are any number of reasons Bush couldn't say those words. Fortunately, we have a president who understands actions speak louder.

Haloscan is Cool

Haloscan commenting and trackback have been added to this blog.

Republicans and the Black Vote

Why won't the vast majority of Black people even consider voting Republican today? What can the GOP do about it? By way of preface, I've done a lot of research and a ton of dialogue on this question. Here we go:


Even though the Democratic Party didn't elect its first Black congressman until 1935 (the Republicans' first Black congressman was in 1869), the hugely popular Franklin Delano Roosevelt won the Black vote away, starting in 1932 during the Great Depression, and it can't be surprising to Republicans that he did. With World War II breaking out in 1939-41, circumstances and his leadership in both peace and war made FDR an irresistible force of nature.

Still, most would be surprised that Richard Nixon got a maybe third of the Black vote in 1960.

It was 1964 candidate Barry Goldwater's support of "states' rights" in opposition to the Civil Rights Act that sank the GOP share to a shocking 3%.

The Dixiecrats' bolt to the GOP sealed the deal. The Republican Party was now the home of American racism.

Black folk know what's what---getting them to vote Republican again is not a matter of technique or championing cosmetic issues.

(Although make no mistake---affirmative action is an article of near-religious faith. Payback is owed, if not for slavery, then for Jim Crow. If not for Jim Crow, then for its residue which must be admitted continues to this day. To be against it, regardless of how principled the opposition [states' rights again, anyone?], is to be anti-Black, case closed.)

Frederick Douglass said the best thing whites can do is leave Black folk alone. Bush largely does that, engaging only the churchmen. He upped his share of the Black vote to 11% in 2004, mostly from Black evangelicals.

But the GOP still shows its tin ear when it associates itself with Rev. Jesse Peterson and Armstrong Williams. When Black folk draw up lists of Uncle Toms (and they do), Peterson and Williams are consistently at the top.

Surveys show that the younger the Black voter, the less married he is to the Democratic Party. The sea change won't really happen until those who came of age in the 60s die off.

Strom Thurmond finally kicking the bucket helped. But Trent Lott, with just a few ill-chosen words, perpetuated the Dixiecrat legacy and remains a symbolic liability. And the Armstrong Williams debacle, especially in its sneakiness, was a bigger disaster than white GOPers can conceive.

The Democrats don't really walk the walk; Black people, even Farrakhan, know that Democrat policies have decimated them. But Black folk were happy enough that The First Black President could talk the talk. That's a sign of respect.

Until and unless the GOP learns how to show that respect, and takes the trouble to learn who's who and what's indeed what, best we restrict ourselves to going about our colorblind business, leave Black folk alone and quit with the clumsy and frankly lazy attempts to woo them, and bank on the attrition of the (very loud) 60s crowd and, ultimately, the strength of our ideas.