Communique Number 1 from Egypt’s Supreme Council of the Armed Forces signalled the beginning of the end for Hosni Mubarak. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)
I think I might actually enjoy blogging this way–you know, the whole bi-weekly thing. I just never thought I’d swing that way. I’m a firm believer in the idea that free creativity ought to be counter-balanced with a healthy dose of structure and I’m already seeing the benefits of applying that concept to my blog. Of course, I don’t know how “creative” any of the things I have to say in this post are, but you get my drift.
Also, in case you haven’t noticed, I’ve changed the name for these posts. They will now be numbered communiques. It’s a meme typically associated with coups: when a military junta comes to power, they will often initiate communication with the population through numbered communiques, such as what Egypt’s Supreme Council of the Armed Forces did on February 10, 2011. Even so, I wouldn’t read too much into the change. More specifically, I’m not suggesting I’m the leader of a coup–I just like the theme.
I don’t recall the exact moment when I realized I disagreed with the mission of the Gideons. I do remember wondering what that realization made me. A dick? A “religious person”? That was a worrying thought, mostly because I wasn’t sure why I didn’t approve of them. Something just didn’t sit right about the whole approach: give people a Bible in order to “save” them and ultimately turn them into little evangelists who then give other people Bibles and create other little evangelists. The whole operation looks and sounds remarkably (and uncomfortably) similar to some sort of grand spiritual pyramid scheme.
My experience with the Gideons is limited: a New Testament at the end of baccalaureate when I graduated from public high school or a leather-bound copy in a hotel’s bedside table drawer once in a while. My reaction in those situations was never, “Oh, how nice and thoughtful;” it was more along the lines of, “Why?” As I’ve thought about it more, it seems that the problem with the whole enterprise is a misunderstanding of the Bible itself and how it should be used. Yes, there is a right way to do it. Continue reading →
"The Creation of Adam" -- Michelangelo, Sistine Chapel (Photo: public domain)
Note: Text in brackets, “[ ],” was added after the original version was published to further clarify my thoughts.
I assumed in my last post that more people would understand what I meant when I said that Bible classes and Creationism do not belong in public schools. But, as the comments I’ve received on that post are demonstrating, people seem to misunderstanding what I meant. So, the purpose of this post is to provide some clarification and more clearly define some essential terminology.
To refresh your memory, my last post, “Bible Classes, Creationism Do Not Belong in Public Schools. Period.” concerned my belief that 1) the Bible should not be taught in public schools and 2) discussions about intelligent design/Creationism do not belong in the public school science classroom. It should be pointed out that the American judicial system has for the past several decades also held these positions to be true, most recently in the ruling for Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District. Incidentally, the presiding judge in that case was appointed to the federal court circuit by former President George W. Bush, one of the darlings of the social conservative movement. Continue reading →