Rev. Barry W. Lynn: August 2008 Archives

So, Jay it now seems clear the not only is Governor Sarah Palin historically challenged, but scientifically challenged as well.  A number of my pro-science colleagues have pointed out how "intelligent design" played a role in Palin's gubernatorial campaign in Alaska.  Just check out this story.  http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/story/8347904p-8243554c.html  Here are all of old stale misunderstandings by the now-Governor about science, good education and acting like students are supposed to be able to distinguish between religion masquerading as pseudoscience.

 

As our readers don't know I will be blogging from Ireland for a bit here.  I'm in Dublin where as, in every place I go to, I found one of those cheesy "ghost tours" (this one on a bus, no less).  One of the twenty-five people on the trip: a friend of Sarah Palin.  She's "a nice hockey mom", she noted.

As some posters have already relayed to you, if this ticket doesn't deliver the conservative evangelical vote it is hard to imagine what would.

You are certainly accurately describing her "Christian Heritage Week" resolution as a "real controversy". As you know, I don't believe it is up to the government at any level to tell people of any faith what week or day they should feel particularly religious.  That's why we have religious leaders who will presumably tell believers to honor their heritage and worship every day of every week.  There is absolutely no good (that is, non-pandering reason) to make these governmental salutes to religion.

Alaska's "Christian Heritage Week" just happens to be a particularly offensive version of so-called "civil religion".  Here are just a few of its problems:

* Jefferson and Madison are quoted completely out of context here--both would be appalled at this idea and, in fact, Jefferson routinely refused to sign "day of prayer" proclamations sent to him by Congress;

*Patrick Henry may have been happy to comment on "sin"; but luckily for America his view of the role of religion in the nation was not that held by the majority of the Framers.  In this country the government tries to stop "crimes"; it leaves the correction of "sinning" to the conscience of the people;

*Most significantly, this proclamation seeks "to encourage all citizens to celebrate this week".  Alaska has a very diverse religious population, including many folks who adhere to traditional native religions.  To suggest that even non-Christians celebrate this historically befuddled "Christian week" is hubris of the highest order.  As the legendary Texas writer and musician Kinky Friedman observes: "Do you know how Native Americans pray on Thanksgiving?  They say 'Thanks for nothing'."  I know that is harsh, but I'm sure you get his drift.

Over the years I've been asked to help prep politicians for debates.  I've never worked for one, so I'm always the outsider coming in.  I usually watch the politician's staff ask softball questions (even when they think they are hard ones) before I pipe up.  My questions are designed to be annoying and the followup is made to make it seem that the first answer was pathetic.  When it comes to criticism after the practice, I usually say "you need more practice".  The politicians' chiefs of staff usually wish they hadn't asked me. However, sometimes when I see the politicians even years later they say "you know, I remember that day you helped me with that debate on X, Y, or Z".  They liked it.

I don't give partisan political advice to candidates, however.  I have always worked for non-profits that cannot by law endorse or oppose candidates for any public office.  Even when I appear as myself--commentator, author, talk-show host--I never tell people who I will vote for.

So, the following question is not partisan.  I am genuinely confused by the announcement just made by John McCain announcing that he has chosen Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to be his Vice Presidential pick.

Why would John McCain, whose fundamental argument with Barack Obama is that he is not seasoned enough, qualified enough, knowledgeable enough to govern, pick a person whose only experience really leading is 20 months as Alaska's governor?  Senator McCain is 72; he has had two bouts with the most serious skin cancer you can have; actuarially speaking, he may just make it through his first term.  Will Gov. Palin be able to take military command immediately if tragedy strikes?  Why does John McCain want the press asking that question for the next 67 day?

Jay, I know the Governor is anti-choice, anti same-sex marriage and pro-school vouchers.  But so is Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, who has been around domestic and foreign policy issues much longer than Governor Palin. What would you have advised? 

OK, this had to happen sometime in the first few weeks.  I have to concede a point to you, Jay.Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito did defend the First Amendment free speech claims of a non-profit in the Wisconsin Right To Life case you cited.  I didn't like all the reasoning in it, but I don't like over-regulation of political ideas in the name of "good government". Campaign finance "reform" got us PACs and then 527s and hasn't noticeably improved the caliber of government.

Just a reminder: telling churches and charities with tax exemptions they can't endorse candidates is fully appropriate regulation.

On the broader issue, you know that we can't only use the Constitution to protect things the framers talked about, at least insofar as we even have complete records of that.  They didn't discuss television, but surely the principle of free speech applies to televised images too.  Also, they made it clear in the Ninth Amendment that just because a right isn't articulated specifically in the first eight amendments doesn't mean it doesn't exist.  Moreover, it might be held by "the people" or by "the states"--two different locales.  What you do about a fetus in my view is a right "we the people" as individuals make.

 I would remind a few of my critical commentators that abortion is never discussed in the Bible.  We do know that Jewish law didn't even treat striking a woman and causing her to have a miscarriage as "murder".  We also know that the early Christian Church did not believe that life begins at conception.  So this religious issue is one glommed onto by the Right today for its ideological purposes, not for theological ones.

Jay, I am looking for change in the Supreme Court.  At least, I am looking for change away from the ideological beliefs of members like Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito.  These men seem to think their function is to be cheerleaders for Presidential policies which have been challenged and are now before the Court. Just watch them during oral arguments, trying to salvage the arguments of the Bush administration's advocates. Moreover, they seem to believe that protecting the rights of the individual to challenge unconstitutional efforts, to speak out on vital issues, to be free from government support for the religious groups others do not agree with--all are secondary, nearly peripheral, duties of the nine justices who sit on the high court.

First, let me assure every reader that the Democratic Party and the Republican Party and every other party can do anything they want or nothing at all to formally recognize the religious in their midst.  Second, let me assure you...

Let's me return to the Pew poll one more time.  It is a rich document for the statistically inclined.  I just wanted to reiterate that two thirds of the public does not like pastors, priests and other leaders using their...

A pleasantly surprising poll has been released today by the prestigious Pew Research folks which shows that the growing mix of flammable partisan politics with equally fiery religion may not be what a lot of Americans are looking for.  (Don't tell...

Sorry, Jay, we are going to have to look for agreements elsewhere.  I think the only justifiable "conscience" exemption is for that physician directly performing the surgical or other medical procedure to terminate a pregnancy.  Your language effectively gives an...

I am not opposed to a very narrowly crafted conscience clause where the issue is the sincerely held belief by a person that he or she is being asked to take a "life".  This means that conscientious objectors to war...

Today the Supreme Court of California issued an extremely important decision in a case which addressed the issue: does the right of religious freedom exempt a medical clinic's physicians from complying with a state law that bars discrimination based on...

Bloggers are now discussing the infamous "cone of silence" problem from Saddleback's Saturday forum. Rick Warren claims that he didn't know that Senator McCain was not even at the church, much less in a hermetically sealed room, at the time...

Let's get to the big mistake first: Barack Obama should not have agreed to do this.  If I were the Senator I'd be looking for a time machine this morning and go back to the day I agreed to show...

Rick Warren certainly did not want to share the official limelight with anybody from the religious right to the religious left. So,Jay, I wouldn't worry too much about any conspiratorial cabal of progressives managing the conversation tonight.  (However, I understand...

Jay, of course the Presidential candidates ought to be talking about the Supreme Court. They should talk about their philosophy of picking judges and about specific decisions with which they disagree (with any luck they will acknowledge they will obey...

Why are we doing this again? Why another "forum" on the spiritual life and political consequences for would-be presidents? This Saturday evening both Senators John McCain and Barack Obama will sit down for separate hour-long chats with mega-preacher Rick Warren,...