Comments on: Big Brother Church Watch

By: TonyRo76

TonyRo76 — Wed, 15 Sep 2004 13:39:24 +0000

In my experience, “social justice” is a code word for “anti-conservative agenda”.

That is a brilliant statement and my observations lead me to the same conclusion. Ever since high school, I’d always get irritated when teachers/professors started in on “social justice” because I knew it meant I was about to hear a massive guilt trip about being white, American, “privileged” or whatever. And of course, any disagreement with their dogma meant I’d be a heartless capitalist with no compassion for the poor.

By: dan

dan — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 15:39:36 +0000

This editorial by Carie Lukas in NRO gives a very good example of statistical differences between demographic groups that is blamed on bad intentions but is more likely to be based on choices.

http://nationalreview.com/comment/lukas200408200939.asp

My own experience illustrates this: I usually seek not only jobs that pay more but I also seek training that is likely to boost my pay (I am a computer programmer). In college, I specifically sought a major that would pay the bills. I was VERY concerned about paying back my loans and earning a living.
My wife has turned down several full time jobs in favor of part time ones that allowed her to have flexibilty with her hours. The full time jobs paid more and would have given her more of the responsibilities she seeks. In college, she pursued a major that she found interesting without much consideration for how it pays after school.
I don’t fault her for that, I think people should pursue their interests, when it is practical. For her, it was. She came from wealth and didn’t have school loans to worry about.

By: La Shawn

La Shawn — Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:12:02 +0000

Where there is evidence for such evil, I am behind efforts to combat it. Social Justice is the idea that any measureable difference between groups is all by itself enough evidence to declare that the cause is racist malice by whitey.

Right on, Dan. Ditto to infinity and beyond!

By: dan

dan — Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:48:56 +0000

BH
If 65% of marine biologists are female, what does that say to you ? Does it say anything to you about career choices? Does it say to you that females choose this career more than men, or that men are kept out? What if 65% of police officers are male, does that say the same things? Are males more likely to be interested in police work? Are females less likely to do so?
The problem is the automatic assupmtion that differences between the general population and a population subset is caused by racism, sexism, evil, etc.
Where there is evidence for such evil, I am behind efforts to combat it. Social Justice is the idea that any measureable difference between groups is all by itself enough evidence to declare that the cause is racist malice by whitey.
It is itself a racist concept. It demands proportional representation in wealth and power because it surrenders on minority groups achieving this in the market. It assumes that the best black America will ever do on its own is less than proportional. It cannot concieve of a future America where 50% of Fortune 500 CEOs are black because they are the best people for the job.
I can imagine and even believe that is possible, I’ll bet that you can too.

By: Parableman

Parableman — Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:31:38 +0000

Christian Carnival XXXI
I stole my theme idea for this week’s Christian Carnival from a Carnival of the Vanities that did something similar. Instead of Rush, we’re going with Kansas, who are in my opinion the best band ever to have existed. They…

By: Gin

Gin — Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:30:16 +0000

DId not mean to imply moveon.org was a church … but it is yet another example of how liberals skirt laws, which is relevant.

Liberals seem to very good at that; no matter what rules and laws there are, find a way to try to “get around” them.

Frankly, now that I consider it, liberalism is a religion (”a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith”) and for too many liberals, the government is the almighty god.

In any case, putting blanket restrictions on speech is never a good idea. Lyndon Johnson did what he did to win an election (purely selfish motive). What he helped kick-start was a bad thing then, and still is now.

The choice of what to say or not to say ought to be at the discretion of the individual (no matter who the individual is) … not at the discretion of a powerful group / politician / the IRS.

If you do not want to listen to what someone has to say, don’t listen. Pretty simple, is it not?

By: actus

actus — Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:14:41 +0000

I have to note that the issue of women pastors is not considered essential Christian doctrine.
but is marking up your prejudices ?

By: DarkStar

DarkStar — Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:16:38 +0000

How are they going to prove this unless they are taping the service?

By: Jim Robertson

Jim Robertson — Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:39:21 +0000

The reason I don’t hold high hopes for the success of this operation is that Leftist politicians have been openly using churches for years, but, as far as I know, with no repercussions. The ACLU, Americans United FSOCAS, the ABA and the IRS are only interested in muzzling Conservative churches and politicians. When Barry Lynn was asked over the phone what he intended to to about Bill Clinton and Gray “Little Boy Lost” Davis rallying at a left-wing “church” in LA, he said he intended to file a brief.

Wow…what a courageous warrior.

Well, we all know what happened recently when somebody put “Bush” and “church” in the same sentence. The honorable Mr. Lynn was behind the microphones once again, fuming over this intolerable violation of the Constitution he pretends to cherish with his life.

I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think anything will come of this.

God bless one and all…

By: Laura

Laura — Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:14:47 +0000

I’d just as soon churches struggle with keeping their tax-exempt status because I don’t WANT my preacher to talk about politics. Any of the ministers. I’d probably have to get up and leave.

By: Duane More

Duane More — Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:52:42 +0000

I believe the conservative spies/liberal churches thing is a response to the same types of activities being engaged in by the liberal spies/conservative churches. I first saw this over at free-republic Americans United for Separation of Church and State have been engaging in this for some time, (http://www.au.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6168&abbr=pr&JServSessionIdr012=mioml9dbw1.app5b&news_iv_ctrl=1475)

Also a NYTimes article (copied into free republic) documents this phenomenom as well (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1172473/posts)

By: Greg Krehbiel

Greg Krehbiel — Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:23:08 +0000

The trouble with this is that some poor schmuck has to sit through a worship service in a liberal church!

By: RepJ

RepJ — Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:38:09 +0000

There are already ‘liberal spies’ in churches trying to get conservative churches tax-free status revoked. There is a church in Alabama, I believe, where the pastor is having to protect itself from ACLU types. I think the conservatives going into liberal churches is probably in response to that attack on that preacher.

If you ask me, though, I think the preachers should be allowed to talk about certain politicians. However, would the congregation not leave? Talking about politicians in a church is like hollywood talking about politicians. They’ve got a right to it, but it’s highly inappropriate and will alienate members of their audience.

By: BH

BH — Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:08:26 +0000

Gin,
Moveon.org is not a church, or religious group. It is a 527 Nonprofit; just like the Swift boat Vets.

I agree there is plenty of politicking going on in places where it should not. And the minute some one is called on it, The 1st Amendment will be used as a defense. Yet, something needs to be done because our system of financing campaigns is corrupt.

Dan,
How else can we gage if programs to combat racism are working, or if racism exists in an area, except by statistics? Getting exact parity is impossible but it should be close, if all other factors are equal.

By: Tyler

Tyler — Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:55:46 +0000

LaShawn, I’ve been asking that question for years! What the hell is “social” justice? And when is anything with the word “social” in front of it any good? “Social” Security, for instance.