The World Beyond BetterMost > The Culture Tent
AP: Novelist Anne Rice says she's leaving Christianity
Monika:
--- Quote from: brokeplex on August 09, 2010, 03:50:31 pm ---sure, I understand that all Xian churches - in particular the RC denom - have been involved, sometimes deeply, in politics. I don't try to defend their actions in Africa or in supporting Prop 8 in CA. However, as individual Xians we don't have to allow the church organization any control over our lives, we can have a personal relationship with Christ. Rice, being a very public person, makes her private disagreement with the RC church a public football when she chooses to publicly separate from them over political issues. Hence, Dinosaur Media opportunists such as the Op-Ed columnist sited above, take advantage of her disagreement to make a political point, unrelated to either Rice of the RC church. If Rice didn't understand that this would happen then she is remarkably naive, but I tend to think that she intended her disagreement to fuel anti-GOP propaganda.
--- End quote ---
we simply have to agree to disagree, Brokeplex. I believe than any organisation that excerts power of any kind should be scrutinized and critizised when needed and in my opinion, Anne Rice has as much right to that as anyone else.
brokeplex:
--- Quote from: Buffymon on August 09, 2010, 04:01:56 pm ---we simply have to agree to disagree, Brokeplex. I believe than any organisation that excerts power of any kind should be scrutinized and critizised when needed and in my opinion, Anne Rice has as much right to that as anyone else.
--- End quote ---
yes, we will respectfully disagree. although we both seem to agree that Rice has a right to criticize, I do not think her action was appropriate in that instance. :)
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: brokeplex on August 09, 2010, 04:01:15 pm ---in this case I am calling the kettle beige because it is beige
--- End quote ---
Hunh?
--- Quote --- - as for name calling, lets look at Pitts Op-Ed piece as primer on how to name call.
--- End quote ---
OK. I looked back at Pitts' op-ed piece. Didn't see any name-calling.
--- Quote --- rather clever of him until you realize that he is using a disagreement between Rice and her former church to make pedestrian political point.
--- End quote ---
Finally, an observation that makes sense. Not an opinion I particularly hold myself, but it is a perfectly valid, if arguable, opinion.
--- Quote ---1) there is no such creature as an Op-Ed journalist - if a commentator chooses to use newpaper columns to voice his or her agenda then they are not journalists - period.
--- End quote ---
I wouldn't call them that, either. You're the one who applied the term to Pitts and Maddow. I'm not sure why.
--- Quote ---2) Pitts is an Op-Ed columnist, just like dozens of others who either chose to mask their partisanship or openly advertise it. Pitts is hypocritical about his partisanship, Krauthammer for example is not.
--- End quote ---
Hunh, again? How so? Perhaps you know something about Pitts that I don't. I've read his columns from time to time over the years, and always perceived him as a left-leaning commentator. Has he ever pretended otherwise, or attempted to "mask" that? Can you link to columns where he was "hypocritical about his partisanship"?
--- Quote ---3) As a Rush 24 / 7 member since the late 1990's, I most definitely have no problem with people being paid to express their opinions - I participate in the honest end of that cycle. Pitts is a part of the dishonest end centered on the MSM.
--- End quote ---
Again, if you want to make this point credibly, you should provide some evidence.
brokeplex:
--- Quote from: serious crayons on August 09, 2010, 04:36:14 pm ---1) Hunh?
2) OK. I looked back at Pitts' op-ed piece. Didn't see any name-calling.
--- End quote ---
1) a throw away line from the 1970 film "Boys in the Band" a take off on the pot calling the kettle black - I guess you had to be there to enjoy the memory of those days.
2) I'll try to highlight the partisan name calling and distortions by selectively quoting his piece. But these quotations show how Pitts has used Rice's comments to make a partisan point.
"The word "Republican" does not appear in the book(Gospels?).
Not once.
Yet somehow in the last 30 years, people of
faith were hustled and hoodwinked into
regarding the GOP platform as a lost gospel.
Somehow, low taxes for the wealthy and
deregulation of industry became the very
message of Christ. Somehow, hostility to
science, gays, Muslims and immigrants
became the very meaning of faith. And
somehow Christianity became -- or at least,
came to seem -- a wholly owned subsidiary
of the Republican Party.
Consider that, after the election of 2004, a
church in North Carolina made news for
kicking out nine congregants because they
committed the un-Christian act of ... voting
for Democrat John Kerry.
Who can blame people for saying, "If that's
faith, count me out?" Has atheism
ever had a better salesman than Jerry Falwell, who
blamed the Sept. 11 attacks on the ACLU --
or Pat Robertson, who laid Haiti's earthquake
off on an ancient curse?
a shriveled faith that marginalizes and
demeans?"
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: brokeplex on August 09, 2010, 04:57:17 pm ---2) I'll try to highlight the partisan name calling and distortions by selectively quoting his piece.
--- End quote ---
OK. I've now read that passage for the third or fourth time. I can see why you might disagree with it. I can even see parts that might arguably be called "distortions." What I don't see is name-calling.
--- Quote ---But these quotations show how Pitts has used Rice's comments to make a partisan point.
--- End quote ---
Yeah? And again: so what? Whoever said an op-ed columnist isn't supposed to be partisan? Almost all of them are, quite unabashedly, since that's their job. Most opinion-page editors even make a stab at providing a balance of them on the left and right.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version