The World Beyond BetterMost > The Culture Tent

AP: Novelist Anne Rice says she's leaving Christianity

<< < (6/15) > >>

serious crayons:

--- Quote from: brokeplex on August 09, 2010, 10:33:27 am ---Sure I am familiar with Pitts, some of his columns occasionally appear in the local Startlegram. And yes its an Op-Ed piece and yes its biased, and yes its also partisan and hypocritical, and no it isn't fair to compare a Dinosaur media journalist with pretensions of "evenhandedness" to someone like Limbaugh who is openly biased and eschews the MSM. Now Rachael Madcow is an excellent example of a mainstream journalist who has become extremely partisan and biased, a bit like Pitts.

People like Pitts and Madcow want to have their cake and eat it too, sorry but you can't be regarded both as a professional journalist and turn out biased partisan hit pieces, or in the case of Pitts make it his mission to promote Obama back in 2007 / 2008. 

--- End quote ---

I don't understand your point here, or why you don't distinguish between straight-news journalists and op-ed pundits, or why you find it necessary to name-call in so many of your posts.

All I know is, it shouldn't be surprising or dismaying to see people who are paid to express their opinions, express their opinions. It's fine to disagree with some or all of the opinions, but absurd to object to them doing their jobs. None of the people you mentioned is expected to be unbiased.

brokeplex:

--- Quote from: louisev on August 09, 2010, 12:35:53 pm ---it wasn't Anne Rice who mixed politics with religion: it was the RC Church spending tens of millions, along with their Mormon allies, which funded the Proposition 8 campaign and have poured their tithings into anti-gay legislative action.  She is merely condemning their actions.

--- End quote ---
actually I condemn both, I think that the mission of the church should not be political, whether it is my church SBC or the LDS or RC - all need to concentrate on the healing ministry of Christ. That said, Rice is forsaking grace by turning a personal religious conviction into a political football.

as point of clarification, if individual Catholics, or Mormons, or SBC members choose to pour their tithings into a political action that is different than the churches themselves funding political operations. But, just as I would prefer that Rice seek grace thru a personal private relationship with the Lord, I also would prefer that individual Xians NOT use their tithings for political operations. (and they won't get an individual deduction if their tithings go into a political campaign)

Monika:

--- Quote from: brokeplex on August 09, 2010, 03:30:30 pm ---actually I condemn both, I think that the mission of the church should not be political, whether it is my church SBC or the LDS or RC - all need to concentrate on the healing ministry of Christ. That said, Rice is forsaking grace by turning a personal religious conviction into a political football.

as point of clarification, if individual Catholics, or Mormons, or SBC members choose to pour their tithings into a political action that is different than the churches themselves funding political operations. But, just as I would prefer that Rice seek grace thru a personal private relationship with the Lord, I also would prefer that individual Xians NOT use their tithings for political operations. (and they won't get an individual deduction if their tithings go into a political campaign)

--- End quote ---

The church is and has been very active and not some silent bystander. The chatolic church for example has spread disinformation regarding condoms in parts of Africa, with the purpose to stop people from using them.
The consequences of this, I´m sure you can guess.

I too would wish that the church was simply about "a personal private relationship with god" but it´s not. It´s very political and has been throughout history.

And this doesn´t seem to be about Rice´s personal relationship with her god at all, but it´s rather about her relationship with the church. It´s the church that she critizises - not the religion itself.

brokeplex:

--- Quote from: Buffymon on August 09, 2010, 03:39:46 pm ---I too would wish that the church was simply about "a personal private relationship with god" but it´s not. It´s very political and has been throughout history.
And this doesn´t seem to beabout Rice´s personal relationship with her god at all, but it´s rather about her relationship with the church. It´s the church that she critizises - not the religion itself.


--- End quote ---
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. 

brokeplex:

--- Quote from: serious crayons on August 09, 2010, 12:54:04 pm ---I don't understand your point here, or why you don't distinguish between straight-news journalists and op-ed pundits, or why you find it necessary to name-call in so many of your posts.
All I know is, it shouldn't be surprising or dismaying to see people who are paid to express their opinions, express their opinions. It's fine to disagree with some or all of the opinions, but absurd to object to them doing their jobs. None of the people you mentioned is expected to be unbiased.

--- End quote ---
in this case I am calling the kettle beige because it is beige - as for name calling, lets look at Pitts Op-Ed piece as primer on how to name call. rather clever of him until you realize that he is using a disagreement between Rice and her former church to make pedestrian political point.

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.
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.
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.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page