Showing posts with label Muslim. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Muslim. Show all posts

Friday, January 26, 2007

Friends of God


Evangelicals








Pelosi Documentary: Evangelism in America's Heartland


Yesterday, I watched with fascination, awe, and yes, a good feeling, Nancy Pelosi's daughter's documentary about evangelicals in America, "Friends of God."

God, Mom and Country: A Filmmaker's Odyssey - The New York Times:








Ms. Pelosi with her son, Paul Michael Vos, born in November.









You are a young documentary filmmaker with a reputation for capturing politicians' antics. In a deliberate departure from politics, your latest film is
a road trip into the world of evangelical Christians that includes a drive-through church, a Christian wrestling federation, a stand-up Christian comic, and an evangelical Elvis.






HBO's Friends of God - TCA Report - TV Squad:
Documentary filmmaker Alexandra Pelosi, who also directed the doc about the Presidential campaign of George W. Bush "Journeys with George," tackles evangelicals in "Friends of God," an original film for HBO. It's a startling look deep inside the conventions, beliefs, and personalities that make up this larger than you would think demographic in the United States, which contains an estimated 50 to 80 million Americans.

Here is what one dismissive critic had to say: "Friends of God" goes into the belly of Evangelical America - TELEVISION REVIEW - Los Angeles Times:

click to show/hide the rest of this section

But in "Friends of God" Pelosi takes her "Real World" self and noncombative questions into Evangelical America and fails to achieve any intimacy whatsoever. The film is a Rough Guide of Holy Roller-ville, Pelosi the Blue State girl hitting the road with implied Trader Joe's snacks to have look-but-don't-touch encounters with Christian wrestlers, Christian car enthusiasts, Christian theme park operators, Christian home-schoolers.

What she observes — that there are millions of evangelicals out there, sectarian culture warriors, young and old, folded into pop culture and with political might — never rises to anything more than the preordained tour into the Land of Difference that Pelosi herself is on.

At its worst, it all comes off as a social worker's patronizing home visit, as when Pelosi drops in on a brood of Christian home-schoolers in Pikeville, Tenn., and seems to want to spirit away the mother of 10, maybe take her back to New York City to teach her how to blog.

Though Pelosi does, once again, get a "get" just by having a knack for being there. In this case it's the Rev. Ted Haggard, disgraced ex-leader of the New Life Church and National Assn. of Evangelicals, who resigned over "sexually immoral conduct" shortly after Pelosi finished her documentary.

click to hide most of this section


Freaks and Jerks


If you are a conservative, you'd expect a hate-filled film, ala Michael Moore, about a subject so foreign to such a secular family as the Pelosi's. Indeed, several evangelicals are up in arms about the film, saying that Ms. Pelosi focused on the "freak-show" aspects of evangelicals.

Dr. Larry Poland said that seeing certain evangelicals on-screen made him cringe a bit, because "Every congregation has their 'jerk factor.' The gays and lesbians have it, the Democrats have it, and we have it."


click to show/hide the rest of this section

Ironic Backdrop


Ms. Pelosi, when she made this documentary, could not have known two things that would be true when it first aired: that her mother would be installed as the first female Speaker of the House; and that her main spokesman for the evangelicals in the film, Ted Haggard, would disgrace himself.

click to hide most of this section


True Believers


I watched the smorgasbord of "freaks" and "jerks" but didn't get the same feeling as some of the defensive evangelicals feared. In fact, witnessing the panoply of eccentrics, as well as the many more ordinary believers, just gave me the feeling that these people really believe. They really really believe, to an extent that is absolute. They are a mighty army trying to use all of modern man's quirks and idiosyncrasies to fight the war for Christ. In their own minds, and with tangible results in reality, as in election victories and stable families, they are winning, one soul at a time.

click to show/hide the rest of the post

Disclosure


In the interest of disclosure, I am not an evangelical. I believe in God, with a mix of Catholicism, Judaism, New Age, and an ear towards listening to God in the real world. If anything, I am biased against evangelicals, since though I believe in God, I do not believe in mankind's absolute interpretations of Him. I believe all religions have something to offer humanity, and do represent a communion with God, but that fallible humans have taken the Bible, the Qur'an, and other holy books, and characterized them as the literal spoken word of God. They presume that they know God and no one else does. Why? Because it says so, in the Old Testament, the New Testament, the Qur'an, or the Bhagavad Gita.

God Speaks to Everyone


So I get very nervous when I hear someone so certain that they have a direct pipeline to God while the rest of us are out in the cold. I believe God speaks to all of us—Christians; Jews; Wiccans; even Muslims, the good ones; Buddhists; and even atheists and agnostics.

Charlatans, God, and Fallible Humans


Still, though I believe that about 60% of the pastors of these evangelicals are charlatans, just out to rake in the money, and I cringe at the absolutism of the evangelicals' beliefs, I do sense God in their midst. They are so happy, so involved, and so certain of their salvation through Christ.

Their young people are smiling. They might have rings in their lips, and purple hair, and sing punk rock, but it's Christian punk rock. These kids seem to have channeled their youthful rebellions into peculiar dress codes instead of drugs, sex and violence.

The families appear happy, united, working hard, the way families are meant to be.

The one glaring failure of all Christians, as with all humans it seems, is in the sexual realm. There are so many sexual scandals. Witness your Jimmy Swaggarts, your Jimmy Bakers, several Catholic priests, and your Ted Haggards.

Still, the evangelicals evidently have great sex lives with their partners. Another plus.


Haggard as Spokesperson


I found the use of soon-to-be-morally-exposed Haggard as the main spokesperson for the evangelicals to be ironic and emblematic. He seemed a good enough fellow throughout the film, full of good will and cheer, enlightenment, and moral certainty, even against gays. Until he was exposed as having gay sexual encounters himself. Again, Pelosi did not know Haggard would fall when she made her film. Still, he added a lot to the documentary, including its irony and a warning to the world that all is not as it seems.

click to show/hide the rest of this section


Kansas City Star | 01/16/2007 | Journeys with Ted and "Friends of God":
Besides, it's hard to see how "Friends of God" could have survived if Haggard had been sliced out of it. As president of the 30-million-member National Association of Evangelicals and pastor of a sprawling megachurch in Colorado, Haggard proved a helpful guide, on-camera and off, for the secularized, urbanized Catholic Democrat as she began her explorations of the praise-Jesus crowd.

If “Friends of God” is able to overcome the doubters and become a useful document of today’s Bible Belt, much of the credit must go to Haggard (he also was featured in the film “Jesus Camp,” which was partly shot in Lee’s Summit). Pelosi said he took her into his family and on trips through the evangelical world; opened doors to Jerry Falwell, who allowed her to film inside his Thomas Road Baptist Church; and turned her on to subculture phenomena like Christian wrestling, which looks just like the blood-and-guts version on cable TV, except there’s an altar call at the end.

Unfortunately, Haggard also provided what, in hindsight, will surely be the film’s touchstone moment. Standing outside church, he tells Pelosi’s camera that surveys have found evangelicals enjoy the best sex lives. Without warning, he turns to a couple of men standing nearby and asks them, “How many times a week do you have sex with your wife?” and, “How many times does she climax?”

But as weird as this exchange is, it does help establish an authentic voice for “Friends of God” that it would not have if it had been made by a born-again believer, who might have left scenes like that one out.

Larry Poland, an evangelical who was a consultant for Pelosi and HBO, told the TV critics he wasn’t entirely happy with the film, but then, “the film I’d have made wouldn’t have been interesting and fascinating."

click to hide most of this section


Cult?



Are evangelicals part of a cult? In my opinion, definitely yes. Some parts of the cult are harmless, as when the pink-haired wrestlers proselytize after a Christian wrestling match.















I am reminded though of the extent that evangelism can go when I watch the 1980 movie about the charismatic psycho-preacher, Guyana Tragedy: The Story of Jim Jones, the guy who led almost 1000 followers to commit suicide. I am reminded of the absolute faith that some Muslims have that lead them to fly planes into towers of innocent people.

Yet, most of the cult of evangelism is either harmless or even positive. After all, they advocate following Christ, whose teachings were very humanistic and positive to all. Until, of course, you get to the dark side, where lurks hatred for those non-Christians, gays, and sinners of all kinds. Then, these Christians forget that Christ said ye without sin cast the first stone.

There is also something creepy about having these guys and gals proselytize 24 hours a day. Who likes a "Bible-thumper" bending your ear when you don't want it?

And, as a cult, there is also the mind-numbing, automaton-like behavior of people in groups—doing, saying, and thinking the same things, reinforced by ritual, song, and groupthink. This is no different from any kind of brainwashing (although evangelicals would say it is a kind of good brainwashing). All religions do it, but evangelicals do it with a special gusto. Radical Muslims do it too, only with evil in their hearts.

click to hide most of this post


Conclusion


I will never be an evangelical, and I would not want my children to be one either.

On the other hand, if I could capture the good parts of the phenomena, and add tolerance, skepticism about their beliefs (a healthy uncertainty), an openness to other religions, and a receptivity to God speaking in the here and now, then I think you'd have something. Keep God and Christ, and the rituals and goodness. Get rid of the hatred, exclusivity, moral certainty, and sinful pride. Admit that you are human, fallible, and that your interpretation of the Bible, or any other holy book, is your interpretation. Don't mistake your interpretation for the word of God.

On the other extreme, I advise not to discriminate against evangelicals. They are mostly good people. Very good people.

I urge every American to see this film, "Friends of God." It captures some truth about America, and about God, and is supremely entertaining.


Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:


Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.


Technorati Tags for this post: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Thursday, January 18, 2007

Feet of Clay


Muhammad
Ali





The Greatest


Muhammad Ali turned 65 this week, and I've been watching his fights on the specials about him. At certain times in his career I think he was the greatest heavyweight boxer in history. At those times he combined speed, power, footwork, agility, endurance, heart, and the ability to take a punch better than anyone. He defeated boxers who were considered invincible, like Sonny Liston and George Foreman. He gave some of the best matches ever, like The Rumble in the Jungle against George Foreman, and the The Thrilla in Manila against Joe Frazier.

Despite being relatively uneducated, he gave us wonderful extemporaneous poetry, was highly entertaining, and also was the best self-promoter in boxing history.
In many ways, he really was The Greatest.






Controversy


He was also controversial. He converted the day after he defeated Sonny Liston to a branch of Islam that hated whites, the Nation of Islam. (He later changed to Sunni Islam, in 1975.) For religious reasons, he refused induction into the U.S. Army during Vietnam, and was convicted of draft evasion until the Supreme Court overturned the conviction. He lost almost four years of his prime boxing years due to his choice not to serve.

Sorting Out My Feelings for the Man


I'm trying to make sense of my feelings about Muhammad Ali. I have to say that I will understand why many Americans might resent him for refusing to serve in Vietnam. I also have some negative feelings about his joining such a white-hating sect of Islam. On the other hand, I am aware that he grew up in Louisville, Kentucky at a time when segregation was full-blown. Cassius Clay, his name until he converted to Islam, was keenly aware of racial prejudice as a youth. There were black and white drinking fountains and the whole constellation of this kind of injustice. The Civil Rights Movement was in high gear as he entered manhood.

So, I am led to let slide some of the hurtful comments Muhammad made about America after he converted, and during the time he was refusing induction. Do I look upon him as a hero? I guess I do. I believe he sincerely stood up for what he believed in and sacrificed his career for it, and I believe he was fighting racism in his own way.

I am not thrilled he chose Islam as his avenue of redemption, especially a white-hating sect. Again, though, given what he saw and experienced as a youth, I can understand it. I was happy that he denounced what happened on 9/11, and that he said the people who did this were not practicing true Islam. He continues to be a devout Muslim, and he certainly does not seem to have hatred in his heart.


My Assessment of Muhammad Ali


Though Muhammad to me will always be a hero, and I'll watch his rebroadcast fights forever, I continue to have some doubts about him. I guess he's allowed to have feet of Clay, though, forgive the pun.

I think it's ironic that he considers Islam a religion of peace, despite the thousands of terrorist attacks in the name of Islam, and even the preaching of hatred towards whites of the sect he chose. I also think it's ironic that he refused induction into the army because of religious reasons, practicing as a Muslim, when there are so many Islamic soldiers warring in the world that it will make your head spin.

I want to make it clear that I completely understand those Americans who feel negatively about Muhammad Ali. At one time Muhammad was a very unpopular guy indeed.

Still, I personally choose to overlook all the negative doubts I have, and take the man for what he appears to be in his heart. He appears genuine to me. However misguided he might be in certain aspects of his life, I believe he stands as a towering figure of courage, decency, and heroic accomplishment. I think overall he has been a force for good in the world, and he remains one of the heroes I salute in this world.

God bless you Muhammad. Happy birthday.


Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:


Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.


Technorati Tags for this post: , , , , , , , , , ,

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Wednesday, January 3, 2007

Truth to Power




Sunni's demonstrate against the disrespect shown their leader.


Taunting Saddam


Iraq to Review Abusive Acts at Hussein's Execution: New York Times, By JOHN F. BURNS and JAMES GLANZ: January 3, 2007, BAGHDAD.
Iraq's Shiite-led government said Tuesday that it had ordered an investigation into the abusive behavior at the execution of Saddam Hussein, who was subjected to a battery of taunts by official Shiite witnesses and guards as he awaited his hanging.

Officials said a three-man Interior Ministry committee would look into the scenes that have caused outrage and public demonstrations among Mr. Hussein's Sunni Arab loyalists in Iraq, and widespread dismay elsewhere, especially in the Middle East. In an unofficial cell phone video recording that was broadcast around the world and posted on countless Web sites, Mr. Hussein is shown standing on the gallows platform with the noose around his neck at dawn on Saturday, facing a barrage of mockery and derision from unseen tormentors below the gallows.

As the shock of those scenes reached a new crescendo in Iraq, American officials said that they had worked until the last hours of Mr. Hussein's life to persuade Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki to delay the execution. The officials, who spoke on condition that they not be identified, said they appealed to Mr. Maliki not to execute Mr. Hussein at dawn on Saturday because of the onset of a major Islamic festival, and because of constitutional and legal questions that the Americans believed threw the legitimacy of the execution into doubt.


A Politically Correct War


This is another indication to me that the United States, and in particular, George Bush and his advisors, are waging and will always wage a politically correct war in Iraq.




This, to me, is a major reason why we are losing.

We are afraid to offend the people that continue to support Saddam Hussein.


American Concerns


For Bush and his advisors, there are two points of concern about the Saddam execution. First, that legal matters were not followed completely in the haste to execute Saddam. Second, that Saddam was subjected to disrespect as he went to his death.

click to show/hide the rest of the post


On the first point, I am not an expert on the law, so I'll demure to legal experts on this matter. Yes, I do want law to rule in Iraq. Yes, it was important to get the execution of Saddam right legally. I believe, though, there were other considerations, which I'll get to.

On the second point, I believe it's possible to show theoretical respect for the office of the presidency of Iraq, and for the Sunni followers of Saddam, while at the same time making it clear that Saddam Hussein himself was a deservedly disgraced man.

Obviously, we don't want blatant disrespect being shown to our leaders, soldiers, prisoners and dead. So, following the Golden Rule, we want to treat even the condemned with dignity.

All this I agree with.

Speaking Truth to Power


On the other hand, we have moral obligations in addition to legal and humanitarian obligations. We have a moral obligation to say loud and clear, to Sunnis and Shias alike, and to the world, that Saddam Hussein was a scumbag, and that he deserved to die a thousand deaths.

This is what members of the "righteous" left call "speaking truth to power." I love the concept. The liberals of course think this applies only when an employee is a whistleblower at an oil company, or when a leftist speaks up about Republican corruption, or when a citizen "bravely" calls President Bush a warmonger. The concept of speaking truth to power, though, should be a universal one—a goal worth trying for in many situations.

In this case, the United States needs to speak truth to power by saying to the Sunnis that Saddam was an evil man and deserved to die. This is the truth, and it ought to be said, loud and clear, regardless of consequences. The Sunnis may riot. They may kill innocent human beings because of it. Then, their rioting and killing behavior is their responsibility, and not ours, and needs to be correctly labeled too, as murder and acts of cowardice.


Our Upside Down World


We live in a crazy world sometimes these days. Terrorists are allowed to disrespect us, torture us, murder us, and follow none of the Geneva Conventions, without getting criticized at all by the world—while we must respect the terrorists, avoid torture, not murder them, follow all the Geneva Conventions, yet still get called war criminals by the world and the left.

Our Moral Superiority


If we had been in charge of Saddam's trial, we would have conducted it over a period of about five years. Then, the appeals process would start. Saddam would still be in jail and would be sitting there for 20 years before and if he were ever executed. He would not have been hanged. He might not even have been executed by lethal injection since that, according to the newest leftist thinking, is cruel and unusual punishment.

Plus, if he ever were put to death under us, he would have not been taunted.

Fine, call us morally superior. I don't see it this way. I say we have lost our common sense. We have become so politically correct that we have lost our minds.


Why It's Good Saddam is Dead


One major reason for executing Saddam so quickly was to eliminate the very real threat of a coup attempt on Maliki, or a kidnapping and freeing of Saddam, where Saddam could again lead the Sunnis on a murderous path. The Maliki government needed Saddam dead, and it did the right thing by killing him quickly. Killing Saddam swiftly did mean that the death came right before a major Muslim festival—but notice it was done before the holy days, not during them.

They Should Have Been Nice to Saddam


As far as the taunting goes, yes, if we were in charge it would not have happened. Maybe it shouldn't have happened. After all, it might have interfered with Saddam's self-delusion of the 72 virgins awaiting him. Seriously, though, maybe it shouldn't have happened, but aren't you glad it did? Didn't he deserve it? Can't we understand the executioners' transgressions? The man had butchered their relatives. Maybe they were wrong for being impolite to Saddam, but wasn't it understandable?

click to hide most of this post


Moral Cowardice and a Polite War


It's okay for us to object to the legality of Saddam's execution and to the taunting, but not for the reasons we did it. We did it because we are afraid of a Sunni backlash. This is the same reason why we don't attack terrorists who hide in mosques, or insurgents who blend in with civilian populations. This is the same reason why we don't attack the enemy on Muslim holy days.

We are such good guys. We are the touchy feely warriors, sensitive to the feelings of the people we are trying to kill. Good for us.

Compare that with Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We won that war, remember? We weren't very nice. We called Japanese Japs and Germans krauts and did what we had to do to prevail. The results? We conquered our enemies. We saved the world, and we were lauded, universally. Even those we vanquished became our allies. Compare that to now. We are such "nice guys," following all the rules, being so polite. The results? We are losing. We are called warmongers.

America, speak truth to power always; and if you're going to fight a war, win.


Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:


Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.


Technorati Tags for this post: , , , , ,

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,