Day: December 16, 2006

Jay Bakker: ‘What the Hell Happened to Christianity?’

Jon Ponder

The son of Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker has an op-ed up at CNN, co-written with a colleague, Marc Brown, in which he questions the politicization of Christianity by the political right:

What the hell happened? Where did we go wrong? How was Christianity co-opted by a political party? Why are Christians supporting laws that force others to live by their standards? The answers to these questions are integral to the survival of Christianity…

So when did the focus of Christianity shift from the unconditional love and acceptance preached by Christ to the hate and condemnation spewed forth by certain groups today? Some say it was during the rise of Conservative Christianity in the early 1980s with political action groups like the Moral Majority. Others say it goes way back to the 300s, when Rome’s Christian Emperor Constantine initiated a set of laws limiting the rights of Roman non-Christians. Regardless of the origin, one thing is crystal clear: It’s not what Jesus stood for.

His parables and lessons were focused on love and forgiveness, a message of “come as you are, not as you should be.” The bulk of his time was spent preaching about helping the poor and those who are unable to help themselves. At the very least, Christians should be counted on to lend a helping hand to the poor and others in need.

[…]

Could Mary Cheney Be a Worse Parent Than George Bush?

Jon Ponder
We live in a world where People Magazine asks the president, a below-average parent, and a man who was rather badly brought up himself, to assess what kind of parent Mary Cheney will be, because she is a lesbian.

I could not have less esteem for Dick and Lynne Cheney. The vice president gives a face to the evil bureaucrat and Mrs. Cheney is an ideological tool. On the other hand, there is no evidence they have been bad parents, and good reason to believe that their daughter Elizabeth has done a servicable job raising her kids, and that their other daughter Mary, who happens to be gay and pregnant, will do as well as most parents.

George and Laura Bush, on the other hand, have raised two girls, the twins Barbara and Jenna, who are widely regarded as drunken aristocratic flibbertigibbets.

And yet we live in a world where People Magazine asks the president, a below-average parent, and a man who was rather badly brought up himself, to assess what kind of parent Mary Cheney will be, because she is a lesbian.

The intent of the question was to draw Bush out on the topic of gay parenting, which is vehemently opposed by the Troglodytes and Talibanis who comprise his few remaining supporters. The president’s response was typically odd and sounded scripted:

“I think Mary is going to be a loving soul to her child. And I’m happy for her.”

Bush often uses code words meant to appeal to the religious right, so maybe his use of the word “soul” was intentional. (Or maybe I’m over-thinking it and he was simply drunk.)

Loving a child is fundamental to parenting but what an odd construction. Anyone — an aunt or a godparent — can be a “loving soul” to a child, but parenting requires a lot more, not the least of which is providing discipline. If all you do is love them, they’ll grow up to be spoiled aristocratic flibbertigibbets — or even the Worst President Ever.

Later, pushing his daily broom after the president’s elephant parade, White House spokesman Tony Snow clarified that by “soul,” the president meant “parent”:

“He believes that Mary Cheney’s child will, in fact, have loving parents.”

There are worse kids than Barbara and Jenna. Sure, they were arrested for under-age drinking and since attaining majority have regularly made fools of themselves in drinking establishments worldwide but they are not axe murderers. My armchair psychiatric analysis is, their parents loved them too much to discipiline them.

Still, I’ll bet Mary Cheney and her unmarried spouse Heather Poe will raise a child who is at least as sensible as the Bush girls.

Laura Bush: Condi Won’t Run for President Because She’s Single

Jon Ponder

In her end-of-the-year interview with People magazine, First Lady Laura Bush offered this unscripted assessment of the reasons Sec. of State Condoleeza Rice won’t run for president:

“Probably because she is single, her parents are no longer living, she’s an only child. You need a very supportive family and supportive friends to have this job,” the First Lady said.

Michael Kinsley said a gaffe is when a politician accidentally speaks the truth. Laura was clearly speaking off the cuff, and she certainly made Condi sound too weak and needy to be president.

Maybe Laura forgot that Queen Elizabeth I was single the entire 49 years she was queen of England. History remembers her as an accomplished world leader, who excelled in a male-dominated world.

Or maybe Laura remembered America’s only president who was single. James Buchanan was the 15th president, a one-termer who served immediately prior to Lincoln. Historians generally believe Buchanan’s failure of leadership put the country on a glidepath to civil war. Because of this, Buchanan was widely regarded to be the Worst President Ever until, the title that now belongs to George W. Bush.

Condi can’t be president because she has a record of egregious incompetence and a political tin ear. Her marital status is irrelevant.