SHRED - "Snobs Hate Red Envelope Day"

The Internet Monk posted criticism of the Facebook phenom "Red Envelope Day."

RED was started by Matt Stokes. Matt wants people to send a red envelope to President Obama saying, "This envelope represents one child who died because of an abortion. It is empty because the life that was taken is now unable to be a part of our world."

Simple enough. One more petition for me not to be involved in.

Matt will take no offense, however, as even he admits that in one sense, it's a "useless" activity, i.e. no laws are going to change as a result. We all know that. Matt smartly encourages more substantial efforts such as supporting adoption and crisis pregnancy shelters. Well and fine.

IMonk takes a different tact: he thinks there is something wrong with participating in RED. Or, more accurately, something wrong with Evangelical-dom:

"This is a perfect representation of where evangelical Christians are in about every area I can think of: theologically, missiologically, ecclesiastically, culturally, politically. It’s perfect."

Not only that, it's a McCarthy-esque plot to single out the "real Christians" from the fake:

"It’s this kind of meaningless symbolism that causes division and argument for no reason. The whole plan is an artificial loyalty test."

Wow. Did this guy have some sort of traumatic experience with a stack of petitions back in the day? There is nothing "theologically, missiologically, ecclesiastically, culturally, or politically" problematic with this petition. It's a petition for crying out loud. Sort of like sending a letter to your Congressman or writing a letter to the editor, or posting on IMonk's blog. Making your opinions known is the American way, after all. And obviously the petition is not a Christian "loyalty test," although it might double for a snob test depending on how much you doth protest when asked to participate in RED. (For example, I register as a "2" on the snob factor scale, and IMonk peaks at about "6.8").

Btw, if you post on IMonk, be advised that the words "sucks" and "jerk" are acceptable (based on what I've seen in other posts), but if you use the term "snob" or "stupid petition" (like I did) IMonk will actually edit your comments in such a way as to possibly lead people to believe that you cursed a blue streak and that the all-seeing "moderator" was forced to "edit" them. (That's pure genius, btw. I love it and plan to use it on my critics, assuming someone ever posts to this blog).

I, on the other hand, fully welcome any sort of mild put-downs here (esp. if they are directed to my critics).

Five Ways to Prove You're a Hip, Retro, Non-Conformist Evangelical

There is nothing worse nowadays than being seen as part of some organized religious group. People today want to stand out from the crowd, develop their own opinions, which probably explains why there are so many people with stupid blogs. (clearing throat)

But it's even worse if you're lumped in with Evangelicals. That's a death wish right there. People make fun of you. Not to your face, granted but . . . um, . . . well, you hear stuff on T.V. Like on the Bravo network. I'm sure they probably said something bad about us at one point. And there was that "Crazy Christians" episode on "Studio 60." (Oh ya, we never forget). Plus, you have to worry about people thinking you have some sort of man-crush on Pat Robertson. Yet, despite these misgivings, you aren't willing to leave the fold. You want your independence, or at least the chance to prove how very unique you are.

Well, here are a few tips to help you prove to your buddies that you aren't a regular old, dyed-in-the wool, Evangelical:

1. Constantly remind everyone that your all-time favorite book is Mark Knoll's "Scandal of the Evangelical Mind." (Actually, that's all you need to do, but I included four other tips just in case).

2. Be critical of Francis Schaeffer. That's like totally cool nowadays. Plus he's dead, so he can't respond. If you need extra shock and awe, follow the lead of "Chris," an obviously brilliant, up and coming 23-year old scholar who dismissed Schaeffer's work "He is There and He is Not Silent" as "too didactic." Wow. I had to look that one up. So you will your friends, most likely.

3. Anytime your one-issue Evangelical friends talk about abortion, emphasize that we need to also support "creation-care." For those of you that don't know what "creation-care" is, it's basically secular environmentalism plus some prayer and Bible verses. (Hat tip)

4. Come election-time, always remind people that God isn't a Republican. Because we really need to hear that one. Also, pepper your vocabulary with terms like "speaking truth to power" and "social justice."

5. Say you're a big fan of Tony Campolo.

Lego-Wars

So I'm looking for something for the kids to buy me for my birthday (always fun). They are into LEGOs, specifically Star Wars. I figure I'd recommend my wife get something like a Death Star or the Millenium Falcon. Might cost what, $100 or so?

Sure, a little expensive, but what the heck. It's my B-Day.

Not quite. How about $485.95?!

Ya, I think I'll be passing on that one. (Darn it.)

Remember the Days . . .

. . . when you had to think really hard to come up with concrete examples of media bias? Everyone knew it was there - you could tell from the slant of the stories, the emphasis on certain facts and not others. But when it came right down to it, the smoking gun proved elusive.

That changed over recent years, especially with the 2008 election thanks in part to the chananigans of MSNBC, who eventually replaced two of its pro-Obama commentators because the "reporting" got so bad. It was like listening to a bunch of frat boys from an Ivy League chapter of "Young Democrats." The AP couldn't say it any better: "Olbermann began to have difficulty keeping his opinions in check, or simply stopped trying."

MSNBC is at it again. Just as Gov. Jindal was walking towards the podium to give the Republican response to Pres. Obama's speech, someone from MSNBC muttered on-air the words "Oh, God."
You can hear the resulting laughter from others in the studio. Apparently, the thought of disagreeing with President Obama provokes a measure of disdain and mirth from that particular network. (Or maybe it was a prayer to President Obama asking forgiveness for having to present an alternative viewpoint.)

Comedian on Conan O'Brien - "Everything's Amazing, Nobody's Happy"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoGYx35ypus

Funny stuff.

. . . When the Doves Cry

The group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has been a harsh critic of the Bush administration for just about anything and everything. Well, after the Bush White House failed to install electronic record-keeping for e-mail when switching to a new system, it turned out that millions of messages could not be found. Naturally, CREW assumed a vast-right wing conspiracy afoot and launched a lawsuit, accusing the Bush administration of trying to hide something.

The Bush-led Justice Department thereafter attempted to get the lawsuit dismissed, but when Obama was elected President, hope was renewed for CREW. After all, with left-leaning progressives in control, surely things would be different . . . wouldn't they?

Not on this issue. Turns out that the Justice Department is also trying to get the lawsuit dismissed. Ouch.

But unlike their scathing criticisms of the Bush administration, CREW was much more subdued this go around, merely fretting in mild terms that the Obama administration should do more to "adequately preserve records belonging to the American people." Just a disagreement between gentleman, in other words. How very civil of them.

And for the record, I'm sure many Americans are just chomping at the bit at the thought of being able to wade through hundreds of thousands of mispelled emails from lower level employees asking each other what time the staff meeting is or whether they should go to McDonalds or Burger King for lunch.

We Never Talk Anymore!!

America is a nation of cowards on race. So says Mr. Eric Holder, recently appointed by President Obama to lead our nation's chief law enforcement agency. Attorney General Holder said that we "need to confront our racial past" and "understand our racial present . . . we simply do not talk enough with each other about things racial."

Urging greater interpersonal dialogue is something I might expect from Dr. Phil . . . but the Attorney General of the United States?? Kind of weird. What's next, the head of the Treasury Department calling us a nation of jerks because husbands don't communicate enough with their wives?