Archive for the ‘prejudice’ Category

>Creation Museum antics

February 14, 2011

>Not long ago I posted a Facebook status about “science” textbook I had come across that mentioned the earth being about 4000 years old.

There is nothing remotely related to science in that belief.

But I was going to let it pass, with hopes that the Mennonite children that might read it would become better educated later in life. I realize that I have no control and no voice in what a private religious organizations teaches its kids.

In and around that time I was involved in a discussion about the replica of Noah’s ark being built. This is being done at the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky. This is to be a full scale replica, big enough to carry specimens of every species, including extinct dinosaurs, I presume, since they believe dinosaurs roamed along with Fred Flintstone and every Australopithecus species and other early human examples.

Photo from exhibit in Creation Museum

I’m not really writing about how ludicrous it is to think that one man could (or would) capture every microscopic species on the earth, and every species of disease carrying mosquito and every species of bedbug and keep those living, even though they might require different environments and micro-climates to sustain them. Remember, some parasites require multiple hosts to complete their life cycle, and for Noah to understand this and be able work out the logistics is just not believable.

No, I am writing about an event the Creation Museum sponsored, a “Date Night” where loving couples were supposed to have a $71 a person dinner and a lecture about what makes a relationship work.

But a gay couple was denied admittance.

They explained to us that the Creation Museum Date Night was a “Christian environment”, therefore the presence of two men eating dinner together would not be allowed. The very sight of this would “add an un-Christian element to the event” and “disrupt the evening for everyone”

.

I assume the organizers of the event have never seen the famous picture of Jesus and his 12 disciples eating together, but I digress.

The gay couple’s tickets were actually purchased by a straight couple. Here is the straight guy’s account of the evening.

Let me just comment that my relationship with my partner is as strong as any straight couple’s relationship that I know, and we can do without the ramblings of any prejudiced instructor on how to make it better.

But still, the gay couple should have been allowed to attend with their straight friends, it seems.

Notice in this photo of an exhibit from the museum that Adam was created as a totally (hot) white guy from that time long ago, the 1960’s.

Maybe he was just ahead of his time…a foretelling of a future Republican congressman wanting to post his profile on Craig’s list.

OK, I’m getting off subject and the Grammy’s just came on so I’ll stop there.

Advertisements

>Tipping Point

October 22, 2008

>OK. Here is the crap I have to put up with. People who are ashamed of themselves and post anonymous comments say things like this:

Joe is extremely prejudiced! More so than the people he struggles to slander on a daily basis through his blog! If you don’t agree with Joe, you my friend are a racist hate monger and public enemy number 1! So what does that make Joe? That’s right, he is just as prejudiced as the person who puts on a white robe and burns a cross or openly speaks out against gay rights or maybe uses the “N” word. Look in the mirror Joe! Oh wait, that would be the christian thing to do.

I did not publish this comment, not because I am embarrassed at the accusation or refuse to publish opposing views, but because it is useless chatter.

First of all, why am I “extremely prejudiced?” I truly don’t understand this accusation. Prejudice is “making a decision before becoming aware of the relevant facts of a case or event.” Unless something I post is copied (with reference) or meant to be funny, I research or confirm what I write.

Prejudice used to mean “making a judgment about a person based on their race, religion, class, etc.”, but more recently has been used to describe”any unreasonable attitude that is unusually resistant to rational influence,” including “race, sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, and religion…”

I understand the people I speak out against. I understand their beliefs, their philosophies. That is why I speak out against them. If I make a broad statement about right wing Christians, for instance, it is because of their beliefs and actions that I consider wrong, but it is not because of their Christianity, per se. The problem is, they have warped Christianity into a divisive element so far removed from what Jesus must have had in mind that it is barely recognizable. But I digress.

Now this anonymous commenter may be reacting to the post he tried to comment on, or he may have read my column in today’s Western Tribune and reached a tipping point, I don’t know. I will post that column tomorrow, for those who do not subscribe to the paper.

It’s almost laughable that I am compared to KKK members by a right winger just days after “they” tried to discredit a civil rights hero (John Lewis) for making the same comparison about certain elements of the McCain campaign. Because I am for human equality, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation and age (innate characteristics) and even religion and creed (chosen characteristics), I am considered prejudiced?

I’ve reached a tipping point myself. I am sick of anonymous commenters. Especially when I have a good idea who they are. And where they work. (I do wonder what they were doing in handcuffs in downtown Bessemer the other day, but my research hasn’t turned up the reason).

I will find a way that is best to avoid anonymous postings, and my first attempt is using openID. When you comment, you will be required to use your google blogger name or one of several other ID’s. I don’t want to exclude commenters, I just want to exclude people who will not identify themselves. If you don’t have any of the ID’s offered, create one, I guess is my recommendation. We will see how this works. My other option is to require membership to the blog to post, but that is limited to 100 people. Well over 100 read each day, but I don’t know how many would want to post comments, and only they would have to be members. Others could read, I guess. Help me out here fellow bloggers if you have suggestions.

If you find you cannot post a comment, and want to, email me…I will try to work around it either by posting your comment myself, with you name (or pseudonym) and the explanation that I am posting it for you, or change the way comments are handled.

In the meantime, continue to enjoy Bessemer Opinions where you can be entertained and educated on an almost daily basis.