Racism

Why do racists always feel the need to point out they're not racist, usually immediately preceding a racist statement?

Surely if you're racist and you're not ashamed of those views you should have no problem admiting it? (I myself hold many unpopular views, though racism is not among them.)

But if you're racist and afraid to admit it, wouldn't that be a clue that you need to reevaluate your perspective?

Just a thought.

Children's Squabble

Matters of religious interest are central to the mission of this page, which is to question and evaluate our basic assumptions about life, the universe, and everything. This is a squirmy process, as I have recently been reminded.

I enjoyed this article in the Guardian on a new ITV documentary airing soon about the Muslim beliefs surrounding Christ. I think it's a great idea. Even as children we're taught that there are two sides to every story. We learn this the first time we get into a squabble with a sibling and our parents (if they're at all sensible) ask each child what happend before handing down a ruling.

Some stories seem to be exempt from this treatment. 'There is one side, once correct view, and it is mine,' seems to be the attitude. Shame, really. I think a lot of people would benefit from the discomfort of hearing the other side of their sacred story.


(And Random Thinker, I know exactly what you're going to say here. No, I am not contradicting my earlier statement about truth being objective regardless of perspective. There is a difference between a story and a fact: a story has multiple sides, a fact does not. In the case of the story of Jesus there are multiple sides (even within the Christian New Testament, where the gospels contradict each other all over the place), and then there is the truth of what actually happened, which nobody knows.)

Back to Basics

I'm going to return now to a variant on the question that inspired me to subject my my blog to a mitotic split and create this spin-off. I am deeply interested in the fundamental ways people perceive the world and how they interact in it. So here is my question:


How do you personally decide what is true or not true?


Should be simple enough.

Burning question

I had a discussion with a devout, evangelical X-tian last winter on a rowing training camp, and he allowed me to pick his brains about a topic that had been bothering me for some time: ghosts and god. Specifically, why one and not the other?

This question became intensified in my mind on the Easter holidays when I was touring old castles with Pirate's mom and little brother. Our tour guide at one particular castle kept getting destracted from the historical element of the tour to tell us about all the castle ghosts. Little Pirate (as we may as well call him, despite the fact that he's 26 years old and a certified engineer) is a devout evangelical christian and got all huffy over the mention of ghosts. Finally he got so fed up with the whole thing he left the tour, lest his ears continue to be accosted by such unholy utterances as the story of the spinning woman in the dungeon.

I find this very difficult to reconcile. If one believes in a god, an omnipotent, supernatural being, why cannot ghosts exist as well? How does one justify the existance of one but deny the possiblity of the other? It seems to me the one is just as un/likely as t'other. So what gives?

Here, then, are your questions:

1. Do you believe in a supernatural deity/god creature?

2. Do you believe in ghosts?

3. If you answered questions 1 and 2 differently, WHY??? (If you answered them the same than you may be wrong, but at least you're consistent.)

You MUST watch this

The Broadcaster's Tale

A Christian, a Muslim, and a Jew go on a radio program...

No, it's not the beginning of a joke. It's a broadcast by journalist John Humphrys who, like me, is seeking to understand why people believe things in the hope that he, too, might come to believe them. Unlike me, he is a famous broadcast journalist and as such has access to high-powered, famous religious people and their brains. In this series on BBC Radio 4 John Humphrys interviews a Christian (Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Williams), a Muslim (Professor Tariq Ramadan), and a Jew (Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks).

Mr. Humphrys is a fellow pilgrim on a journey seeking truth. He approaches each interviewee with the same mindset and question, summarized thus: I used to believe in God. As a child I believed. But then I became disalusioned of the idea upon witnessing a world of suffering in my career as a journalist. I want to believe again; I want to have faith. How can I get it? How can I find God again?

It's worth listening to the extended interviews if you have time. I recommend doing some ironing or other mindless task while you enjoy the broadcast. Cheers!

The Saga Continues

...over at Herebe Monters' place.



Note: the posts of mine he's referencing (that he didn't link) are Big Questions and Faith part II