Web of Trust and the new censorship

discovery.org | WOT Reputation Scorecard | WOT (Web of Trust)

discovery.org

Description:

Discovery Institute is a nonpartisan public policy think tank conducting research on technology, science and culture, economics and foreign affairs.

This is one of the many Christian sites that has received an "Unsatisfactory" or worse rating in at least one of the four categories- Trustworthiness, Vendor Reliability, Privacy, Child Safety- by Web of Trust (or WOT for short) users because they disagree with its views rather than  any alleged malicious material.  Since this means that anyone who has the add-on on their browser and tries to visit the site will be warned that it is a potentially dangerous site, such actions can best be described as attempted censorship and poisoning the well.  Evidently, there are those who prefer such tactics to an open exchange of ideas.
All this does in the long run, I would argue, is make the internet a less safe place by discouraging people from using an otherwise fine add-on or casting doubts about the integrity of its ratings in the minds of those who do use it.

Israel, Palestine, and the old saying about how two wrongs don't make a right

Christians and Israel « Deeper

If you find yourself in disagreement with the author’s central claims, I urge you to still give the letter a read. Consider what they have to say. The majority of the letter is devoted to understanding 2 key ideas: first, God’s promise of the land to Abraham and his descendants, and who it applies to (here’s a hint: the Israelites were not Abraham’s only descendants); and second, the conditional nature of Israel’s possession of the land. They were to treat the people in the land, especially including aliens, the poor, and so on- with justice, or risk losing it altogether (which they did when God sent both kingdoms into exile- only hundreds of years later were they allowed to return and partially reoccupy the land).

Now if the equations were as simple as Israelis = bad guys and Palestinians = innocents (or, conversely, Palestinians = bead guys and Israelis = innocents).

You know what would be a refreshing change of pace in this discussion? If one side (or better, both) would actually stop the pointless finger-pointing and finally admit that its own side perhaps isn’t as completely innocent as it portrays itself to be. By omitting key facts, this open letter shows itself to be nothing more than another example of this trend. While I have no intention of whitewashing or excuse Israel’s numerous wrongdoings, it would be equally objectionable to ignore the many wrongs that have been committed against it.

The 3-ton elephant in the federal deficit discussion room

Amplify’d from humor with a point « Don't Stop Believing [View this Amp}

Jonathan Shelley forwarded this satirical look at our national debt. It’s only three minutes long, and be sure you watch it all the way to the end.

As I allude to in my response, the federal deficit, like the weather, is something almost everyone talks about, but no one does anything about:

However helpful videos such as this may be in making people aware of the deficit problem, it falls short in that it offers no solutions. What gets left unsaid is while most people admit that we need to reduce the federal deficit, very few are willing to sacrifice his or her own personal sacred cow to do so. It's fairly easy and popular to blame the rich, the poor, the politicians, any multitudes of "them" come to mind here, just as long as it's someone other than ourselves.
I'm not disagreeing with the video that something needs to be done, just pointing out that doesn't really get us any closer to a solution.

Why I'm not willing to jump on the "Tim Tebow for president" bandwagon

Quarterbacking Our Country: Tebow Style - Matthew Dowd - NationalJournal.com

Obama, and so too the Republican candidates for president, can learn a lot from what is going on in the Mile High City.  Our economy, and this country, are struggling with huge deficits of confidence and faith.  We need a leader who can bring us together, exude confidence in us as a team, and lead us to where we need to go in the 21^st century.  A leader who is willing to admit mistakes and approach politics not by pointing fingers or scoring points but by helping us all be better people....

But maybe a quarterback who seems as much boy as man can show us all, including the candidates for president, how to win and how to get our country back on track.  And how to have a little fun along the way.  Now that is a leader I would enthusiastically go in the huddle with.

First, this is a false analogy.  Presidents and quarterbacks are chosen in very different manners.  Until we, as voters, stop making it politically unwise to admit to making and not blame others, we're going to keep getting leaders who do just that.  Second, as important as it is to have a president that can lead, where he's trying to lead us to is even more important.  I'd rather have a leader that somewhat ineffectively leads us in the right direction than one who effectively leads us in the wrong direction.

And a couple of (or three) bones to pick with Sharper Iron:

On Tebow and Obama: "one man is offering his team the leadership they need while the other is trapped in traditional discourse and scoring political points" | SharperIron

On Tebow and Obama: "one man is offering his team the leadership they need while the other is trapped in traditional discourse and scoring political points"

First,  the original article makes it clear that the author is criticizing both Obama and the Republican candidates for president.  To fail to mention that it does so distorts its context, making it sound like it's saying that only Obama is guilty of such behavior.  Second, the charge is so vague that it could probably aimed at 99% of all politicians from both parties.  Singling out only Obama makes the author of Sharper Iron's soundbite sound blatantly partisan.  Third, doing so would also seem to be an example of being "trapped in traditional discourse and scoring political points", the very thing that he or she is criticizing Obama for.  Physician, heal thyself!
BTW, the title of this post isn't meant as a slam  against Tim Tebow, but simply an acknowledgement that what makes him a (so far) decent-to-good QB doesn't necessarily translate into him (or someone with the same characteristics as him) being a good president.

The return of "Happy/Merry/Feliz/Joyous/Blessed [insert holiday of choice here]!"

Things That Drive Me Crazy About Christmas | SBC Voices

So this time of year is full of joy and slight annoyances. I wanted to share my list of humbugs with you as we are all joyus [sic] and grouchy.

A Christmas Rant by Dan Barnes « Εις Δοξαν [Links to the above; the last sentence in my response below only appears here.]

Dan has done some of the work for those who would like to air a few grievances Frank Costanza style about many who like to combat those who perpetuate the so-called "War on Christmas."

 See also: Happy/Merry/Feliz/Joyous/Blessed [insert holiday of choice here]!

Just wondering if you've seen In Defense of "Happy Holidays" | 9Marks, which is very similar to this post?  I've never quite understood the purpose of the campaign to get stores to get their employees to say "Merry Christmas" instead of "Happy Holidays".  Let's suppose, for the sake of argument and against all common sense, that they are wildly successful in their efforts and stores switch to saying "Merry Christmas" en masse.  Does anyone really expect that people are going to start thinking, "Wow, all these employees keep saying 'Merry Christmas' to me, therefore Christianity must be true.  I'd never have seen the light if they had told me 'Happy Holidays' instead.  I better go repent right now. <sigh>  I just wish I could thank each and every Christian that fought the war for Christmas because without them, I would have never seen the errors of my ways."?
As for "justification" of the war, I think what it basically comes down to is that some Christians feel that culture needs to reflect their beliefs in order for them to feel that their beliefs are validated.

Deof Movestofca's Grand Web Tour #1: 20 links in 56 days

Note: the following first appeared on the "¤ Deof Movestofca's Web Tour ¤" static page, but were moved here to keep it from getting overloaded with links.

Proud Fundamentalist makes observations similar to my posts in my "Myths about Fundamentalists" series, but from a different angle

Bumper Sticker Christianity A fairly good assessment of "minimalistic" Christianity.

Deeper Issues Behind the Same-Sex Marriage Discussion The main issue, as I write in response to the article, is whether marriage is a God-made or man-made institution.

John Piper: I Was Racist | Christianity Today | A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction I find myself agreeing with some of what Piper says and disagreeing with other statements of his.  In this case (an excerpt of an article by [about?] him that appears to have been printed in Christianity Today), I find his writing to be too muddled to know whether I agree with him or not.  Perhaps he becomes clearer as the article progresses, in which case I might be doing his writing a bit of a disservice here.  From the excerpt itself, however, I couldn't find any indication of what specific point he was trying to make in the article.

Argument Poor, Make Fun of the Opposition add a side of appeal to ridicule with that bacon.

The Problem of Evil: Lesson 03 While the lessons over all are good, I disagree with many of the author's objections to the free will defense.

The Problem of Evil: Lesson 04 So does the author agree with free will or not?

Oh no! My wife’s coming home Well, not my wife, rather that of the author (who makes a very good analogy between cleaning house physically and cleaning house spiritually) of the post

Recall Notice A bit of humor over at TWeb

Why Won't God Heal Amputees No, not the website, but a post trying to "help" it by positing the "argument" that if God existed, He would have created 25-hour days. Since a day only has 24 hours, He doesn't exist.  (An example of Poe's Law, atheist style?)


Is There Really a non-Fundamentalist Christian? I don't see how one can deny the fundamentals of the Christian faith and still claim to be a Christian

Is Inerrancy Idolatry? A Few Simple Thoughts If an inerrantist believes that God is the source of all scripture, and that an effect (in this case, scripture) cannot be greater than its cause (in this case, God), how could they possibly place scripture above God?  An argument only a few intelligence points above the "God would have created a 25-hour day if He existed" one.

The Sad Lack of Rational Argument...  In which an argument by Dr. James F. McGrath against inerrancy on the basis that it relies on circular reasoning is shown to rely on circular reasoning.  Oh, the irony!

exclusivism If living in a pluralistic society didn't stop Peter, John, and Paul from proclaiming an exclusivist message, why should it stop us today?  (I found Johnathon Shelley's satire of the post-modern rationale behind inclusivism especially funny)

voting on heresy Who's next, Arius or perhaps Marcion?

intergenerational warfare Anyone who has heard The Who's "We Won't Be Fooled Again" or Genesis' "Land Of Confusion" should recognize this as being "same song, different verse"
.
Rob Bell takes his message to the churches Nothing really to add here

Does Hebrews Tell Us to Move On from the Gospel? "A text without a context is a pretext for a proof text."

pluralism Not all pluralisms were created equal

NB: I give up on making this page looking like I want it to.  Some of the spacing between lines is off, but I've already copied and pasted the entire post to notepad, copied and pasted it back to Blogger, and then re-did the links.  Anyone who thinks I'm going to do it again needs a psychological examination even worse than I do.

WARNING: Christmas music watch is now in effect

To avoid any misunderstandings, let me state for the record that I (at least tend to) like Christmas music... just not for hours on end practically every day, especially before December 1.  So, please, someone, STOP THE INSANITY!

You may now return to your regularly scheduled blog.  Oh, except for one more thing: "These Are a Few Of My Favorite Things" is NOT a Christmas song.  It's from "The Sound of Music" and was meant to soothe some of the Von Trapp children who had been scared by some lightening (or something like that).  As much as I like that movie, the truth must be told.

Venom: Whiniest. Supervillain. EVER!

Background (for those who might need it):

1. An immensely powerful being known as the "Beyonder" abducts many of Marvel Comics superheroes (including Spider-Man) and supervillians to another planet to fight each other.
2. After damaging his costume, Spider-Man discovers a "liquid" that molds itself to him and creates a new costume for him.  As a bonus, it also provides him with unlimited webbing and can mimic regular clothing, which allows him to change in and out of costume almost instantaneously.
3. The old adage "anything too good to be true, usually is" rears its ugly head.  The new costume is actually a symbiont (or symbiote, for those who, unlike my spell checker, prefer that spelling) that is controlling Spider-Man while he sleeps and forces him to go adventuring while he sleeps, leaving him physically exhausted when he's awake.
4. When Spider-Man, curious as to why he's suddenly tired all the time, discovers the truth, he rejects the symbiont.
5. The symbiont slithers off, only to find a new host (Eddie Brock) that also happens to hate Spider-Man.  The two become known as "Venom".

Now we get to the interesting (whiny) part: why Eddie Brock hates Spider-Man.  A man named Emil Gragg had "confessed" to him that he (meaning Gragg) was a serial-killing supervillian known as Sin-Eater.  Brock, a journalist, is so eager to get a scoop that he forgets one of the cardinal rules of his craft: always check your facts.  In this instance, the only thing Gragg is guilty of is being a compulsive liar.  When Spider-Man catches the real Sin-Eater, Brock's career takes a nosedive.  No matter how unheroic Spider-Man's other choices may have been, such as letting Sin-Eater continue his killing spree (which would have revealed Brock's shoddy journalism anyway) or killing Sin-Eater, his main concern should have been saving Brock from his own error.  And that, for pure whininess (which, believe it or not, really is a word), is hard to top.