Sleepycatz

Wingnut Circus

In participating of Kevin Drum’s Wingnuttiest Blog Post of All Time competition, I was reminded of the great American poet Wallace Stevens’ Emperor of Ice Cream for some reason. So here it is:

Call the roller of big cigars,
The muscular one, and bid him whip
In kitchen cups concupiscent curds.
Let the wenches dawdle in such dress
As they are used to wear, and let the boys
Bring flowers in last month’s newspapers.
Let be be finale of seem.
The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream.

Take from the dresser of deal,
Lacking the three glass knobs, that sheet
On which she embroidered fantails once
And spread it so as to cover her face.
If her horny feet protrude, they come
To show how cold she is, and dumb.
Let the lamp affix its beam.
The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream.

Headache

There are days when my mind just can’t keep up with the insipid reasoning of the rightwing. I generally try to avoid engaging the poorly reasoned ramblings of the bloviating pundit class. But just when I thought that I was out they pull me back in.

Over at the conservative site, townhall.com, Dinesh D’Souza announced that he will be debating Christopher Hitchens on the subjects of God and religion. D’Souza has been considered to be one of the ‘great thinkers’ in the modern conservative movement. So how is this intellectual conservative defend Christianity and religion? He invokes laughable a prioric argument of Anselm of Canterbury, also known as the ontological argument for the existence of God.

For those who are unfamiliar with Anslem’s argument — later extended by Descartes — it can be stated simply as: “Humans can conceive of an infinitely perfect being (ie. God); This perfection is greater then any other perfection humans can conceive of; thus, the knowledge of this being must be a prioric, or innately known to be true; therefore this being, God, must exists.”

As any first year philosophy student will point out, Anslem’s argument is easily susceptible to what’s known as the ‘overload objection’. In other words, humans can conceive of any number of fantasitcal creatures which do not exist, pegasus, unicorns, and even invisible pink unicorns. The fact that these creatures can be conceived of but are nonexistent undermines the notion that God exists because we can conceive of God. We are left with the Anslem’s and Descartes notion of the ultimate perfection of God. We can only conceive of a single being of unmediated perfection - that being must be God.

This, however, leads to a different problem for D’Souza and others: that this perfect being is by no logical reasoning Christian. This is essentially the same problem suffered by Pascal’s Wager. We may argue that, perhaps, some God figure exists, but the arguments lead towards no evidence of the nature of that being. Even if we would blindly accept the a priori argument for God’s existence there is nothing in the argument to suggest that Christianity reflects the nature of God. If fact, we can conceive of an ultimately perfect being which is completely ambivalent towards mankind; thus, negating any need for religious devotion.

It is also worth mentioning, at this point, Immanuel Kant’s objection to the a prioric argument. Kant argues that mere existence is not a quality which defines the actual existence of an object. But that actual existence is defined by more specific properties of a thing.

Nonetheless, the silliness of D’Souza is to suggest that he can logically define or prove the existence of God in the first place. There is no rational argument which can prove the existence of God, and most conservative intellectuals have even given up trying. Even Michael Gerson, a conservative Christian and speech writer for George Bush, in a recent screed against atheists didn’t try to prove the existence of God, but instead focused on the necessity to believe in God. Gerson, like many conservatives, argues that man needs God to have moral order in this world and the next. God becomes an authoritarian necessity — an excuse to accept the ‘natural order’ and to defer unpunished injustices to the next world. For many rational conservatives this is the natural argument for the necessity, not the existence, of God.

D’Souza — who was once heralded as the new example of conservative intellectualism — seems to miss the fact that his argument for existence was dismissed over a hundred years ago and is now taught as a logical fallacy in most universities. It’s a fact that most conservatives would find it politically difficult to argue that religion is necessary for social order but has no basis in fact. This the primary reason why conservative theorists don’t engage in arguments about religion. Instead they leave those debates to the true believers. Those who — with no rational arguments — believe in their theology which supports the conservative authoritarian ideology. D’Souza is seemingly trying to bridge this gap between faith and the mind. From his essay it is abundantly clear that he lacks the intellectual ability to even begin such a meditation, let alone participate in any real discussion of the issues.

I want to make it clear that I have no love or admiration for Christopher Hitchens. I find him to be overbearing and much of his arguments flawed. His continued support of the war in Iraq has shown him to have lost any connection to a rational reality. His logic at a recent conference speaks for itself: sickening.

h/t Canadian Cynic

In Defense of Ann Coulter

Usually, I pay little to no attention to the ravings of Ann Coulter. She’s crass, vapid, and incendiary: she is the Andrew Dice Clay of punditry. However, this week she instigated one of her patented kerfuffles when she was interviewed on CNBC and I couldn’t resist commenting. Ann declared that Jews are good people that simply haven’t been perfected by Christianity:

COULTER: Well, OK, take the Republican National Convention. People were happy. They’re Christian. They’re tolerant. They defend America, they –

DEUTSCH: Christian — so we should be Christian? It would be better if we were all Christian?

COULTER: Yes.

DEUTSCH: We should all be Christian?
…

COULTER: Yes. Would you like to come to church with me, Donny?

DEUTSCH: So I should not be a Jew, I should be a Christian, and this would be a better place?

COULTER: Well, you could be a practicing Jew, but you’re not.

DEUTSCH: I actually am. That’s not true. I really am. But — so we would be better if we were - if people — if there were no Jews, no Buddhists

…

DEUTSCH: That isn’t what I said, but you said I should not — we should just throw Judaism away and we should all be Christians, then, or –

COULTER: Yeah.

…

COULTER: No, we think — we just want Jews to be perfected, as they say.

…

DEUTSCH: But that’s even a scarier thought. OK –

COULTER: No, no, no, no, no. I don’t want you being offended by this. This is what Christians consider themselves, because our testament is the continuation of your testament. You know that. So we think Jews go to heaven. I mean, [Rev. Jerry] Falwell himself said that, but you have to follow laws. Ours is “Christ died for our sins.” We consider ourselves perfected Christians. For me to say that for you to become a Christian is to become a perfected Christian is not offensive at all.

Since her appearance, Coulter has been condemned by the Anti-Defamation League and other for being antisemitic or simply theologically ill-informed. Ann Coulter, ill-informed? Shocked, I am! Shocked, I say. . . But Ann, and her defenders, insist that she is not antisemitic, simply ‘pro-christian’. And they are correct; Ann is no more antisemitic then Christians have been throughout history. She is simply expressing a tenant of her faith — as a conservative evangelical Christian.

Conservative and fundamentalist evangelicals believe that they have the only inside scoop on ’salvation’ and are the only true Christians. But good conservative evangelicals understand the God singled out the Jews in his operator’s manual, the Bible, as special. Pastor Hagee, the fundamentalist founder of the powerful Christians United for Israel, has built a religious and political empire on his theology of imperfect Jews. For Hagee, Jews combined with the state of Israel form a prophetic key which opens a magic gate and allows Jesus to return. Unfortunately, this prophetic ‘happening’ doesn’t bode too well for the Jews, as Bruce Wilson has pointed out:

Many Christian Premillenial Dispensationalists — the theological persuasion Pastor John Hagee belongs to — believe that the majority of the Jews currently living in Israel will be killed in the period of warfare that follows the “Rapture,” when “believing” Christians ( fundamentalist Christians, that is ) are bodily transported up to safety in heaven. The standard interpretation is that 2/3 or more of Israeli Jews will be slaughtered during this period but that a righteous “remnant”, who have realized the error of their ways and converted to Christianity, will survive what Christian Zionists often call the “final Holocaust” or the “second Holocaust.”

I am not trying to assert that Ann Coulter shares Pastor Hagee’s theology, simply that the belief that Jews are imperfect is one which is very prevalent in contemporary conservative Christian culture. Certainly Coulter and Hagee share similar notions of America’s role in the world. Both desire America to attack Iran, both view Islam as threat to world order, and both see secular conspiracies all around them. And, it would seem, that both share the notion that Jews need to accept Christ as their savior or messiah in order to be better human beings.

What Ann Coulter did this week was to speak a tenant of her faith, one which is not usually spoken out loud. She voiced a tenant that is understood among believers, but rarely spoken of outside of prophesy. For this she should be applauded. Her honesty and childlike recitation of dogma helps others to better understand conservative evangelical Christianity. Her words have helped spread a knowledge of her faith, and we can only hope that those words reverberate so that every American can understand the faith which has asserted itself as the true American Christianity.

The Grand Diversion

The United States Senate, the most deliberative body in the world, this week affirmed,in a bold move, by a vote of 72 to 25 that

A recent attack through a full-page advertisement in the New York Times by the liberal activist group, Moveon.org, impugns the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces.

Just to be clear, the advertisement did not suggest that Gen. Petraeus received his bronze star under false pretenses or behaved questionably under fire; yet, these assertions were made quite regularly against a decorated officer by those now rushing to defend the honor of the military. Additionally, the doggerel presented in the MoveOn ad did not go so far as to suggest that Gen. Petraeus is an enemy of the United States, as so many others have suggested, using a similar lyrical device, of a sitting United States Senator. There is an inherent hypocrisy in the Republican discourse being foisted on America. Under the rules of this discourse proponents of the administration are always presenting logical facts while those who question the administration are always ‘playing politics’ or worse, unpatriotic cowards. The fact that a minority of Democrats in the Senate failed to vote against the measure only reinforces how successful this hypocrisy has become.

Meanwhile, on the same day that the US Senate voted to condemn the uncouth folks at MoveOn.org, three American soldiers lost their lives in Iraq. That’s three Americans who will never see their family or loved ones again; three Americans who cannot pursue their dreams and hopes; three Americans who cannot participate in debate over Iraq.

Of course, unsatisfied with the bloodshed in Iraq, on the same day the condemnation of political speech was approved by the Senate another was introduced by supporters of Gen. Petraeus, one which would allow the President open authority to extend his war to Iran. And it can be guaranteed that anyone questioning the need to offer up more human suffering in sacrifice for the honor of of military will be dismissed as unamerican or defeatist.

Jap Awareness Week

Ok, not quite that bad, but close. The David Horowitz Center for Freedom is sponsoring Islamo-Fascist Awareness Week on college campuses throughout the country in October. According to their guide this will be the “biggest conservative campus protest ever.” — meaning more then 100 people will participate.

The organizing guide for the event makes the agenda fairly clear:

If you are looking for a challenge this fall, if you want to break through the barrier of politically-correct doublespeak that prevails on American campuses, if you want to help our brave troops who are fighting the Islamo-Fascists abroad — bring Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week to your campus this October.

The list of planned events include:

1. A showing of Suicide Killers, Obsession, or Islam: What the West Needs to Know or the ABC mini-series The Path to 9/11
2. A panel on the Oppression of Women in Islam or any facet of the Islamo-Fascist threat
3. Distribution of materials on Islamo-Fascism including the pamphlets The Oppression of Women in Islam, The Islamic Mein Kampf, Why Israel is the Victim, Jimmy Carter’s War Against the Jews, and What Every American Needs to Know About Jihad.
4. A “sit-in” outside the offices of the Women’s Studies Department protesting the silence of feminists over the oppression of women in Islam

Somehow, I find it hard to believe that these conservatives actually care about the rights of women in the Middle East , or anywhere else. Rather, for these people the plight of women around the world becomes just another rallying cry for their race-baiting.

The real problem with all of this, aside from the dehumanization, is that these kinds of demonizations actually harm the security efforts of our country. America has not suffered from the disaffection of Arab or Muslim youth seen in Europe because we have not ghettoized these groups of immigrants. America has treated these immigrants no differently then others. By demonizing them we risk loosing their cooperation and isolating them from the rest of society. In general, isolation breeds radicalism. Mr. Horowitz and his followers don’t see this as a problem, the see it as a goal: they seem to like their Muslims as charactictures: bearded, turbaned, and bomb throwing. And the goal of an event like this is to get the rest of us to see the Muslim world with the same hateful stare that they have.

Blessed are the hateful

As I was poking about the nutty side of the blogosphere today , I came across the following invocation:

Father God,

In our hearts we believe that you will hear our prayers and will put all these curses upon our enemies and on those who hate us, who persecute us. We will keep not silence, for the mouths of the wicked and the mouths of deceit are opened against us; they have spoken against us with lying TONGUES. They have compassed us about also with words of hatred, mockery, and deciept; and have fought against all that is Holy without a cause. In return for our agape love they are my adversaries, but we now resort to prayer. They have rewarded and laid upon us evil and slander for good, and hatred for love. Set a wicked man over them as judge, and let a malisious accuser stand at their right hand come Judgment Day.

When Liberal talk show host Randi Rhodes and her followers; when the wicked and mockers at Democratic Underground are judged, let them be condemned, and let their prayers for leniency be turned into sins. Let their days be few; and let others take their offices and charge. Let their children be parentless and their souses become widowed. Let their children be continual vagabonds as was Cain and beg; let them seek their bread and be driven far from their ruined homes.

IN JESUS NAME, I BIND UP EVERY DEMON COMING ACROSS THE COMPUTER LINES, AND I RETURN THEM AND ANY CURSES.

In Your Name, Amen.

As an example of an imprecatory prayer, or curse, it’s pretty mediocre, but the mere idea of such a prayer would strike many as anti-christian. We can easily imagine that muslim fundamentalists pray for similar retributions� against American citizens. The barbarity of religion begins when hate turns to prayer and then prayer turns to action. It seems that we are two-thirds there.

Army of God

Among conservative evangelicals there has often been a subtle argument that in order to defeat Islamic fundamentalist terrorists, Americans must adopt the same religious fervor seen in our enemies. The most overt display of this philosophy was seen recently in Jesus Camp, where children’s minister Becky Fischer remarked: “I want to see young people who are as committed to the cause of Jesus Christ as the young people are to the cause of Islam. I want to see them as radically laying down their lives for the Gospel as they are over in Pakistan. . .”

Fischer is not alone in her desire to bring religious zeal to our conflicts. For some time there has been an on going effort to evangelize those in our armed forces. Now comes Operation Stand Up (OSU). OSU is an evangelical group focused on providing entertainment and morale to US soldiers serving in Iraq. As they say on their site:

We perform these shows specifically for military soldiers. Our shows are specifically geared to be intriguing to the hard core soldier. Spouses and children are welcome but we make no bones about the fact that we are speaking directly to the soldiers of the greatest fighting force of in the world. No “mamsie pamsie” stuff here! Even our ventriloquist is rated one of the top 5 in the world and has soldiers busting a gut with laughter.

If all OSU was offering our soldiers is a Sargent Slaughter ventriloquist act one could hardly object, except perhaps on grounds of comedic taste. But speaking of their upcoming tour to Iraq the founder & CEO of OSU stated:

We are most excited about this crusade and yes we are willing to go to the front lines with a very encouraging word straight from God, to our troops. We feel the forces of heaven have encouraged us to perform multiple crusades that will sweep through this war torn region.

This statement coupled with the fact that OSU is sending copies of the video game Left Behind: Eternal Forces in care packages to troops certainly suggests that they are attempting to theocrotize both the military and its operations. For those unfamiliar with Eternal Forces, the game play consists primarily of converting or killing non-Christians.

The fact that the Pentagon is both supporting and endorsing OSU should make us all a little queasy. Do we as a nation want our military to become a group of Christian Crusaders? At what point does personnel religious belief become the policy of of military — and what will happen to the people who that military is suppose to protect who don’t live up to that religious belief?

Jonathan Hutson has a good look at OSU at TalktoAction — wherein he examines the homoerotic merchandise offered on their website — the hyper-masculinity is very similar to that seen in illustrations by Tom of Finland.

h/t: Liz