I am currently on media overload. Do you ever arrive at that point?
Let’s take a closer look at what I’ve consumed: Over at Mike Duran’s, we have an agnostic/emotionally traumatized crowd name-calling and issuing threats toward people who dare to make any assertions at all because “asking questions” is the only reasonable method of discoursing on religion. One commenter says (not to me), “I’d like to engage in a conversation with you, but based on your last few comments I don’t think you have the intellectual capacity to do so. You can’t answer a basic question, and you just speak in cliches.” If you dare to read the thread, you will find that “speaking in cliches” means you are making assertions (that is, making statements that aren’t questions). Intellectual capacity is based off the ability to call intelligent and reasonable people old sacks and off the ability to shame others into apologizing for having opinions.
And then there was this: 8-year-old flags ‘sexist’ children’s books. Bite if you want–it’s disgusting in the same way as the previous. Basically, little girl cries with rage over the difference between a survival book aimed at girls versus one aimed at boys. She tells mommy that they need to talk to the manager, and a bookstore worker removes the offensively sexist material. Mommy is proud and happy of daughter because daughter stood up for her feelings and had them validated, which is a far more important lesson to teach a little girl than the free-market one of “don’t buy the book if you don’t like it” or, conversely, one of “emotionally manipulating others into doing whatever you want them to in order to keep you happy will ultimately be destructive to you and to others”.
Would you like more? I’m too lazy to link out to anything more. I’m sure you’ve read the others, though–all the rest making the social media rounds. What about the one in which the government shutdown means barricading off the World War II Monument or a tiny blip of a child’s park with fake turtles in it? We all know these are the parts of government that are costing trillions of dollars–right? Honestly, if you want to get right down to it, this government shutdown just brings me to utter hilarity. It’s all so hilarious that I’m this close to collapsing on the floor. The damned Repubs are just mucking things up, and thank the good Lord above that Congress won’t back down on individual mandates. All Americans want and/or need those individual mandates. Way to go Congress! Stick to your guns, I say. The mandate is for our own good. Since you already know I’m being sarcastic, please don’t jump to the conclusion that I believe the Repubs are any more honorable in all of this. The politicians on both sides are just playing at the good cop/bad cop routine. Which is which, I can’t actually determine.
Also, if I might add a final entry, I was reading about the Lutheran Women’s Missionary League in my latest Lutheran Witness, and its progress through history struck me as being rather sad. In the early days of the 1850s, women started auxiliaries that met the actual, physical needs of people around them–in hospitals, orphanages, retirement homes, and seminaries. They mended clothes and established schools and supplied hospitals with equipment. Then it became an official LCMS organization. It became codified, in other words. I don’t honestly know what the LWML does these days, except collect money and hold conventions and review and accept mission grant proposals. Yes, they still support missions, but what happened to the hands-on approach? I don’t want to disparage LWML at all; they’ve raised tens of millions of dollars for missions, according to the Lutheran Witness. I simply wonder if all this codification and consequent distancing is good for our souls.
This is the way of our modern world, you understand. It reminds me of our troubles with Big Government, mostly owing to the change in perspective that Mother Teresa figures have gone through over the twentieth century: they used to throw themselves into their own grassroots organizations. Now they want their charities to be codified; they don’t want to do the work themselves. Of course, when viewed in the light of government enforcement, I know which is more honorable. Missionary leagues may have distanced themselves from hands-on work, but they don’t use authority to wrest money from people who don’t want to give it. The women involved give from their own supply, and from their own hearts.
That brings me full-circle. If I tried, I could connect all these thoughts. It would be simple. The people at Mike’s blog despise Christian culture. As for codified charity programs, they lean progressive, and the interviewee admits that they do, which almost certainly means they are for codified “charity” programs. They search out misogyny in the church and find it (what a shock!). Perhaps they would find it offensive that Lutheran women have a history of mending clothes rather than preaching in the pulpit–who knows? Perhaps the daughter who cried tears of rage because she was offended by a silly, comedic child’s book will throw a fit until somebody in authority hides stereotypical books about girls who mend clothes to help people in need.
I’ve come to the end. As I said, I’m on media overload. And this blog, right here, is media.