The defense for Fundamentalists’ obsession with homosexuality is the Bible, which they claim to read literally. If this was true, they might notice the words “poor” and “poverty” appear 446 times and that “wealth” is mentioned in 1,273 verses, rarely positively. Only five or six passages discuss homosexuality, though nearly every American can recite them, hearing each one quoted so often. If Fundamentalists fought LGBTQ equality as a hobby, after fulfilling their duty to fight poverty, they might be chastised and forgiven. They’ve revealed, though, they will abandon the poor, to condemn not only gay men and women but anyone who tolerates them. In doing so they’ve denied the very faith and savior they claim to revere. Whatever religion Fundamentalism is, it isn’t Christianity, and it’s time to revoke that label. Categorizing homosexuality, not injustice, as the greatest evil is absurd and disturbing, but it reflects a whole moral system that contradicts the essence of Christian Scripture.
I’ve said before: these people have no interest in the teachings of Jesus. They use the Bible as an authoritative voice to endorse their hatred and bigotry, just like they did for slavery years ago, ignoring the entire book of Exodus which a foundational story for the identification of the Israelites in what we refer to as the “Old” Testament is ABOUT BEING FREED FROM SLAVERY.
They’re much closer to the opposite of Jesus than to Jesus. Which is to say they are anti-Christ. Wolves covering themselves in lamb’s clothing.
31“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory. 32All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, 33and he will put the sheep at his right hand and the goats at the left. 34Then the king will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; 35for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.’ 37Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? 38And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? 39And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?’ 40And the king will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.’ 41Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; 42for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not give me clothing, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44Then they also will answer, ‘Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not take care of you?’ 45Then he will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ 46And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
“Oh! If we had seen Jesus in need of help, we would have helped Him! But all we saw were these poor people who were different than us, and we thought we were supposed to hate them! Ooops!”
These are not Christians. Not if the term means anything like “A Person Who Follows The Teachings of Jesus.”
These are people filled with hatred who want to wrap their hatred in some pious talk.
Doesn’t fool us, and I doubt it fools God.
Every year I ask my class on “Wealth and Poverty” to play a simple game. I have them split up into pairs, and imagine I’m giving one of them $1,000. They can keep some of the money only on condition they reach a deal with their partner on how it’s to be divided up between them. I explain they’re…
Very succinct view of the current problem facing U.S. politics and economic policy. Inequality will be an intractable issue until more members of the so-called 1% break ranks and take a long term view of their own interests.
Note that I don’t suggest that anyone adopt the national interest. This isn’t fantasy-land.
A well-educated time traveller from 1914 enters a room divided in half by a curtain. A scientist tells him that his task is to ascertain the intelligence of whoever is on the other side of the curtain by asking whatever questions he pleases.
The traveller’s queries are answered by a voice with an accent that he does not recognize (twenty-first-century American English). The woman on the other side of the curtain has an extraordinary memory. She can, without much delay, recite any passage from the Bible or Shakespeare. Her arithmetic skills are astonishing—difficult problems are solved in seconds. She is also able to speak many foreign languages, though her pronunciation is odd. Most impressive, perhaps, is her ability to describe almost any part of the Earth in great detail, as though she is viewing it from the sky. She is also proficient at connecting seemingly random concepts, and when the traveller asks her a question like “How can God be both good and omnipotent?” she can provide complex theoretical answers.
Based on this modified Turing test, our time traveller would conclude that, in the past century, the human race achieved a new level of superintelligence. Using lingo unavailable in 1914, (it was coined later by John von Neumann) he might conclude that the human race had reached a “singularity”—a point where it had gained an intelligence beyond the understanding of the 1914 mind.
The woman behind the curtain, is, of course, just one of us. That is to say, she is a regular human who has augmented her brain using two tools: her mobile phone and a connection to the Internet and, thus, to Web sites like Wikipedia, Google Maps, and Quora. To us, she is unremarkable, but to the man she is astonishing. With our machines, we are augmented humans and prosthetic gods, though we’re remarkably blasé about that fact, like anything we’re used to. Take away our tools, the argument goes, and we’re likely stupider than our friend from the early twentieth century, who has a longer attention span, may read and write Latin, and does arithmetic faster.
The time-traveller scenario demonstrates that how you answer the question of whether we are getting smarter depends on how you classify “we.” This is why Thompson and Carr reach different results: Thompson is judging the cyborg, while Carr is judging the man underneath.
Abandoned: Mark Twain Branch Detroit Public Library by Brandon P. Davis
I need to go back to this city. Left me bewilderd and pictures like these bring all the emotions back.
Build the investor deck and the customer deck separately. Do them at different times and do not be tempted to leverage a few slides here and there to move things along. Truly put yourself into the head of the audience and see with their eyes what they see and think and experience. When you do this, you will realize that you are building the story very differently for each group.
This actually came up at my company the other day. I don’t use a deck when I pitch customers, so there is no customer deck. (I loathe PowerPoint and refuse to present in the dark with a glowing screen behind me. Such terrible visuals.)
A member of the team was gearing up to use the investor deck to deliver a brief summary of the company to a potential partner. We nipped that in the bud, but the very thought made my skin crawl.
Mark nails it: make sure you’re in the right headspace when you’re crafting your deck. That is, strive to occupy the mind of your intended audience, and be smart enough to know that there’s more than one.
I’m not sure Todd always thinks so, but I like it.