Saturday, June 26, 2004

Rockys and Barrys and Dippers - Oh My!

See this article posted on a web site for an organization calling themselves "One."

Actually, to see the reason for the title I used, you really need to see this article from WorldNetDaily, which quotes the London Times' religious affairs correspondent (a singularly appropriate title, in this case), and gives excerpts from the new "translation."

Perhaps most disturbing about this (or is it typical?) is the backing this re-write of the New Testament receives from no less than the Archbishop of Canterbury. Enthusiastic backing, I might add.

Some religions take a lot of heat over their intractibility regarding certain doctrinal questions. Especially those doctrines that run counter to what have become the socially accepted norms of the day. Here we see exactly why we need to remain "intractible," as it were. This is nothing less than a complete re-write of the very scriptures that make previously unacceptable behaviors acceptable. A very telling quote from the "Translation Co-ordinator" is:

Nothing has been deleted, only less homophobically translated.

Ah, of course. The downtrodden rainbows in the world have been given their scriptural voice. If you can't defend homosexuality in the scriptures (that same principle which brought about the downfall of Sodom and Gomorrah), hey, just change the scriptures!

The sales pitch is that this "translation" (be honest, guys... did you really revisit the Greek and Aramaic?) makes religion more accessible. Fine, but what good is religion if it is in fact so watered down as to make it worthless where human salvation is concerned?

All that aside, the most telling statement comes once again from the lead translator on this project:

There is nothing final about this translation. It is a rolling translation. It will be changed in future editions in response to constructive suggestions from those who find it helpful. It is not meant to replace any other translation, merely to provide a fresh and exciting alternative.

There you have it, folks! Designer scriptures! Don't like what you hear? No problem... just give us a holler and we'll make it all better for you.

Just don't expect a big welcome wagon when you finally meet St. Peter at the gates. Or should that be, St. Rocky...?

Wednesday, June 23, 2004

Moore Loses Ratings Fight

So "Farenheit 9/11" keeps its "R" rating. I don't really know why Moore and his distribution cronies are so fussed about it. Consider the following:

For years, Hollywood appears to have gone out of its way to produce graphically violent, sexual, amoral, and even down-right evil films and market them to the youngest audiences they can legally target. In point of fact, most films that garner the "R" seem to wear it as a badge of honor, if my unscientific poll of local theaters is any indication. In any given week, I can drive by the several cinemas in my local area and find that no fewer than 75% of the screens are showing "R" rated garbage.

The disturbing part of this is the excited chatter among the younger set detailing exactly how many of these shows they plan to see, some of them multiple times. Me, I take my kids to see Harry Potter and cover their eyes (and even their ears at times) during the scarier parts.

The truth is, most youth today are already too jaded to let a little thing like an "R" rating stop them from seeing any film if they really want to. They'll finagle Mom and Dad somehow, or pass themselves off as being old enough. Have you ever seen a theater check IDs for "R" films? Me, either.

Tom Ortenberg, president of Lions Gate Films states that it's perfectly acceptable for 15 and 16 year-olds to see films about war (and, of course, graphic portrayals of the horrors of same) since they one day may be asked to fight one for us. The problem is, Moore's slant is to make war so terrifying, or our leadership so hypocritical, that no one, eventually, will accept a call to serve. Follow that through to its logical conclusion: If he achieved his ultimate goal, how would this country defend itself in a conflict that more people believed in? How would his thinking have affected, say, our participation in World War II?

The bottom line here is that Moore and his ilk want to peddle their particular political agenda and make money doing it. To make money in Hollywood, you have to target the kids. There is no other way. The fight over the rating will only make it that much more tantalizing to the very kids the "R" rating is supposed to protect. I'm sure that's crossed their minds.

Tuesday, June 22, 2004

A Little Caffeine With My Lullaby...

Many of us grew up learning the little lullaby that begins "Now I lay me down to sleep..." No problem there: I've never had trouble falling asleep. No, my problem is waking up. No matter how much sleep I get (or, more typically, don't get) I just can't seem to rev the ol' motor in the morning.

For those of us with such tendencies, I've crafted a response to the lullaby. I intend to recite it every morning as a sort of mantra until I see no further reason for the last line:

Now I try myself to wake.
My teeth to brush. My hair to rake.

But were I smart, what lies ahead
would make me want to stay in bed.

Feel free to quote me.

Monday, June 21, 2004


It's not so much a matter of touting my political orientation, or even raising awareness of some pressing social issue or other. It's just a venue, really, for my own rambling thoughts on life in general.

On the other hand, I can (and occasionally do) get wound up about things, hence the name.

Blog on!