November 23, 2007 at 2:08 am
(Civil Rights)
The idea of the megachurch is instinctively repulsive to me. I think this is because huge “churches” seem to combine the superficial slickness that’s become such a big part of our culture with that insidious car-salesman glibness that makes people act so nice when they’re trying to con you, in this case into joining their church. Of course, both of these things are intended (and are quite successful) as a recruiting tool, especially for young people. As such, one could imagine that, well, big churches aren’t so evil after all.
I read this story on the expanding megachurch enterprise with some interest (particularly, in my case, a little heartburn–I can’t help it.) One of the reasons that big churches are so successful, it appears, is that they are actually becoming very efficient at serving their communities. Which is, of course, a great thing.
But my sense is that these groups are encroaching on the territory of secular humanists and we aren’t doing a good job at protecting our image. One of the most frustrating things to me is to watch a campaign (say, for more attention to be paid to the Darfur genocide) that goes nowhere until a faith-based group notices and takes action. Then, once there is finally mass attention on the issue, the faith-based group or groups appear on-top even though they didn’t get the word out first.
It’s extremely frustrating to deal with the image that religious groups pull more than their fair share because even if it’s true, it does a disservice to the many selfless atheists and secularist individuals who are working hard in their communities, sometimes through secular groups but sometimes through groups that are clearly religious (the local rescue mission, for example.) It’s tough to deal with the opinion, perhaps not prevalent but nonetheless pungent, that you can’t be a good person if you don’t pray to a particular God. Or worse, the absurd statement that “there are no atheists in foxholes.”
I’m at a loss…my feeling is that the best way to combat this image is to become more visible…and yet, how do you do this without becoming exclusive? It’s evident from the Darfur example that if we’re really on the same side ultimately, we need everyone working together. I’m also a little frustrated by the lack of a secular humanist structure that isn’t very secular and hardly at all humanist.
On a side note, I’ve been aware for some time of the subtle attacks on Islam in popular culture (I almost walked out of the movie Gladiator because of the way it portrayed Arabs) but I’ve recently started to notice an uptick in anti-Catholic sentiment. Has anyone else noticed this? It would be frightening–a re-tightening of the ostensibly approved religions in a nation founded on religious freedom. Not that we’re giving the Fourth or Second Amendments any more respect.
1 Comment
November 22, 2007 at 2:07 am
(Science/Technology)
I’m a big fan of Web 2.0 even though it’s not obvious to the outside viewer. (Even my blogging has sagged off recently!) It has this potential to re-reshape things which is seemingly unlimited. Wikipedia, has, for all its limitations, completely changed the way I (and many others) look for information on all sorts of topics, as Google had before it. Many of these topics are trivial (I learned today, for example, that UNAM, the national university of Mexico, has a campus in Gatineau, Quebec.) Some of these are exceptionally informative (take a look at some of the pages on focal length or other optic-related subjects.) The level of both detail and breadth of topics is already astounding.
The Web 2.0 app du jour is Facebook, which has apparently broken that critical mass which allows it to be mentioned everywhere. Being too busy (formerly too lazy) to do a lot of heavy lifting in terms of research, since that’s what everyone else is talking about, I’ll talk about it too. I was working on a great piece on Facebook, Web 2.0, advertising and the long tail but got interrupted during a little first-hand research (more–hopefully–on that topic later)
I signed up for Facebook without much enthusiasm. My wife brought it up–she had some friends who were using it was thinking about following suit. I wasn’t that interested buuut… if she was going on line, I knew I’d have at least one “friend.” (Side note: remember those stories about college kids who would IM their roommates? Yeah, I did that too.)
So I signed up and put ridiculous amounts of personal information online such as my high school and graduation year. And sure enough, a few days later one of my old high school classmates added me to her list. And since then it’s been a kind of regular thing…either I find someone new or someone else adds me.
Most of this has been trivial for the most part. I mean, we’re talking about acquaintances rather than close friends…I mean, my close friends would already be on my friend list, right? (This is somewhat odd: none of my closest friends–at least the ones who are easy to find with Facebook’s school-centric model–are actually on Facebook. A second odd thing: all but one or maybe two of the people in my network are currently in college–and we’re talking about people in their late twenties! They’re all doctors, lawyers and scholars. Which makes me wonder who I’ve been hanging out with!) It’s momentarily exciting to think that some person who I haven’t seen in ten years takes a moment out of their day and thinks “Gee, I wonder how Marcel is doing.” But I haven’t had any real conversation with any of my long-lost pals, many of whom have dozens or even hundreds of people in their networks.
Nonetheless, I did have an interesting…journey. I was just “added” by the former valedictorian of my high school who is currently collecting degrees from institutions both exotic and respected. My high school’s seeds being spread far and wide, I rarely come across anyone who knows anyone else in my immediate area. Yet Anne did have another person from Lexington on her page. So I clicked on his profile. Sure enough, I found a familiar name among his Lexington friends: Crit Luallen, who was recently re-elected to her State Auditor position and is widely expected to race against Mitch McConnell for Kentucky’s open Senate seat in 2008.
So maybe, to the right people, this is a valuable networking tool. Me? I’ve always tended to apply Heisenberg’s famous principle to people.
Parting thought: my initial idea for my mug shot on facebook was the “Simpsonized” image you could get from the movie website. It’s insane how many people have actually done that!
Comments
November 6, 2007 at 2:32 pm
(Kentucky)
The Kentucky gubernatorial election is one of the most newsworthy elections in the country
today? That’s…upsetting. The Kentucky election is kind of a joke. I don’t think there is actually an issue at all…it’s virtually all “character.” The Republican incumbent has pretty much proven his lack of character over the past four years; the Democratic challenger is only suspected of lacking character. Oh yeah, there is something about gambling. And the Ten Commandments.
But I guess other than that there is no conceivable way either of these two men could affect our lives. Otherwise, we would have heard about it from the press, right?
In Kentucky, it seems, the misdirection ploy is working quite well.
Comments
