In a comment to my previous post, Adrian Spidle (founder of the Church of the Modern Era [more on that later]) invites me to enter into political discussions over on his weblog, the Public Inquiry Project.
Well, Adrian, thanks for the invitation, but no thanks. And here’s why:
While others categorize me as a “leftist,” I catorgize myself as an independent who supports human and civil rights, democratic process, the American Bill of Rights, the Golden Rule, and the rights of individuals and cultures to pursue their own destinies. I also believe that we all have the right to defend ourselves from oppression by individuals or by governments; that, while the ideals of our American democracy are good and moral and should be embraced, the current American administration has led us a long way from those ideals; and that, until we in America get our own house in order, we have no right to try to persuade others that our capitalistic or our democratic ways are the best ways.
I will support any political candidate who also supports those same things — not only in words, but — so much more importantly — in action. And I will oppose any candidate that obviously doesn’t.
Bush’s actions prove him to be the antithesis of everything in which I believe. The fact that he is a Republican is irrelevant. I look at who he is, with whom he surrounds himself, and what he’s done to our American ideals — and I come to the conclusion that I don’t want him to continue being my president.
Now, I have to admit that Adrian’s site boasts some interesting facts. At least I’m willing to assume, for the moment, that they really are facts. The stuff here, for example.
Having worked at the New York State Senate (for the Deputy Majority Leader at the time) as a writer for several years, I saw how laws get passed, witnessed the “horse-trading” and compromising. It works that way on tv’s West Wing, and it works that way in reality. So, legislative facts often become so despite the true desires of the good guys. In the political world, you hardly ever really win. The most you can do is to keep playing the game and keep hoping some good will come of it. (At least that’s what you do if you’re one of the good guys; if you’re one of the others, you try to get as much for yourself and your cronies as you can while you can.) I wish someone would come up with a way to separate politics from government.
So, Adrian, thanks but no thanks. I try not to argue politics and/or religion and/or art. I know what I believe and why I believe it.
Having said that, I have to say that I’m intrigued by Adrian’s statement on his Church of the Modern Era site:
The Theology of the Modern Era
Do you think that modern science has explained enough of the workings of us and our universe so that you see no need for a Creator? Do you find it difficult to believe that the state-of-the-art in theology and morality was established two or three thousand years ago? Does the idea of a personal God who creates miracles seem silly? Do these beliefs leave a void in your life?
If you honestly answered yes to the above questions then this church is for you. Welcome to the theology of the modern era that will show you how humans will create God with the technology of the future. And, it will also show you how God will use that technology to provide perfect justice and everlasting life to us, our ancestors and descendents. Get ready to travel beyond that nar-row sliver of space-time that your intuition can easily grasp.
The Empirical Path to Transcendent Truth
I find the above interesting in light of a mystery novel to which I’m currently listening: The Footprints of God. I’m only half way through, but as the story unfolds, it looks as though technology is, indeed, creating “god,” or at least a reasonable fascimile thereof.
And now I’m off to listen to the next chapter.