Mad at Mel

Since everybody else in the blogosphere will likely be posting on the Mel Gibson DUI fiasco, might as well throw in my two cents.

He's obviously a fine actor, and I respected him for bringing the Passion to theatres with his own money (although the movie was not to my liking overall). But I serisouly question his tether to mother earth at this point. My concern began during the filming of the movie where frankly he looked a little 'wild-eyed' to me in some of the interviews.

The man really couldn't have done more damage to Christianity if he tried, and at the worse possible time. Unfortunately there are some who will unfairly link him with Christianity to the point it will be Jesus in the drunk tank, not Mel.

We can only hope the left cuts him the same slack extended to nearly every member of the Kennedy family. Maybe they'll forgive his hateful remarks like they did for Cynthia McKinney, Ray Nagin...or even their own Howard Dean, all apparently made when stone cold sober.

UPDATE 7/29/06

A pretty classy apology. He's obvisouly got some issues, but don't we all. It's amazing the power of a sincere and contrite apology, although it's one of the hardest things to do.

So far the big lefty bloggers have refrained from piling on, which itself is pretty classy.

SPEAKING OF RELIGION 7/29/06

I thought about making this a new post, but it seems to be somewhat tangential to the the Mel episode, religious hypocrisy, the right wing, and the left.

If you can manage to wade through the sneerish underpinnings typical of most New York Times stories regarding the republican party or evangelicals, then this is a thought-provoking article. As a sometimes attendee of a so-called 'mega church', it hits home.

First, there are several aspects of Pastor Byrd's proclamations that I agree with. Number one, America is NOT a "Christian nation" in the purest form, since to be such would require a theocracy. He's absolutely correct that the founding fathers, all of whom believed in God, were trying to get away from theocracies when they built America.

This was borne out recently when I toured Monticello. It was interesting to hear the tour guide speak of Jefferson's faith. She compared him to a modern day Unitarian, who believed strongly that man's influence on religion had corrupted it. You can get this sense by reading some of the letters between Jefferson and John Adams. Both believed in Christ, but harbored trepidations about organized religion.

That doesn't mean the founders were atheists. They loosely based the country on the premise that God created man and gave him unalienable rights, they based our justice system as such, but at the same time they didn't want any one particular denomination to dominate. I believe that's the main reason why many felt the American experiment might fail, since it depends so much on the intergrity, honesty and morality of each individual citizen--a very mature form of government.

I can vouch for the article when it talks about mega churches and 4th of July celebrations. Bellevue Baptist here in Memphis has used military imagery in such cermonies in the past, but I don't think there's anything horribly wrong with it as long as it remains a respectful honoring of the country's fallen.

But at the same time I believe Pastor Byrd is onto something. The Church must remain neutral politically. It's natural for the flock to want direction on how to tackle the issues of the day, and the only way remains through the ballot box and political involvement, however that must remain a civic duty for each individual with choices made based upon teachings of the church. There's a difference between that and the issuance of voting guides.

But the Times ain't gonna flop off the hook scott free. The innuendo throughout this front page article was noticeable. Here's how I read it--that Byrd was a hero for announcing that God wasn't a republican and the culture war (and other wars) are a silly waste of time. You could almost hear the newsroom rejoicing, because in their partisan minds God is a democrat.

If they really believe in objective journalism they will make this a series and go investigate all the churches in the Twin Cities. Surely they'll find a few in other areas with the roles reversed. Two wrongs don't make a right, but one wrong isn't always by definition wronger than the others.