In this episode of Drunk Ex-Pastors, Jason and Christian discuss the various forms of police brutality that have been making headlines of late (yeah, yeah, we know: Not all cops are bad cops. But the way things are going, the po-po’s gotta earn the benefit of the doubt rather than being given it). We then discuss C.S. Lewis’s argument that Christ is either “a liar, a lunatic, or Lord,” and even listen to Bono’s version of the trilemma, and yet Christian still manages to harden his heart and resist the holy and inspired Word of Bono. And God. We take a listener call about the relation of faith to science and, much to Christian’s annoyance, Jason takes a completely reasonable and intellectually respectable position that refuses to see any rift between the two. Another voicemail seeks to determine the reason why all believers are self-serving assholes (because that’s not a contestable premise *at all*), to which Jason’s reply is essentially “I know you are, but what am I?” Christian’s bieber involves rude drivers, while Jason is biebered by Apple’s braggadocio.
Also, if Tom Hanks becomes a serial rapist it’s seriously going to be a huge pain in the butt for us.
Links from this week’s episode:
- J-Pop America Fun Time Now
- True Detective
- The Notebook
- L.A. Confidential’s Edmund Exley
- Chewing on Watch
- Horse with No Name
- Straight Outta Compton
- Suge Knight video
- Good Will Humping
- The Village
- Michael Richards’ rant
- Liar, Lunatic, or Lord?
- Bono on “Who is Jesus?”
- Jon Stewart on Rolling Stone and U2
- Fides et Ratio
- Last Man on Earth
- Violens: “It Couldn’t be Perceived”
- Jon Snow at a dinner party
Christopher Lake
In reply to the caller who claimed, seemingly, that all Christians are self-serving a-holes, at different points in my life, I’ve been an agnostic, an atheist, and a Christian. I’ve known caring, generous, self-sacrificial people in all three categories, and I definitely wouldn’t say it has been my experience that most of the Christians I’ve known have been self-serving a-holes. *Maybe* I would have said that in junior high and high school, when I was being bullied by professing Christians, and very few people came to my defense, but the fact is, most of the non-Christians I knew *also* weren’t stepping up to help me, so even then, it probably would not have been fair for me to make some huge blanket statement about the a-hole status of Christians! (My teenage years were pretty horrific in many ways.)
As a Catholic, I don’t do good works primarily out of a fear of going to Hell. I do them because, at least in my better moments, I genuinely want to be like Christ, whom I claim to follow, and because God calls me to do them. Fear of Hell is in there somewhere, but it’s not my primary motivator. I’m not trying to say that I do nearly as many good works as I *should* do, as someone who *does* want to be like Christ, but God hasn’t given up on me yet, so I won’t give up either!
On climate change, I’m agnostic but leaning toward believing that it is a problem. In other words, Kenneth and I differ on this issue. 🙂
However, I have a friend with a science background (he majored in chemistry) who believes that climate change is happening but that humans aren’t significantly contributing to it, at least not nearly as much as the current scientific consensus claims. My friend claims that the climate change consensus is being driven largely by money, as there are so many grants being given these days for research into, and projects to combat, climate change.
Again, personally, I’m agnostic on the issue but increasingly leaning toward believing that it is a problem. Having said that, I also can’t help but think back to the 1970s, when the scientific consensus seemed to be that there was going to be a coming Ice Age. “Time” and many other publications were publishing “science-based” articles about the eventual freezing of the earth, which, at the time, serious thinkers were convinced was coming! …
Climate change does seem to be a problem, but I’m just not sure to what degree humans are contributing negatively to it. I’m not parroting Rush Limbaugh here either. I’m just listening to my friends who are more formally trained in science than I am, as well as thinking about what many scientists were seemingly sure of in the ’70s but now can’t seem to remember at all!
On overpopulation, I have seen strong data on both sides of the argument, *depending on the area of the world in question*, but I do know that *low* birth rates are a huge problem in Europe (except among Muslims in Europe, who are having many more children than European Christians and non-Christians combined, generally speaking) and in Japan.
In any event, as a Catholic, I’m not so fearful about the population of the Earth that I’m going to embrace a worldview that sees new human life as something to be avoided and/or resisted, while I still happily engage in the *act* which creates new human life! “Humanae Vitae” was largely scorned, with the Church and outside the Church, in its time and ours, but reading it now, it definitely seems prophetic in many ways…
Christopher Lake
In that last sentence, I meant to say, “H.V. was largely scorned, within the Church and outside of her, but…”
I’ll have to give my more detailed thoughts on police brutality in another comment. I see it as a serious problem, definitely more so than most other white people whom I have conversed with on the issue, whether in person or online.
However, my position makes for interesting conversations with my Rush Limbaugh-loving, hardcore Republican, black friend who generally argues *in favor* of the police when police brutality comes up in the media!!
Christian
Christopher,
that all Christians are self-serving a-holes
I’ll need to re-listen to what we said but I remember being more interested in talking about her theory than addressing whether or not all Christians are assholes, so we may need to clarify on our next episode that we certainly don’t think that.
Christian
Christopher,
My take on climate change is that maybe we are the change, maybe we aren’t. Seems like we could be, but that could also be wrong. Either way, why not take the opportunity to start using renewable energy sources and stop pillaging and polluting the earth?
Kenneth Winsmann
This episode really drives home an idea I’ve had for quite some time now. Namely, atheists are the new village idiots. There was a time in the distant past where hordes of uneducated and indoctrinated christian drones would gather with pitch forks to persecute various scientists and philosophers who would challenge the accepted status quo of the time. These people didn’t care to evaluate idea on their own merits, but merely wanted the challengers to disappear. These troublemakers had upset the status quo, and so they had to be slandered and run out of town.
This is precisely the kind of thing we see today with modern pop atheism/agnostics. Challenge a secular super dogma and be prepared to have a horde of morons come charging up to rush you out of the public square. Most of the time, these people couldnt even begin to explain or describe the very secular gospels they are so eager to defend. Only one thing is certain; there will be no consideration of Christian challenges to secular untouchables. Only disdain, accompanied by jeering insults, and slander. We see some of that in this podcast with Christian saying that “Most christians don’t think” and another caller claiming that “christians are self serving ass holes”. Forget the quality of their ideas. Just focus on the slander.
Don’t agree with gay marriage? Claim you subscribe to natural law given by God? You are a hateful bigot. Deny evolution through random mutation and natural selection? Must be a wacky brainwashed fundamentalist. Deny climate change? Must be a conservative drone promoting oil and gas. No problem with over population? You mean all those abortions and condoms weren’t helping a righteous cause? Now your really bothering people.
Margulis, one of the Altenburg 16, a group of evolutionary biologists who met at a conference in Altenburg, Austria, reported a conversation he had with noted biologist D.r Ayala….
But when they say it, it’s cool.
The Harvard Smithsonian institute and thousands of other scientists have come out against man made climate change…. but when they say it, everything’s fine.
When committees from the United Nations explain that the earth can sustain 12 billion people, a number that their models do not predict we will ever reach, the world collectively looks the other way.
A quick read through Martin Luther Kings letter from a Birmingham jail shows him arguing for and affirming the same natural law theory as Christians uphold in defending traditional marriage…. but when he did it it was cool. When we do it now, it’s hateful.
This sort of shameful propoganda is no different whatsoever from the very hordes of ignorant peasants who criticized and persecuted Gallelio. It certainly doesn’t showcase the “healthy skepticism” atheists and agnostics are supposedly so proud of. What they really mean by “question everything” is “question everything that challenges what you were told on comedy central or CNN.” Because Bill Maher, Colbert, and Stewart know best.
Indoctrination, indoctrination, indoctrination…..
comradedread
Not going to feed the trollish post.
There is a gang culture in some police departments that really needs to be addressed by city, state, and even Federal politicians. Rather than “Protect and serve”, in many places, the motto should be “us vs. them.”
Throw in the tendency for military surplus equipment to be given or sold at a discount to police departments and we have towns of 10,000 people buying armored troop carriers and forming their own SWAT teams which are dispatched to serve drug warrants, and we begin to see a serious reinforcement of the Us vs. Them mentality which turns the police department from protectors of a community into an occupying force keeping the community under heel.
It might not be that bad if the good cops felt as if they could turn the bad ones in, but if you’re a part of the gang, you’re expected to protect your fellow gang members from any threat, even if that threat is justice from concerned politicians and citizens.
And the Village is a good movie right up until the twist ending which sucked.
Christopher Lake
Christian,
I didn’t get the impression, at all, that you and/or Jason were actually agreeing with what the caller said about Christians being self-serving a-holes. I was only replying to what she seemed to be saying.
Christopher Lake
Christian,
I fully agree with what you wrote on climate change. Maybe humans play a significant role, or maybe we don’t. Either way, I’m in favor of what seem to be common-sense policies to address it (such as finding and using renewable energy sources), as long as those policies don’t move in the direction of fear-mongering that treats new human life as a liability.
Christopher Lake
On police brutality, I’ve been aware of it, and frustrated and angered by it, since I was a teenager. I’ve never been beaten up by police, myself, but I’ve heard and read too many stories, often accompanied by tears and angry wails…
This is only one example. When I was 16 and 17, in 1989-90, I spent a significant amount of time with a young black woman who claimed that her cousin had been killed by the sheriff of a town in the state where we both lived at the time. According to this young woman, this sheriff also happened to be the Grand Dragon of the local KKK. I see no reason– no reason at all– to think that she was lying about any of this. Her cousin was dead, and she knew that she would likely never see justice for his murder in this life.
I agree with comradedread’s comment about there being a “gang culture” in some police departments. I’m really surprised, at times, that people even try to argue that this is *not* a reality. Anyone who undertakes a study of the histories of various U.S. police departments in the first half of the 20th century would learn some hair-raising stuff. Heck, anyone who watches the 1973 classic movie with Al Pacino, “Serpico,” knows that corruption and other misuses of power have been absolutely rife at times in certain police departments!
I’m not a cop-basher. I know that there are many, many good, honorable people serving in police departments across the U.S. However, it still amazes and disheartens me how many people will seemingly look for any way to deny that police brutality happens, even when the evidence is right in front of their eyes.
Greg (@greghao)
The Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics does not have a position on climate change. A scientist employed by the Center has published papers denying climate change and as it turns out, in all this talk about greedy scientists who suckle at the teats of grant money, actually are scientists who work for corporations. Yes everyone, you can pick your jaws off the floor now from the shock and amazement that you must be experiencing.
Here’s what you get when you type “harvard smithsonian climate change”:
You’ll also learn that Willie Soon, the scientist in question, has received over $1MM from various corporations, mostly fossil fuel companies.
I’m perfectly happy to read people drone on and on about how climate change is not “proven” science but could we please stop with the charade that it’s not the climate skeptics who are the ones that are well funded.
Greg (@greghao)
So called “gang” culture exists every time you have groups larger than one. Nobody wants to be called a snitch and there is social pressure to conform, especially when it comes to high testosterone institutions like the police, fire fighter, or frats.
Thousands of people are killed by the police every single year and fewer than a handful are ever prosecuted, much less given jail sentence.
So, I’m fully on board with NWA. Fuck the police.
David
Jason, it’s unfortunate you misrepresent the political right when it comes to these recent police shootings. There are a lot conservatives and libertarians incensed about these shootings, in which many on the right in terms of people and media institutions like Reason magazine, Cato Institute, National Review, American Conservative magazine, etc., are all more than troubled about police shootings and policing polices … In short, they see them as congruent with the increase of the state as all powerful … this attitude goes back decades, and generations … and is a major concern of anyone trying to preserve the idea of the limited state. In fact, Reason Magazine has been upset with these shootings for years, for example. Part of the problem is this idea (it seems you believe this) that the right is Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh. Absurd. Whereas those on the ideological right would have big problems agreeing these “pop conservatives” represent their views holistically, or especially now, parcellly. I would say they represent a lot of socially conservative, pop conservatives; those conservatives who buy into America as messianic country, which is more paleo-progressive than it’s ever been a classical liberal belief. And so, they’re popular with conservatives who are not wholly consistent in their ideology. Truly, The political right (ideologically) is far more diverse, and multifarious in it’s culture and political principals than Limbaugh or Fox News. Just go to some respected conservative and libertarian forums. Listen to some Barry Goldwater speeches. Therefore, It’s simply intellectually dishonest to throw everyone who is a classical liberal (a conservator of 18th century liberalism) in the same boat or that Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are somehow representative of conservatism universally … That if you’re on the right all these shootings are “just fine.” Horseshit. We are all scared to death of the police state, which makes sense given the protections the U.S. Constitution prescribes to individual’s over and against the state and therefore the police… I know I post many comments about and against the police and their abusive power on a regular basis on Facebook,!and I’m far, far on the political right.
Bob Stephens
I’m not close enough to the situation in the USA to have a good sense of the situation. On the other hand some external perceptions might be relevant. First up I consider myself to be somewhere on the right of politics but I’ve not quite worked out where that fits in the spectrum of US politics. There is a sense in Australia of US politics to be mostly well to the right of Australian politics.
My impression is of a rapidly escalating level of militarisation of police along with an insane amount of handguns and very high powered military weapons in the hands of people with no credible need for them. I’m with Greg on concerns about encroaching government power and all that goes with it but am also left with the impression that much of what I’m seeing regarding police brutality is ignoring a large part of the picture.
I have the impression that a small percentage of the police shootings of unarmed black people are nothing short of murder but that most are down to a much more complex set of factors which sometimes leave otherwise good police dealing with unworkable situations.
From what I can tell there are characteristics to violent crime in which race is a significant factor that is not neatly tied to non racial aspects of disadvantage (the same patterns are not repeated for people of other races). NYPD publishes reports covering some of this at http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/analysis_and_planning/crime_and_enforcement_activity.shtml I’ve seen material addressing the disadvantage question but don’t recall where it was currently.
As I understand it the overwhelming proportion of black deaths homicides are committed by blacks against blacks. I wonder why those deaths don’t seem to matter in the same way that the death of people who die as a result of police actions often after assaulting those same police officers. The point has been well made about police doing the wrong thing hurting the reputation of all police, the same thing happens where one group is over represented in violent crime.
From outside the USA appears to almost worship it’s military (generalising I know) in a way that I don’t get. Your president routinely orders drones and hit squads to execute people without trial or attempt to capture http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/top-secret-america-a-look-at-the-militarys-joint-special-operations-command/2011/08/30/gIQAvYuAxJ_story.html
I think the situation is far wider than gangs of rogue cops, it’s an acceptance of violence against the other that is dangerous to all. It’s some issues around race and culture that are being played by advocates for political gain rather than honestly addressed.
For my part I recently had a train ticket checked by two partly plain clothed officers (civilian clothes but pistols and Tazer’s on their belts). It’s hard to imagine any likely situation on a suburban commuter train in this country where the firing of a pistol whilst conducting ticket checks would be a viable option. So just why in a country where it is illegal for me to own any item for self defence do cops need to carry pistols checking train tickets? We may be following in some of your footsteps and it’s not something I relish.
Bob
Jason
David,
I don’t doubt that there are some in those camps who are troubled by these shootings. But if you were to listen regularly you’d hear us say often that by “the Right” we mean the popularizers of conservatism, rather than unknown pundits working for think tanks. So: Rush, Hannity, O’Reilly, Coulter, etc.
Hope that clears things up a bit.
Greg (@greghao)
Jason – in the example you posed about performing non-selfish altruistic act of giving some toys to Dave, it’s actually your kids who were altruistic. All you did was tell them to give some of their possessions to Dave’s nieces/nephews. You didn’t actually do anything selfless…
And it’s funny that in an episode where you talked about Friends, you guys didn’t recall that there was an episode on this specific issue between Joey and Phoebe (“The One Where Phoebe Hates PBS”): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahDxg3hc5pM
Greg (@greghao)
And just to reiterate Jason’s point above about conservatives, these conservatives who are troubled by these shootings don’t really seem to be working too hard about calling out their fellow conservatives who have hijacked their party’s rhetoric.
Christian
Greg, ha ha! Great Friends clip!
Kenneth Winsmann
Rush, Hannity, Colture, Orielly, etc. All universally condemned the walter scott shooting as a horrible act.
Kenneth Winsmann
Greg,
The only people who have hijacked the conservative rhetoric is….. you guys.
https://youtu.be/65m_e_1yzQk
Greg (@greghao)
Kenneth,
Thanks for your comment because it reminded me of something else I wanted to comment on while listening to the podcast.
It is certainly a good thing that Limbaugh, Hannity, et al are condemning this act, but it just harkens back to the classic Chris Rock bit from Bring the Pain (one of the greatest comedy albums of all time): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3PJF0YE-x4
Limbaugh, Hannity, and friends are supposed to condemn the behaviours of corrupt cops. This should not be a thing that you get credit for.
Kenneth Winsmann
Greg,
Lol no one was applauding them for their behavior. Only noting that the left has hijacked the conservative rhetoric and twisted it to say X, while all along precisely no one has said that. Well done, liberal media. Well done.
comradedread
Bullshit. If there hadn’t been video of the confrontation showing the officer shooting hte man in the back and planting a taser on him, they’d be portraying the victim as a thug, a deadbeat, someone who picked a fight with the officer and deserved to die, just as they’ve done with every other black shooting victim in recent memory.
Christopher Lake
Greg,
You claim that conservatives who differ with pundits such as Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity don’t seem to be calling them out much on issues such as police brutality. I am curious though– do you actually spend much time looking for, and/or reading, such “differing” conservatives?
In my circles of politically conservative-leaning Catholic friends and acquaintances, there are many people who vocally disagree with, and call out, Limbaugh and Hannity. The websites, “Ethika Politika” and “The American Conservative,” might surprise you with some of their articles. (I’m not providing the links here, only because when I have tried to link to sites here recently, my comments have, for some reason, not been published.)
There are many Christians of a conservative political bent who disdain the thinking and rhetoric which one often hears from some of the more the widely-known-and-heard radio and TV pundits. I am one (and only one) of these Christians.
asksusantaylor
Christian,
I think there were two different issues at play in the discussion about christians being assholes because their belief is self-serving. As Jason pointed out, it’s a pretty broad generalization to characterize all christians that way. i know a heck of a lot more who are loving and kind than who are petty and critical. But, as for self-serving, it seems like it would be hard to find anything in our lives that we do not do for at least some part of it being satisfying to ourselves. I don’t know that that has to negate it though, does it?
Seems like the issue isn’t black and white, as in: either i do something that gives me nothing at all, or what i do gives me something and the value is therefore negated.
The other day, I was walking through the grocery store parking lot. I saw an elderly woman whose cart was still full, the trunk lid was open, and she was moving pretty slowly. I spontaneously said, “Hey, can I put your groceries into your trunk for you?” Of course she said yes. I didn’t do it because I was trying to get anything out of the transaction, but I certainly *did* get some things out of the transaction. But that doesn’t negate the value of the gesture, in my very very humble opinion.
I always enjoy the show, even when I am talking back to you vehemently.
Christian
asksusantaylor,
Actually, I’m the one that pointed out before Jason said anything that “all Christians are assholes” is an “assumption” that we’re just supposed to agree with, clearly indicating that we don’t. I would never agree with a statement like that, nor do I believe that in any way.
I think what it boils down is whether or not there really is such a thing as altruism. I think there is, but it’s difficult to prove, as the link Greg posted above demonstrates in a funny way:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahDxg3hc5pM
Greg (@greghao)
Christian,
I think that we’re all assholes but whereas non-christians can choose to not be assholes, christianity tells its adherents not to be, so christians who are assholes are that much more odious. That is probably the root of the “all christians are assholes” thing, e.g. it stands out more.
Kenneth Winsmann
Great video on altruism! This one is a little more dolled up…
https://youtu.be/OxiAikEk2vU
Greg (@greghao)
Christopher,
Uh, I’m not conservative so no, I don’t spend much time looking for, and/or reading, such “differing” conservatives. Though I am familiar with both sites you mentioned, and, generally speaking, I do not agree with their perspective. And since I’m not an actual political scientist (nor do I believe it does much good), I don’t spend much time trying to engage my political opponents. It’s much like religion, despite the innumerable words that have been spilled over these many comment threads, I doubt anybody’s changed their mind on their position.
I was speaking to the conservatives that everybody knows, and they are Limbaugh and Hannity. Hell, I daresay that not even most conservatives know about sites like The American Conservative.
comradedread
I know of the American Conservative. It’s one of the few places where you can still find sane conservatives, accept when they go a bit neo-confederate or wheel Uncle Pat (Buchanan) out to scream “GET OFF MAH LAWN!”
Christopher Lake
Greg,
Thanks for the reply. I was trying to get a sense of how much time you actually spend with conservative thinkers, since you mentioned that you don’t hear many of them calling out the radio and TV pundits.
Given that you admittedly don’t spend much time looking for, and/or reading “differing” conservatives (“differing” from the pundits who make excuses for, or deny the existence of, things like police brutality, that is), you can’t really *know* that there *aren’t* many conservatives who differ from the widely-heard pundits on said issues. Well, there *is* a way for you to know (i.e. read more of them), but by your own admission, you don’t seem to be inclined to do that.
Christopher Lake
Comrade,
TAC is one of the conservative sites that I wish more “Rush-style” conservatives (and liberals, and radical leftists) would read! I think that it could bring people of widely differing beliefs together– and it could also show conservatives who think that because they listen to Rush, they are “well-informed,” that the conservative world of ideas is much, much bigger than his show or Hannity.
I’ve had some trouble posting links here recently, but I’m going to try to post this one, because it might be of interest to you, Greg, Jason, Christian, and others on the site. http://www.theamericanconservative.com/seven-reasons-police-brutality-is-systematic-not-anecdotal/
Greg (@greghao)
Christopher,
I’d rather spend my limited time talking to actual people in my life who are conservatives or libertarians. But frankly, even that’s not that interesting anymore because it’s all just slogan shouting. Nobody (and I count myself in this) is really interested in engaging in true discourse anymore. I know that there is going to be precious little that a conservative can say on any given subject where they could actually change my mind and vice versa.
As a result, there is no incentive for me to look into the universe of conservative thoughts or reasoning — and mind, it’s not as if I am seeking out Limbaugh, Hewitt, et al either, it’s just that their presence and opinions are shoved down my throat on a near daily basis because of the coverage that they themselves receive from non-conservative news outlets.
Now, none of this is to say that I’m not interested in real positions that have been well thought out and defended but far too often, arguments from both sides end up in tired talking points that don’t further the conversation.
Lane
To the point that Christians are self-serving, because they are doing things to either get a reward or avoid punishment is too simplistic. As Jason pointed out this is the lowest level of spiritual maturity. That might be how one starts, but it isn’t how one finishes (hopefully). Eventually you grow in habit and sanctification, and actually love loving others, for love’s sake.
Christian, I believe, pointed out that the joy you get from helping/loving others is an award, and implied that this keeps the good act from being altruistic. This is a Kantian idea. Namely, that a good deed is only good if you do it out of pure duty – even an emotional reward of joy robs the deed of its goodness. This is bullshit. Next time you do something nice for your significant other, tell her you did it out of duty and not love and see how far it goes. If this is what altruism is, It simply does not do justice to the human experience. As Jason said in his last Heavy For The Vintage article: “[it] is simply too cold, unimaginative, and boring to be true.”
Loving love IS the proper motivation. If you enjoy loving, good – that’s how you were designed. Loving love is how we love God; it is how we become truly who we were meant to be.
Lane
Actually, I’m not too surprised at all to find a-holes in the church. I view the church as a hospital for sinners, and you shouldn’t be surprised to find very sick people in a hospital. Atheists sometimes points out the prisons have much higher percentages of Christians than atheists than the general population. One of my good friends evangelizes weekly at the local prison. He says that it is extremely easy to evangelize people who are behind bars with the consequences of their sin shoved in their face on a daily basis.
The worse you are the more Grace you need. Maybe that leads a-holes more quickly into the visible church. Further, maybe this explains why St. Paul refers to himself as the chief among sinners. At first this comes across as a humble boast, because he is clearly doing amazingly good things as an apostle. But then you realize that Jesus Christ Himself had to appear to him and strike him blind to convince him to stop encouraging the stoning of Christians!
AB
Wow, this podcast continues to roll.
Kenneth, your website about coffee is broken..