« Links to 20th Century "Zero Work" Theorizing | PseudoCyAnts's Blog | Bragging Rights? More Congressional Reps Use Twitter Than Dems »
Max Blumenthal: Rick Warren's Africa Problem
Interesting read:
Max Blumenthal, "Rick Warren's Africa Problem", The Daily Beast, January 7, 2009
A nice companion read:
"The Less They Know, the Better", Human Rights Watch, March 29, 2005
Related current news item:
Max Blumenthal, "Rick Warren's Africa Problem", The Daily Beast, January 7, 2009
A nice companion read:
"The Less They Know, the Better", Human Rights Watch, March 29, 2005
Related current news item:
Mississippi has claimed the distinction of having the highest teen birth rate in the United States, a figure more than three times higher than the states with the lowest rates, health officials said on Wednesday.
Mississippi, a comparatively poor state in the South, had a rate of 68.4 births per 1,000 women ages 15 to 19 in 2006, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in a report. That marked a 13 percent increase over 2005.
[. . .]
The only states with a decrease in teen birth rates from 2005 to 2006 were North Dakota, Rhode Island and New York.
The CDC previously reported that the nationwide teen birth rate rose in 2006 for the first time in 15 years. The national average was 40.5 births per 1,000 women ages 15 to 19.
Critics have said that one factor in that increase may be recent federal funding for so-called abstinence-only education that does not give information about contraceptives.
Will Dunham, "Mississippi has highest teen birth rate", Reuters, January 7, 2009
Advertisement
I believe that Missouri also has the highest infant mortality rate.
January 8, 2009 7:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good finds, rec'd. The Blumenthal article was really fascinating. Thanks.
January 8, 2009 9:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, the Mississippi story was in yesterday's Google News rotation, and it relates, so I added it in.
The HRW study was new to me, and I picked-it up using a trick of mine. In the comments to the Blumenthal article, some clown, pseudo: Leader, claims to be Ugandan. The English is a bit too good, but this does not necessarily mean it's a sock. Yet, look at the second link in Leader's reply, it is to a Google search using the .se domain. That's Sweden, and causes me to seriously doubt this poster is Ugandan. What are the odds that a Ugandan would have an excellent command of English, and be comfortable using Swedish Google? Something is rotten here.
The trick is when someone is attempting to prove a point with a very specific Google search, look for the outliers. Here's a link to the search on Google.com. It returns 9 records, and the only one that doesn't reference the same article was a link to the HRW study. Pretty cool, eh?
January 8, 2009 9:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Brilliant
January 8, 2009 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Think of the jobs created by this Federal Program.
Abstinence Only provides monies to churches who pay no taxes, which may not be a good thing. But think of the amount of jobs created by increased teen pregnancies--OBGYNs, social workers, ERs, ...
I could go on an on about this.
January 8, 2009 9:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Okay. You know, up to this point I have been one to let the Warren thing sort of blow itself out. I was willing to take Obama's view of reaching out in spite of differences. But not anymore. This Warren guy and his pal Ssempa have done pissed me off.
Now I have to find a way to express this pissed offness and let Obama know I think he made a poor choice with Warren. Do I do that with an email? Who do I send it to?
Thank you very much Ants. I didn't know. Now I ain't as dumb about it as I used to be...and the sad thing is I didn't know I was dumb about it in the first place. That's why I like coming to this site and reading the posts and learning the different viewpoints and going off to read the links that aren't written in Chinese.
Migwetch. Chi Migwetch.
January 8, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Migwetch. Chi Migwetch thing is Anishinaabemowin (Native American) for thank you, thank you very much...which I had added on but it didn't post for some reason. Gremlins? Hmmm.
January 8, 2009 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
As I've stated in these pages many times and many ways, Warren is a shit of a human being. Borderline insane, deeply ignorant... and frankly dangerous.
His appearance at the inaugural is more than an embarrassment, it is an insult to humanity.
January 8, 2009 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Loki, I think Warren's Christianity is cliche ridden and plays on peoples' ignorance; that his recounting of history is laughably in error, and that his attempt to inject America's political system with his personal version (per.version) of religion is a threat to our liberty.
Still, it is likely counterproductive to engage in polarisation presently. Take care you do not force people into a corner, forcing them to choose between their religion, including a preacherman's errancies, or freedom and justice for all.
The sides for and against same-sex marriages cannot be easily divided down the liberal/conservative linearity, in fact, opposition to it is anit-conservatism at its very core. Choose you targets carefully.
Feed the snake its own tail.
January 9, 2009 12:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmm... I see. I guess being too aggressively equal rights is counterproductive. Asking nicely has always worked with the religious right.
January 10, 2009 9:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Loki, hopefully you're still tracking.
The religious right is the proper target of opportunity, but conservatism, as a whole, is not, if your primary objective is secure equal rights for gays. I often use the phrase, "contemporary conservatives"; as a derogation. What passes for conservatism presently is a brutal parody. It has become a vile cesspit of new-rightys, states rights crackers and religious loons.
Opposition to gay marriage is antithetical to at least two very fundamental conservative principles: less government interference in personal affairs, and the right to contract.
There is a battle brewing for conservatism's soul presently. I believe that there are many real conservatives who are very uncomfortable being associated with the non-conservative right-wing that has been melded into their political theory since Nixon. Kathleen Parker's "oogedy boogedy" is on the mark. This does not mean that real conservatives are about to embrace gays, but they should be willing to accept that this is a question of liberty and justice for all.
I'm still trying to work this out into a good presentation. I've been collecting s decent body of references. I'll post something here, when I'm able to make a good case.
To hell with all of the poseur preachermen, they are assholes and hypocrites. Just take care when you are targeting them to minimise corollary casualties.
January 10, 2009 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hi Ant.
I guess I was wondering why that particular response to my comment? I thought I was clearly commenting only on Rick Warren. Not on all of religion (though, it's true I've done that before).
The thing is it appears we are in agreement. I just didn't get the need for admonition from you-- and not to be too nitpicky here but I've seen some of your comments in these pages. Being lectured about being "counterproductive" was just off-putting I suppose.
Nevertheless, I take your points.
January 10, 2009 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
my thoughts range widely, and i often need a place to set them down with permanence to work on them. bear with me if they seem off target, ok?
January 10, 2009 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
fair enough.
Cheers.
January 10, 2009 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Example, Rick Warren (wish I had the link at the moment) thinks that AD means that modern history is dated "after the Resurrection." Um.... no. AD means "anno domini" - year of the lord - and it refers to the "birth" of Jesus (so far as they could date it at the time).
That suggests that Rick Warren doesn't even understand how history and church history intersect in an area that most first year Latin scholars would learn!
January 10, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not that anyone has time for this but there was a change in many countries around the fifth and sixth centuries and later concerning whether the new date, AD should be from Christs birth or death. If you read Mallory, you will see, if you take a lot of time that everything is dated 30 years or so earlier because he was reading mostly from old French or Frynsshe 'books' that contained older myths handed down orally. But Rome dictated the year of the birth which is 1, not zero. So that there is only one year separating 1 BCE from 1 AD.
Pretty boring stuff, huh?
January 10, 2009 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Abstinence-only never had a chance of achieving anything but was a sop to social conservatives, and a reason to stop providing real assistance.
January 8, 2009 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent blog, PCA. This makes it clear that there are many holes in the dike that Warren wants people to believe he is selflessly building. Wish I had the time and energy to provide a more detailed response.
But this connection between African bigots and US Episcopalains who profess "orthodoxy" - and the way in which Warren seems to seize on issues that are self-promoting is a scary blend. Call them "orthodox bigots" - a brand of "divinely ordained" and very dangerous slight of hand tricksters. (my view, they'd disagree)
Just one question: Where might Sarah Palin fit into this? The focus on the demonic and the campaign to root out witchcraft reminds me of her pastor in Alaska. Once you brand homosexuality as akin to satanism and witchcraft, you've arrived at a whole other horror - one which concerns me greatly.
With regard to an Africa - Sweden connection, believe it or not, I might be able to supply a conjecture - not that I'd agree with the potential source - but I could speculate. If you're interested, you know how to reach me. (just speculation, mind you, but based on personal knowledge)
TPM - it's less than 7 degrees of separation sometimes.
January 8, 2009 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was more vociferously angry than most about Warren at the inauguration and it still irks me but I can live with it so long as it brings a proper spotlight on the reverend. Thanks for staying on this Pseudo. I got angry. You've been analyzing the situation quite rationally and quite well. What can I say? I'm a fan!
January 8, 2009 9:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, i know i'm intense, relentless, and undiplomatic often in my responses. it's good to know you understand we're on the same side when it comes to marriages though. might be a good idea to remember some words of Sun House next time i get up in your face.
January 8, 2009 11:39 PM | Reply | Permalink