7 things @ 9 o’clock (9.24)

7 things @ 9 o’clock (9.24) September 24, 2013

1. David Sessions, Libby Anne and Doug Muder all have perceptive things to say about the immensely creepy Stephen Baskerville’s recent lecture at the right-wing Christianist Patrick Henry College. Baskerville attempts to paint an intellectual and spiritual veneer on his subject, but you’ll recognize the misogyny and rape-apology as the same “men’s rights” garbage you’ve seen parroted by 10,000 interchangeable Internet trolls.

2. “It seems important not to dwell on the fact that Sikhs are not Muslims,” said Amardeep Singh after a mob shouting anti-Muslim and anti-Arab slogans attacked and beat a Sikh professor in New York. “For one thing, the attackers may not care that much one way or the other. But more importantly, one doesn’t want to sanction hateful speech or violence against any vulnerable group based on ‘correct’ identification.”

3. Word of the day: kludgeocracy (via).

4. “Why do so many Americans live in mobile homes?” the BBC’s Tom Geoghegan asks. Geoghegan notes that “in reality mobile homes are never really very mobile,” but he doesn’t consider what that entails — a market failure that prevents competition from putting any downward pressure on the rent and fees charged by the land-owners who control these parks. Apart from that rather large hole, Geoghegan offers a good overview of the neighborhoods that 20 million of our neighbors call home.

5. I’ve never really understood the supposed appeal of “Pascal’s wager,” which seems unlovely in its lovelessness and appeals to a fairly stunted reward-seeking/punishment-avoiding framework. I prefer Rieux’s wager, which is less Christian, but more Christ-like, I think.

6. Sometimes, occasionally, I can be reachable and teachable:

7. David Neiwert on “Why It’s Important for Communities to Confront Nazis“:

Haters and racists thrive in darkness, and they thrive on silence. They look for approval from whatever source they can muster. For them, silence equals tacit approval.

But paying attention to haters and, moreover, standing up to them requires both constant vigilance and a keen awareness of the dangers inherent in doing so. In my experience, the best response it to make a complete mockery of them, as a crowd of counter-protesters did several years ago in Olympia. …

The important thing, though, is for these communities to be able to stand up and say “Not In Our Town.” And this time it was successful.

Whether it’s “Not In Our Town” or “Not In Our School” or “Not In Our Church,” if we don’t speak up and say “not in our name,” then our silence will be claimed as tacit approval.

There are more things to admire in people than to despise. You betcha.

"Okay. Bye bye, child. No one else wants to play with you, and now I'm ..."

LBCF, No. 238: ‘The end of ..."
"I was in that show in 9th grade."

LBCF, No. 238: ‘The end of ..."
""...they said that you speak with great emotional fluency..."They're right. I'm really looking forward to ..."

LBCF, No. 238: ‘The end of ..."
"No need for anyone to respond. This crisis is right on top of the Democrats ..."

LBCF, No. 238: ‘The end of ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Alix

    Ooh, thank you!

  • ohiolibrarian

    Pretty obvious that Stephen Baskerville has :’issues’. His position on divorce seems to stem from his own outrage at his wife divorcing HIM. How DARE she?

  • Lori

    That’s the case with the majority of MRAs that I’ve had the misfortune to run across. They go along being fairly run of the mill asshats and then a wife escapes their clutches when they didn’t want her to, or a custody issue doesn’t go their way and that’s all she wrote.

    Obviously she was only in the marriage in the first place to take his precious bodily fluids to get the babies every woman desperately wants and his money, which every woman also desperately wants. Any court that would demand that a man pay to support a child who is no longer in his direct control is obviously in thrall to the evil feminist conspiracy. Any time a straight white man doesn’t get his way it’s clearly the result of a plot against the natural order. Blah, blah, blah.

    It should go without saying, but with idiots like Ivan in the world I’ll spell it out. Some men to get screwed over by their ex-wives and family court doesn’t always treat fathers fairly. That’s exhibit 12302: misogyny hurts everyone, not proof that MRAs are right.

  • Ivan

    Shame isn’t it? Price we pay for exponential growth. You never forget your first creation. Printing circuit boards by hand used to so much fun.

  • I finally figured out how to cook chicken and steak in a way that won’t burn them to hockey pucks perhaps a year ago. *hides*

  • cyllan

    A friend of mine made Hot Butterscotch instead of Hot Chocolate once. It was amazing — although sweet enough to rot your teeth on the spot. We cut it with whiskey which only made it better.

  • Matthew Steele

    I’ve been accused of invoking Pascal’s Wager in the past, but I don’t think I did. My argument was that you should choose what you want to believe, and if it turns out that you go to heaven, that’s a bonus.

    Pascal’s wager is based on a punishment/reward sort of thing… But really, it’s based on, I think, people not understanding what they get out of faith, and why someone else might get something else.

  • Matri

    It’s based on the concept that everybody’s only in it for the reward.

  • eyelessgame

    Re mockery: the sainted Molly Ivins attended multiple “Moon the Klan” counter-rallies, which seems like the perfect sort of “why yes, these are a bunch of pasty white asses, here let me show you” mockery.

  • Re. #7: I’m going to go out on a limb here, and guess that I won’t have to explain to most people why I’m thinking of some Illinois Nazis all wet in the river.

  • tricksterson

    Yeah! Indonesians and Malaysians stand up for yor right to be harrassed and discriminated against! Fight the Power!/snark

  • tricksterson

    The problem with Pascal’s Wager is that it maticaly assumsthat Ga sadsticpsyhopah o will cndeople o an etrnity of trehonest differnceof opiion