Jon Stewart was on Fox News Sunday this morning, and the interview blew my mind.
What's hilarious is that Chris Wallace does not get that The Daily Show is a comedy show. It seems like he and the Fox News take themselves so seriously that they can't conceive of anybody not playing the exact same game. So since Stewart lampoons them on a nightly basis, he must have as militantly a partisan agenda as they do.
They don't get the joke.
The only analogous situation I can think of is evangelical Christians who rant and rave about the "homosexual agenda", insisting that people of other sexual orientations are out to convert others to their way of life. That's what they do, after all, and they assume everyone else is playing the same game.
What if people who disagree with us or are just wired differently than us aren't at war with us? What if the majority of people in the world don't have a "kill or be killed" mentality about everything? What if it actually is possible to respectfully disagree, peacefully coexist, and perhaps even have our horizons broadened by those who are different?
The sooner Fox News and the establishment they represent ponder those kinds of questions, the sooner they stand a chance of actually being "fair and balanced".
Showing posts with label Fox News. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fox News. Show all posts
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Saturday, May 01, 2010
Fox News on Mr. Rogers
I'm part of the generation that was "ruined" by Mr. Rogers, and I'm proud of it.
According to the fine folks at Fox News, "this evil man" has messed up a generation of kids by telling them that they are special for being just who they are, instead of telling them they have to work hard to be special.
First of all, I think Fox is playing with fire here. Many of their core audience are hardcore Calvinists, and Mr. Rogers was a Presbyterian minister. Don't bite the hand that feeds you, guys.
Second, Mr. Rogers was right. You and I and every single individual on this earth are special and wonderful for being exactly who we are. As someone trained in theology, Fred Rogers understood that this message wasn't just a cute saying on a poster, it is one of the core truths that the whole narrative of scripture is based on.
Genesis 1:26 says that God created human beings in God's image. If we are God's image bearers, then we are very special indeed. In the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 6:26, to be specific), Jesus tells his hearers that God takes good care of the flowers in the field and the birds in the air, and since we are much more valuable to God, we should not worry (easier said than done, of course). Mr. Rogers was right: we are very special.
This doesn't mean we deserve an "A" on every test, as the Fox News anchors claim. That's silly, and Mr. Rogers, Big Bird, and all the other characters I loved as a child never told me that. American kids who have a gross sense of entitlement can't blame that on children's TV. Come to think of it, isn't blaming our problems on others one of the things conservatives rail against? Hmmm...
Mr. Rogers was right. And I am proud to be part of the generation that he "ruined".
According to the fine folks at Fox News, "this evil man" has messed up a generation of kids by telling them that they are special for being just who they are, instead of telling them they have to work hard to be special.
First of all, I think Fox is playing with fire here. Many of their core audience are hardcore Calvinists, and Mr. Rogers was a Presbyterian minister. Don't bite the hand that feeds you, guys.
Second, Mr. Rogers was right. You and I and every single individual on this earth are special and wonderful for being exactly who we are. As someone trained in theology, Fred Rogers understood that this message wasn't just a cute saying on a poster, it is one of the core truths that the whole narrative of scripture is based on.
Genesis 1:26 says that God created human beings in God's image. If we are God's image bearers, then we are very special indeed. In the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 6:26, to be specific), Jesus tells his hearers that God takes good care of the flowers in the field and the birds in the air, and since we are much more valuable to God, we should not worry (easier said than done, of course). Mr. Rogers was right: we are very special.
This doesn't mean we deserve an "A" on every test, as the Fox News anchors claim. That's silly, and Mr. Rogers, Big Bird, and all the other characters I loved as a child never told me that. American kids who have a gross sense of entitlement can't blame that on children's TV. Come to think of it, isn't blaming our problems on others one of the things conservatives rail against? Hmmm...
Mr. Rogers was right. And I am proud to be part of the generation that he "ruined".
Tuesday, January 05, 2010
Conversion as a "great example to the world"
By now you've probably heard about Fox News' Brit Hume's take on Tiger Woods' personal problems. For those that haven't, here's what he said on "Fox News Sunday":
Let's assume for a moment that Brit Hume (who has no education or experience in theology, comparative religion, or interfaith dialogue) intended this statement as something more than mere pandering to the rich, white, wealthy, suburban, evangelical Christian demographic that makes up the core of Fox News' audience. Let's assume he's trying to make a substantive point.
First, on what basis does Mr. Hume claim that Buddhism does not have the redemptive qualities of Christianity? For that matter, where has he heard that Tiger Woods is a Buddhist?
It's true that Buddhism does not place an emphasis on radical, instantaneous conversion in the same way as does Western, post-Augustinian Christianity (particularly the American brand that styles itself in the mold of the Second Great Awakening). But to say that Buddhism doesn't speak to Tiger Woods' or any other person's moral failings is simply not true.
The Four Noble Truths of Buddhism state that the suffering of life comes from our attachment to worldly things, and that the way to alleviate suffering is to combat this attachment. If Tiger Woods is, in fact, a sex addict, as some have suggested, isn't his problem too great a desire for worldly pleasures? Might the core tenants of Buddhism encourage him to detach himself from his desires be very helpful? For something to be redemptive, it must, by definition, participate in healing and making something new. The Buddhist faith would, in fact, be very redemptive for Tiger Woods' situation.
Along the same lines, I have to wonder where Mr. Hume grounds his claim for Christianity as being more redemptive than Buddhism or any other religion? Does he ground this in the examples of Christian ministers who used to be guests on his channel until their own moral failings came to light (Ted Haggard, etc.)? Or on the televangelists who frequently appear on the network, who make their reputations more on who they hate and what they oppose than on the God of love and peace made known to us in the Bible they claim to take so seriously?
As a Christian I do believe in the redemptive power of Jesus Christ. It is a claim upon which I have staked my life and my very being. But why do we have to attempt to prove that by bashing other religions about which we know so little? And aren't there better reasons to enter into the journey of being a disciple of Jesus Christ than "to be a great example to the rest of the world"?
The faith of the one who said "deny thyself, take up your cross and follow me" (Luke 9:23) means ridding ourselves of our attachment to our reputations and not worrying about "being a great example to the world". It actually means the opposite and being thought a fool by most of the world.
Mr. Hume, let me encourage you to read a bit about Buddhism, and maybe a little bit about Christianity, before you try making any more grand theological statements.
Let's assume for a moment that Brit Hume (who has no education or experience in theology, comparative religion, or interfaith dialogue) intended this statement as something more than mere pandering to the rich, white, wealthy, suburban, evangelical Christian demographic that makes up the core of Fox News' audience. Let's assume he's trying to make a substantive point.
First, on what basis does Mr. Hume claim that Buddhism does not have the redemptive qualities of Christianity? For that matter, where has he heard that Tiger Woods is a Buddhist?
It's true that Buddhism does not place an emphasis on radical, instantaneous conversion in the same way as does Western, post-Augustinian Christianity (particularly the American brand that styles itself in the mold of the Second Great Awakening). But to say that Buddhism doesn't speak to Tiger Woods' or any other person's moral failings is simply not true.
The Four Noble Truths of Buddhism state that the suffering of life comes from our attachment to worldly things, and that the way to alleviate suffering is to combat this attachment. If Tiger Woods is, in fact, a sex addict, as some have suggested, isn't his problem too great a desire for worldly pleasures? Might the core tenants of Buddhism encourage him to detach himself from his desires be very helpful? For something to be redemptive, it must, by definition, participate in healing and making something new. The Buddhist faith would, in fact, be very redemptive for Tiger Woods' situation.
Along the same lines, I have to wonder where Mr. Hume grounds his claim for Christianity as being more redemptive than Buddhism or any other religion? Does he ground this in the examples of Christian ministers who used to be guests on his channel until their own moral failings came to light (Ted Haggard, etc.)? Or on the televangelists who frequently appear on the network, who make their reputations more on who they hate and what they oppose than on the God of love and peace made known to us in the Bible they claim to take so seriously?
As a Christian I do believe in the redemptive power of Jesus Christ. It is a claim upon which I have staked my life and my very being. But why do we have to attempt to prove that by bashing other religions about which we know so little? And aren't there better reasons to enter into the journey of being a disciple of Jesus Christ than "to be a great example to the rest of the world"?
The faith of the one who said "deny thyself, take up your cross and follow me" (Luke 9:23) means ridding ourselves of our attachment to our reputations and not worrying about "being a great example to the world". It actually means the opposite and being thought a fool by most of the world.
Mr. Hume, let me encourage you to read a bit about Buddhism, and maybe a little bit about Christianity, before you try making any more grand theological statements.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
