Media Bias
Last week Taylor University had its commencement and made news because Vice President Mike Pence gave the commencement address against the wishes of many. They protested because he was too ... Christian ... and Taylor, being a Christian school with students and faculty who declare their faith, certainly shouldn't have a Christian speaker. Well, the university stood its ground and Pence spoke. Here's where you see the media bias. All the media -- even Fox. The headlines were all about "graduates walk out on Mike Pence's speech." The headline is accurate; some did. But the story includes the fact that of 494 graduates, most remained seated. They even gave Pence a standing ovation. The fact that "dozens" of graduates and faculty walked out because they opposed the vice president's biblical values is appalling, but it is a minority. Very few who see this story will come away with that conclusion. Media bias? I think so. But it could also just be the nature of news. Not walking out on a speaker is not news. On the other hand a large group of graduating students giving the vice president a standing ovation? I'd think that might be news.
News or Not
The headline read, "AOC calls for impeachment" or something like it, so I thought, "Not news." I mean, that's not a surprise, right? Nothing new. But wait! What if she was calling for her own impeachment? Now that would be news. So I checked out the story. Not news. She wants Trump gone. As always. But wait! The story says that Nancy Pelosi is reluctant to proceed with impeachment proceedings partly because Republicans control the Senate and partly because polling has shown that Americans are divided on impeachment and less than half support it. Now that's news. It's news that less than half support it and it's news that Pelosi was concerned about what the people wanted. Well, okay, that last wasn't quite accurate. She was concerned about alienating voters. Alright, that's not news.
Wondering Out Loud
I'm just wondering here. Joe Biden is considered the current Democratic forerunner in the race for 2020 (among, what is it now, 23?). We currently reside in a "believe the woman" culture. "If she makes the accusation, it's true. Burn 'em to the ground." So why does Joe get a pass? His tagline is "Make America Normal Again." Is Joe saying, "Be like me"? Why are the Democrats completely silent on the various accusations against him? I know, there are lots of nuances here, but it seems like the heavy-handed hatchet that has been applied across the board in the last couple of years without proof or consideration of "how bad was it" has been suddenly and radically withheld here for reasons I don't fully understand. Mind you, I think the whole #MeToo thing has been weaponized and I firmly oppose "guilty until proven innocent." I'm just looking at what appears to be another double standard. "It's bad if your people do it, but not at all if it's one of ours." Maybe they just don't really care about women and sexual abuse?
A Gomer Pyle Moment
You may not remember Gomer Pyle. He was a character on a TV show. One of his best known phrases was a deeply-Southern-accented, "Surprise, surprise!" Really good for sarcasm. Like when you read that Greg Johnson, the pastor of the church that hosted the Revoice Conference last year, came out as gay in Christianity Today. "Well, looky there! What a surprise!" Right? Perhaps you don't remember the Revoice Conference. It was put on by "Christian" group ostensibly aiming to tell Christians who experience same-sex attraction how to deal with it in an "historic, biblical sexual ethic." (That last quote is from an article written by Greg Johnson.) "So," we ask, "Greg, how are Christians who experience same-sex attraction supposed to deal with it in the historic, biblical sexual ethic?" I would guess his answer now would be, "Well, give in to it, of course, right?"
Pro-Life Outrage
Abortion is very legal in Virginia (where the governor talked about deciding whether or not to let a baby live if it was born live after an abortion attempt), so you can imagine the outrage when a shelter euthanized a healthy dog so it could be buried with its owner who died. Yes, that is outrageous. Killing babies? Not so much.
Not Surprising Study
The Institute for Family Studies and the Wheatley Institution released a study that asked the question, "Is faith a global force for good or ill in the family?" As our secular world tells us today, the obvious answer is "No!" I mean, how many TV shows or movies give us happily married couples with a genuine religious faith? Very few. The society is telling us that true happiness comes from dumping that religious baggage and getting free. And, as you might expect, coming from me, the study shows the opposite. Surveys from 11 countries found that "highly religious couples enjoy higher-quality relationships and more sexual satisfaction, compared to less/mixed religious couples and secular couples." Did not see that coming, did you? Other findings were equally impressive. It is clear that a stable home produces a better chance for positive outcomes for families. As it turns out, highly religious couples tend to have more stable and more satisfying relationships than the mixed or secular couples. In fact, the study indicated that the highest levels of relationship attachment, commitment, sexual satisfaction, and stability were found in the couples who were highly religious and held traditional views of gender roles. The highly religious couples report the lowest rates of domestic violence. And it appears that families that pray together (the operative word is "together") apart from religious services and meals actually report the highest positive relationships. You know, "the family that prays together..." and all that. Surprise! Or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment