Like Button

Saturday, March 27, 2021

News Weakly - 3/27/21

Media Oddity
This is strange. On the same day that CNN (and others) reported that there are "more than 5,000 unaccompanied minors in U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBD) custody, CBS and others report that there are 15,000 in custody. Now, admittedly, 15,000 is more than 5,000, so technically "more than 5,000" would be accurate, but surely that is a misleading story. Worse, "Biden officials are blaming the former Trump administration for the border crisis." I don't even ... how does this make sense? Thank you, President Biden. This situation is so much better than when the evil Orange Man was in charge. (Oh, sorry, I forgot the word "not" in that last sentence.)

Seems Fair
As expected, Evanston, Illinois, is the first U.S. city to offer reparations to black residents. So who is paying for the reparations? They're doing it from tax money gathered on a 3% tax on the sale of recreational marijuana. In other words, the users of recreational marijuana are paying reparations to black people in Evanston. If some of those users are black, they're paying for their own reparations. If others don't use marijuana but are guilty of the actions and attitudes for which the reparations are being paid, they're not helping pay for it. Seems fair to me. Or not.

You Keep Using That Word
The Atlanta shooter purchased his weapon of choice on the day he did the shooting, a 9mm handgun. The Boulder shooter bought a Ruger AR-556 rifle a week before the murders. This one is an "AR-15 type" rifle. Neither are automatic. So to fix this serious problem (and I'm not suggesting it is not a serious problem), President Biden is calling on Congress to ban assault weapons. If these shootings exemplify "assault weapons," I think you can begin to see that a ban on "assault weapons" would essentially include all guns. And, like "women's reproductive rights" means "killing babies in the womb," "banning assault weapons" takes on a whole different meaning, but sounds much better than it is.

Racist Anti-Racism
Oakland is planning to launch a "guaranteed pay plan" for low-income families of color. That's because if there are low-income white families, they just don't much care. It isn't a matter of "low income;" it's a matter of color. Of course, all of that is beside the point. Their "guaranteed pay plan" is for $500/month, which might give low-income families some assistance but won't make them less low-income, pay the rent, or anything truly useful. Mind you, I'm not opposed to giving aid like this to people who need it (although I wish we didn't have to be racist about it -- denying it to some people who do need it simply because they're white) and I'm really not opposed to it because it is privately funded. That makes it all right. Private people can fund what they want and I'm fine with that. I'm just pointing out that in our efforts to be helpful and anti-racist we're not being helpful and we're being racist.

Fault-Finding
There is an increasing number of voices -- within and without of the church -- who have discovered the real cause of the shooting in Atlanta. Yes, there is racism. Yes, there is mysogyny. Sure, sure, but the real problem is Christian ideology. They are citing radical beliefs like the call for sexual purity outside of marriage, the belief in the "saved" and the "unsaved," the concept of "good" and "evil," the promised return of Christ, and other "radical" Christian teachings that "radicalized" that good church kid into being a racist, woman-hating killer. Yes, the problem is the white race and the problem is males and the problem is capitalism and the problem is American Imperialism, but deep down at its core, the real problem -- at the core of all of these problems -- is anything approaching biblical Christianity. In short, the problem is those Christians who take Christ at His word -- His "incendiary rhetoric." (That was actually in the story.) They're already working on taking your 2nd Amendment rights. If it is biblical Christianity that is at fault, how long before they come for your 1st Amendment rights?

First They Came for the Basketball Team
Oral Roberts University just beat out #2 and #7 seated teams to get to the Sweet Sixteen round, and not everyone is happy about that. It's a Cinderella story that demands to be burned to the ground. "It is the school's discriminatory and hateful anti-LGBTQ+ policy that fans should protest." Like prohibiting sexual behaviors that are expressly prohibited in Scripture. Like holding to a biblical view of marriage. What they term "toxic notions of fundamentalism that fetishize chastity, abstinence and absurd hemlines." Oh, no, if they or anyone else opts for a biblical view on the current tide of "if it feels good do it," then beware. Hemal Jhaveri wants them out of the NCAA. Who knows what she wants for the rest of you who believe this "dangerous and hateful ideology," and we all know what today's cancel culture will do. (Note: It will likely be dangerous and hateful.)

Bee Good
You may have seen that Virginia abolished the death penalty. Now, it seems, the only crime for which you can be legally executed in Virginia is being an unwanted baby in the womb And the Bee points out that with so many 'Black Lives Matter', 'Asian Lives Matter', And 'Hispanic Lives Matter' Yard Signs in your neighbors' yards, it seems like they're getting dangerously close to "all lives matter" ... which, as we all know, is racist.

And I had to laugh at the all-too-true headline from the Genesius Times that read, "Dems shocked to find their lives still suck after Trump is no longer president."

7 comments:

Craig said...

I'm not much of a math expert, but 15K seems like significantly more than 5K, without taking into account those that aren't counted.

Stan said...

Craig, are you suggesting that those who reported "more than 5,000" when the actual number was "more than 15,000" were being less than honest??? Shock of shocks!

Craig said...

As you pointed out, they were honest, but in a misleading and less than honest way.

Stan said...

Serious question, if "lying" is "untruth," (and I don't believe it is), then this isn't lying. If "lying" is "the intent to deceive," (as I believe it is), then would telling the truth like this with the apparent attempt to deceive be lying? Is there such a thing as telling the truth and lying at the same time?

David said...

I would definitely say yes, one can lie with the truth, just not the whole truth. Isn't the a saying that the best lies are based on truth?

Craig said...

Stan,

I fully agree that intent is crucial to something being a lie. I would argue that it's reasonable to conclude that the headline was intended to deceive, and that would make it a lie. Even though the information is accurate. I'd agree that it's possible to be lying and telling the truth simultaneously.

Craig said...

After some thought, I'd say that the deception is compounded if the 5K figure was prominent in the headline, and the more accurate figure was buried deep in the article. I believe that there is a tendency for news organizations to write headlines in such a way as to discoursge people from reading any further. Especially online, when they fill the article with op up ads, page breaks, or put the article behind a pay wall.