HOT5 Daily 5/3/2009

1. "Obama Sowing the Seeds of Disaster" Over-reliance on emotion.

Representative Sample: Although emotions are one of humanity’s most critical survival mechanisms, without careful consideration, they remain one of humanity’s greatest liabilities.

2. "ANOTHER MONUMENTAL UN MESS IN THE DRC" The UN at work.

Representative Sample: Can it be possible that a so-called “peacekeeping organisation”, with unlimited resources and funding (17 000 men plus), is actually this incompetent?

3. "GOP Listening Tour: A Cruel Joke" Exactly.

Representative Sample: It always sounds nice when our elected leaders decide it's time to reach out and listen to us. The problem is it's not because they want to hear our concerns; it's because they're out of power and need us

4. "Why Is Congress Debating the BCS System?"Apparently they have nothing better to do.

Representative Sample: Representative Joe L. Barton of Texas apparently cannot get over the fact that the BCS picked Oklahoma rather than Texas to play in the 2009 BCS championship game. In response, he is proposing "big government" policies that seem utterly inappropriate for a Texas Republican.

5. "There Will Be Saved Parasites in Heaven!" The implications of resurrection.

Representative Sample: While the parasites in the guts of Enoch and Elijah never died, but were translated to Heaven with them, the E. coli parasitic bacterium in the gut of Jesus died and were resurrected back to life by God along with the body of Jesus.

To submit a blog post for HOT5 Daily, please e-mail me at unrright@NOSPAMgmail.com. Put HOT5 in the subject.

The Radicalism of Biblical Inerrancy

Bart Ehrman has an interesting post up in the On Faith blog at the Washington Post. Reacting to Christian responses to his new book, Jesus Interrupted, Ehrman points out that belief in the Bible as the foundation of Christianity is a relatively recent invention.

The idea that to be a Christian you have to "believe in the Bible" (meaning, believe that it is in some sense infallible) is a modern invention. Church historians have traced the view, rather precisely, to the Niagara Conference on the Bible, in the 1870s

As he notes,

To make faith in the Bible the most important tenet of Christianity was a radical shift in thinking -- away, for example, from traditional statements of faith such as the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed, which say not a word about belief in the Bible.

Although Ehrman's points are well-known to those knowledgeable about the history of Christianity, I suspect they'd come as a surprise to many of those who call themselves "Bible-believing" Christians.  As Ehrman writes,

Christianity has existed in places where there were no Bibles to be found, where no one could read the Bible, where no one correctly understood the Bible. Yet it has existed. Christianity does not stand or fall with the Bible.

This is also interesting from the atheist perspective, as atheists often attack Christianity by pointing out the many problems with the Bible. Such a line of argument can be effective with Christians who believe in the primacy of Biblical authority, or Biblical inerrancy, but is less compelling to those who hold more liberal versions of Christianity.

HOT5 Daily 5/2/2009

1. "The Future of the GOP - a symposium" Five viewpoints.

Representative Sample: Arlen Specter's party switch has reignited the debate over the GOP's mission: a conservative party vs. a big tent coalition including liberal Republicans

2. "The foundations of modern civilization." Pretty funny.

Representative Sample:The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundations of modern civilization

3. "Insider thoughts on piracy and arming crews" The role of insurance.

Representative Sample: or the shipping company, it's a matter of economics. It's less expensive for them to lay off the risks(hull, cargo and ransom) to the insurer and the insurer is a willing accomplice.

4. "End the Blame Game, Take Responsibility" Stop blaming Bush for everything? You must be joking.

Representative Sample: On President Obama’s 100th day in office, as part of his never ending election campaign he said, “Number one, we inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit…. That wasn’t me.” The “blame it all on Bush” mantra is getting old, but this one is becoming particularly grating.

5. "World’s Most Accurate Horoscope - May" Tired of non-specific horoscopes that can mean anything to anyone? Try this one instead.

Representative Sample: Aries: Have you ever had one of those dreams where you find yourself at work, naked, with all your co-workers standing around laughing at you? Well, next Tuesday, it won’t be a dream.

To submit a blog post for HOT5 Daily, please e-mail me at unrright@NOSPAMgmail.com. Put HOT5 in the subject.

Dutch Operations a Model for Afghanistan?

The Wall Street Journal reports that the Obama administration is looking at Dutch operations in Afghanistan as a possible model for future U.S. efforts. U.S. officials say that the Netherlands has better integration between civilian and military personnel, and has a strong focus on economic development. A Dutch military spokesman explains, "Over time, there's been a focus on pure development" in the Dutch forces, said Col. Gert-Jan Kooij, chief of operations for the Royal Netherlands Army's 13th Mechanized Brigade, which is deployed in Uruzgan. "We need to provide defense, but the priority is on development and diplomacy."Although Dutch forces are stationed in a relatively quiet area, their success at "understanding that the civilian components of a counterinsurgency strategy need to be intertwined with the military," is apparently widely recognized.

But the article also notes that the U.S. is having difficulty finding enough civilian experts willing to go to Afghanistan. The idea that the U.S. can implement the Dutch model on a much larger scale, and in areas with far greater Taliban activity, may be little more than wishful thinking.

Overwhelming Support for Torturing Terrorists

Many sites have linked to the latest Pew Research survey, "The Religious Dimensions of the Torture Debate." The responses indicate that white evangelical Protestants are more likely to favor torturing terrorists. That's been the lead story with regard to this poll. But it misses the big picture. According to the survey, a full 71% of the U.S. population believe that torturing terrorists can sometimes be justified, even if only rarely. Only 25% believe that torture is never justifiable.

Answers to this sort of question vary wildly depending on how it is asked. But the next time some terrorist rights supporter pretends that he holds an obvious, unassailable position when he claims that torture is always wrong, it might be useful to remember that 71% of the population appears to disagree.

Souter-inspired Thoughts

I wasn't going to write anything about Justice Souter retiring. From a right-wing perspective, I don't see all that much to say. With Obama as president, we are going to get a replacement who is just as bad or worse. Republicans aren't really in a position to do much about it. Our best hope is that Obama nominates someone who is just a mainstream liberal, as opposed to a radical leftist. But whoever we get is likely to have the liberal judicial philosophy that the Constitution means whatever they think it should mean. And that brought something to mind.

The left in general, along with some allies, have been screaming and howling about the legal interpretations of the Bush administration. The Bush legal team came up with creative legal reasoning to justify waterboarding and other borderline coercive interrogation measures. The left is shocked and horrified, to the point that many of them actually favor prosecuting the lawyers for their legal advice. How dare lawyers come up with some sort of legal reasoning that enabled a Republican administration to do what it wanted to do? But when the judicial branch does the same thing, in a far more extreme way in support of liberal causes, they are completely fine with it. As long as it is done in the service of the "correct" cause, the Constitution is just a tool that can be twisted to justify anything they desire. Think I'm exaggerating? Look at abortion.

I personally support abortion rights, but the right to an abortion has nothing to do with the Constitution. Abortion is a right today because of government fiat. The Supreme Court declared it a right, and the government treats it as one. If you disagree, go look at a copy of the Constitution and find the right to an abortion. Most of those who support abortion rights have no problem with the ridiculous legal reasoning behind it. Why? Because it serves the purpose -- legalizing abortion. A significant portion of the left, which strongly supports abortion rights found nowhere in the Constitution, is apparently blind to the right to bear arms, which is plainly spelled out there in black and white. This is why, among other reasons, I find the hysterical outrage at Bush administration lawyers so laughable.

Oh, and back to Souter's replacement... Wouldn't it be nice if we could get an Obama nominee who appeared liberal but turned out to be much more conservative once on the court? That would be a fitting successor to David Souter.

HOT5 Daily 5/1/2009

1. "Democrats Chilling U.S. Counterterror Efforts" Links a Stratfor article.

Representative Sample: Politics and moral arguments aside, the end effect of the memos’ release is that people who have put their lives on the line in U.S. counterterrorism efforts are now uncertain of whether they should be making that sacrifice

2. "Did Alan Greenspan’s atheism cause the financial collapse?" I didn't even know he was an atheist.

Representative Sample: The godly folks of Ministryvalues.com have accomplished what all those highfalutin financial advisers could not. They found the cause of the global economic crisis

3. "Human Rights Maps (53): Death Penalty, Number of Executions in the U.S." If you look at crime statistics under murder, the trivial number of executions is apparent.

Representative Sample: It's a graphic

4. "a brief history of evolution" Short and clear.

Representative Sample: Here’s a great video from the BBC narrated by Sir David Attenborough, who’s 50 years of experience in natural history programming make him one of the best qualified presenters to talk about the history of the living world.

5. "Asinine tax target — digital goods" The greedy reach of the state -- in this case the state of Mississippi.

Representative Sample: This is so beyond stupid, I don’t know where to start. I know the states are hurting for tax revenue, but going teh dumb doesn’t seem like a good place to start.

To submit a blog post for HOT5 Daily, please e-mail me at unrright@NOSPAMgmail.com. Put HOT5 in the subject.