What did Paterno know?

Joe Nocera, writing in today’s New York Times, notes that at the time the 2002 child sexual abuse incident in the Penn State locker room was reported to Joe Paterno, information about the widespread sexual abuse in the Catholic church, and the damage to the church from such activity, was widely known. Joe Paterno is a devout Catholic and was likely watching these developments with great interest.

By March 1, 2002 — the date, according to a grand jury report, that Jerry Sandusky, the former Paterno assistant, was spotted in the locker-room shower raping a boy believed to be about 10 years old — every Catholic was sadly familiar with the sex abuse scandal that had engulfed the Roman Catholic Church. They knew that predatory priests had taken advantage of their proximity and positions of trust to sexually abuse young boys, just as Sandusky appears to have done. They knew that church leaders had covered it up. And they knew the devastating consequences of the abuse.

Two months before Sandusky’s alleged rape, The Boston Globe had begun publishing its powerful series on clergy sexual abuse. Dioceses were being sued by lawyers for the victims, who, in turn, were coming forward to describe how the abuse they suffered as children had shattered their lives. Alcoholism, drug abuse, and depression were common themes.

Watching the damage to the Catholic church caused numerous cover-ups, why in the world didn’t Paterno act to protect his beloved Penn State by disclosure to the police at the time he first became aware of the problem?

Nocera also condemns the standard big-time college football practice of refusing to pay or insure “student-athletes” while making millions of dollars from football programs. He wonders whether that isn’t a form of abuse as well.

Religion quote of the day

L. Ron Hubbard

L. Ron Hubbard

Instead of printing the legend as fact, I recently interviewed the acclaimed science-fiction author Harlan Ellison, who told me he was at the birth of Scientology. At a meeting in New York City of a sci-fi writers’ group called the Hydra Club, Hubbard was complaining to L. Sprague de Camp and the others about writing for a penny a word. “Lester del Rey then said half-jokingly, ‘What you really ought to do is create a religion because it will be tax-free,’ and at that point everyone in the room started chiming in with ideas for this new religion. So the idea was a Gestalt that Ron caught on to and assimilated the details. He then wrote it up as ‘Dianetics: A New Science of the Mind’ and sold it to John W. Campbell, Jr., who published it in Astounding Science Fiction in 1950.

Michael Shermer, Scientific American, November 2011. (via Quotation of the Day Mailing List)

Technology as religion

Umberto Eco, way back in 1994, penned an essay in which he argued that DOS was equivilent to the Protestant religion, Apple’s OS was Catholic, and Windows was Anglican. The analogy was certainly apt at the time, and perhaps remains so today. Here is an excerpt quoted in The Telegraph:

The fact is that the world is divided between users of the Macintosh computer and users of MS-DOS compatible computers. I am firmly of the opinion that the Macintosh is Catholic and that DOS is Protestant. Indeed, the Macintosh is counterreformist and has been influenced by the “ratio studiorum” of the Jesuits. It is cheerful, friendly, conciliatory, it tells the faithful how they must proceed step by step to reach – if not the Kingdom of Heaven – the moment in which their document is printed. It is catechistic: the essence of revelation is dealt with via simple formulae and sumptuous icons. Everyone has a right to salvation.

DOS is Protestant, or even Calvinistic. It allows free interpretation of scripture, demands difficult personal decisions, imposes a subtle hermeneutics upon the user, and takes for granted the idea that not all can reach salvation. To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself: a long way from the baroque community of revelers, the user is closed within the loneliness of his own inner torment.

You may object that, with the passage to Windows, the DOS universe has come to resemble more closely the counterreformist tolerance of the Macintosh. It’s true: Windows represents an Anglican-style schism, big ceremonies in the cathedral, but there is always the possibility of a return to DOS to change things in accordance with bizarre decisions…

 

Dominionism: term of the hour

Both Michelle Bachmann and Rick Perry, besides being contenders for the GOP presidential nomination, are believers in Dominionism. What it it? Bascially, it is a belief that Christians (and only Christians) should run institutions, governments, schools and businesses around the world.

Here is a brief summary from Michelle Goldberg:

Put simply, Dominionism means that Christians have a God-given right to rule all earthly institutions. Originating among some of America’s most radical theocrats, it’s long had an influence on religious-right education and political organizing. But because it seems so outré, getting ordinary people to take it seriously can be difficult. Most writers, myself included, who explore it have been called paranoid. In a contemptuous 2006 First Things review of several books, including Kevin Phillips’ American Theocracy, and my own Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, conservative columnist Ross Douthat wrote, “the fear of theocracy has become a defining panic of the Bush era.”

More in the full article.  Also, the topic is covered in this profile of Michele Bachmann from a recent issue of The New Yorker.

Governor Christie could win

When and if Chris Christie decides to run for President, his straight talk would serve him well. I don’t agree with all his positions, nonetheless he does have integrity and would be a formidable candidate.

For example:

Political quote of the day

Now I will have to say that, if we don’t have the same daddy, we’re not brothers and sisters. So anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I’m telling you, you’re not my brother and you’re not my sister, and I want to be your brother.

Robert Bentley, newly elected governor of Alabama, and apparently a Christian to the exclusion of others.

NOM attacks Steve Jobs

The National Organization for Marriage or NOM (which more accurately should be referred to as the National Organization for and only for Heterosexual Marriage) has launched a press release attach and TV ad against Steve Jobs. Why? Because Apple would not approve an app that promoted “traditional” marriage and pro-life propaganda.

This crew is really a bunch of whackjobs.

For a reply, there is no one better than Fake Steve Jobs. In fact, Fake Steve wrote a rebuttal before this video even came out. Read the whole thing, but here is a taste.

Dear faux Christians,

First of all, it’s my store, and I’ll sell what I want, and I will not sell what I don’t want to sell. That’s my definition of freedom — I’m free to do whatever the hell I want with my store.

Second, your “religion” is a myth. It’s bogus. Jesus did not die and rise from the tomb and ascend into heaven. Okay? That. Did. Not. Happen. God did not take the form of a little bird and fly down and impregnate an unwed teenage virgin girl so that she could give birth to a half-human half-divine man-god. Immaculate conception, virgin birth, raising people from the dead, walking on water, loaves and fishes — great stories, but correctly filed under “fiction.” The sad fact is, what you call “faith” is a form of mental illness. It’s amazing enough that so many of you are running around in your mental case dream world. But it’s simply unacceptable when you start trying to impose your delusions upon the rest of us. Cynical politicians may feel the need to humor you and kowtow to your demands. I, however, do not.

Tumortown

Christopher Hitchens speaking at The Amazing M...
Image via Wikipedia

Christopher Hitchens is battling esophogeal cancer. And he appears likely to die soon.

But that doesn’t stop him from writing, including this essay in Vanity Fair that highlights two important points. First. anyone with cancer is immediately provided with “helpful” tips about the latest, “best” or wackiest treatment. Second, a decent chunk of Christians are trying to stop the development of new treatments based on stem-cell research. Both need to stop.

… ast August a federal judge in Washington, D.C., ordered a halt to all government expenditure on embryonic stem-cell research. Judge Royce Lamberth was responding to a suit from supporters of the so-called Dickey-Wicker Amendment, named for the Republican duo who in 1995 managed to forbid federal spending on any research that employs a human embryo. As a believing Christian, Francis is squeamish about the creation for research purposes of these nonsentient cell clumps (as, if you care, am I), but he was hoping for good work to result from the use of already existing embryos, originally created for in-vitro fertilization. These embryos are going nowhere as it is. But now religious maniacs strive to forbid even their use, which would help what the same maniacs regard as the unformed embryo’s fellow humans! The politicized sponsors of this pseudo-scientific nonsense should be ashamed to live, let alone die. If you want to take part in the “war” against cancer, and other terrible maladies too, then join the battle against their lethal stupidity.