Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Breaking News: Bill Dembski Invents American Political Satire

December 17, 2006
Intelligent Design
Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Or at least you’d think he did judging by the reactions over lampooning Judge John Jones. Since when did federal judges get immunity from political satire? I must have missed that SCOTUS ruling. Maybe one of the many tut-tutters can point me to it.

Comments
littlejon: Obviously you've not even followed the conversation. The link between a Christian publishing satire and morality is clear. And "offputting" for non-Christians? Swallow your own pill. It is disturbing to see how often the "non-Christian" relies on Christian values to criticize Christians! Showing that they in fact agree with those values - while not living by them themselves. As though those values don't apply to all persons everywhere. There is only one moral Law.Borne
December 19, 2006
December
12
Dec
19
19
2006
12:25 PM
12
12
25
PM
PDT
Bit puzzled as to why a discussion on political satire is thought to be settled by Bible quotes. Cite who you all want, of course, but this is getting a bit offputting for non-Christianslittlejon
December 18, 2006
December
12
Dec
18
18
2006
10:45 AM
10
10
45
AM
PDT
A superficial study of the life of Christ shows how often he spoke out in rigorous, rebuking ways against wickedness of every kind. He Called Herod an old fox - a higher authority in those days than Jones for sure. And John the Baptist didn't mince any words dealing with Herod either.tribune7
December 18, 2006
December
12
Dec
18
18
2006
10:07 AM
10
10
07
AM
PDT
"Kind of harsh words from Jesus, would you agree? It seems to me that when enemies of truth then lead others astray, it is acceptable to use harsh rhetoric or ridicule." Absoultely agree. The bible is full of harsh words spoken to ungodly fools as well as religious hypocrites. Time the Xians of the world stopped rolling over to play dead. I'm rather disappointed with Xians acting like wimps sucking up to Darwinian momes and those who are always telling us to pretend "stinging rebuke" - whether by satirical media or harsh words - is unChristian. A superficial study of the life of Christ shows how often he spoke out in rigorous, rebuking ways against wickedness of every kind. He Called Herod an old fox - a higher authority in those days than Jones for sure. Ultimately it's a question of wisdom and what's appropriate in a given circumstance. The unfortunate thing here, I think, will be in the backlash. Darwinian fundamentalists are hardly known for logic. Nor for grace or politeness. They will certainly lash out against Dr. D. and ID in more brutal ways than mere mockery. Unfotrunately for them is that this will only bring even more attention to ID, Judge Jones' laziness, lack of intellect or integrity, and the whole issue of origins.Borne
December 18, 2006
December
12
Dec
18
18
2006
09:20 AM
9
09
20
AM
PDT
Russ -- I don't think crude satire is an appropriate vehicle for Christians who are trying to be both critical and missional in their culture. As for Jesus' words, in John 8, they were directed at hypocritical religious leaders who were claiming God as their father while planning to kill him. The context doesn't suggest that sort of speech is normative for us. Our norm with respect to political authorities is Romans 13.dopderbeck
December 17, 2006
December
12
Dec
17
17
2006
07:50 PM
7
07
50
PM
PDT
John 8:44 44 "You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies." Kind of harsh words from Jesus, would you agree? It seems to me that when enemies of truth then lead others astray, it is acceptable to use harsh rhetoric or ridicule.russ
December 17, 2006
December
12
Dec
17
17
2006
07:11 PM
7
07
11
PM
PDT
dopderbeck, would you say then, that political satire is, by definition, "unchristian"?russ
December 17, 2006
December
12
Dec
17
17
2006
07:02 PM
7
07
02
PM
PDT
It isn't a matter of freedom or right, it's a matter of responsibility as an ambassador of Christ. Or, as Paul said in 1 Cor. 10:23: "Everything is permissible"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible"—but not everything is constructive.dopderbeck
December 17, 2006
December
12
Dec
17
17
2006
05:08 PM
5
05
08
PM
PDT

Leave a Reply