Pope Benedict: Western Culture Too Secular

The pope spoke Thursday at a convention of the Italian Catholic Church, stating that modern Western culture is "unable to dialogue with religion" because we have become too secular and must return to our "Christian root".

From the story :

He identified "utilitarianism" - the philosophy that prescribes the maximization of personal happiness and pleasure - and "relativism" - a doctrine whereby all criteria of judgment are relative to the individuals and situations involved - among the ills of modern culture.

I don't know if it is the pope or the writer of this story, but someone has this wrong. Utilitarianism is putting the good of the many before the good of the few...maximum happiness and pleasure for the maximum number of people, not personal happiness and pleasure. And what is wrong with relativism? That is why half of the stories in the Bible don't make any sense...they are relative to the time in which they were written, relative to the culture and experiences of the writer.

He goes on to say that because we are radically and profoundly separated "not only from Christianity, but more generally from the religious and moral traditions of humanity," that we are "unable to undertake a real dialogue with other cultures in which the religious dimension is strongly present." Is being separated from the "moral traditions of humanity" the same as being immoral? ...maybe amoral? Either way, it seems to me many of the traditional morals are still the same, but maybe he's focused on the "big" issues, like abortion (which really is a personal distinction between moral and immoral, because that determination is based on a piece of information [is it life or no?] that really cannot be determined by fact).

I do agree that we are doing a worse job than ever of communicating with other nations, especially those in the Middle East, where religion is one of their main focuses of life, but isn't the leader of our nation a Christian appointed by God?

Peace,

Alphadork

Kudos to Claire

The Talent campaign is becomming desperate and sinking to new lows as he turns up the attacks on McCaskill. McCaskill, however, remains confident, witty, and willing to scrap...nicely.

In the recent Springfield debate, Talent attacked McCaskill relentlessly, questioning her integrity and whether or not she pays her taxes. McCaskill, however, refuses to follow him down that path.

"This is just about smear," McCaskill added. "I will not go there with Sen. Talent. I will never attack his family, and I think Missourians need to put their foot down and say if we're going to change Washington, we're going to change the way these campaigns are being run."

Talent said the election should be about changing Washington, and asserted: "I've done that." He cited legislation requiring greater use of renewable fuels and cracking down on methamphetamine ingredients, among other things.

Note that Talent's version of "changing Washington" has nothing to do with actually changing Washington; he just cites some legislation he was involved in that the general public would support.

During the debate, Talent's attacks used a method recently discussed on The Daily Show, in which one simply states something they want to present like it's fact in the form of a question. It therefore isn't incorrect if it's untrue because you are asking a question, but it still puts the question on everyone's mind. His was regarding whether or not McCaskill pays her taxes (actually, more along the lines of whether or not her husband pays his own), saying "We have reason to believe that maybe she and her husband haven't paid all of them".

Well, I have my own allegations of Talent. Does Jim Talent have a mind of his own, or is he just an unasking, brainwashed, robotic rubber stamp for the Bush Administration? We have reason to believe that he does not think for himself and is therefore not a good senator for the state of Missouri.

Peace,

Alphadork