Category Archives: Politics

Toxic News. Lamentations of a Liberal.

Leave a reply

Warning. I’m hammering on Trump. If this bothers you, please move along.

I really have to back off on the consumption of news. My attitude has become far more misanthropic than usual. Between the savage war in Ukraine, Trump’s traitorous boy crush on Putin and bills signed by that demon-seed governor of Florida, my head is throbbing from the noise of all the dissonant waves coming in. Surely, something is going right in the world, isn’t it? Maybe?

Part of what is stressful is the inability to intervene personally, to make a positive difference. Oh, to have 2 minutes to yell at #45. Or to remind DeSantis and the Florida legislature that their elementary schools have never taught sex education and have never given kids instruction on how to choose alternative genders or lifestyles. It would be disastrous for any teacher’s career and they know it. This LGBTQ instruction “issue” in K thru 3rd grade is entirely invented to agitate the excitable and poorly informed on a certain side of the bell curve. This is social conservative engineering boldly executed in plain view and vastly amplified by instant distribution on social media. DeSantis is maneuvering to be an alternative to Trump in 2024, which is a choice between bad and awful.

Trump is morally bankrupt. This should be obvious to any high school graduate who paid attention is school. He is a real estate developer who banks on his special gift of persuasion. His speaking style is well suited to that of an after dinner speaker. He teases his audience by saying naughty things and mugs and poses behind a false modesty, all of this while he is not making outrageous claims about his abilities. And many people eat it up. It is a very effective rhetorical style polished by years of practice. His time on reality TV has helped hone an air of authority and expertise in organizational management.

He learned that if you are going to exaggerate, make it big and repeat as often as possible. Throw great gobs of it and see what sticks to the wall. This is propaganda 101: Political persuasion through any means available.

As corrosive to American democracy as Trump is, there is a bigger problem. That would be the matter of his large crowd of eager voters. They seem to be of a disposition that instinctively distrusts government and lays a large part of the blame of alleged government malfeasance on liberalism. Since the days of Reagan, the word “liberal” has come to be an epithet through repeated encouragement by Republicans. Blame for societies ills on liberalism was further exaggerated by Newt Gingrich in the 1990’s. Unfortunately, this guy has reappeared and is frequently interviewed in conservative (Fox) news today.

I can remember stopping by a booth at the Boulder County fair in the mid 70’s which was occupied by the John Birch Society. They are ultraconservative, staunchly antigovernment and libertarian in orientation. I see many similar traits in the earlier Tea Party and in the current MAGA crowd. Unfortunately, once someone embraces this kind of mind-set, they rarely come back towards the middle in my experience. Distrust, fear and paranoia are things the human brain does very well.

Never in the history of humanity have so many people had a platform for the instant broadcast and receipt of political information. It is a challenge to the stability of a democratic nation when fringe ideas spread and are adopted across the population in a matter of days. Not everyone remembers history or has a grasp of basic political and economic concepts. In prior times, there were limits to the accessibility, reach and variety of news and opinion. There was also editorial control over what got published. Fringe letters to the editor or op-eds were published once and that was it. The reach was often limited to where the paperboy went.

With most of social media in much of the world there is no editorial control. Any brilliant or stupid post gets broad circulation with equal ease. The volume knob has been turned up for individuals who wish to practice the art of persuasion. Unfortunately for the Chinese and Russian people, their governments are clamping down on the content of both received and sent information.

Back to toxic news. Broadcast companies are businesses. Broadcast news has a job to do. It is to deliver as many eyeballs to ad messages as possible. It’s the same with social media. What gets aired is that which is compelling to the eyes and heart. And “compelling” draws eyeballs. To expect to get an education or a balanced view from commercial TV is a fools errand. Some people believe that “balanced” means that all views are equal. Well, some views are based upon a false premise and are unworthy of consideration. Also, the old saying “if it bleeds, it leads” still applies no matter what pious talk you may hear about journalism.

Something that needs to be said

Leave a reply

I completed the hunters safety course back when I was about 12 years old in the late 1960’s. I got a kick out of target practice and plinking tin cans or watermelons just like everyone else. I remember stalking imaginary prey in the countryside along Lizard Creek in Iowa, just itching for a reason to fire the .22 caliber rifle at it. I might have actually hit a bullhead in the creek (properly pronounced ‘crick’) but it got away. In retrospect, shooting at a fish was cruel and pointless. As a high schooler I went elk hunting in the mountains of northern Colorado. We never saw an elk.

Shooting is something that I never latched on to for some reason. Probably because guns weren’t a big thing in my family. My farming parents and grandparents in Iowa never fought in the world wars because of the accident of their birthdates. My father served in Korea, but just after the war. I saw my grandfather shoot a badger once, but only because he was afraid we’d stumble upon it. Today I have a .22 caliber antique Ruger revolver somewhere in storage that I inherited. That is my arsenal.

I guess I’ve been lucky. I’ve never had the fear of foreign invaders taking over North America by anything less than global nuclear war. I’ve never had a fear of a tyrannical government, at least until Trump and his motley band of demented idiots came along. I have never lived where I felt I needed to keep a gun at the ready. And I’ve never had the need to strut around like a peacock in tactical gear packing pseudo-militaristic weapons.

Guns are too deeply imbedded in American culture and in the basements of citizens to ever be gotten rid of by a government ban. There would be a civil war before guns could be confiscated, which I doubt will come to pass.

The great advantage guns give you is the ability to commit severe and instantaneous violence from a safe distance. Since the invention of gunpowder in China, the utility of blasting things at people has been lost on no one. The firearm has long been popular as an enabler of protection, conflict and crime. So popular, in fact, that most Americans are stuck between the brick walls of gun violence and second amendment arguments with no resolution to the conflict coming anytime soon.

There is one thing we can do, however. Something that a civilized citizen of this amazing democracy can easily do. We can urge fellow citizens to simmer down a little. We can show some restraint in the reflex to use, carry or flaunt our firearms in public, especially as a half-hidden means of intimidation, as a first step. On the streets and in the movies.

In American entertainment, guns wielded by attractive actors and actresses are the usual tool for the resolution of conflict. The accurate portrayal of shooting technique and the highly realistic effects of a bullet on the human body have become an art form in US entertainment. Not so in British television I have noticed. There is generally very little gunplay in Brit TV entertainment. And they still manage to tell a great story through well crafted writing. How can a kid grow up in America and NOT come to the conclusion that pointing a gun or shooting someone is the most effective way to settle a dispute?

It has been said jokingly that the second amendment has become the founding document of the angry white male gun club. This may be an exaggeration but we cannot forget that the amendment defines a right, not an obligation to use. It is not an invitation to aggressive, belligerent behavior with weapons. It does not give the person pointing the weapon the right to be judge, jury, and executioner unless in self defense.

There will always be people, some of them fearful, who harbor an unusually large fascination with weapons. Realistically, these folks are probably beyond reasoned persuasion to a lifestyle less oriented to paranoia mixed with weaponry. But we can try to improve this American civilization around them overall to one that more substantially values non-violent means of conflict resolution, either in reality or in the movies. Plenty of other countries can do it, why can’t we?

Civilization and CRT

2 Replies

With the birth of every child, civilization must start anew. Parents and other adults are the major actors in rebuilding civilization and their first duties are to teach the child how care and fend for themselves in an often hostile world. Wariness is critical to surviving potential threats out in the open or those that lurk in the shadows. Adults must encourage wariness but not to the point of freezing solid in fear. Nuance is required in order to balance the threat/benefit relationship with the main goal of living as long as possible. In more precise terms, children must be educated and given examples of how to use that gained knowledge to not only live longer, but better as well. Seems obvious.

Today we see a movement in US civilization towards the disassembly of K-12 public education in favor of throwing those resources to conservative private and parochial education. Here in Colorado there is a silent group with out-of-state funding methodically getting far right, like-minded school board members elected. And it’s working. These groups wrap themselves in the flag playing Yankee Doodle, while often carrying a cross, and blow popular rightwing dog whistles as loud and often as they can. Currently, Critical Race Theory (CRT) is the most popular generator of dread fear among a great many in the population.

The fear that the CRT “threat” seems to be aimed at is the American liberal arts education taught in the public schools and in universities. First, some clarity. A liberal arts education is not about indoctrinating kids to be a democrat. The word “liberal” has come to be an epithet in common usage by many. A liberal education is actually meant to learn about a variety of topics and ways of thinking- to be less dogmatic and narrow. It encourages open minds. It tries to be neutral on the religiosity scale as well. And it has been quite successful for generations. Look around and you’ll see an endless assortment of objects and systems whose invention was by people educated under the liberal arts education.

Definition from Wikipedia: “Usually global and pluralistic in scope, it can include a general education curriculum which provides broad exposure to multiple disciplines and learning strategies in addition to in-depth study in at least one academic area.”

It seems that encouraging open mindedness or broad knowledge is exactly what they don’t want. What they want is actually indoctrination into “their” knowledge and thinking using their narrow definitions. It is about a narrow form of mind control, not objective facts and analysis. There is a fear that an accurate study of actual US and world history or science leads kids astray, away from God and country, to a world of anti-Americanism and to eventual eternal damnation. But, an accurate accounting of US history must eventually come to grips with the moral issues of slavery and the origins of the Civil War or the long, unfinished story of racism. To paint it over with heroic tales of settlers on the Oregon Trail while ignoring details of the slaughter and confinement of Native American to the reservation is an affront to reality and in all likelihood will eventually be made known to students anyway. Hiding the truth is a fools errand.

In my estimation, the American liberal arts education in the public schools, while flawed, has been a success. It has helped to provide a vast store of knowledge and skill that has lead to inventions and systems that have extended and improved our lives. Yes, the story is not perfect, but it is not over yet. To place the education of our young in the hands of politically partisan actors peddling extreme conservative views and possibly into corporate control is to steer our civilization into a less democratic, darker future.

See the comments section for more elaboration on this topic.

Assorted Thoughts on our New Nuclear Age

Leave a reply

If you search Google News for ‘nuclear war’, you’ll find links to articles from a large variety of sources. Putin’s invasion and belligerent behavior has resulted in a great deal of media buzz which is rightfully spooking the world. Better relations with Russia began with the fall of the Soviet Union and has lasted to some degree up to now- about 30 years duration.

Along with the invasion of Ukraine, Putin has been making threats suggesting to some that we may be heading back to a world of nuclear brinksmanship. Nuclear sabre rattling largely disappeared sometime after the fall of the Soviet Union. For the past 30 years the world has carried on as though nuclear weapons don’t exist anymore. Everyone knows that the major powers have nuclear weapons and understands the rationale for Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD). This has been in the background. Yes, there are outliers like North Korea and Iran.

Ronald Reagan took exception to the logic of MAD and in 1983 announced the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), sometimes derided by the name “Star Wars”. Reagan promoted the plan by asserting that orbiting SDI platforms would make nuclear weapons obsolete, at least with strategic weapons like the ICBM. It was a grand plan to make the world safer. It certainly made the world safer for defense contractors. Many of us think that the program was really meant cause the Soviets to go bankrupt in trying to keep up with the west in SDI technology. After the Soviet Union collapsed, enthusiasm for SDI in its original form faded away. You can read about it in the SDI link.

With Putin, steel must be met with steel. He only respects strength. For this reason it may have been a mistake to announce that there would not be a no-fly zone enacted over Ukraine. Handing over certainty to Putin only emboldens him. We should have said that it is on the table and left him guessing.

The big question is what to do if, in desperation, Putin uses a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine? How should NATO respond? Whatever it is, there must be an unambiguous response. The choice for Putin to use a tactical nuclear weapon will only be difficult the first time it is used.

On the lighter side, if you don’t already know, now may be a good time to familiarize yourselves with nuclear weapons effects and how the bombs work. If you’re in Vegas, stop by the National Atomic Testing museum. Get familiar with mankind’s fastest and most spectacular expressway to the collapse of civilization! Remember, nuclear explosions are effectively point sources of heat and pressure. The effects fall off as an inverse square law with distance. Distance is your friend.

On the personal level, try to come to terms with the stochastic nature of radiation damage and the existence and effects of background radiation. The dose/response curve to radiation gets quite fuzzy at the lower dose levels. Remember, exposure and dose are not the same.

The tragic effects of this invasion on the Ukrainian people is horrible. But I have Russian friends and have been to Russia. I grieve for the Russian people who are unwittingly on this dreadful misadventure of Putin’s. During the last 30 years of relative peace Russians have known a much improved quality of life. It is awful to see this ripped away from them. Russia just can’t shake itself free of despotic leadership.

David Brooks has an insightful article on Putin’s view of the world and Russia’s place in it. An excellent interview can be found in Der Spiegel describing Putin’s character by Ivan Krastev from the Institute for Human Sciences in Vienna.

Hard and Soft Propaganda

Leave a reply

There is an interesting Op-Ed in the LA Times on the nature of propaganda and how it is used, written by Megan Hyska of Northwestern University. Putin’s recent exercises in the application of propaganda is used as an example. Persuasion isn’t always the goal. You’ll probably recognize that these techniques are used everywhere. I won’t repeat any of it here, but it is worth a glance.

WTF? Die to Abolish CRT?

2 Replies

So #45 is at his incitement game again. He asked spectators in a rally in South Carolina recently to be willing to die to abolish critical race theory, CRT. He said, “The fate of any nation ultimately depends upon the willingness of its citizens to lay down, and they must do this, lay down their very lives to defend their country …”, and then he said, “If we allow the Marxists, and communists, and socialists to hate America, there will be no one left to defend our flag or to protect our great country or its freedom …”.

Wow! Marxists and communists? In the USA? Really? An old bogeyman has resurfaced from the cold war days and has come to plague the hearts and minds of unsuspecting innocents going about their business. The horror! The horror!

When he says “to die”, what exactly does that mean? This can easily imply some kind of participation in violence. Does he mean to participate in a struggle to physically attack school board members who do not acquiesce to or even understand their demands? At what point should an opponent and a proponent of CRT fight to the death? With his usual cageyness, #45 leaves these details for individuals to sort out and suffer the legal consequences in his name.

The great and powerful Oz clearly hopes that fear and anger from the phony threat of CRT will translate into votes and political contributions. Fearmongering has been a conservative strategy for decades. And it works! Remember how Reagan turned the word ‘liberal’ into an epithet? Americans of a certain mindset will reliably continue to eat it up with a spoon. How disappointing it is to see so many countrymen be so gullible and persuaded by such transparent manipulation.

Donny and Vlad

1 Reply

Yet another mournful lamentation on Putin and Trump.

Yesterday, 2/22/22, Trump had words of praise for Putin’s move into Ukraine with “peace keeping” forces. He used the word “savvy” in his praise of the tactic. This is in addition to his spoken admiration of Putin in past years. But he also said that if he were in office this wouldn’t have happened. Trump’s acolyte, Tucker Carlson, seems to be issuing forth the same kind of spew. So, what is Trump really saying?

During Trump’s term he proved to be cool on NATO and America’s place in it. So much so that he spooked EU countries. By most accounts, he had little if any recognizable foreign policy and left a great many important posts unfilled in the State Department. Foreign affairs just didn’t capture his interest. Yet, he says he could have prevented Putin’s invasion if he hadn’t been cheated out of the presidency. I guess the invasion is maybe the fault of Biden supporters.

I have come think of Trump as a wannabe despot who admires Putin the despot (and others) as one professional may admire the work of another. Putin as leader is accustomed to having considerable control of Russia. Trump was in control of numerous private companies and thus not accountable to public shareholders. Both characters are used to the exercise of unquestioned power. Maybe it’s not surprising that there is mutual admiration.

Will Trump followers be disappointed by his open admiration of Putin? It seems doubtful. His supporters have an evangelical zeal for the man. A great many of his followers are conservative evangelical Christians who believe that Trump’s appearance on the scene meshes with their end-times theology. His appearance is related to the beginning of the apocalypse of prophesy. These supporters believe that the man is here due to supernatural forces that must play out and cannot be dissuaded.

If this is your belief, then it must be comforting for you. For the rest of us, it is an incoherent and destructive kind of nonsense. How can it be that the same religion that preaches love and gave us the Beatitudes would also give us a leader the likes of the ethically disabled Trump. Somehow the creator of the universe, the one who set the galaxies spinning and knows the movements of every flea in the tail feathers of every sparrow, gave us a malignant narcissist like Trump. It is not a question shrouded in religious mystery. It is what it appears to be- absurd. Ambitious and destructive characters like Putin and Trump have appeared regularly throughout history. And through the lens of history we can make some good guesses as to what they can do. Both are threats to democratic civilization in their own way and must be contained.

As to the original question, what did Trump mean by his comments, I don’t know. He makes things up as he goes and lies profusely. I don’t think that even he knows what he means.

When future historians view this pandemic

Leave a reply

Some historians in the future will focus on this time period and try to make sense of the social and political turmoil we’re now experiencing in this endemic of COVID-19. Many US citizens are in conflict with knowledgeable authorities who are trying to limit the spread of this viral disease. As of this writing the endemic has not yet fully played out.

There are several particularly good questions that must be investigated- How should we view a culture that can’t bring itself to cooperate internally in the prevention of a communicable disease that has so far caused more than 900,000 deaths? Would one expect that roughly 1/3 of the adult population in a highly advanced culture such as ours would refuse to cooperate with the most minor measures to prevent the spread of contagion? That is, wearing a light weight mask when around others. Standing apart just a little bit and washing your hands a little more. These are simple requests yet they appear to be outrageous forfeitures of liberties to many people in the USA.

What kind of civilization is this where an appreciable fraction of the citizens refuse to act in the direction of self-preservation of the population? When shouting about personal rights to not wear a mask or get vaccinated outweighs the rights of the majority to remain infection free?

As bad luck would have it, the endemic coincides with a far right wing-leaning conservative political movement in the USA. This crowd had issues with the government anyway. They are especially furious that experts within various health agencies have issued instructions and mandates on containment of the disease.

We might have thought it obvious that when presented with a highly infectious virus that is spread through the air, it would be in our self-interest to voluntarily control where infectious breath goes, dial back our movement a bit and increase interpersonal distances temporarily in order to avoid mass infection and mass casualties. One might also think that given the long and highly successful use of vaccines, volunteering to get a shot would seem reasonable and also be in our self-interest.

The US constitution is silent on personal freedoms in a time of contagion as it is on many other things. I interpret that as wiggle room to figure out solutions for the problems of our time that serve to further the cause of survival against a mindless but efficient virus.

One of the purposes of government has always been to protect ourselves from each other. What we’ve experienced when government has tried to intervene is loud hysteria and political pressure from an infectious vocal minority who are actually dying from COVID at a higher rate than the vaccinated public. Aggravating matters greatly, some of the opponents of masking and vaccination have very large commercial platforms from which to broadcast self-serving misinformation. It has been obvious for a long time that this is done to increase viewership and profit from the misinformed. Capitalist organizations are using their broadcasts to increase the bottom line on the backs of the volatile misinformed.

At the moment, it doesn’t look like persuasion with solid information will work with the anti crowd. Do the rest of us have to wait around until these folks, many of whom are fervent authoritarian Trump supporters, just live out their lives and die hoping that they don’t crash democracy along the way?

Is this really the direction that the American experiment goes? What kind of country are we? I thought that I had a good grasp of that. I was wrong.

GOP Evangelical Dread-Fear Machine In Action. Again.

2 Replies

The weighty voices of the GOP evangelical propaganda wing have activated following the awful soaking that Houston received. The wagging fingers of TV evangelists were not far behind to remind us of the looming existential threat.

We’ve witnessed a burlesque of  righteous-sounding preachers leaning in from the video pulpit and warning, solemnly and in no uncertain terms, that hurricane Harvey is only the latest in a series of calamities to befall our nation. Our corrupt society is wallowing in a fetid pit of sin and depravity. The storms were heaven sent they intone, to show Who is actually in charge.

It’s all so very clear to these folks. The root cause of the mass murder at Sandy Hook and hurricanes Katrina, and now Harvey is the grievous sin of omission. For what? For failing to put an end to abortion and gay marriage. They’ve been connecting the dots and these dots lead to perdition. An existential threat is on the move. It’s Old Nick up to no good.

The conservative fear machine has kicked into full ruckus configuration. They deploy their weapons of incitement via their heavy presence on AM radio and cable TV. For elections and in the face of national debate, these evangelical conservatives know that they can dependably frighten just enough people to swerve the Republican hive mind. Who are these pliable voters? I think more than a few of them are people who for one reason or another did not take advantage of the education opportunities decades ago and now find themselves near the terminus of a life of toil.

Conveniently for those right of center, the Democratic Party is comatose and strapped into an iron lung, wheezing away the years in an undisclosed location.

9/10/17, Addendum.  In case I was not clear, it’s my observation that conservative protestant evangelical organizations have become a menace to American civilization. It seems to me that the election of Trump and the support bestowed upon him by conservative Christian groups, many of whom can be found out in the open on his evangelical advisory board, has opened the door to opaque theocratic influence on the large scale conduct of American government.

It’s axiomatic that people have an inherent right to worship as they please. So imagine the nightmare of trying to control what people believe when religion is folded into the curriculum of the public schools. What a tragic misunderstanding of human nature it would be to attempt to impose religious doctrine upon students. Parents would have none of it. But, a private school may have much more flexibility to teach a particular sect of religious belief. Is it  a coincidence that privatizing schools is favored by many religious organizations?

Finally, there is the matter of magisteria. Steven J. Gould wrote about religion and science as being non-overlapping magisteria. A magisterium is defined as a “a domain where one form of teaching holds the appropriate tools for meaningful discourse and resolution”. A magisterium may or may not recognize an external system of laws, facts, or values. Gould maintained that science and religion were non-overlapping magisteria in the sense that the tools of science were of no use in solving religious questions.

The secular world can be thought of that which describes what is human made and of human concern. It can also be thought of as that which is independent of religion. It is not atheistic or better or worse in any way. In chemistry we might say that the secular is orthogonal or perpendicular the religious. A bolt, an integrated circuit, or a tractor would be in the domain of the secular. So would the National Electrical Code, city ordinances, and state and federal law. All of these items are contrivances made by people for purposes living a better or safer life. Added to these items would be mathematics, the sciences and engineering. That which is measureable like the Volt or the kilogram have no defining attribute which traces back to religious definition.

It has been said that the purpose of government is to protect ourselves from each other. I would extend that to include the general domain of the secular. Having secular government means that subjective interpretations of religious matters must be secondary. This is owing to the reality that there are many religious beliefs in the world and the question of whose religion will prevail in an action involving the public will rapidly become intractable due to disparate beliefs. The secular world has elements of logic, measurement and guidelines for evidence or objective observation. All of these examples could be contained within a secular magisterium.

Public schools have long been the institutions where secular matters were introduced and learned. Government at all levels has been steadfastly kept within the secular domain. There was and remains to be a need for government to manage the secular details of a thriving civilization. The religious magisterium has a heavy reliance on beliefs which is a subjective matter subject to interpretation. A democracy requires a goodly amount of objectivity and evidence.

The notion of non-overlapping magisteria raises an interesting question. What if elements in one magisterium want control of elements in another magisterium? To have elements of a subjective domain in control of elements in the objective domain is to introduce chaos in both. Since neither side has the tools to operate in the other we have to conclude that this circumstance makes no sense for either domains.

 

God in the image of man

4 Replies

The portentous return of American protestant evangelical politics on the coattails of the Trump win has certainly been startling to me at least. As if to underscore this return is the announcement that the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) will take on the case No. 16-111 Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd., et al., v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, et al. Petitioners.

According to the petition for a Writ of Certiorari, at issue is the following:

Whether applying Colorado’s public accommodations law to compel Phillips to create expression that violates his sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage violates the Free Speech or Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment

I for one sympathize with both parties. I would like to think that as a business man I had some control in the business arrangements I enter into. On the other hand, it seems quite reasonable that an order for a wedding cake should not be complicated by the theology of the baker. I gather that the sign over the door did not say “Bakery for Observant Christians Only”.

Having been in sales, I know there are a hundred ways to purposely kill a sale without it descending into a fight or bad feelings. A sky high price, a ridiculously long delivery time, kitchen remodeling, a diseased baker, etc. Ok, so it is a lie. It happens.

From my purchasing experience I know it is possible for a careful buyer to disclose as little information as possible so as not to cue a vendor to raise the price or decline to make an offer. The couple in question could have discretely asked for a cake without giving away their relationship or could have sent in a proxy. The figurine of a gay couple on top of the cake could have been purchased separately and set in place at a different location. Alternatively, the gay couple could have simply found another baker willing to do the job, say in Boulder to the north.

Yes, yes, yes. I know. Neither side should have to use subterfuge to complete this simple transaction. And neither side, in principle, should have to fear the consequences of their core values. But for crying out loud, this is Colorado Springs. A more conservative Christian enclave would be hard to find. The city is full of conservative retired military and a number of fundamentalist Christianist organization headquarters like Focus on the Family among others. But what are you going to do? Fight to the death everyone you find disagreeable? Does everything have to be consecrated to God? Crimony! Can’t there be secular activities like putting a lug nut on a bolt or buying baked goods?

If SCOTUS rules against Colorado’s public accommodations law to compel the petitioner to create expression that violates his sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage, then they will have set back the cause of LGBTQ rights, possibly for generations. Likewise, a ruling for the respondent might do similar damage for the conservative cause. Both sides could live with some ambiguity in this matter.

The notion that baking a cake for a gay couple somehow validates LGBTQ values seems to be a bit of a stretch. It seems to me that a conception of a God who would see the act of baking this cake with so negative a view as to impose an existential threat to the baker’s eternal salvation is to conjure up a very strange picture of the deity. If a human were to wield this kind of existential threat to the baker, that human might be regarded as psychopathic.

In my view, American evangelical Christianists have constructed a model of God in the image of a very cranky, peevish male human. A God who set the galaxies spinning, ignited our sun, breathed life into inanimate earth, and accounts for every flea riding the tail feathers of every bird would certainly have the insight and fatherly patience to see this gay Wedding Cake matter as a tempest in a teapot. Yes? Maybe? But perhaps that is me constructing God in the image of a mensch.

I like that- God as a mensch.