Thoughts of a Freethinker

Probably few readers know of Bowling Alone  by Robert Putnam. It was discussed everywhere when it was published in 2000. I seldom see it referred to today although Wikipedia says it is frequently required reading in college social science classes.  Putnam, a retired Political Science Professor at Harvard, is credited with the term "social capital." This refers to social organizations that have existed traditionally in communities large and small across the U.S. There are fewer churches, service clubs and other groups as the years have passed. Putnam had written about what he perceived to be a general decline in happiness that he attributed to the fewer opportunities to socialize or experience community. He came up with a research project to document the decline in social capital, recording the decline in the number of organizations he had assigned to it. After considerable research to document these declining numbers, which represented a rather uninteresting book of numbers, ...

I was pleased to see the Trump guy won the Republican primary for Senate in Texas. This will set up the perfect battle of ideas that should have happened decades ago but has now arrived . It is the confrontation with a student of the Bible, Democratic Talarico, against the conventional-wisdom-Bible-talker, Paxton. An atheist with a big following on Face Book complained that the Democrats should have someone with broader appeal than Talarico. Another poster on a news site said both Democrats and Republicans should not put up such extreme candidates because the public is not that polarized. Talarico was one of his examples.  I think Talarico is the perfect guy to run in a state like Texas that has voted majority right-wing for a long time. He quotes the Bible on abortion. That is, he notes the Bible does not condemn abortion. A choir of pundits and politicians say he is wrong. But I think the political effect of him saying correctly the Bible does not condemn abortion is different th...

I don't think there is any other branch of the Jewish/Christian thread that has anything like nuns. Where did the concept come from? People in the faith have their own version of history. The economist looks for an explanation that has self-interest and a source of money.  A book and movie about local Catholics in Ireland explained how a parish supported itself. Besides local tithing, the parish operated a residence for young Catholic women who were unmarried but pregnant. The nuns who worked there were recruited from local families. It was strongly suggested to local parents who had several children they send one of their daughters to the local convent to be employed at the facility for unwed pregnant women. It was clear to some of the women who spent time there these nuns were not happy being there. Some tried to transfer out.  The facility took in laundry for money. Who did the laundry work? The young pregnant women, of course. After the babies were born, the mothers took c...

I'm nearly finished with the book, The Letters of Paul in Their Roman Literary Context; Reassessing Apostolic Authorship  by Professor Nina E. Livesay. The case she makes is that there was no "Paul." Instead, there were schools or groups studying under the tutelage of wealthy and literate men in the years surrounding 200 CE. These wealthy "professors" had various views, probably often self-serving, they wanted to promote in the public of that time. They used their "schools" to teach students, from wealthy families no doubt, how to write and circulate the ideas and philosophies their wealthy "professors" were all about.  A reviewer said the case made by Professor Livesay bordered on airtight. While it destroyed the narrative of Paul walking about starting churches and sending them letters that we read today he, himself, had trouble leaving behind the romantic narrative of the traveling preacher changing the world. Professor Livesay documents t...

The majority of Mormons are Republicans. They were not, however, part of the right-wing 2050 rally in DC. A prominent Mormon columnist is now cheering on the split that is taking place between that denomination and the Trump MAGA. Mormonism, like other conservative and demanding branches of Christianity, has had a tendency to latch onto whatever is popular and not think through the long-term consequences. Decades ago, devout denominations favored abortion rights. The thinking was lots of babies was a self-serving Catholic thing. Conservative Christians did not like Catholics and Jews. Then a political deal came along that conservative Protestants thought would help their numbers. It was to do an about face and be against abortion. Now when abortion rights are increasingly popular the switch does not look like a good idea.  Mormons did something similar when California voters petitioned to put gay marriage on a state-wide vote. Mormons could have said nothing. For some reason, the m...

I seems so obvious, yet it is not being reported as such. Trump was not able, and will not be able, to take Iran's uranium nor control the Strait. Iran will have both  more power and more influence than it had before it was attacked. Pundits are guessing Trump is hoping no one will notice.  Obama figured out how to deal with Iran. He referred to it with its assigned name, Islamic Republic of Iran. No other Presidents had done that. Then Obama explained to Iran why the West was concerned about nuclear weapons, that being threats on Western nations and on allies in the Middle East. At the same time, Iran explained it had enemies in the region and needed weapons to defend itself. As I recall, the two sides agreed to be quite open about activities and plans and agreed to be respectful of the concerns of the other.  Trump threw all of that mutual respect under the bus and stopped the relationship agreed upon with Obama. From day one it was threats of bomb and burn. We now see ...