martinpost.com

Minds and Brains

"It is interesting from a psychological-epistemological point of view that, although consciousness is the only phenomenon or which we have direct evidence, many people deny its reality. The question, 'If all that exists are some complicated chemical processes in your brain, why do you care what those processes are?' is countered with evasion. One is led to believe that...the word "reality" does not have the same meaning for all of us."
    --Nobel physicist Eugene Wigner, 1967

What is Wigner talking about here? He's representing the popular idea of people like Richard Dawkins (technically, called naturalists, materialists, or physicalists). Their point, only material stuff exists. Get it?, only stuff made of atoms. Only stuff that can be observed with our five senses. So no god, no angels, no devils. And, no minds, no consciousness, no hope.

No purpose. No courage. Nothing. Nothing but atoms and clusters of atoms.

We are 100% determined by chemicals.

Read more about the new atheists at www.the-brights.net.

Congradulations Barack Obama

It’s 3:45 in the morning, and I can’t sleep.

For over two hours, I have tossed and turned. Senator Barack Obama, the next President of the United States of America,* is on my mind.

But what’s going through his mind? Imagine. What must it be like to have a dream that you are about to become the 44th President of the United States of America—then wake-up, realizing it’s all a reality? Which emotion is stronger, jubilation, or the sense of responsibility?

I wonder what his two beautiful children think.

Is he as good as he sounds?

One thing for certain. This man rose not due to privilege and circumstance—his father was not power broker, but a dead beat. His is a story of two raw human commodities: hard work and talent. His was a home where love-through-education was put before entitlement.

There’s something incredibly inspiring when those that came from humble origins (the Regans, Clintons, Obamas) rise to such positions of power and influence. Obama, as a five-year-old boy, dreamed of becoming president. It seems that Regan was right on this one: “My philosophy of life is that if we make up our mind what we are going to make of our lives, then work hard toward that goal, we never lose - somehow we win out.”

Congratulations Barack Obama. You are in my prayers. I wish you and your family the very best.

*My 13 year old daughter offered the wisdom of a child, "dad, what if he doesn't win? You don't know what will happen!" I responded logically:"Well, honey, either he will...or daddy will look very foolish."

Sorry, Dad, I'm Voting for Obama

posted by Paul Martin

The son of William F. Buckley has decided—shock!—to vote for a Democrat. Let me be the latest conservative/libertarian/whatever to leap onto the Barack Obama bandwagon. It’s a good thing my dear old mum and pup are no longer alive. They’d cut off my allowance.

Read More

Pope John Paul II and the Iraq War

(For those having trouble understanding my position on war and abortion, please read this article. It is a perfect articulation of where I'm coming from.)

Promoting Peace in a Bellicose World

By Austin Cline, About.com

The most public and serious condemnations of the invasion of Iraq came from Pope John Paul II and other top officials at the Vatican. Catholic leaders did as much as they could to dissuade Britain and America from their bellicose course of action, but to no avail. Conservative Catholics in America did as much as they could to convince the Vatican and Pope John Paul II that the invasion was not only morally licit, but also a very good idea. They, too, failed.

John Paul was unequivocal in his sympathy for the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and his condemnations of terrorism. At the same time, though, he had long been a persistent critic of Western policies that have led to poverty and resentment among Muslims in the Middle East. He was the first pope to visit Israel, but he was also critical of Israeli policies towards the Palestinians. If there is any sort of “middle ground” to be walked between Western and Muslim interests in the Middle East, he has done his best to find it.

In January, 2003, Pope John Paul told his Diplomatic Corps:

“War is not always inevitable. It is always a defeat for humanity... War is never just another means that one can choose to employ for settling differences between nations… War cannot be decided upon…except as the very last option and in accordance with very strict conditions, without ignoring the consequences for the civilian population both during and after the military operations.”

John Paul was not a pacifist — he describes war as a “last resort,” not as an impossible resort. At the same time, though, he never thought that the invasion of Iraq had reached the “last resort” stage. Catholic Bishops in the United States and Great Britain were unanimous in their support for his message of peace.

According to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the invasion of Iraq did not “meet the strict conditions of Catholic teaching for the use of military force.” Bishop John Michael Botean of Canton, Ohio, even went so far as to declare that fighting against Iraqis was a mortal sin. Papal representatives met with President George Bush to try to change his mind.

Andrew Greeley wrote in the Chicago Sun-Times:

“The papacy does not accept the theory of unilateral preventive war. It does not agree with the Bush administration's foreign policy. It did not think that all possible grounds for a peaceful solution were exhausted before the American attack and, like most of Europe, it did not believe that there was sufficient evidence of weapons of mass destruction — and it turns out that they and not the Bush administration were right. It urged that nothing happen until the completion of the U.N. arms inspection — and it turns out that here again the pope was right and the president was wrong.... The teaching on the Iraq war is not “authoritative.” Yet, ought not Catholic conservatives, who virtually worship the pope, at least listen to him respectfully on this subject?”

Conservative Catholics from America launched their own public relations blitz to try to convince the Vatican and Pope John Paul II to change. People who are more often seen condemning liberal Catholics for their dissent from Vatican teachings on abortion or birth control were themselves going to great lengths to justify their dissent from Vatican pronouncements on war. So-called “Cafeteria Catholicism” where one picks and chooses which teachings to accept or ignore is not limited to liberals.

What made this situation even more ironic is the fact that Pope John Paul II very explicitly linked his rejection of the justness of invading Iraq with his rejection of the justness of actions like abortion. For him, it was all part of the “culture of death” which he has been attacking throughout his pontificate. Conservatives who accept this rhetoric on some matters were openly rejecting it on others — specifically, the invasion of Muslim nations.

Eventually, though, even Pope John Paul II had to give up his opposition to the war and deal with the cold, violent realities on the ground. He no longer inveighs against the invasion and Vatican officials insist that Western troops need to stay in Iraq as long as is necessary in order to ensure the stability of the nation and freedom of the Iraqi people. To quote one source at the Vatican, “The vase had been broken, and we have to try to find a way to mend it.”

Abortions Do Sometimes Produce Live Births

posted by Paul Martin

Appearing on C-SPAN last weekend I mentioned that Barack Obama had opposed the Born Alive Infants Protection Act when he was an Illinois state senator -- a position he has attempted to deny or obfuscate ever since. The liberal blogger who appeared on the program with me erupted with indignation. She didn't deny that Obama had opposed the bill. She denied, hotly, that babies are ever born alive after an attempted abortion. Since I have actually met Gianna Jessen, who survived an attempted abortion, I invited viewers to contact me directly if they wanted evidence. My inbox has been bursting.

read more...

The Viability of "Imperfection"

posted by Paul Martin

WASHINGTON -- In addition to Barack Obama making history as the first African-American to be nominated for president and Sarah Palin taking her shotgun to the glass ceiling, there was a third civil rights barrier broken at the political conventions this year.

Trig Paxson Van Palin -- pronounced by his mother "beautiful" and "perfect" and applauded at center stage of the Republican convention -- smashed the chromosomal barrier. And it was all the more moving for the innocence and indifference of this 4-month-old civil rights leader.

read more...

Guilt by Association

To those in this conversation about the issue of abortion, let me say a few things.

1. It is irrelevant, with respect to my views, how many Christians voted for Bush in the last election. I didn't. I voted for Kerry/Lieberman, and financially supported their campaign.*

2. I have spoken-out (publicly and here) against the dogmatic hate-mongering practices that have come from much of the so-called evangelical right in America.

3. In my pastoral ministry, I was viewed as anything but another conservative evangelical. Most congregates were young liberals; I was, on at least ten occasions, rebuked for "liberal innuendos." I received countless emails lauding me for my stances on social justice, open-mindedness, and my style of incorporating secular sources into my sermons.

4. I am a man of this world, indulging as far as my faith allows in food, wine, woman (my wife!), literature, philosophy, art and politics.

5. I live my life in sharp contrast to many positions of the evangelical right.

6. I am free thinker, drawing most of my political views from  the original writings of the great western ethical philosophers (Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Anselm, Abelard, Scotus, Locke, Burke, Kant), and from the Christian scriptures. I supplement these readings with scholarly work from only the most respected contemporary experts from both religious and secular world-views.

In spite of these six points,  many of you cannot seem to contain me: a man of faith holding to a consistent stance on human rights (no abortion, no capital punishment, adherence to the church's just war provision which is centered in the moral philosophy of the great medieval Catholic philosophers).

So you associate my views with that of the evangelical right--guilt by association.

Am I defensive? Perhaps. Why? Because my influence comes not from Bush, nor any of the evangelical right leaders. Let me make it very clear that my association is with the likes of Mother Teresa and John Paul II. I vote as I believe they would, with a consistency for human rights.  They are my heros for having the logical consistency and the no bullshit courage to stand up and call a spade a spade, a murder, a murder.

I end with another quote (neither from Bush nor Robertson):

"But I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child - a direct killing of the innocent child - murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another? So abortion just leads to more abortion. Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching the people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want. That is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion" (Mother Teresa).

*The basis for this vote was the war in Iraq, and the threat of escalation into a full-scale war in the middle east. I rejected the policies of Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz, and the crusading "bring it on" rhetoric. I believed that more lives could have been lost through war than through US abortions. It was a vote based on a wager for lives.

   

WWMTD? (What would Mother Teresa do?)

"What is taking place in America is a war against the child. And if we accept that the mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"

February 1997 -  National Prayer Breakfast in Washington attended by the President and the First Lady.

This quote underscores the kind of conviction and moral consistency required of today's American believer. Pro life, across the board. No nuance, no being mezmorized by grandiose speeches about social justice and MLK. I challenge all "on the fence believers"to stand with moral conviction in the spirit of this great hero for justice.

A vote for Obama is a vote to promote abortion.

The Logic against Obama

Follow the sequence below. If one accepts premises 1-5, how can one avoid the conclusions of 6 and 7?

1. Christians are commanded in scripture to labor (work, volunteer, pray, vote) for the righting of wrongs, including preventing the intentional killing of innocent life.

2. An abortion (without debate, a third trimester abortion) is the intentional killing* of an innocent life.

3. US presidents affect the number of abortions, through the appointment of judges, veto power, and other forms of influence associated with the office of the US Presidency.

4. Senator Obama supports abortion rights.

5. Senator Obama is running to become the next President of the United States.

6. The intentional killing of innocent life (#2) is supported by Senator Obama (#4).

7. Therefore, because Senator Obama supports the intentional killing of innocent life (#6), and is running for president (#5), Christians are commanded in scripture to work, volunteer, pray and vote (#1) against his presidency.

*The term killing, understandably, could sound militant. Yet, for purposes here, it is meant simply to describe an intentional action that causes, directly, a living thing to die.

Well done, Senator Obama

I can’t vote for a candidate with limited experience, to run the world’s superpower. Experience matters, more than vision and charisma. And I  don’t understand a believer who opposes bans to save babies surviving abortion.

But I love Barak Obama.

I will always love this great man, whether or not he is my president. He has blasted through the glass ceiling of racial inequality.

I commend him.

This is a historical moment in our nation’s history. I wish Senator Obama, and his family, the very best.