However, I did watch the inaguration.

Here are my thoughts, in an order designed for maximum rhetorical impact (not really):

* DKL’s response was painfully predictable.

* I wonder if this is the first time that so many Mormons have switched their primary allegiance from the Gospel to a new messiah. (Oh, wait. There was Ronald Reagan. Never mind. This is barely a blip then).

* John Williams’ is still riding the coattails of his Star Wars success. Seriously - he's not that good of a composer. Yeah, yeah, Wagnerian motiffs, etc. etc. It's the same old same old.

* Itzhak Perlman was born in Tel Aviv, Yo Yo Ma was born in Paris. Gabriela Montero was born in Venezuela. I have no idea if this means anything at all. I was born on the internet, so what does that make me?

* Dick Cheney needs a cat to stroke and metallic hands. It would have also helped if he had had his back turned to the audience so no one could see his face.

* Aretha Franklin’s outfit was freshly killed that morning, I heard.

* Obama’s missteps in the presidential oath will mean whole loads of right wing nutters will argue that he isn't really president. Those who are a little smarter will notice that the oath was administered again the next day, and instead argue that everything Obama did on his first day in office doesn't count.

* Obama’s inaugural address was pretty much the same as the last two. (Yeah, yeah - I linked to that in the last post. So what?)

* Elizabeth Alexander’s reading was, I believe, post-post-post-modern performance art. There's really no other explanation.

* I got distracted before Joseph Lowery’s Benediction, so I missed it. The music afterward was typically overblown, but that's a bipartisan fault.

In the end though, I'm sure that critics of this administration will be consumed by the unprecedented, hateful hysteria that has surrounded our last president (the main difference is that Obama will enjoy a solid, worshipful base that Bush never had).

Something in the air over at T&S (or the water, or both)

They really love that Obama guy over at T&S. It's from on extreme to another. After years of pouring out hate filled rants about Bush or shameless attempts to (mis)use tragedies for political ends, Julie has decided Obama really is the Messiah - the scriptures even prophesy of him, according to her. (Some may notice Adam Greenwood has already called her on this, but he does it with his characteristic lack of class, so no one will pay attention anyway. Since my only existence is as an abstract concept, I don't care if no one is paying attention.)

Meanwhile, Marc Bohn (oh, the entendres possible with his last name!) has taken a quote from Elder Ballard every so slightly out of context, and interpreted it to mean that everything Obama wants to do is great and God-blessed. I think Frank might be making some good points against Marc's post, but it's so buried in bizarro-economic jargon (but I repeat myself), I can't be quite sure what he's really saying.

So, over at Totally & Sincerely worshiping Obama instead of the real anointed one, I can look forward to many, many posts about how those who will not support Obama are just not good members of the church. Perhaps Kaimi will get his wish to have "do you prove you aren't racist by believing Obama is God's anointed servant" added to the temple recommend interviews (and why isn't Kaimi an apostle yet? He's clearly much smarter and more in tune with the Spirit, with a greater understanding of the Gospel than the people we currently have in that office).

Of course, that may change when the realize the new boss is pretty much the same as the old boss. (Ah, who am I kidding? These Servants of Obama have already handed over what little bit of their critical thinking they had. They're hopeless. I had some hope that since the permabloggers in the 'Nacle already had, nominally, a religion, they might not go for the Obama worship so full throttle. Well, they've crushed my hope. There is no change here).

Who is more damaging to the Church?

Devyn S. or Ex-mormons?

I was thinking about this question the other day as I read Devyn S.'s rather odd post wherein he compares a specific group with largely quantifiable aims, philosophies, and practices (ACLU) with a largely undefined and undefinable group with various competing goals, theologies, and customs (the so-called "religious right"). So, I figured I'd do the same to him.

Now, Devyn S. is (apparently) a faithful member of the church, and claims to believe in it on some level. However, Devyn is a bigot. Bigots are prejudiced against other groups, so much so that they see those groups as fungible, and claim they all contain the same negative traits. The bigot is incapable of seeing "those people" as individuals, and while a bigot may have some "best friends" from among the group they aim their bigotry at, on the whole they condemn the group. Devyn created perhaps the most bigoted post ever on the 'Nacle when he attacked married Mormon graduate students for sometimes using government aid (in a rather judgmental post that also exposed Devyn for being a hypocrite, as he constantly attacked others for being too judgmental). Now, Devyn is also clearly a bigot when it comes to the religious right, treating it as though it were equivalent to the ACLU, and everyone in it exactly the same.

Ex-mormons, even when indulging in anti-mormonism, have left the church and therefore can only attack it from the outside. They have no power to drag any substantial number of members along with them.

I would say then, that Devyn S. is more damaging. There are too many Ex-mormons predict what they as a group (if they can even be considered a group in any sort of demographic sense) would do or not do to the church. Devyn S., on the other hand, outright hates married Mormon graduate students on welfare, people with large families, and the religious right. As a (suppossedly) faithful, active member, he has more power to spread this bigotry amongst the members. Therefore, Devyn S. is a grave danger to the church as a whole.

Well someone at BCC really, really hates Israel

I would come up with a good response to their inane embrace of cliched anti-Israel talking points, but instead, I'll just link to that neo-con stooge and right wing shill Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV).

Considering how often those at BCC talk about how awesome Reid is, I'm sure they'll start taking the pro-Israel side soon. They can't be that in thrall to the left-wing pundits, can they? At least Reid shows occasional signs of being able to think for himself.

I was going to say something

about this post,

but Sarahcuda already beat me to it. I can't improve on that, really.

Just admit it Kevin.

You'd rather not be at church, and you think Apostle Dallin H. Oaks is full of crap. Your basic thesis seems to be that church would be a lot better without that whole "church" thing.

There used to be a time when what you do would be called rude.

May your ward members be more charitable toward your failings than you are to theirs.

Delete from Your Bookmarks

Let me just recognize that the Bloggernacle is a mingling of self-absorption and egos gone wild. Seeing posts that are actually designed to help people live the gospel and do charitable service would shock pretty much everyone (and then they would retreat to the safety of posts about how much better they are than the average Mormon). Like it or not, that’s the way it is overall. There are, however, a few topics that find too much play that have little to do with the Gospel whatsoever. Here are my top picks:

1. Why the average Mormon is wrong about the interpretation of Scripture.

2. gaymarriageabortionpropeightsarahpalinweworshipobamainsteadofjesusdeathtoscouting

3. Look at how nuanced I am! I'm so nuanced! (Cue comments: It's amazing how nuanced you are! Followed by Steve Evans banning anyone who points out the emperor has no clothes).

4. Graduate students who accept any form of government welfare will burn in hell. (Of course, being a bigoted and judgmental jerk gets you a ticket to the Celestial Kingdom).

5. Let's speculate wildly in our zeal without knowledge about (the next apostle, multiple mortal probations, the second coming, etc.)

This is only a start, but if the Bloggernacle would abandon posts like these, it would be an infinitely better place (of course, that would require permafrosters and comet-taters to be self-aware and willing to improve themselves, rather than constantly acting like dogs returing to their own vomit.)