OK, so the shit has hit the fan in India's Mumbai over the last few days, yet the BBC seems to find it necessary to dedicate an entire article to just one Briton who was caught up in it.
It's not that I don't appreciate the patriotism or indeed the immense tragedy of it all, but why does this man deserve so much more attention or respect than the other hundred reported casualties? This pisses me off.
Arrogance abounds in this statement from the Bishop of Lancaster.
The Right Reverend Patrick O'Donoghue claims that graduates are spreading scepticism and sowing dissent. Instead of following the Church's teaching they are allegedly "hedonistic", "selfish" and "egocentric".
These intellectual trends have resulted in a fragmented society that marginalizes God, with many people mistakenly thinking they can live happy and productive lives without him.
I won't even bother arguing against this point; you know how to use a computer, so can probably think for yourselves.
The Bishop did make one worthwhile point:
However, every human endeavor[sic] has a dark side, due to original sin and concupiscence. In the case of education, we can see its distortion through the widespread dissemination of radical scepticism, positivism, utilitarianism and relativism.
Education can sometimes be but education in a single opinion. Sometimes it is no different than a religious "education". If I were to claim in this post that a proper education is automatically, certainly 100% better than an uneducated religious upbringing, it would be undefensible.
He does go on to spoil his brief moment of clarity, though, with more unbalanced hyperbole. A report, "Fit for Mission? Church" that he produced examines the current problems facing the Church and is designed to "enable Catholic men, women and children to resist the pressures to compromise, even abandon, the truths of the Catholic faith", emphasis mine.
Truths, eh? I can name hundreds of people who have led happy and productive lives without "him", which blows that unequivocal claim right out of the water at the outset. Fail.
I actually don't know whether this guy is serious or not. Given that he's one of the most influential conservative bloggers in the US, somehow I suspect that his apparent sarcasm was in fact not intended.
Either way, he surely cannot mean these words:
Obama thinks he is a good talker, but he is often undisciplined when he speaks. He needs to understand that as President, his words will be scrutinized and will have impact whether he intends it or not. In this regard, President Bush is an excellent model; Obama should take a lesson from his example. Bush never gets sloppy when he is speaking publicly. He chooses his words with care and precision, which is why his style sometimes seems halting. In the eight years he has been President, it is remarkable how few gaffes or verbal blunders he has committed. If Obama doesn't raise his standards, he will exceed Bush's total before he is inaugurated.
Just… wow.
