woke

, , , , , , , ,

Thinking about 'God Made Trump,' with 'Hemingway -- Mark Hemingway'

, , , , , , , ,
Thinking about 'God Made Trump,' with 'Hemingway -- Mark Hemingway'

Editor’s note: While preparing for this week’s podcast (“Carefully entering the hall of mirrors created by the 'God Made Trump' video”) I emailed a former GetReligionista who is way smarter than me about the Byzantine Beltway world. That would be “Mark — Mark Hemingway.” If you get that reference, you know that @Heminator knows a few things about mass-media satire. Here is his response, with slight editing.

—————

I haven't seen anything that establishes it's satire; but it's so over the top I also can't imagine anyone took it seriously.

I would only note that there's a very, very fine line for the "meme magic" online right between satire and stuff calculated to "trigger the libs." Basically, if the left is outraged by something, the idea is that they're going to lean so hard into it so as to make the issue pervasive enough that the criticism for doing what is unacceptable loses its sting.

Why? Because the left holds tremendous cultural power in setting the boundaries for what is acceptable and unacceptable discourse. That was always a power that the left abused by applying double standards and political correctness to their advantage; but it was mostly done around the margins because of a general consensus on the First Amendment as an important value. 

However, in the last decade or so with critical theory/wokism/cancel culture finally obtaining some sort of critical mass in among institutional leadership that the First Amendment consensus is really no more, at least among a lot of cultural gatekeepers, and they've just been moving the goalposts randomly as it suits their purposes.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

When you 'Wish' upon a sermon: Is there a religion ghost in the latest Disney flop?

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
When you 'Wish' upon a sermon: Is there a religion ghost in the latest Disney flop?

Anyone who has been paying attention to the pop-culture marketplace during 2023 knows that even the most secular business analyst would be tempted to think that the Walt Disney Company has done something to provoke the wrath of whatever Supreme Being the Mouse lords are willing to acknowledge.

Marvel at this Inside the Magic headline, if you will: “Disney Chief Predicts Total Disaster for Studio Before End of Year.”

That’s a take that will awaken even the most woke studio boss.

This brings is the the latest Disney box-office flop — “Wish.” At the time I wrote this post, I could not even get any of the “Wish” links to work at the Rotten Tomatoes website — which is never a good sign. If you’re interested in the tomato-past details, see this story at Screen Rant: “7 Reasons Wish's Rotten Tomatoes Score Is So Divisive.”

Is there a “religion ghost” in this drama? Not if you read Variety. This latest Disney nightmare is simply another example of Disney+ being overextended and the American movie audience suffering from lingering COVID-19 fears. Here’s that headline: “Disney’s Bleak Box Office Streak: ‘Wish’ Is the Latest Crack in the Studio’s Once-Invincible Armor.”

Hold that “religion ghost” thought for a moment. Here is the stunning overture of the Variety piece, showing the wider context of the “Wish” crash:

“Wish” misfired in its opening weekend, extending Disney‘s bleak box office fortunes.

The animated musical fable, about the Wishing Star that so many Disney characters have wished upon over the studio’s century-long history, failed to become the de facto choice for families around Thanksgiving. “Wish” opened in third place with a dull $31.7 million over the five-day holiday, a far cry from Disney’s past Turkey Day feasts. Perhaps King Magnifico, the movie’s villain (voiced by Chris Pine), is holding hostage the wishes of Disney executives?

Instead of recapturing the studio’s magic, “Wish” joins a long list of its underperforming 2023 tentpoles, such as “The Marvels,” “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny,” “The Haunted Mansion,” and “Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Podcast: What would happen if GetReligion provided 'hot' GOP debate questions?

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: What would happen if GetReligion provided 'hot' GOP debate questions?

I’m not a fan of the cable-television festivals called “presidential debates,” because they rarely feature any substantial debates and the candidates don’t act presidential.

Maybe this is more evidence that I am what I am, a journalist who is a registered third-party person who doesn’t fit in America’s Republican-Democrat binary vise (rather like Megyn Kelly’s take here).

However, the producers at Lutheran Public Radio had an interesting idea for this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in). They asked me to prepare questions — thinking religion-beat, GetReligion-oriented stuff — that I would ask if (#ducking) I was the moderator at last night’s GOP presidential debate at the Ronald Reagan Library.

I came up with 10 or so questions and I’ll share some of those shortly. However, I knew that the subjects that most interest me — as an old-school First Amendment liberal — would not be on this debate’s menu.

First, let’s deal with the orange elephant in the room. The New York Post, in it’s “exclusive drinking game for the second Republican presidential debate,” reminded viewers to:

Take a sip of WATER …

… every time Donald Trump is mentioned. This will keep you hydrated.

Later, the Post team offered these style points:

Take a sip of your drink …

… every time a candidate says “woke”

… when a candidate calls another candidate by an unflattering nickname

… when someone references the Biden Crime Family

… when a candidate uses a 3-letter acronym (think FBI, IRS, DEI, CDC)

… when a candidate tries to deflect when asked if they think the election was rigged

… when a candidate says they support Trump’s movement (but think they’re the one to finish the job)


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Question looming over America's future: Are 'pew gap' issues hurting military recruiting?

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Question looming over America's future: Are 'pew gap' issues hurting military recruiting?

I know it will be hard, but for a moment try to forget the growing stack of Donald Trump indictments and the messy details of Joe Biden’s telephone conversations, while serving as vice president and point-person for Ukraine policies, with a Ukrainian oligarch. Apparently, these friendly chats were about the weather, as opposed to son Hunter Biden’s career and financial needs.

You see, there’s another big story lingering in the back pages of news publications, a story about hard facts that could affect all kinds of conflicts around the world — especially if China’s leaders gaze at Taiwan and get ambitious.

This is a story GetReligion has discussed several times, including in this podcast-post: “Are many Bible Belt military families losing faith in the U.S. armed services?”

Now, it’s totally understandable that — in today’s preach-to-the-choir journalism ecosphere — that elite progressive outlets like National Public Radio, The Washington Post and The New York Times are not asking pushy cultural and, yes, religious questions about the dangerous trends in U.S. military recruiting.

Ah, but what about niche-media on the other side of “political” aisle?

This leads to a Daily Mail story that ran under one of that newspaper’s long, long headlines (and I didn’t include the three subheadlines): “Public confidence in the US military hits lowest point in two decades — with only 60% of Americans saying they have a 'great deal' of confidence in the armed forces, new survey finds.”

This leads to the overture:

Public confidence in the US military has reached its lowest point in 25 years with 40 percent of Americans now saying they don't have much faith in the forces, a poll found.

The survey said only 60 percent of people have 'a great deal' or 'quite a lot' of confidence in the military. It's the lowest it's been since 1997, according to Gallup, which conducted the poll.

The national decline is being fueled by a massive slump in the confidence amongst Republicans.

That’s logical. However, did any Daily Mail editors wonder if there’s additional content hidden in that safe political word “Republican”?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A journalism question that suggests an answer: 'Who's Afraid of Moms for Liberty?'

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
A journalism question that suggests an answer: 'Who's Afraid of Moms for Liberty?'

For nearly 20 years now, GetReligion has focused on discussions of religion content in what used to be called “hard news,” as in old-school journalism that attempted to do accurate, fair-minded coverage of public events, debates, trends, etc.

Long ago, I was taught that the more controversial and disputed the topic, the harder journalists should strive for “balance” in terms of content about participants on both sides, or all sides, of the debate.

Honest. People used to believe things like that.

Thus, your GetReligionistas have always tried to separate “hard news” from analysis, commentary and even outright public relations.

This brings me to a fascinating news feature in The Free Press, an important online news source that — from my point of view — grew out of the digital, social-media wars inside The New York Times. Founded by Bari Weiss, an old-school liberal, this new publication covers many controversial topics that have been overlooked, ignored or even cancelled in elite newsrooms.

Is The Free Press a “hard news” publication? It certainly publishes lots of new information, using sources that it quotes on the record. Much of the content is analysis, in the style of The Atlantic and similar publications.

In this case, we are talking about a Robert Pondiscio article with this double-decker headline:

Who’s Afraid of Moms for Liberty?

A growing cadre of angry mothers is taking over school boards and winning influence as GOP kingmakers. Why are they being called a ‘hate group’?

The overture makes it clear that, in this case, The Free Press team is interested in the lives and beliefs of the actual members (think “stakeholders”) of this organization, as opposed to the Republican candidates that court them. Ah, but do these groups overlap?

In a breakout session in a windowless conference room at last weekend’s Moms for Liberty “Joyful Warrior Summit” in Philadelphia, Christian Ziegler, the chairman of the Florida Republican Party and father of three school-aged daughters, is stiffening spines. Dozens of attendees, mostly women, are nodding and taking notes as Ziegler explains how to work with local news media. 

“Your product is parental rights. Your product is protecting children and eliminating indoctrination and the sexualization of children. You’re the grassroots. You’re on the ground. You’re the moms, the grandparents, the families that are impacted. The stories you tell help set a narrative,” Ziegler coaches them.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Podcast: Culture Wars 2023 -- As it turns out, traditional Muslims have children too

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: Culture Wars 2023 -- As it turns out, traditional Muslims have children too

Gentle readers, please allow me to start with a short anecdote from about 15 years ago, during the years when I was teaching journalism a few blocks from the U.S. Capitol.

I attended a typical off-the-record think tank forum in which lawyers from church-state groups were talking about rising tensions in public, taxpayer funded, institutions. At one point, someone asked a question that sounded something like this: What should public-schools leaders do when approached by parents who want opt-out choices for their children when faced with class activities that clash with the teachings of their faith?

The question, of course, was linked to tensions between public-school leaders and evangelicals, and maybe traditional Catholics (“traditional” in the FBI meaning of the word).

One lawyer gave an answer that was way ahead of its time: School administrators should look at these people and do everything they can to pretend that these parents are Muslims. In other words, pretend these parents are part of a minority faith that public officials respect (Muslims), as opposed to part of a larger faith group that administrators distrust, fear and possibly even loathe (evangelicals).

This was one of two Beltway anecdotes I shared during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in), which focused on a Washington Post story that I have been thinking about during the past week or two. That headline: “Hundreds of Md. parents protest lessons they say offend their faiths.” The Post team appears to have worked hard to keep the main news hook out of that headline and even the lede.

Hundreds of parents demonstrated outside the Montgomery County Board of Education’s meeting … demanding that Maryland’s largest school district allow them to shield their children from books and lessons that contain LGBTQ+ characters.

Still in the dark, right? Keep reading:

The crowd was filled largely with Muslim and Ethiopian Orthodox parents, who say the school system is violating their religious rights protected under the First Amendment by not providing an opt-out. Three families have filed a lawsuit against the school system.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

DeSantis' Catholic faith goes under the media microscope before '24 presidential primaries

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
DeSantis' Catholic faith goes under the media microscope before '24 presidential primaries

The presidential race is just starting to heat up. While it may still be early, candidates are popping up every few days and announcing their intention to seek the Republican nomination in 2024.

Among those seeking to dislodge the early favorite — polling shows that to be former President Donald Trump — is Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. This is the same man who has become something of a conservative darling in recent years for relentlessly going after “woke” ideology. His battle with Disney is an example of a culture war fight DeSantis hasn’t been afraid to address in recent years.

DeSantis has been criticized for many things, from whether his wife Casey is “a problem” to confusion over the pronunciation of his last name.

As the past weeks have shown, DeSantis’ foray into national politics has come shone a brighter media spotlight on him, his family and beliefs.

Yes, Christian beliefs. It’s true that DeSantis is seen as possibly the only candidate in the ever-growing GOP primary field capable of defeating Trump and possibly even President Joe Biden.

This increased scrutiny — both by the mainstream and religious press — has included whether or not DeSantis, a Catholic, is personally devout. I tackled this very topic more than a year ago in a post that ran under the headline “As Florida’s DeSantis wages culture war, his Catholic faith isn’t news — unless it’s used to attack him.”

Here was the main thrust of my argument:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Podcast: Who gets to pin labels on the armies fighting in those good 'ole SBC wars?

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: Who gets to pin labels on the armies fighting in those good 'ole SBC wars?

Once upon a time, starting in the late 1970a, the Southern Baptists Convention had a big civil war — fighting about the authority of the Bible and “biblical inerrancy,” a rather inside-baseball term that was little known by pew-folks at that time.

There were two big armies, with the gray three-piece-suit players of the Southern Baptist establishment and on the other the rebels who, if my memory is correct, sometimes wore plaid. Cut me some slack, because it’s been a long time. But this background was crucial in this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in), focusing on early coverage of strife leading up to the 2023 SBC meetings next week in New Orleans.

The good guys back then called themselves “moderates” because they tended to seek compromise stances on hot-button issues — such as abortion and the ordination of women. Thus, journalists called them “moderates.”

The bad guys called themselves “conservatives” and took strong stands on the big Bible issues (with the exception, let’s say, of economic justice). Thus, many journalists called them “fundamentalists” — including some rather ordinary evangelicals who didn’t fit that f-word term.

The right said there were “liberals” all over the place and the SBC left said “liberals” didn’t exist. Truth is, there were very few doctrinal liberals around (in a seminary chair or two) who were weak in defending ancient beliefs — think the Resurrection and the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Journalists were not interested in investigating facts related to these debates, since the “moderates” said that was all, well, disinformation.

Flash forward to the present. The few remaining “moderates” have mainline Protestant demographics and often have quiet disputes about mainline Protestant-style issues (think LGBTQ+ matters).

The hot-button SBC 2023 issues are (1) how tough to be on fighting sexual abuse and (2) the ordination of women (and old issue is back).

Everyone defends biblical inerrancy (while maybe offering slightly different definitions). Everyone stands together on the big doctrinal issues. In the background, however, is an important issue — when it comes to an issue like ordaining women, does the SBC have “doctrines” or “opinions”?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , ,

Podcast: Women in ministry remains a hot topic in SBC life, especially at the pulpit level

, , , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: Women in ministry remains a hot topic in SBC life, especially at the pulpit level

Any controversy linked to the Rev. Rick “Purpose Driven Life” Warren is, by definition, going to be a big news story. I mean, that mega-bestseller has been translated into 100-plus languages and is so omnipresent that it’s most famous quote ended up in a Marvel Comic Universe movie.

Meanwhile, any controversy that involves conservatives opposing the ordination of “moderate” or “progressive” Baptist women is going to be a big news story, because — for most mainstream journalists — that is a good vs. evil story, and that’s that.

Thus, it’s no surprise that there has been quite a bit of ink about the vote by the Southern Baptist Convention’s executive committee declaring that the giant Saddleback Church, founded by Warren, is no longer “in friendly cooperation” with America’s largest non-Catholic flock.

Yes, that’s SBC lingo. We are dealing with a “convention” of autonomous congregations, not a “denomination,” and it’s primary source of national giving/income is called the “Cooperative Program.” So, has Saddleback been “ousted,” “expelled” or “kicked out” of SBC life for good? We will see.

GetReligion readers will not be surprised that we ended up discussing all of these issues during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in). The good news, in this case, is that the most important stories about this case were written by experienced religion-beat pros. Here’s the top of the Associated Press report:

The Southern Baptist Convention … ousted its second-largest congregation — Saddleback Church, the renowned California megachurch founded by pastor and best-selling author Rick Warren — for having a woman pastor.

The vote by the convention’s Executive Committee culminates growing tension between the nation’s largest Protestant denomination — which officially opposes women as pastors — and a congregation whose story has been one of the biggest church-growth successes of modern times.

The committee cited Saddleback’s having “a female teaching pastor functioning in the office of pastor,” an allusion to Stacie Wood, wife of the current lead pastor of Saddleback, Andy Wood.

But the controversy began in 2021, when Warren ordained three women as pastors, prompting discussions within the denomination about possibly expelling the megachurch.

What is going on here? There are several important clues in that material.


Please respect our Commenting Policy