adjective "Christian"

Tue May 17 11:48:53 UTC 2005

Takes all kinds, don't it ? It's handy to find spiritual sanction to do exactly what you want to do anyway.

What's "bofos" ?  The Firesign Theatre LP was "I Think We're All BOZOS on This Bus" (1971).

JL

"Rex W. Stocklin" <stocklin at EARTHLINK.NET> wrote:
---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
Sender: American Dialect Society
Poster: "Rex W. Stocklin"
Subject: Re: adjective "Christian"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At 10:27 AM -0800 3/14/05, Arnold M. Zwicky wrote:

>from the NYT, 3/10/05, p. A22, "Favor the Rod, Get the Ax" (with
>subhead: "College Expels Education Student Who Advocated Corporal
>Punishment"), by Patrick D. Healy:
>
>The profanity transported him [Scott McConnell, the education student
>in question] back to his own days at Robert E. Lee Elementary School in
>Oklahoma in the 1980's, when there was a swift solution for wiseacres:
>The paddle.
>
>"It was a footlong piece of wood, and hung on every classroom wall like
>a symbol, a strong Christian symbol," said Mr. McConnell, who is 26.
>-----
>
>i'm struggling to see how a paddle used for punishment serves as a
>Christian symbol. what's the interpretation of "Christian" here?

Several weigh-ins have been noted here, among which include a
scripture reference and some symbology.

One insight can be gleaned from reading George Lakoff's dissection of
contemporary politics as showcased in "Moral Politics: How Liberals
and Conservatives Think," as well as the best-selling chap
extrapolated from that hefty scholarly tome, "Don't Think of an
Elephant." The UC Berkeley linguistics & cognitive science prof
astutely sees two models at work in the diametrically opposed
extremes of todays political climate. On the one end, there is a
strict father which is the one with which the right...and by
association, the bulk of the fundamentalist Christians identifies.

Here is an excerpt:

>"I put in the two different views of the nation, and out popped two
>different models of the family: a strict father family and a
>nurturant parent family. You know which is which. Now, when I first
>did this - and I'll tell you about the details in a minute - I was
>asked to give a talk at a linguistics convention. I decided I would
>talk about this discovery. In the audience were two members of the
>Christian Coalition who were linguists and good friends of mine.
>Excellent linguists. And very, very good people. Very nice people.
>People I liked a lot. They took me aside at the party afterward and
>said, "Well, this strict father model of the family, it's close, but
>not quite right. We'll help you get the details right. However, you
>should know all this. Have you read Dobson?"
>
> I said, "Who?"
>
> They said, "James Dobson."
>
> I said, "Who?"
>
> They said, "You're kidding. He's on three thousand radio stations."
>
> I said, "Well, I don't think he's on NPR. I haven't heard of him."
>
> They said, "Well, you live in Berkeley."
>
> "Where would I . . . does he write stuff?"
>
> "Oh," they said, "oh yes. He has sold millions of books. His
>classic is 'Dare to Discipline'."
>
>My friends were right. I followed their directions to my local
>Christian bookstore, and there I found it all laid out: the strict
>father model in all its details. Dobson not only has a 100-to-200-
>million-dollar-a-year operation, but he also has his own ZIP code,
>so many people are writing to order his books and pamphlets. He is
>teaching people how to use the strict father model to raise their
>kids, and he understands its connection to rightwing politics.
>
>The strict father model begins with a set of assumptions:
>
>The world is a dangerous place, and it always will be, because there
>is evil out there in the world. The world is also difficult because
>it is competitive. There will always be winners and losers. There is
>an absolute right and an absolute wrong. Children are born bad, in
>the sense that they just want to do what feels good, not what is
>right. Therefore, they have to be made good. What is needed in this
>kind of a world is a strong, strict father who can:
>
>* Protect the family in the dangerous world,
>* Support the family in the difficult world, and
>* Teach his children right from wrong.
>
>What is required of the child is obedience, because the strict
>father is a moral authority who knows right from wrong. It is
>further assumed that the only way to teach kids obedience - that is,
>right from wrong - is through punishment, painful punishment, when
>they do wrong. This includes hitting them, and some authors on
>conservative child rearing recommend sticks, belts, and wooden
>paddles on the bare bottom. Some authors suggest this start at
>birth, but Dobson is more liberal. "There is no excuse for spanking
>babies younger than fifteen or eighteen months of age." The
>rationale behind physical punishment is this: When children do
>something wrong, if they are physically disciplined they learn not
>to do it again. That means that they will develop internal
>discipline to keep themselves from doing wrong, so that in the
>future they will be obedient and act morally. Without such
>punishment, the world will go to hell. There will be no morality.

Thus, the nurturant parent model, which I didn't get into here, which
is the one adopted by most on the left, is seen as too lenient and
not "tough" enough".

*I* am a Christian, not by family upbringing, but by choice, by
personal life decision of a spiritual nature. I am, however smart
enough to know that not all models work in all milieus. It is one
thing to be a stern daddy and to practice tough love, but quite
another to lord it over other countries of differing cultural belief
systems. However, MOST Christians, sincerely true ones, as well as
the ones who pay lip service (the ones that just go to church on
Sunday, or call themselves so because they think it is their
birthright because we are supposedly a Christian nation.
Yeah...whatever) to the concept think that corporal punishment is a
Christian thing to do. I think it is in their "DNA." They can fully
grok the OT Christendom of justice, but not the NT one of grace, of
turning the other cheek. That's why you see a WAY more passion than
compassion in the 20th century believer. Why we are more concerned
with punishing potential enemy countries than helping out ones that
are in a world of real hurt. Certainly they have no qualms about
extending the spoiling-the-rod axiom to capital punishment to boot.
Never the mind that innocents get caught up in the web of their
so-called justice along with the few guilty. But I digress....

I Think We're All Bofos On This Bus,
Lexy Rexy
Fishers

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com