God, Mother Nature Hate You

Two celebrities on opposite ends of the political spectrum had incredibly insensitive things to say this week about the earthquake in Haiti.

Pat Robertson:

"Something happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people might not want to talk about it," he said on Christian Broadcasting Network's "The 700 Club." "They were under the heel of the French. You know, Napoleon III, or whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, we will serve you if you'll get us free from the French. True story. And so, the devil said, okay it's a deal."

Cool true story, bro. I don't know what sort of strange version of original sin Robertson believes in, but any theology that views God as a vengeful deity interested in punishing the descendants of alleged sinners many generations after the fact is not merely a God I could never believe in, but a God I would actively hate were it anything more than a figment of pathetic human imagination. Hail Satan!

Danny Glover brings us the leftist version of apocalyptic theology:

"What happened in Haiti could happen to anywhere in the Caribbean because all these island nations are in peril because of global warming," Glover said. "When we see what we did at the climate summit in Copenhagen, this is the response, this is what happens, you know what I'm sayin'?"

As Roderick Long observed in reference to an proposed environmentalist ad:

What I’ve yet to see anyone point out is how counterproductive the ad’s caption is:

The planet is brutally powerful. Respect it. Preserve it. www.wwf.org

(a.k.a. “Kneel before Zod!”) When you hear that “the planet” has killed 100 times more people than 9/11, is your natural response to respect and preserve it, let alone to donate money to its support? I’d think the natural response would be “I guess the planet is our enemy! We’d better declare war upon it!”

I feel more sympathy for Robertson than Glover. Robertson has to deal with the problem of evil for theological reasons: if God is an all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good deity, then why does God allow evil to exist? The obvious answer is that the existence of free will is even more valuable than the existence of evil is undesirable, but this only helps explain evil that results from human actions, not natural disasters like earthquakes in Haiti.

So Robertson invokes convenient patsies - the devil, the sinning ancestors of contemporary Haitians - to explain away the tragedy and get his God off the hook. But what is Glover's excuse? Worshipers of Gaia have no need to address the problem of evil, unless they maintain that mother nature is omnibenevolent - which a cursory examination of, well, nature, would be quick to disprove. Nature, as Alfred Lord Tennyson reminded us, is red in tooth and claw.

Share this

Global Warming causes earthquakes?

I am a bit confused about that quote, does global warming somehow cause earthquakes? Or is he saying that we made the Earth mad by failing to address global warming and now it is fighting back?

The first is ignorant, the second is absurd.

Glover appears to be very

Glover appears to be very much alone in this. I looked around for reaction, and everyone, left and right, is treating him like an idiot.

However, his statement reminds me of statements several years ago connecting the great tsunami disaster to climate change. There were many who made the connection and were seemingly taken seriously. Tsunamis are caused by underwater earthquakes.

For example, here we read:

LONDON (Reuters) - Quakes, volcanic eruptions, giant landslides and tsunamis may become more frequent as global warming changes the earth's crust, scientists said on Wednesday.

Climate-linked geological changes may also trigger "methane burps," the release of a potent greenhouse gas, currently stored in solid form under melting permafrost and the seabed, in quantities greater than all the carbon dioxide (CO2) in our air today.

"Climate change doesn't just affect the atmosphere and the oceans but the earth's crust as well. The whole earth is an interactive system," Professor Bill McGuire of University College London told Reuters, at the first major conference of scientists researching the changing climate's effects on geological hazards.

"In the political community people are almost completely unaware of any geological aspects to climate change."

The vulcanologists, seismologists, glaciologists, climatologists and landslide experts at the meeting have looked to the past to try to predict future changes, particularly to climate upheaval at the end of the last ice age, some 12,000 years ago.

"When the ice is lost, the earth's crust bounces back up again and that triggers earthquakes, which trigger submarine landslides, which cause tsunamis," said McGuire, who organized the three-day conference.

One can find more in this vein. So Glover's statement is not unprecedented. Perhaps Glover remembered statements like the ones relayed by the Reuters article. If global warming can cause undersea earthquakes, then why not land earthquakes? It's not that much of a stretch for a non-scientist to make, if he's reasoning from the statements that scientists made about the Indonesia tsunami.


a theology that views God as a vengeful deity interested in punishing the descendants of alleged sinners many generations after the fact

What is Judaism ?

Judaism doesn't have the

Judaism doesn't have the same concept of original sin as Christianity, though as I've written elsewhere, some Jews still adopt this Christian mentality. Here is Pat Robertson's own CBN website quoting an article written by yours truly (unfortunately I can't find a full version online at the moment) on the issue of Jews and collective guilt:

Collective guilt doesn't always result in such extreme measures, and those who have been its victims can even validate it. There are Jews today who would regard all Germans since the time of Naziism as anti-Semites. In a recent article in Jewsweek, Micha Ghertner points out, "... it is not discussed often, but Jews are still silently shamed by friends and family into boycotting that coveted Beemer or Benz, even though six decades have passed since the Holocaust ... ."

I go on to say in the same article,

This practice is not only hypocritical, but morally wrong. If Jews are serious about fighting the anti-Semitism of ignorant Christians who hold modern Jews accountable for the alleged sins of their forefathers, then Jews must be willing to refrain from holding modern Germans accountable for the sins of the Nazis.

We must never forget. Nor must we forgive the Nazis for the unthinkable crimes they committed. However, unlike race and ethnicity, guilt is not an inheritable characteristic. To judge the children and grandchildren of Nazis -- and Germans in general -- not for their own actions, but for the actions of their genetic predecessors, is to be guilty of the same logical and moral fallacies for which we rightly condemn racists, sexists, and anti-Semites.

The cruelty of bigotry is that it is inescapable for the victim. No one has control over his or her birth status. It's the ultimate injustice to treat people poorly for something they cannot change, for something they did not do -- in short, simply for their existence as human beings. Jews have a long history of being the targets of bigotry and should be especially sensitive to this. We have a special responsibility to not do to Germans what we do not want done to us by Christians.

I will not be held responsible for crimes I did not commit. I will not feel guilty about them. And I will not deny to others the same respect that I expect them to give to me.

Aside from the relatively modern phenomenon of Jews boycotting German cars, there are also some Jewish laws which appear to me to punish the descendants of alleged sinners many generations after the fact; though this does not seem to be the primary intended purpose of these laws, they still have this effect. See the Wikipedia entry on the category of person Jewish law refers to as a Mamzer - roughly a more extreme version of a bastard child.

Martin Luther did a lot for

Martin Luther did a lot for Christianity, such as debunking the idiotic notions of the Catholic church, one of which was original sin. The Catholic church is a poor example of Christianity, and is downright inapplicable when making generalizations about Christianity. Anyone who has read the bible can tell you that, actually the bible has a word for Catholics.


Martin Luther wasn't such a

Martin Luther wasn't such a big fan of the Jews, so he isn't the ideal representative of Christianity either. And Pat Robertson is not Catholic.

Pat Robertson isn't such a

Pat Robertson isn't such a big fan of the Jews either. Pat Robertson also believes in certain catholic precepts when they fit his twisted world view.

He is far from being representative of Christians or the religion as a whole.



You're an idiot. The

You're an idiot. The Catholic church is the Christian church. You're probably also an American. Enough said.

It’s so sad to know want

It’s so sad to know want happen in Haiti and to know that I’m so far away and that I can’t do anything but to pray every day and every minute god will help all and he is on all side don’t give up an don’t loose hope help each other out an always keep your head up.Internet Marketing Product Review