Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 248

One of the best expla­na­tions of reli­gious lib­er­ty I have read, along with arti­cles about the pan­dem­ic, UFOs, the Chi­nese Com­mu­nist Par­ty, and a fas­ci­nat­ing inter­view with a pas­tor.

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

I’m a lit­tle hap­py because the num­ber 248 seems cool to me. If I ever reach 1248 I’ll think it’s even cool­er.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Reli­gious Lib­er­ty and the Com­mon Good (Nation­al Affairs, William Haun): “Many of today’s pro­gres­sives, con­ser­v­a­tives, and lib­er­tar­i­ans [can­not] explain why reli­gion in par­tic­u­lar and reli­gious exer­cise in par­tic­u­lar should shape the com­mon good, even when they go against the grain of sec­u­lar visions adopt­ed in law.” This is prob­a­bly the most impor­tant link I’ve shared in quite a while. Not light read­ing but worth­while. The author is a lawyer for the Beck­et Fund.
  2. Erwin McManus: The Peace­able War­rior (Paul J. Pas­tor, Out­reach Mag­a­zine): “I talked to some­one last Sun­day who said, ‘I’m here because some­body invit­ed me. I didn’t want to come.’ [Laughs] She actu­al­ly said, ‘I’m mean, jad­ed and cyn­i­cal. I don’t believe in God or reli­gion. I think it’s all a sham.’ I said, ‘You’re real­ly dis­ap­point­ed, aren’t you?’ ‘Why?’ ‘Because you like us,’ I said. ‘Yeah,’ she said, ‘I don’t know what to do with that.’ ” (the excerpt is actu­al­ly from part 2 of the inter­view and the sto­ry gets even bet­ter). I only stum­bled upon this slight­ly old­er arti­cle because it won a Mag­gie award for best inter­view of 2019.
  3. Coro­n­avirus News & Per­spec­tives
    • Com­par­ing COVID-19 Deaths to Flu Deaths Is like Com­par­ing Apples to Oranges (Jere­my Samuel Faust, Sci­en­tif­ic Amer­i­can): “When reports about the nov­el coro­n­avirus SARS-CoV­‑2 began cir­cu­lat­ing ear­li­er this year and ques­tions were being raised about how the ill­ness it caus­es, COVID-19, com­pared to the flu, it occurred to me that, in four years of emer­gency med­i­cine res­i­den­cy and over three and a half years as an attend­ing physi­cian, I had almost nev­er seen any­one die of the flu. I could only remem­ber one trag­ic pedi­atric case.” The author is an instruc­tor at Har­vard Med­ical School. Fas­ci­nat­ing.
    • Pho­tog­ra­ph­er Takes Pics Of Peo­ple In Pub­lic From 2 Per­spec­tives And It Shows How Eas­i­ly The Media Can Manip­u­late Real­i­ty (Liu­ci­ja Ado­maite and Denis Tymulis, Bored Pan­da): “‘The prox­im­i­ty of peo­ple has wide­ly been debat­ed in Den­mark in the past weeks. Dan­ish politi­cians and author­i­ties have fre­quent­ly referred to images which they believed to show mem­bers of the pub­lic behav­ing in dis­agree­ment with the gen­er­al guide­lines.’ As a nation­al pho­to news agency that sup­plies visu­al cov­er­age on the coro­n­avirus pan­dem­ic, ‘we became aware that our con­tri­bu­tion could be mis­read.’” A pic­ture is worth 1000 words, not all of them hon­est.
    • Seattle’s Lead­ers Let Sci­en­tists Take the Lead. New York’s Did Not (Charles Duhigg ‚New York­er): “Con­stan­tine told me, ‘Jeff rec­og­nized what he was ask­ing for was imprac­ti­cal. He said if we advised social dis­tanc­ing right away there would be zero accep­tance. And so the ques­tion was: What can we say today so that peo­ple will be ready to hear what we need to say tomor­row?’ In e‑mails and phone calls, the men began play­ing a game: What was the most extreme advice they could give that peo­ple wouldn’t scoff at? Con­sid­er­ing what would like­ly be hap­pen­ing four days from then, what would they regret not hav­ing said?”
    • A Vir­ginia preach­er believed ‘God can heal any­thing.’ Then he caught coro­n­avirus. (Peter Jami­son, Wash­ing­ton Post): “In the days after Lan­don suc­cumbed to covid-19, his death brought words of sym­pa­thy from peo­ple who knew him — and jeers from peo­ple who didn’t. The New York Post, the Dai­ly Mail and an athe­ist blog pub­lished arti­cles seiz­ing on his March 13 Face­book post. Lan­don was posthu­mous­ly attacked as a vic­tim of mis­guid­ed beliefs — in the assur­ances of his pres­i­dent and the pro­tec­tions of his God.”
    • Infor­ma­tion Can Do What Lock­downs Can’t (Lyman Stone, The Pub­lic Dis­course): “Amer­i­cans, like peo­ple in almost every coun­try, were quick­er to under­stand the risks than most of the peo­ple who gov­ern us. Alas, had our lead­ers tak­en the threat seri­ous­ly a month ear­li­er, and com­mu­ni­cat­ed the risks to Amer­i­cans more explic­it­ly, COVID could have been a flash in the pan. Instead, many thou­sands of Amer­i­cans are going to die unnec­es­sary deaths.”
    • Why Did YouTube Remove The Doc­tors’ Brief­ing? (Rod Dreher, The Amer­i­can Con­ser­v­a­tive): “…I absolute­ly believe that it’s wrong to cen­sor what qual­i­fied med­ical pro­fes­sion­als (read: not quacks) are say­ing about the cri­sis, which is so unique in our expe­ri­ence as a nation. A strong lock­down was nec­es­sary at first. If there is good med­ical evi­dence that the lock­down, and relat­ed pub­lic health strate­gies, might be doing more harm that good at this date, then let’s hear that argu­ment.”
    • Relat­ed: The Inevitable Coro­n­avirus Cen­sor­ship Cri­sis is Here (Matt Taib­bi, Sub­stack): “The peo­ple who want to add a cen­sor­ship regime to a health cri­sis are more dan­ger­ous and more stu­pid by leaps and bounds than a pres­i­dent who tells peo­ple to inject dis­in­fec­tant. It’s aston­ish­ing that they don’t see this.”
    • With US Bor­ders Closed by Covid-19, How Will I Afford Insulin? (James Stout, Undark): “Dur­ing months when I teach as an adjunct pro­fes­sor and am cov­ered by my university’s insur­ance plan, I stock up as much insulin as I can. Dur­ing the remain­der of the year, I do what thou­sands of oth­ers do: I cross the bor­der to Mex­i­co where, just 12 miles from my house in San Diego, I can buy the same med­i­cine at one-tenth of the price.” Sent my way by a stu­dent.
  4. UFO Sight­ings: They Deserve to Be Tak­en More Seri­ous­ly (Tyler Cowen, Bloomberg): “The offi­cial release of some pre­vi­ous­ly leaked UFO videos tak­en by U.S. navy pilots has sparked renewed inter­est in the big­ger ques­tions. For sure those fly­ing objects are uniden­ti­fied, but how much atten­tion should we earth­lings devote to this issue? I am struck by the con­trast between those who see this as an impor­tant ques­tion and those who think the whole thing will turn out to be an error or some kind of opti­cal illu­sion.”
  5. On the Chi­nese Com­mu­nist Par­ty: 
    • Chi­na Has a Post-Pan­dem­ic Dream for Hong Kong (Yi-Zheng Lian, New York Times): “But the recent devel­op­ments actu­al­ly are remark­able. For the first time, the tra­di­tion­al pan-dems are being treat­ed as ene­mies just like the sep­a­ratists. And for the first time, Bei­jing is vio­lat­ing the very let­ter of the Basic Law, which it itself has pro­mul­gat­ed; the Chi­nese gov­ern­ment typ­i­cal­ly only con­torts the law and dis­torts its spir­it.”
    • The End of the Har­vard Cen­tu­ry (Mat­teo N. Wong, Har­vard Crim­son): “Chi­nese offi­cials reg­u­lar­ly deliv­er com­plaints to uni­ver­si­ties host­ing events on sen­si­tive issues and even offer schol­ars mon­ey to mod­i­fy research crit­i­cal of Chi­na.… giv­en Harvard’s sta­tus in the inter­na­tion­al aca­d­e­m­ic hier­ar­chy, Chi­nese author­i­ties may be par­tic­u­lar­ly inter­est­ed in the Uni­ver­si­ty. ‘We’ve had Chi­nese cit­i­zens at Har­vard, who are clear­ly doing the bid­ding of the Chi­nese state, com­ing and sit­ting in on talks and tak­ing notes and report­ing back,’ Per­ry says. She sim­i­lar­ly sus­pects Chi­nese cit­i­zens of report­ing on vis­it­ing Chi­nese schol­ars’ activ­i­ties.” This arti­cle is quite long but fas­ci­nat­ing.
    • Amer­i­ca is awak­en­ing to Chi­na. This is a clar­i­on call to seize the moment. (Mitt Rom­ney, Wash­ing­ton Post): “China’s alarm­ing mil­i­tary build-up is not wide­ly dis­cussed out­side clas­si­fied set­tings, but Amer­i­cans should not take com­fort in our dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly large mil­i­tary bud­get. The gov­ern­ment of Pres­i­dent Xi Jin­ping doesn’t report its actu­al defense spend­ing. An apples-to-apples analy­sis demon­strates that China’s annu­al pro­cure­ment of mil­i­tary hard­ware is near­ly iden­ti­cal to ours; but because our mil­i­tary has mis­sions around the world, this means that in the Pacif­ic, where Chi­na con­cen­trates its fire­pow­er, it will have mil­i­tary supe­ri­or­i­ty.”
    • I was arrest­ed in Hong Kong. It’s part of China’s larg­er plan.(Mar­tin C. M. Lee , Wash­ing­ton Post): “Hong Kong peo­ple now face two plagues from Chi­na: the coro­n­avirus and attacks on our most basic human rights. We can all hope a vac­cine is soon devel­oped for the coro­n­avirus. But once Hong Kong’s human rights and rule of law are rolled back, the fatal virus of author­i­tar­i­an rule will be here to stay.”
  6. My Native Amer­i­can father drew the Land O’Lakes maid­en. She was nev­er a stereo­type. (Robert Des­Jar­lait, Wash­ing­ton Post): “Mia’s van­ish­ing has prompt­ed a social media meme: ‘They Got Rid of The Indi­an and Kept the Land.’ That isn’t too far from the truth. Mia, the stereo­type that wasn’t, leaves behind a land­scape void­ed of iden­ti­ty and his­to­ry. For those of us who are Amer­i­can Indi­an, it’s a his­to­ry that is all too famil­iar.”
  7. By Biden’s Own Stan­dards, He Is Guilty As Charged (Andrew Sul­li­van, New York Mag­a­zine): “On Friday’s Morn­ing Joe, Biden laid out a sim­ple process for judg­ing him: Lis­ten respect­ful­ly to Tara Reade, and then check for facts that prove or dis­prove her spe­cif­ic claim. The objec­tive truth, Biden argued, is what mat­ters. I agree with him. But this was emphat­i­cal­ly not the stan­dard Biden favored when judg­ing men in col­lege. If Biden were a stu­dent, under Biden rules, Reade could file a claim of assault, and Biden would have no right to know the specifics, the evi­dence pro­vid­ed, who was charg­ing him, who was a wit­ness, and no right to ques­tion the accuser.”
    • This arti­cle is about col­lege Title IX pro­ceed­ings using Tara Reade and Joe Biden as illus­tra­tions. If its inclu­sion comes off as par­ti­san, bear in mind that the author intends to vote for Biden.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

  • Dol­phins swim in bio­lu­mi­nes­cent waves in New­port Beach (YouTube): three min­utes
  • Obvi­ous­ly Con­fused Amash Runs For Pres­i­dent Even Though We Already Have Two Choic­es (Baby­lon Bee)
  • Unusu­al­ly Heavy Call Vol­umes (Pearls Before Swine)
  • Lat­est Com­put­er Mod­el Pre­dicts Between 0 And 12.6 Bil­lion New COVID-19 Deaths By Sum­mer (Baby­lon Bee)
  • Steve Har­vey Gets Tie Stolen by Pick­pock­et Bob Arno (Steve Har­vey Show, YouTube): sev­en min­utes, rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent
  • Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

    Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have the provoca­tive read In Defense of Flog­ging (Peter Moskos, Chron­i­cle of High­er Edu­ca­tion) — the author is a for­mer police offi­cer and now a crim­i­nol­o­gist at the City Uni­ver­si­ty of New York. This one was shared back before I start­ed send­ing these emails in a blog post called Pun­ish­ment.

    Why Do You Send This Email?

    In the time of King David, the tribe of Issachar pro­duced shrewd war­riors “who under­stood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chron 12:32). In a sim­i­lar way, we need to become wise peo­ple whose faith inter­acts with the world. I pray this email gives you greater insight, so that you may con­tin­ue the tra­di­tion of Issachar.

    Disclaimer

    Chi Alpha is not a par­ti­san orga­ni­za­tion. To para­phrase anoth­er min­is­ter: we are not about the donkey’s agen­da and we are not about the elephant’s agen­da — we are about the Lamb’s agen­da. Hav­ing said that, I read wide­ly (in part because I believe we should aspire to pass the ide­o­log­i­cal Tur­ing test and in part because I do not believe I can fair­ly say “I agree” or “I dis­agree” until I can say “I under­stand”) and may at times share arti­cles that have a strong par­ti­san bias sim­ply because I find the arti­cle stim­u­lat­ing. The upshot: you should not assume I agree with every­thing an author says in an arti­cle I men­tion, much less things the author has said in oth­er arti­cles (although if I strong­ly dis­agree with some­thing in the arti­cle I’ll usu­al­ly men­tion it). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. Also, remem­ber that I’m not report­ing news — I’m giv­ing you a selec­tion of things I found inter­est­ing. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in the world that’s not mak­ing an appear­ance here because I haven’t found stim­u­lat­ing arti­cles writ­ten about it. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Leave a Reply