A new direction for NASA

[Ron Collins]

i.e....that judeo-christian vunerability may have been heightened by (from their perspective) god's "no-show" on 9-11. The subsequent military actions and increased zeal against the Islamicists bear this out as an ostensive indicator of the same felt vulnerability. There may even be a competitive component in the "Jesus Camps" that sprung up after 9-11 teaching the youth to have the same self-sacrificing zeal as their Islamic counterparts--essentially a proto-mirror of the Taliban/Al-Qaida/Islamic extremists. A proposition: the more powerless a God is perceived in a particular religion the more likely its adherents would take up arms to defend itself.

I don't agree with that. To my knowledge, there have been no indications of mass discontent with the Christian God post 9/11 and likewise there has not been a flood of converts to other religions. Also to the best of my knowledge there has not been an influx of converts to Christianity either. So therefore I contend that religious affiliation was only minimally affected if at all by the events of 9/11 and the subsequent military actions. However, it can easily be shown that targeted Islamic/Arab bigotry has increased exponentially following these events. If i am wrong and there is a study showing this I would honestly appreciate your pointing me to it. otherwise I just don't think this is a defense mechanism for the perceived shortcomings of a religious doctrine. Hate is rarely logical and its origin and fervor is always a mystery.

As to your proposition, I would agree. But the degree, in my opinion, is proportional to the message/outrage of that religions clergy and is typically congruent with the economic comfort of the populace. Simply put, if my religious conduit says my God is angry enough and I am not too comfortable in my current situation I will readily take up arms. Otherwise I will give only a half assed effort if at all. As I said, just my opinion here. I have no empirical data to back it up.

I am no fan of organized religion. Humans are capable of incredibly cruel atrocities when their conscious is cleared by an absolving God. This is all to often a theme in nearly every religion on earth.

 

[davide]

Gibbs tried to settle the issue in today's WH press conference. Responding to Bolden's claim that NASA's "foremost" goal was Muslim outreach, he said, "That was not his task and that’s not the task of NASA".

Now... on to Mars!

 

[Michael Allen]

I don't agree with that. To my knowledge, there have been no indications of mass discontent with the Christian God post 9/11 and likewise there has not been a flood of converts to other religions. Also to the best of my knowledge there has not been an influx of converts to Christianity either. So therefore I contend that religious affiliation was only minimally affected if at all by the events of 9/11 and the subsequent military actions. However, it can easily be shown that targeted Islamic/Arab bigotry has increased exponentially following these events. If i am wrong and there is a study showing this I would honestly appreciate your pointing me to it. otherwise I just don't think this is a defense mechanism for the perceived shortcomings of a religious doctrine. Hate is rarely logical and its origin and fervor is always a mystery.

As to your proposition, I would agree. But the degree, in my opinion, is proportional to the message/outrage of that religions clergy and is typically congruent with the economic comfort of the populace. Simply put, if my religious conduit says my God is angry enough and I am not too comfortable in my current situation I will readily take up arms. Otherwise I will give only a half assed effort if at all. As I said, just my opinion here. I have no empirical data to back it up.

I am no fan of organized religion. Humans are capable of incredibly cruel atrocities when their conscious is cleared by an absolving God. This is all to often a theme in nearly every religion on earth.

I think my propositions do not depend on either an overt display of "mass discontent" or increased conversions--today's cognitive dissonance day I suppose. I am not arguing about the actual data--but the perceptions among certain faithists on both sides regarding what could be data to them. For instance, it is noteworthy that both the Muslim and Christians I've met like to cite statistics proving their religion is the "fastest growing" in America--an argument easily settled by data of course, but which data does one trust?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2002/01/08/ncguest2.htm

The Barna Group - How America's Faith Has Changed Since 9-11

 

[Ron Collins]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2002/01/08/ncguest2.htm

The Barna Group - How America's Faith Has Changed Since 9-11

Neither of these sources refute anything I said (though I do not think you included them to do so), in fact they both support it. Both show that there was no mass exodus of belief systems. Rather no change in one and a quick reaffirmation in the other. I don't see these as contradictory either, probably just a difference in what questions and how they were asked. Still the point can be made that the events of 9/11 did not spawn a reexamination of a particular religious dogma. For your theory to hold water there needs to be a clear indicator that such a reexamination is possible. If ever a perfect catalyst(I think we can agree that there needs to be a catalyst) for religious examination existed, 9/11 and the subsequent actions provided it.

Admittedly, I am not very good at free thinking. Just so you know your intent was not lost on me. But, when I need to make a point, ultimately, I am a data guy. I formulate opinions after subjecting myself to endless research and evaluation. (Buying a car in my house can cause my wife to threaten divorce.) That I tend to retreat to the data is second nature.

Again, this is only my completely biased and somewhat self aggrandized interpretation of how I perceive the pull of the Christian religions in America. That being said, I personally doubt that this can be as easily influenced as your initial statement suggested. In fact, I think that if anything would dethrone Christianity in America or in Western culture as a whole it would be agnosticism, atheism, or some amalgam new agey type religion.

To the latter, my imagination can see some open architecture religion that accepts large portions of all dogma and buttressed by a mutual respect and tolerance for cultural difference. (Hmmm, lets call it Open Theism. If thats not taken, I hereby claim it and promote myself as it's founder. If it exists, then insert whatever name you like.) But, going from one rigidly dogmatic religion to another where the dissimilarities of culture throw hurdles and road blocks in the path of transition, making the transition a serious struggle, is ..... exhausting. Americans loath all things exhausting. We as a culture like quick declarations and easy transitions.

Simply put, its too damn much work to consider the tenets of another religion, conduct introspection, decide on a path, and then change my religion. I have way more important things to do. Like stop by Starbucks for another iced latte, then call so and so, and OH American Idol is on tonight.......

 

[Jay]

Gibbs tried to settle the issue in today's WH press conference. Responding to Bolden's claim that NASA's "foremost" goal was Muslim outreach, he said, "That was not his task and that’s not the task of NASA".

Now... on to Mars!

Agreed. Anyone have Burt Rutan's number??

 

[NTS]

"they are in a holding pattern sort of waiting Obama out"

The next Reagan or Bush (do they really expect better from Republicans?) will complete the job of turning America into a third-world country that will never have the prosperity to support a space program. Obama's not as bad as that, but his half-measures haven't done nearly enough to counteract the 30-year campaign to destroy the middle class that Reagan started. Unless the next president is another Democrat considerably more progressive than Obama has turned out to be, they'll have a long wait.

 

[jpw.in.wi]

I think the real question we should be asking is How has intelligence gathering, analysis, and sharing changed since 9-11? rather than How has America's faith changed since 9-11?

Sen. Bob Graham's book Intelligence Matters is a fine summation of the problems that existed before 9-11, and which allowed it to happen. How eye-opening to read about how one very energetic and committed FBI special agent tried to get his colleagues in the FBI, CIA, and INS to keep an eye on Arabs and men from a few other Mid-Eastern nationalities who were suddenly coming to the US to get pilot's licenses, and who were working their way into positions at all levels of the air transportation industry, from baggage handlers on up. Islamic terrorists struck over Lockerbie, Scotland, and this special agent could see that they still had a thing for messing with aircraft. But everything that was wrong with our intelligence community neutralized all of that agent's efforts, and ended up allowing that horrible atrocity to be committed.

And so, with that bit of history in mind, it does make me wonder about an administration whose leader bows before Arab leaders, and who now apparently wants to open the doors of our space program and presumably share technology and collaborate on projects with men (and women) whose neighbors conspired to kill innocent Americans on 9-11. Will this make us safer?

 

[NTS]

Will this?

http://www.hermes-press.com/bush_kiss.jpg

 

[justcurious]

Will this?

http://www.hermes-press.com/bush_kiss.jpg

Nice picture.