That's the top-rated comment on the Washington Post article, "Supreme Court to review Indian Child Welfare Act, which prioritizes adoptions by Native American parents or tribes."
१ मार्च, २०२२
"In the name of a level playing field, this is evangelicals finding their way back into the business of converting Native Peoples to the faith of their bronze age deity."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
५२ टिप्पण्या:
The left would do better if it didn't have an open hostility to Christianity. They can still be hostile, just be cleverly vague about it. Also if Christianity is Bronze age, what does that make older religions like Judaism, Hinduism, or Zoroastrianism?
Several states' intention to adopt forms still ask for your religion. I wonder if anyone is courageous enough to say Druid or Wiccan or one of the nature-religions? How do you explain paganism to the adoption agency?
I'll take the faith of my bronze age deity over the new Gods of progressivism any day. Christ offers redemption and forgiveness, while the gods of wokeness, state power, and globalism offer nothing but mindless hedonism, endless humiliation, fear, and slavery.
For parity should someone point out the stone age faith of the Native Americans?
Of course, adoptions should be incentived to make sure American Inidans stay with American Indians. The same is true of blacks and Asians. Kids are better off with parents of their own race and culture. I thought that was common sense.
And here I thought the NYTimes comment section was a cesspool of stupidity, they have a ways to go to get this stupid
About 7 million Native Americans in the US (a little more than 500 different tribes). About 7.5 million Jewish Americans.
About 135,000 adoptions in the US each year.
It’s tough to preserve culture in the US.
As an adoptive parent (also with adopted siblings) we are quite familiar with the adoption community and who actually shows up to do the work. I don't know who was showing up in past eras to take in Native children who lost parents, but based on what has been happening the last 100 years, I'm going to guess that it wasn't other natives. There is a similar set of complaints from some in the black community who believe that black children are being robbed of identity by going to white families.
So step up and take some yourself, folks. And that includes you white anti-evangelicals (including especially for the adoptions of special needs children) who can't bear the level of self-accusation they would have to endure if you thought honestly. I have known some nonreligious people who have taken on very difficult lives (harder than I would have dared) - I don't want to pretend otherwise - but you can't interact with the larger adoption community without noticing the obvious in who showed up. Lots of evangelicals. Walk a mile in their moccasins.
But no, it's much more fun to make fun of the motives of the people who are doing the job you won't, as if they couldn't possibly be loving, generous, and self-sacrificing. They couldn't possibly be that way, because that would be a strike against you, who thinks that making snarky comments online on liberal websites is real morality.
Some might call that commenter a bigot.
But of course he/she isn't.
Because.
I have Native family members who always had foster kids because there were so many children and so few families that were able to take placements easily. This practice should be stopped. The poor children that have continued to be abused and neglected because of their ethnicity trumped their treatment. Where are they now as adults? Is it possible to break the cycle by allowing good families to step in? Because it's horrible now.
I'd say that policies favoring family unification above all other considerations are just as toxic. The pendulum is too far in favor of parental rights at the expense of children who need stability and consistency.
""In the name of a level playing field, this is evangelicals finding their way back into the business of converting Native Peoples to the faith of their bronze age deity.""
The Secular Cult raises it's voice.
Pretends Atheists are the most violent murderous cult in history.
I thought we were saving children from horrible living conditions in poverty stricken communities that have historically proven unable to meet the most basic necessities of their people. Sounds like someone is upset that a white devil didn't go to prom with them.
The article is replete with references to evangelicals -- NOT! The positive reception
of the comment speaks volumes about the kind of folks who are still attracted to WaPo, that is, ignorant progressive bigots. Big surprise.
Anyone with experience in the judicial realm of child welfare is likely familiar with the weaknesses of both child protective services and ICWA. Judges should be free to rule based on the welfare of the child. Since it cannot be so, the people who argue that the child is always better off with the tribe are motivated by something other than the child's welfare, usually politics.
I dont know, or care, about constitutional. It's just bad law.
Why are the evangelicals being dragged into this?
I've read the story and skimmed through the cert petition, the opposition, and the lower court decision.
Nowhere do I see any reference to the religion of the challengers to the law.
Of course, the reference to a "bronze age deity" is a give-away to the bigoted anti-religious hate of the commenter, so maybe this is yet another case of manufactured hate to lash out and attack even when the object of the attack is minding their own business.
I don't think Native Americans in North America can really be throwing stones about the Bronze Age . . . technically their gods were still Stone Age gods after all, since they hadn't developed smelting technology (South America had metallurgy, but this is about the US). But perhaps it goes the other way? That Man's proper obedience is owed to the Old Gods of the Stone Age, our true ancient and original faith, not these Bronze and Iron Age interlopers --
Thou hast conquered, O pale Galilean; the world has grown grey from thy breath.
We have drunken of things Lethean, and fed on the fullness of death
Jesus Christ was firmly Iron Age, I'll have you know. For that matter, Iron Age is for pre-historical cultural designations. Once we have written documents, we're out of Iron Ages and into the historical periods.
So nyah!
When did Native Peoples start having written histories, hmmm?
Approximately 85% of all American Indian and Alaska Native child welfare cases are related to substance abuse
My best friend in the Corpse was the grandson of a Navajo Shaman. His Dad was an abusive alcoholic so he was adopted out to a Mormon family in Orange County, Ca. He was a skinny 5'5" coke-bottle glasses math genius who turned into the Tasmanian Devil when he got drunk. He would pick fights with pimps on 14th street in DC. He had enough sense to only drink once a month. He had a rocky relationship with his adoptive family, but on the whole it was better than life on the Res.
It is a common plot line of television that a white racist patient refuses treatment from a black doctor, or a transfusion or organ transplant from a donor who is non-white. Now people are denying children help because would-be parents are the wrong color. I’m holding my breath for a TV show about this latter day racist behavior. Turning blue….
"We don't respect your deity because your fires aren't hot enough to work iron" is a rather strange argument. Of course so is "we don't respect your deity because he's been around a long, long time."
This is a case of being damned if you do and damned if you don't. Many adoptees I've known were from troubled parents (i.e., those who could not or would not keep them, such as due to prison or drugs), or the children were born with disabilities that the parents didn't want to manage. This spans all races and ethnic groups. Some unwanted children had bounced between numerous foster homes before being adopted.
Yes, all parents will share or impose their values on adopted children. However, is it better for those children to not have any stability in their lives and be subject to the mercenary tactics of (some) foster parents or orphanages? Children are never fully transformed to the views and values of adopted parents, and retain a lot of whatever they brought to the table.
Viewing adoption as a negative is an extremely harsh form of nationalism/segregation.
What was your MOS in Corps, Nitschke Howard? Giving handies at the officers club?
Top comment at WaPo demonstrates reflexive leftism through ignorance of the topic at hand and religious bigotry. Rinse, repeat.
"Jesus Christ was firmly Iron Age, I'll have you know. For that matter, Iron Age is for pre-historical cultural designations. Once we have written documents, we're out of Iron Ages and into the historical periods."
I'm seeing these dates at Wikipedia (referring to the Near East):
Stone Age (2,000,000 – 3300 BCE)
Bronze Age (3300 – 1200 BCE)
Iron Age (1200 – 586 BCE)
Historical periods (586 BCE – present)
That puts Jesus firmly in the historical period.
But maybe the "bronze age deity" is the Old Testament God. The Old Testament was written between about 1200 and 165 BC, and the definition of "historical period" has to do with putting things in writing, but presumably the God was believed in before the Old Testament was actually written.
"Why are the evangelicals being dragged into this? I've read the story and skimmed through the cert petition, the opposition, and the lower court decision. Nowhere do I see any reference to the religion of the challengers to the law."
I have an ongoing interest in the mental processes of the readers of the NYT and the WaPo. This is a type of post that you'll see on my blog from time to time — maybe 1 or 2% of the posts — where I begin with a popular comment over there that drags things straight to hell.
"I begin with a popular comment over there that drags things straight to hell."
I hear your evangelical dog whistle.
But as the "popular" comments show, hell is the progressive destination.
"I have an ongoing interest in the mental processes of the readers of the NYT and the WaPo."
Lol! I have the same interest in people who watch CNN and MSNBC.
I believe the old con/magician who once told me, "Most people want to be conned."
Top comment at WaPo demonstrates reflexive leftism through ignorance of the topic at hand and religious bigotry. Rinse, repeat.
Kids are better off with parents of their own race and culture. How old does a child have to be to have a "culture?" Is it innate (i.e., another name for "race") or does it require exposure to the parents/caretakers to develop? If the latter, are kids really better off in a culture that resulted in the kid being available for adoption?
"It is a common plot line of television that a white racist patient refuses treatment from a black doctor, or a transfusion or organ transplant from a donor who is non-white. Now people are denying children help because would-be parents are the wrong color. I’m holding my breath for a TV show about this latter day racist behavior. Turning blue…"
NPR ran a story the other day (Saturday?) about how black people (sorry, Black people) have improved health outcomes when treated by a black, er, Black health care worker. This doesn't end well.
rcocean said...
Of course, adoptions should be incentived to make sure American Inidans stay with American Indians. The same is true of blacks and Asians. Kids are better off with parents of their own race and culture. I thought that was common sense.
No that's racism.
But if you're going to start there, you certainly should stop there. Because after all that means that a "white" mother or father is a bad thing for Black / Asian / Hispanic / Native American kids. So I guess we should be bringing back all the anti-miscegenation laws, right?
Oh, and I guess we should make assimilation against the law, since that deprives kids of "their culture".
Or, we shoudl call out this BS for the trash that it is, and junk it
Ann Althouse said...
I have an ongoing interest in the mental processes of the readers of the NYT and the WaPo.
How to say you're a masochist without saying you're a masochist.
Damn, talk about "taking one for the team"!
One of the frustrating things about progressives is their open criticism of Christianity while giving a pass to other religions. Say what you will about Bill Maher, at least he dislikes all religious belief. But let him point out that Islam is homophobic or sexist and lefties jump all over him.
I remember sitting in church years ago listening to a pastor talking about racial reconciliation. She said that white families who adopt African American children should take them to a black church. Black churches vary more than white folk realize, just as white churches do. More important, if you follow that logic, you'd have to take a kid adopted from a country in the the middle east to a mosque. As some denominations become more liberal, I suppose that would be considered the right thing to do, but it sure waters down the idea that our faith is the sole path to salvation.
Iron Age, Bronze Age, schlemiel schlimazel--the cult that runs through all ages, probably dating back to when the cave man with the biggest club began smashing heads and stealing furs--is the Cult of the State.
"But maybe the "bronze age deity" is the Old Testament God. The Old Testament was written between about 1200 and 165 BC, and the definition of "historical period" has to do with putting things in writing, but presumably the God was believed in before the Old Testament was actually written."
The Old Testament God and Christ are the same God, and since the poster brought this up in the context of evangelical belief he clearly knows this.
rcocean confusingly said...
Of course, adoptions should be incentived to make sure American Inidans stay in foster homes or centers with American Indians. The same is true of blacks and Asians. Kids are better off without parents not of their own race and culture. I thought that was common sense.
As Birches pointed out; the three options are:
a) sit in a foster home without parents
b) be adopted by people willing to adopt even though they aren't Indians
c) This option not available
rc thinks this is common sense.. I'm not really sure why
Ann Althouse said...
I have an ongoing interest in the mental processes of the readers of the NYT and the WaPo.
Are you sure mental processes are occurring?
Re: Stephen:
It is a common plot line of television that a white racist patient refuses treatment from a black doctor, or a transfusion or organ transplant from a donor who is non-white.
My impression (based mostly on anecdote) is that in the real world, at least in the US, the reverse fact pattern is more common -- Black patient leery of getting treatment from East Asian, Indian, or White doctor. But that's actually a reason that while I am on the whole opposed to Affirmative Action as a noxious racist practice, I would be willing to carve out an exception for medical school. Racist Blacks deserve medical care too, and if they won't accept care from Asians and Whites, well, then we need to make sure we have Black doctors available too.
All that said, I don't think I actually know any Black doctors, so there's an obvious sampling bias in terms of what kind of stories I would hear. The White racist situation does occur, although I don't know what race of doctor the patient's mother was objecting to there (the "speaks English" makes me suspect Asian or Indian, as opposed to Black). Also that story I linked is from Canada, and what with Prime Minister "Blackface" Trudeau and all, I don't know whether their racial attitudes are quite the same as the US.
rcocean said...
Of course, adoptions should be incentived to make sure American Inidans stay with American Indians. The same is true of blacks and Asians. Kids are better off with parents of their own race and culture. I thought that was common sense.
No that's racism.
But if you're going to start there, you certainly should not stop there. Because after all that means that a "white" mother or father is a bad thing for Black / Asian / Hispanic / Native American kids. So I guess we should be bringing back all the anti-miscegenation laws, right?
Sorry I left off that "not"
Side note about the religiosity of the original commenter:
The Old Testament God and Christ are the same God,
... says Inquiry, above. True, but God's OT interactions with humanity are a good bit different from His NT interactions. I have heard this difference attributed to His having separated the children of Abraham who became the Israelites and eventually the Jews from the culture of their region, and over the course of centuries, taught them to live in a new God/humanity relationship based on love, forgiveness, unearned grace, sacrifice, and continual repentance and return to relationship - brought to fulfillment in Jesus. It's not beyond the pale to recognize the giant leap from creator-God (representative of the Bronze Age relationship of God and humanity) to redeemer-God.
So maybe the original commenter really understood the implications of that "Bronze Age deity" comment, and maybe not.
That puts Jesus firmly in the historical period.
Well, since history literally hinges on Him, on how we reckon time, that makes sense.
The Old Testament God and Christ are the same God
From the Christian perspective, yes. But not from the Jewish, obviously.
Balfegor said...
My impression (based mostly on anecdote) is that in the real world, at least in the US, the reverse fact pattern is more common -- Black patient leery of getting treatment from East Asian, Indian, or White doctor. But that's actually a reason that while I am on the whole opposed to Affirmative Action as a noxious racist practice, I would be willing to carve out an exception for medical school. Racist Blacks deserve medical care too
I'm pretty sure that we as a society are convinced that a white patient who doesn't want a black doctor can FOAD.
So I believe the exact same should be said to a black patient who doesn't want a white doctor.
Just say NO to racism.
My primary care physician recently (Dec.) left her practice, and my new PCP is a Nigerian immigrant. Her immediately previous practice was at Cook County Hospital (!), so I imagine that OR is a step up for her. So far we've only had a videoconference, and my only difficulty is figuring out how to pronounce "Akpamgbo."
What's that saying...history doesn't repeat, but it rhymes?
The segregation of the future will be conducted by those who would have claimed to be against it 50 years ago.
Re: Balfegor
"All that said, I don't think I actually know any Black doctors"
In my experience, all the black doctors and pharmacists are Nigerian. Well, no, there was one biracial girl in my pharmacy school class and a boy I know currently in school.
The Mormons saw Native American children as easy pickings for creating new members. The LDS church history of this is beyond ugly. At some time in the 1960s, the mom of one of my friends, Peter Lone Elk, was induced by the Mormons to revoke her parental rights and give Peter over to adoption. His white parents made him a good Mormon, and taught him how to play the piano. As a young man he bounced around doing this and that, and was involved with AIM for awhile. At some point he came out as gay to his Mormon family. He was excommunicated for being human; and eventually died of AIDS in 1995 shortly after my partner did.
Some time after that, I saw Peter in a dream. He seemed happy.
Is it better to live and die in desperate poverty, or live with all the "advantages" of a "good life" in exchange for having your culture stripped away? Peter would have been buried in the same dirt either way.
The LDS Church is a band of monsters.
Scott said...
Is it better to live and die in desperate poverty, or live with all the "advantages" of a "good life" in exchange for having your culture stripped away?
So you're claiming that "culture" is genetic?
Which is to say, you're saying we can and should judge people by the color of their skin?
What's your definition of "racist"?
Bronze Age bad, Stone Age good!
Misinforminimalism said...
NPR ran a story the other day (Saturday?) about how black people (sorry, Black people) have improved health outcomes when treated by a black, er, Black health care worker. This doesn't end well.
______________________
From what I’ve seen, the studies this is based on are rather bad. The problem is biased sampling. Those with the greatest need of specialist treatment have the worse outcomes, because they are the sickest going in. Surprise, surprise, the specialists are much more likely to be white.
Jamie said...
True, but God's OT interactions with humanity are a good bit different from His NT interactions... It's not beyond the pale to recognize the giant leap from creator-God (representative of the Bronze Age relationship of God and humanity) to redeemer-God.
So maybe the original commenter really understood the implications of that "Bronze Age deity" comment, and maybe not.
If the OP is aware of that leap it makes it more disingenuous to apply the Old Testament understanding of God to Evangelicals.
More likely, the OP just assumed 1st Century Israel was Bronze Age. That only requires an error of historical semantics rather than a deliberate strawman or a woeful misunderstanding of Christianity.
"So far we've only had a videoconference, and my only difficulty is figuring out how to pronounce "Akpamgbo.""
It's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove".
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा