Silly Santorum

Rick Santorum is the Republican Senator from Pennsylvania who raises questions in the eyes of the public as to whether he is truly the social issues activist he claims to be or a partner of corporate America who is interested in money-making. He was one of the fighters who fought to keep Terry Schiavo alive, and he was at the "media scrum" in Tampa near the hospice where she had been located during her final days and made a visit to pay his respects to the family. However, eyebrows were raised when questioning why he was in Tampa in the first place. Allegedly, he was at a fund raising lunch with one of his corporate benefactors, Outback Steakhouses and apparently flew in on another corporate donor's jet- everybody's favorite corporation- Wal-Mart.

I believe it's hard to pull off a scheme such as he has, especially when he has claimed to be fighting for homosexual and abortion rights, which don't necessary go hand in hand with conservative corporations. Looks like he has got himself in a bind that will be hard to crawl out of.

Seasonal Blair

Former Prime Minister Tony Blair revealed in a television interview that, had it not been for his strong religious beliefs, he would have found his job as prime minster much more difficult. This is interesting because Blair's then director of communications, Alastair Campbell, once said "We don't do God." Later, Campbell turned around and said, "Well, he does do God- in quite a big way". Some of his practices supported this, one being that he would go to church every Sunday, no matter what part of the world he was in. Blair makes it seem that his politics and religion were definitely intertwined, however, exactly how and what policies were affected by his faith?

The reason I pose this question is due to the fact that, although Blair makes it seem that his religion guides him, human cloning was legalized in Britain, civil partnerships for homosexual couples were legalized, and abortion is permitted up until the 24th week of pregnancy. I don't know about you, but I don't see any evidence of his religion being put into action.

Jesus Back in Court

An Indiana state lawmaker, Senator Dennis Kruse, mentioned Jesus Christ in a prayer given to the Indiana Senate in which the ACLU and others protested this "sectarian" behavior. One would think that there have been enough instances where problems have been caused mixing religion and politics, but this man obviously forgot and once again, controversy arose as it always does.

Being a senator, one would assume that he would know the logistics of what would happen by mentioning Jesus in a prayer, and surely enough it did. It is possible to pray without saying Jesus' name and it would make his life, and everyone else's involved much easier. One could think of Jesus to themselves, inside their own head, and there would be no necessity to say it as long as one thinks of it inwardly.

Mystical Masses

Both the New York Times and the Washington Post have researched why there is growing popularity of the Tridentine Mass in the Catholic world. Federal government worker Ken Wolfe attends Latin masses 4 times a week, and he reported that this specific mass is different from the usual- "it's a very serious liturgy. Apparently these were the types of masses that went on before for 1,500 years before Vatican II- in a world different from ours today. Priests find this revival of the Tridentine Mass a very significant endeavor for them and, according to some, should be focusing on more important things like the fact that fewer and fewer Catholics are going to confession today?

In my opinion, it's matters like these that should be the priority of these spiritual leaders instead of trying to revive an ancient liturgy. I'm sure it's exciting to do because it's different from the norm of every Sunday, but we shouldn't lose sight of the important things that affect our daily lives like confession.

Change in the Book of Mormon?

"After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principle ancestors of the American Indians."
"After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians."
If you ask me what the difference is between these two sentences, I would tell you that "the principle ancestors" changed to "among the ancestors". Otherwise, I have no clue what the heck that means or why it has any significance at all. That is probably just me being ignorant. This has raised some DNA related debate, considering there is no evidence of practically anything that is written in this book, including "Reformed Egyptian" which Smith claims to have transcribed, no Book of Mormon kings, tombs, etc.

Now, I am not one to be easily judge things, but I just think it's totally bogus and it amazes me to see such a large group of followers who actually believe in this. How Joseph Smith new "Reformed Egyptian" is beyond me, maybe he picked it up in grade school or something. It is just not convincing at all- I could probably make up a more convincing story and ultimately my own religious that's more legit than this!

Me= God

I learned that Mormonism is America's most prosperous religion, and that really surprised me; it shows how much I have yet to learn. What surprises me even more is the Mormon belief that they become their own gods. This really stuns me. God is the only God and if he is as almighty and powerful as they believe him to be, than no human could ever equate to being a god. I'm sure there is some spiritual or religious explanation for this but it's issues like these that give Mormonism a poor connotation. And sadly enough, I am part of the crowd who is swayed by these. There is not enough positive attention going toward Mormonism, and this is one of the reason that presidential candidate Mitt Romney is going to have major issues.

What the heck is tithing?

Tithing is the concept of giving 10% of one's income to the church. Recently, churchgoers have been challenging what some churches have made to be their rule of tithing and has ultimately lead to several people questioning and eventually leaving the church. Church leaders say that this idea comes from the Bible itself claiming that "Jews brought 10% of their harvest to a storehouse as a welfare plan for the needy or in case of famine". Whether of not this was the case does not mean that it should be a requirement for regular churchgoers! I understand that churches need ways to raise money and this is a quite and easy way for them to achieve that. However, making it a requirement for families to give 10% of their income away is really a difficult thing for me to grasp. Every family is in a different financial situation, and they should give what the each individually can afford to give.