![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
For those living under a rock: Pat Robertson blamed the earthquake disaster in Haiti on the Haitians, claiming it was due to a "pact with the Devil" that they had made.
One of my friends brings up an interesting question which I'm sure many non-Christians have asked: when someone says "I am a Christian and I believe this Really Offensive Statement" and it makes the news, why are there no opposing statements?
Well, just to get the first part out of the way, here's my opinion of "the Haitians deserve it":
So, ANYWAY, why is what he says making the news, and "He's wrong, Church/Bible/Jesus says so" not making the news? I think there are two reasons. The first and simplest is this:
"Christians promote love, charity" is not news.
The second is more complicated: people choose their information provider based both on what they want to hear (hockey fans read hockey news sites, for example) and on what they don't want to hear (someone in favor of gun control doesn't want to read pro-gun news stories). If a person chooses a news site whose audience doesn't want "religious news" then the only stories they'll see are those that are so outrageous they're regular news-- like "Haiti deserved it" and such.
So, I guess the answer is-- if you want to see Christians doing good but you want to see it in a way that doesn't shove it in your face? You're going to have to look for it, and not assume it will come to you.
1No, that's not Fermat's Last Theology. It's just off-topic.
One of my friends brings up an interesting question which I'm sure many non-Christians have asked: when someone says "I am a Christian and I believe this Really Offensive Statement" and it makes the news, why are there no opposing statements?
Well, just to get the first part out of the way, here's my opinion of "the Haitians deserve it":
It's unreasonable to blame a disaster on a supernatural cause, when there are perfectly reasonable natural causes that explain it perfectly well.
Even if it was reasonable, if you could prove that there might be something people had done to bring disaster down on themselves, the most helpful time to discuss it would be before the disaster, the second best time would be after the disaster's effects had been fixed as far as possible-- and the WORST time is during/right after the disaster.
Finally, I believe that if you are able to provide help to someone who is suffering for lack of the basic human needs, and you choose not to do so because you think they deserve to suffer, you are acting against a very important instruction that Jesus gave. (I have a perfectly good explanation of why this is, but this post is too small to contain it1.)
Therefore, I believe that Pat Robertson's actions are unreasonable, unhelpful, and not in accordance with what Jesus would want any of us to do. I don't know if he is doing this deliberately to draw attention to himself because he thinks it's good for the Church, or what, but I can guarantee it's not doing anyone any good, and I think he needs to stop speaking publicly until he can bring himself more in line with the teachings of the Church. And I'm saying that as a Christian.
So, ANYWAY, why is what he says making the news, and "He's wrong, Church/Bible/Jesus says so" not making the news? I think there are two reasons. The first and simplest is this:
"Christians promote love, charity" is not news.
The second is more complicated: people choose their information provider based both on what they want to hear (hockey fans read hockey news sites, for example) and on what they don't want to hear (someone in favor of gun control doesn't want to read pro-gun news stories). If a person chooses a news site whose audience doesn't want "religious news" then the only stories they'll see are those that are so outrageous they're regular news-- like "Haiti deserved it" and such.
So, I guess the answer is-- if you want to see Christians doing good but you want to see it in a way that doesn't shove it in your face? You're going to have to look for it, and not assume it will come to you.
1No, that's not Fermat's Last Theology. It's just off-topic.
