.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;} <$BlogRSDUrl$>




Ontario Empoblog

Ontario Emperor Blog
("yup, its random!")
This blog has been superseded by the mrontemp blog


Home
Archives

October 2003   November 2003   December 2003   January 2004   February 2004   March 2004   April 2004   May 2004   June 2004   July 2004   August 2004   September 2004   October 2004   November 2004   December 2004   January 2005   February 2005   March 2005   April 2005   May 2005   June 2005   July 2005   August 2005   September 2005   October 2005   November 2005   December 2005   January 2006   February 2006   March 2006   April 2006   May 2006   June 2006   July 2006   August 2006   September 2006   October 2006   November 2006   December 2006   January 2007   February 2007  


The Breast Cancer Site
Fund free mammograms at no cost to yourself by clicking on the link, then on the pink button.


Hall of Shame (NoteUnworthy Blog Posts)
Other Blogs (sorted regionally)
Ontario Emperor Selected del.icio.us Tags

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Listed on BlogShares

;

pkblogs.com


Who Links Here

Click for Ontario, California Forecast

Wednesday, July 19, 2006

redbluechristian.com 


Sheep's Crib author J. A. Gillmartin has announced that he is now a contributor to a group blog called redbluechristian.com.

So, what about redbluechristian?


RedBlueChristian.com is a group blog within the online stable of Dr. Andrew Jackson’s SmartChristian.com. This group blog is primarily about the Kingdom of God and its relationship to American politics and public policy. We believe that our biblical faith should inform our political engagement, and not be artificially separated from it.

The purpose of the RedBlueChristian.com is to provide Christian bloggers — whether Conservative RedChristians or Progressive BlueChristians — the same blog space to post, discuss, and debate essential and important issues related to the Kingdom of God and American politics.

We desire to promote a healthy biblical approach to politics as opposed to the adversarial “us” verses “them” stance which has resulted unfortunately in sincere Christians talking past each other more often than not.

We want contributors and commenters to think biblically about the crucial public issues of our day without being constrained to boundaries set up for us by any political party platforms or rheteric.

Our optimistic desire is for a biblically-informed RedBlueChristian political third way begin to emerge which can influence our culture and society with the fragrance of the Kingdom of God.

No, we don’t expect full agreement on everything, but we pray for a solid, ongoing mature conversation. We envision this blog focused on, and continuing through, the 2008 American presidential campaign.



Here's an excerpt from a post by Mark Daniels:


I’m looking forward to what unfolds on this blog in the weeks and months leading up to the 2008 election. I hope that all of us who read it will learn a great deal from each other.

As a contibutor of content to RedBlueChristian.com, I surmise that my own writing will revolve mostly around empowering Christians to make their own decisions and not in advancing a particular political agenda. I’m skeptical of any political agenda which claims the adjective, “Christian,” as though God handed down, say, a particular tax policy at Mount Sinai.

I may also occasionally contribute posts on the faith lives of past US presidents, an area I hope to one day explore in book form. Looking at this topic may help to inform some of our considerations of what role faith can or should play in the selection of our political leaders as well as in the policies they pursue....



Needless to say, anyone who has read the Ontario Empoblog realizes that such a blog would definitely appeal to me. (See this recent post.) I am interested in going beyond political labels to explore the meaning of the Christian faith, and how we can follow God's call in the political arena (rather than following politics' call in the God arena).

As I read the blog, the first thought that occurred to me: Should I try to become a contributor? At first glance, it seems like something to which I could contribute. Although leaning toward the conservative (but not neo-conservative) side of the political spectrum, I can appreciate the views of religious leaders on the other side of the political spectrum, which could make for some healthy analysis and conversation.

So I read the page that talks about contributors:


All contributors must commit to provide a quality, thoughtful post AT LEAST ONE TIME A WEEK.


The "one time a week" minimum would be no problem - I'm doing that at Word Search already.

Quality? Thoughtful? Open for debate.


Although we welcome hard hitting and even confronting posts, we want all contributors to be self-controlled and not allow themselves to sink into simply name calling, cheap shots, and emotional clichés.


I can refrain from using the terms "communist" and "baby seal clubber."

Maybe.


We request that all posts not become long dissertations. We want shorter, well-thought out, distinct posts, and if need be, link to longer articles.


Uh...this would be...uh...a problem. Those who have read my blogging style know that "shorter" and "well-thought out" are not in my vocabulary. And this style is infecting my MySpace blog also. Here are a few excerpts from a post that I wrote on MySpace on Tuesday (emphasis added):


There are two attitudes that the government can take toward the electorate:

(1) Assume that the electorate is stupid and act accordingly.

(2) Assume that the electorate is intelligent and act accordingly.

The Dutch have chosen to take the latter approach:



After a long quote from an article about a political party for Dutch pedophiles, I continued:


And that brings up another point - namely, my objection to NIMBY politics. In the U.S., the assumption is made that a sentence for a crime is limited to a certain time period. For most crimes, the official sentence is less than a life sentence. But when the government ends its sentence, the people begin theirs.

I refer specifically to angry residents who chase registered sex offenders out of their communities. Not that I have any great love for sex offenders, but if they can't live in community A or community B or community Z after their release, where are they supposed to live?

And do the law and order people who demand more prisons agree to place the prisons in THEIR city?



After some more quotes, and some speculation that some towns that house prisons may want to encourage crime to boost their economy, I injected this for my MySpace readers:


This is probably as good a time as any to provide this warning to people who haven't read me before....On occasion, my blog posts tend to...uh...wander from subject to subject. If you're looking for cogent analyses of the world we live in (and life in general), seek them elsewhere. Just be thankful that I didn't drag my Whitman/Eno theory or the OVVA into this mess.


I then continued on my merry way, talking about a Democrat who turned Republican.

Shorter? Well-thought out? Distinct? Don't think so...

From the Ontario Empoblog (Latest OVVA news here)

Comments:
I love it ... just the kind of blogging I like to read.

Andy at RedBlueChristian is the maestro of the blog, so what he says goes. Nothing but O'Reilly like posts - pithy!

I can do that! But I don't think you can. Keep it on the back burner to think about though.

Blessings,
HE ALONE IS WORTHY
 
This is great news! We need more thoughtful and respectful discussion from Christians on matters of politics.
 
Post a Comment


Links to this post:

Create a Link