G.Quest

Saturday, May 29, 2004

not the best way to promote your religion

Some offbeat news from Reuters.

A pair of Pentecostal ministers grounded a flight leaving Buffalo, New York after they frightened passengers by declaring the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were a good reason to pray.

One preacher told fellow passengers as the Continental Airlines plane taxied down the runway, "Your last breath on earth is the first one in heaven as long as you are born again and have Jesus in your heart," according to FBI spokesman Paul Moskal.

Passengers on the Wednesday flight to Newark, New Jersey told a flight attendant, who alerted the plane's captain, officials said. The captain turned the plane around.

"They were sincere in their beliefs and were not malicious," Moskal said by telephone from Buffalo. But "in the context of 9/11 it may not have been the best way to promote their religion."


Imagine hearing that on your flight. =P

posted by f @ 8:10 AM  

5 Comments:

  • At May 31, 2004 at 1:37 AM, Blogger Neko said…

    ahhh, in the light of religious 'fundamentalism' and 'extremism' being lobbed around like nobody's business... why not simply refrain from such evangelism, ie NO talk of such issues, esp on planes? O_o

    "They were sincere in their beliefs and were not malicious," < well, i can imagine examples whereby other people 'preaching' faiths would not be subjected to similar leniency..

    And this is similar in news to:

    Passengers: Pilot promotes faith on flight
    link: http://www.religionnewsblog.com/6003-Passengers__Pilot_promotes_faith_on_flight.html

    first pilot, now passengers? moral of the story.
    DON'T PREACH (esp like these examples) ON PLANES. O_o

     

  • At May 31, 2004 at 11:20 PM, Blogger random said…

    all fundamentalists are morons....

    And i am beginning to think religious people are not much better

    My pet peeve is Muslims who say "Insya Allah" instead of "I promise". It's a get out of jail free card for them. "insya Allah" means God willing. My tip for non Muslims out there: Think twice about trusting a Muslim who says insya Allah.

    Translated, Insya Allah means "God Willing". The rationale is that God being almighty decides the final failure or success of every project. TO say something like I promise might sound arrogant cos it might mean any scrap of human agency.So there are Muslims who say this when he or she is asked to do something. Let's say that you lend someone money and he or she says "insya Allah" It means God willing, he or she will pay you if God permits. So if he or she is not able to complete the task, it is because God did not allow it. This is really irritating to me. Take some responsibility dammit.

     

  • At June 1, 2004 at 6:17 AM, Blogger Neko said…

    but then again the word fundamentalism, basically works on the premise of fundamentals which is what most religions are about. If you don't follow the fundamentals, what are you then? liberal religious? i think extremism would be a better choice.

    i think your choice of example, in having lent someone money and the person replying such is arguable. i dun think they would reply such, well not any muslims that i know off.

    i'm guessing that the phrase is used within a greater context with several safety valves. they would include, trying your best, and hopefully no unexpected misfortune befalls the person, similar to any promise imo. most of the times i've heard it used in the context of a person going off to a trip, and when you say see you soon, the person might say the phrase, meaning hopefully something doesn't happen along the way.

    but hey, what do i know.. :) only little info that i guess might be off.. haha

    misuse of powerful words such as 'promise' is however, i agree, adjective>bad.

     

  • At June 1, 2004 at 6:44 AM, Blogger Neko said…

    Bush Focusing on Faith-Based Initiatives
    link
    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&ncid=703&e=1&u=/ap/20040601/ap_on_el_pr/bush_faith_based

    "Opponents of the effort worry that government would wind up paying for religion. They also object to allowing taxpayer-funded groups to hire and fire based on religious persuasion."

    sigh, separation of church and state anyone?

     

  • At June 1, 2004 at 3:26 PM, Blogger f said…

    Faith-based iniatives sound like a good idea on the surface. Why shouldn't the government provide aid to organisations (albeit religious) in their charity work? But therein lies the danger. A further meshing of personal beliefs with political involvement.

    Here are some eye-opening statistics:
    Back in the 1960s, Gallup polls found that 53% of Americans thought churches should not be involved in politics, and 22% thought members of the clergy should not even mention candidates for public office from the pulpit. By 1996, these numbers had reversed: 54% thought it was fine for churches to talk about political and social issues, and 20% thought even stump speeches were permissible in church. Furthermore, 58% of Americans think that unless you believe in God, you cannot be a moral person.

    The Economist writes,
    But it is not even clear how important religion is in determining the political and social views of evangelical Protestants (the largest religious group in America). The largest concentration of these churches is in the South, among whites. But white southerners held conservative views on homosexuality, government, defence and so on long before the Moral Majority was invented. It is just as likely that social conservatism has encouraged evangelical churches as the other way around.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home