In his appearance on Meet The Press, Mike Huckabee, like so many other evangelicals, stated his belief that all humans are sinners. While that remark makes sense in broad terms...especially if one accepts the validity of most religious constructs...Tim Russert, in the following video, points out that Huckabee has a history of shifting his focus to the "sins" of homosexuals.

This hyper-focus on the behavior (sins) of gays is puzzling to me. Time and again, men like Pat Robertson and James Dobson point out that gays are a very small percentage of the population. If that is true, and evidence suggests as much, then why pay so much attention to this small segment of society?

Look, if evangelicals want to be viewed as god's policemen, why don't they direct their attention to the behaviors of their own? I find it amusing that they rail against any recognition of gay relationships while they seemingly ignore the failed construct of heterosexual marriage.

I think it's safe to assume that a good evangelical christian should be focused upon efforts which eradicate the most "sin". If that is true, then why haven't they taken the same aggressive approach (that they apparently reserve for opposing homosexuality) to banning divorce or directing their attention towards the rampant infidelity that plagues heterosexual marriage?

In answering my own question, my suspicion (ever mindful of human nature) is that it is far easier for evangelicals to tell gays which behaviors they need to suppress than it is to correct their own flawed behaviors. Truth be told, the real threat to conventional marriage comes from conventional heterosexuals...men and women who treat marriage like the acquiring of a new car; it's great for a few months but before long all the other models look far more inviting. One might be concerned if these heterosexuals were having affairs with homosexuals...but the last time I checked...the lion's share of adultery takes place between a man and a woman in a heterosexual marriage.

Each time a married heterosexual ends up in the wrong bed, they diminish the institution of marriage. Each time a homosexual ends up in bed with his or her partner has absolutely no impact on anybody's heterosexual marriage. If were going to attach blame, how about we pin it on the proper culprits?

If Mr. Huckabee and his fellow evangelicals truly believe sin is about the behaviors we choose, then I suggest they forego their fixation on gay behavior and clean up their own dismal track record. Besides, there is little doubt that the vast majority of gays have been birthed in heterosexual marriages. Wouldn't you think that would lead evangelicals to wonder why this sacred heterosexual environment is so conducive to the emergence of homosexuals?

If I were to apply the logic evangelicals utilize in opposing gay marriage, I might have to be in favor of banning heterosexual sex. After all, how can family values be saved if these very families are churning out all of these homosexuals? Sounds like bad behavior to me.

Life can be about symmetry or it can also be about irony...and occasionally it can be about both at the same time. As I've pondered the end of 2007 and the beginning of 2008...looking for words to say goodbye to one year as well as to greet the new year...Dan Fogelberg's death came to mind as did his song "Same Old Lang Syne".

Both seemed to fit the moment as well as capture the essence that so often eludes us during the holidays...a realization that in the course of one year, life and death have traveled hand in hand. What one takes, the other returns...though the ledger never seems to satisfy as losses and gains are difficult to measure.

Life and death, one year stacked upon another, the constant parade of seasons...all mark endings and beginnings though none are quite the same...yet each prevails when it arrives. Some bring symmetry, some bring irony, some bring neither, and some bring both.

Regardless, at the end of any journey, all that remains are the stories we tell. As we enter 2008, may your stories be filled with joy, may your losses leave you with treasured tales of times gone by, and may you gain the wisdom to accept what yesterday has brought...as well as what tomorrow may bring.

The following video is a holiday greeting set to Dan Fogelberg's "Same Old Lang Syne". Below it is a poem I wrote many years back while seeking to make sense of the countless dichotomies found in this existence. Today, I simply accept that their constance represents the nature of our uniquely human story.

Anyone interested in understanding the thoughts which underly atheism and an opposition to the constructs of religion would be well served to watch this multi-part program. The participants are Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens. Each has drawn significant attention with their recent publications. Each is frequently misunderstood by those who view their words as little more than an assault upon theism.

Far removed from the hype and media attention paid to the writings of these four scholars, this round table discussion allows the viewer to see that atheism is far more an acceptance of reason than a rejection of religion. As such, the objective of atheism isn't premised upon vilifying religion for the sake of vilification; it is an attempt to establish a basis for human consensus...one that is focused on what we share in our humanity and not what we embrace in the promotion of any particular iteration of religious ideology.

The following four video clips comprise the final entry of a three part posting here at Thought Theater. Part one can be found here and part two can be found here.

Please feel free to offer your thoughts on the many subjects discussed by these men. As Hitchens notes during the program, debate and dialogue are the essential elements in effecting a change in our existing and long-held constructs.

Anyone interested in understanding the thoughts which underly atheism and an opposition to the constructs of religion would be well served to watch this multi-part program. The participants are Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens. Each has drawn significant attention with their recent publications. Each is frequently misunderstood by those who view their words as little more than an assault upon theism.

Far removed from the hype and media attention paid to the writings of these four scholars, this round table discussion allows the viewer to see that atheism is far more an acceptance of reason than a rejection of religion. As such, the objective of atheism isn't premised upon vilifying religion for the sake of vilification; it is an attempt to establish a basis for human consensus...one that is focused on what we share in our humanity and not what we embrace in the promotion of any particular iteration of religious ideology.

The following four video clips comprise the second of a three part posting here at Thought Theater. The first part can be found here. In the next few days, I will publish the final posting containing the remainder of this program.

Please feel free to offer your thoughts on the many subjects discussed by these men. As Hitchens notes during the program, debate and dialogue are the essential elements in effecting a change in our existing and long-held constructs.

The following video clip is from Little Britain, a sitcom that airs in the UK. In this particular clip, a well-known...and supposedly straight...politician attempts to explain his actions following being caught in a compromising situation...one that is very reminiscent of Larry Craig's infamous toe-tapping episode.

This episode preceded the Larry Craig scandal. I guess it just goes to show that the more things change, the more they remain the same.

If you enjoy British humor...with a gay twist...you can view some other clips from the show here, here, and here.

Anyone interested in understanding the thoughts which underly atheism and an opposition to the constructs of religion would be well served to watch this multi-part program. The participants are Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens. Each has drawn significant attention with their recent publications. Each is frequently misunderstood by those who view their words as little more than an assault upon theism.

Far removed from the hype and media attention paid to the writings of these four scholars, this round table discussion allows the viewer to see that atheism is far more an acceptance of reason than a rejection of religion. As such, the objective of atheism isn't premised upon vilifying religion for the sake of vilification; it is an attempt to establish a basis for human consensus...one that is focused on what we share in our humanity and not what we embrace in the promotion of any particular iteration of religious ideology.

The following four video clips comprise the first of a three part posting here at Thought Theater. In the next few days, I will publish two additional postings containing the remainder of this program.

Please feel free to offer your thoughts on the many subjects discussed by these men. As Hitchens notes during the program, debate and dialogue are the essential elements in effecting a change in our existing and long-held constructs.

I first saw Nicole Atkins perform The Way It Is on The Late Show with David Letterman. I remember thinking her voice sounded like another artist I really like...but I couldn't think of who it was. When I decided to post her performance, I listened to the song she sang on Letterman and I also found a second song, Neptune City, which I've posted below.

That's when it hit me...she sounds a lot like Mama Cass from The Mama's & the Papa's. Her sound also reminds me of the folksy style of Judy Collins from many of her old songs...although Atkins has incorporated a number of new elements in her style and her sound.

Atkins grew up in New Jersey and her album, "Neptune City", has the same name as the city in which she was raised. "Neptune City" is Atkins' first widely recognized work. To find out more about Atkins, you can visit her web page here...or her MySpace page here.

I've always felt Mo Rocca was one of the most underrated comics in the business. Perhaps that's a function of my interest in politics and the fact that Rocca is as knowledgeable as most of the news reporters we see on television. Even better, his skill at deadpan comedy in a political setting is unmatched.

Rocca has covered a lot of territory in is career; having worked as a correspondent on The Daily Show, worked on Larry King Live as a consultant/political historian, and now as a feature player on The Tonight Show. He also appears on PBS, VH1, The Food Network, and has a regular show on Sirius Satellite Radio.

His work during the 2004 Democratic and Republican conventions is some of his best. Besides being quite funny, his knowledge of U.S. presidents is extensive and the fact that he wrote a book on the pets of the presidents titled, All the Presidents' Pets: The Inside Story of One Reporter Who Refused to Roll Over, only adds to his comic depth.

In the following video clip, Mo points out that gay marriage was one of the leading wedge issues in the 2004 presidential election. He goes on to explain that drivers licenses for illegal immigrants is a current topic of discussion. That leads Mo to ask passers-by about the latest hot button election issue..."should gay illegal immigrants be allowed to drive to their own same-sex weddings?"

Feel free to share your own answers and observations.

Keith Olbermann once again excoriates George Bush and his actions with regards to the seeming failure of the administration to acknowledge the fact that the latest National Intelligence Estimate fully undermines the President's assertion that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons and is apt to be the place from which WWIII would originate.

As Olbermann points out, not only was the president's assessment wrong, he apparently sought to withhold or failed to share the findings of the NIE report which were largely completed a number of months ago. Instead, the President chose to make numerous inflammatory statements in which he invoked the dangers posed by Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Olbermann has scolded the president on many occasions and he has previously called for his resignation and/or his impeachment. This time Olbermann goes even further in calling the President a puppet of Dick Cheney...a "snake oil salesman" of the worst kind; one who creates facts out of thin air in order to advance his own agenda. Olbermann closes with the assertion that the President is nothing more than a "bald-faced liar" who has no business being the President of the United States.