Decluttering the Blogs

Someone has observed that opinions are like armpits—everybody’s got ‘em.  Thanks to the internet, it’s never been easier for us to share our opinions.  And in a world that seems overrun by current events and contentious conversations, it’s getting harder and harder to tell the difference between the opinions and the armpits.  The good news:  We’ve got deodorant for the latter.   

 

One of the easiest ways to convey an opinion—besides social media—is now through blogging and online articles.  The long process of free lancing, with the rigors of editors, a magazine staff, and stiff competition, is now just a few hours long for those of us who choose to blog.  As a result, we are able to react to current events immediately.  Opinions upon opinions, many of them long on emotion and short on facts, get passed around like gospel truth.  I’m sure that over the years, my own social media page has been home to a few of those articles. 

 

How can we protect ourselves from sensationalism and emotionalism?  Like a hotel maid who can maneuver a messy room and deal only with the wet towels and carpet crumbs without disturbing my valuables strewn all over the dresser, it sure helps to know how to de-clutter a blog and still salvage the truth.   What is the clutter I can try to maneuver past in search of the salient points? 

 

1.  Over-emphasis on anecdotal evidence. 

 

Jesus used stories to support His teachings (parables), and every good writer uses support material.  Most of us appreciate the efforts of pastors who illustrate their points with relevant stories.  But stories themselves cannot make the point.  Being urged to share with all your Facebook friends about the little boy who died after his vaccine—or the other little boy who died from not getting a recommended vaccine—is sensationalism.   There is usually at least one critical element missing from every emotionally-charged story. And even stories that are not lacking information cannot stand alone without data.  Remember:  Every story has a counter-story.    

 

Additionally, it is common nowadays to enhance the anecdotal evidence with close relationships.  While the person closest to a tragedy may have the most emotion invested in an issue, emotion alone does not automatically make him the most qualified to speak on it. In fact, if objectivity means anything at all, grieving family members are often the least qualified to speak on a subject, since grief can have a terribly distorting effect on our outlook.  I wish the media would stop treating grieving families like props in political campaigns. 

 

2.  Attacks of personalities.   

 

Current issues have a tendency to become linked forever to certain individuals.  There’s a lot not to like about George Zimmerman—such as the fact that he went on, after his famous victory in the Treyvon Martin case, to get accused of pointing a gun at his own girlfriend!  But my view of the second amendment and “Stand Your Ground” laws goes way beyond anything George Zimmerman does.  In current events, the issue of judicial overreach and state rights is still worth discussing amiably, without bothering to stop and tangle over Kim Davis’ religion, divorces, and history of bearing children without the benefit of marriage.  Beware of bloggers who give unbridled support of certain personalities to represent their “cause,” or—conversely, use the personal failings of famous personalities to prove an entire ideology wrong.   Truth sometimes lurks in the most unlikely of places.  Most of the issues that have steered the history of our country, for both good and bad, involved characters whose personal lives might surprise us.  The truth itself is bigger and stronger than the frail humans who transport it from one generation to the next. 

                      

3.  Dependance upon popularity.

 

Possibly the most annoying of all is the use of polling statistics to sway reader opinion.  Whatever happened to standing alone for what you believe?  It is illegitimate debate to tell me how many people believe in global warming, gun control, drinking, or the sighting of Elvis Presley at a Moto Mart in Memphis.  People have been wrong before—in pretty big numbers, actually.  Noah’s ark had only eight people in it.  I like to do my own thinking, even if that happens to put me in the minority. 

 

4.  Over-citation of credentials.

 

Our friends in the media are very careful to interview “experts” who like to sit down and tell us what to think about just about everything from the stock market to genetically modified food.  While we are all very thankful for the many qualified scientists and lawyers who use their knowledge and professions honorably, there’s still no reason to hand your brain over to someone just because he spent twelve years in college. 

 

What I find most troubling is the tendency to use religious credentials in order to prove a point.  Church size, advanced degrees, and even book authorships do not guarantee that someone is automatically an expert at all things Biblical.  Remember, it’s even possible to have theological credentials without actually knowing the Lord as Savior! 

 

5.  Oversimplification of complex issues.

 

One of the key marks of a dishonest writer is the inability to acknowledge that this world is not always a tidy place to live.  A few weeks ago, I was reading a thread where a pastor was defending his decision to send his children to the local public school.  He felt it had been a good experience for his children in learning to stand up for their beliefs. Although we choose to homeschool, I was still interested in his thoughts—both as a graduate of a public high school and also as a mother trying to teach my children to be strong in the expression of their faith in Christ.  Another pastor entered the conversation and asked, “Would you feel differently if your daughter went to the school in Hillsboro, Missouri (where a transgendered boy is demanding to use the girls’ restrooms)?”  Immediately, the first pastor responded, “Nope.  It would be a good experience for them.”  At that point, he lost me.  Glibly waving a dismissive hand across that whole disturbing situation in Hillsboro reflects an unwillingness to acknowledge that the opposition can offer a valid point.  An honest writer is willing to acknowledge pesky evidence. 

 

6.  Irresponsible use of the Bible.

 

Contrary to the impression we often get from our local Christian bookstores, the Bible is more than just a collection of inspirational quotes.  It is a library of sixty-six books, and it was meant to be read, over time, in its entirety. 

I cringe when I hear people making fun of obscure or difficult Bible verses—not because it makes the Bible look bad, but because it makes them look bad.  Despite what President Obama said a few years ago about the book of Leviticus, the apostle Paul told Timothy that “all Scripture is . . . profitable.”  Bloggers who can dismiss entire portions of the Bible have no business quoting the verses they do like.  While the genealogies, ceremonial laws, and dietary instructions for the Old Testament Jews may seem like outdated vestiges as we happily skip over to the Psalms, the entire Bible still has a direct relationship to our lives and how we view and worship God today, even though we are no longer bound to eschew pork or blended fabrics.  When we find ourselves wondering why certain verses are in the Bible (as we all do every once in a while!), it just means that we have found another area where we still have to grow as students.  It does not prove that there are certain books of the Bible that can be set on a shelf and treated like antiques—or, worse, laughed at. 

 

 

Those are just a few things to think about, as you and I maneuver our way through the millions of bytes of data each day, trying to gain perspective or just to hear out the other side of an issue we are passionate about.  When truth gets buried, we all lose—even if it’s our own ideas that bury it.