About the only original thing I've heard or read about the latest Pat Robertson eruption is by my former Chimes colleague Brian Bork. Quoth he:
In my estimation, Pat Robertson is just the "tails" side of a coin whose "head" is the portrait of a Paris Hilton. They are essentially similar pieces of cultural effluvia: both are famous, but no one can really concieve the reason why, both demand an undue amount of cognitive energy because of their ubiquitous cultural presence, both have achieved notoriety via visual media. ... Both also seem to espouse their own peculiar and bat-shit insane brand of morality - morality that few among us can identify with, but nevertheless seem enamoured by it all.
I'm inclined to agree with this, and with Brian's conclusion that despite the Reformed call to engage culture, there is some culture not worth engaging. I don't just defer to Phil. 4:8 on this; indeed, calling a "tare" a "tare" in Brian's words strikes me as a form of engagement, not withdrawal.
If you want some peace and quiet, close your eyes and listen for some harsh reprimands issued by conservatives ... hear anything yet?
