Confessions of a Recovering Pharisee

[NY Times]

Onstage before thousands of believers weighed down by debt and economic insecurity, Kenneth and Gloria Copeland and their all-star lineup of “prosperity gospel” preachers delighted the crowd with anecdotes about the luxurious lives they had attained by following the Word of God. Private airplanes and boats. A motorcycle sent by an anonymous supporter. Vacations in Hawaii and cruises in Alaska. Designer handbags. A ring of emeralds and diamonds.

“God knows where the money is, and he knows how to get the money to you,” preached Mrs. Copeland, dressed in a crisp pants ensemble like those worn by C.E.O.’s.

Even in an economic downturn, preachers in the “prosperity gospel” movement are drawing sizable, adoring audiences. Their message — that if you have sufficient faith in God and the Bible and donate generously, God will multiply your offerings a hundredfold — is reassuring to many in hard times.

The preachers barely acknowledged the recession, though they did say it was no excuse to curtail giving. “Fear will make you stingy,” Mr. Copeland said.

Read more here.

[From me]

Where in the Bible does God promise us earthly wealth? This kind of teaching give $$ to one group of people–the health and wealth preachers. Are we to give to God? Yes, but not so we can get rich. We give because God commanded us to give and we give out of gratitude for what he has given us.

I guess according to the Health and Wealth Prosperity teachers, I must be living a sinful life. I’m making a LOT less $$ than I have in a long time. I can’t sell a house in another state. So, if I go give a wad of $$ Kenneth and Gloria will all my financial problems go away? How do they explain all of the people around the world who have so much less than I have. Lots of people here in the US are suffering today. Many are followers of Jesus Christ and they haven’t done anything sinful, we just live in trying times. I am blessed not because of the money I have but because I have a relationship with Jesus Christ.

I will continue to give to GOD but never to get anything in return. These people are preying on vulnerable people and should be ashamed of themselves. But I guess they can take their shame to the bank.

What do you think?

[Christian Post]

Southwest Airlines, which for years has boasted of its “unique corporate culture and family-friendly environment,” has been getting a lot of flak over the past month since the unveiling of a not-so-family-friendly plane.

SI One, the Boeing 737 wrapped with a temporary decal featuring Sports Illustrated swimsuit model Bar Refaeli, was revealed last month after much speculation and was touted by the airlines spokeswoman as “absolutely beautiful.”

“This definitely seals the deals on Southwest Airlines’ fun and edgy factor,” exclaimed Christi Day after the unveiling of SI One in New York’s LaGuardia Airport.

Southwest may have, however, moved on an edge that many parents don’t feel comfortable taking their children on or even near.

“What were you thinking Southwest? I am shocked that a company with your values would stoop so low as to plaster their plane with a barely dressed woman,” wrote mother and frequent flyer Carolyn Dunham last Monday on Southwest’s blog website, blogsouthwest.com.

“I fly Southwest several times a year with my four children and would stop cold turkey if we were ever made to board that plane. It objectifies women and confused (sic) children,” she continued. “You have lost your ‘family friendly’ status with this and I, for one, am deeply disappointed with a company that I’ve long admired.”

Many have also found the recent move ironic, given the last time Southwest came under fire.

In July 2007, a Southwest employee pulled aside 23-year-old Kyla Ebbert as she was preparing to board a plane departing San Diego for Tucson and told her she was dressed too provocatively to fly.

Read more here.

[From me]

When I fly, I want peanuts, a Diet Coke and peace.  I sure don’t want to fly something I would be embarrassed to take my children on. Ironically, I’m scheduled to fly with my boss on Southwest later this month.  I sure hope we aren’t scheduled for this one!  What in the world were they thinking?

What do you think?

[Times of London]

PARENTS should avoid trying to convince their teenage children of the difference between right and wrong when talking to them about sex, a new government leaflet is to advise.

Instead, any discussion of values should be kept “light” to encourage teenagers to form their own views, according to the brochure, which one critic has called “amoral”.

Talking to Your Teenager About Sex and Relationships will be distributed in pharmacies from next month as part of an initiative led by Beverley Hughes, the children’s minister.

The leaflet comes in the wake of the case of Alfie Patten, the 13-year-old boy from East Sussex who fathered a child with a 15-year-old girl and sparked a debate about how to cut rates of teenage parenthood.

It advises: “Discussing your values with your teenagers will help them to form their own. Remember, though, that trying to convince them of what’s right and wrong may discourage them from being open.”

The leaflet suggests that parents should start the “big talk” with children as young as possible, before they pick up “misinformation” from their peers in adolescence. The best way to raise the topic may be while performing mundane tasks such as “washing the car . . . washing up, watching TV, etc”, it says.

Read more here.

[From me]

With this line of thinking we should just let children feed themselves too! We don’t want to force our food views on them do we? Also, don’t force your views on playing in the highway with moving vehicles to ourselves.  This has to be the dumbest advice I’ve heard. The only way to truly prevent unwanted pregnancies is to abstain.  I pray the US government doesn’t print such trash.

What do you think?

[Bloomberg]

U.S. taxpayers, who feel they own a stake in Wall Street after funding a $700 billion bailout for the industry, don’t want executives’ bonuses reduced. They want them eliminated.

“I may not understand everything, but I do understand common sense, and when you lend money to someone, you don’t want to see them at a new-car dealer the next day,” said Ken Karlson, a 61-year-old Vietnam veteran and freelance marketer in Wheaton, Illinois. “The bailout money shouldn’t have been given to them in the first place.”

Compensation at Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Morgan Stanley, Citigroup Inc. and the six other banks that received the first $125 billion of the federal funds is under scrutiny by lawmakers, including Rep. Henry Waxman, a California Democrat, and New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, also a Democrat. President-elect Barack Obama cited the program at his first news conference on Nov. 7, saying it will be reviewed to make sure it’s “not unduly rewarding the management of financial firms receiving government assistance.”

While year-end rewards are likely to decline with a drop in revenue this year, industry veterans say that eliminating them risks driving away the firms’ most productive workers.

“There are instances where bonuses are justified, deserved, and in the best interests of the investment bank involved,” said Dan Lufkin, a co-founder of Donaldson Lufkin & Jenrette Inc., the investment bank acquired by Credit Suisse Group AG in 2000. “Your very best people are people you want to hold, and your very best people will have opportunities even in this environment to transfer allegiance.”

`Your Jaw Drops’

The companies, which set aside revenue throughout the year to pay bonuses, haven’t commented on plans for year-end awards, typically decided this month or next. A study released last week said the firms are likely to cut bonuses for top executives by as much as 70 percent.

“Even really sober people are saying this is the worst financial crisis since the Depression, and they’re saying bonuses are just going to be reduced?” saidPatrick Amo, a 53-year-old retired merchant marine in Seattle. “Oh my God, you read that and your jaw drops.’‘

Wall Street firms’ pay has traditionally been tied closely to performance of the companies, which is why employees receive most of their compensation at the end of the year after final results are known. Depending on seniority and performance, bonuses for traders, bankers and executives can be a multiple of their salaries, which range from about $80,000 to $600,000.

Read more here.

[From me]

How in the world should people in companies that have been “bailed out” get bonuses? People are losing jobs and foreclosing on houses that actually worked hard.  Others, like myself have cashed out retirement to make ends meet and people who ran our retirement plans in the ground and are “bailed out” with our tax dollars are going to get a bonus!  Something is not right.  The government should make sure no one gets a bonus in any corporation that got “bailed out.”  Those executives should be thankful they still have a job.  Bonuses are not suppose to be expected unless you perform.  Companies that have lost money don’t deserve bonuses.  I respect Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutte who recently took a pay cut because his city is in a financial crisis. Leaders sacrifice in times of crisis not pad their own accounts!  Come on! If our leaders expect us to sacrifice–they need to do so also.  How about Congress taking a pay cut!

What do you think?