"Fundamentalist" is a term that's often used in lieu of "biblical literalist," but they are not the same. The Good President Carter is correct to call himself a fundamentalist if he's one who believes that hierarchical and heavily-ritualized religions are not the way to go, and that instead one should worship in a simpler, more "fundamental" manner, a la Jesus (go into your room, close the door, and like that).
The biblical literalists are those who propose that, well, the bible is literally true. These are the main source of ID/creationist poo-poo in the classroom, and the ones Mirecki is most upset at. And then there are the dominionists; those are the ones most likely to welcome the destruction of the world because it will hasten the return of Christ and the establishment of a new creation. These are also the people who are shockingly sanguine about an apocalyptic war in the middle east, for the same reasons, and these are also the people who have Moyers most concerned just now. To quote him about the dominionists: "One of the biggest changes in politics in my lifetime is that the delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the fringe, to sit in the seat of power in the oval office and in Congress." This is the former secretary of the interior under Reagan saying "when the last tree is felled, Jesus will return." This is tin-foil-hat spooky stuff. Moyers is clearer in other writings; I assume that the Moyers quote here is him speaking loosely. He does discriminate between literalists and dominionists and fundamentalists. That said, it's important to note that membership in one of these classes of folks does *not* preclude membership in one or both other classes, but there is a "stewardship" movement that comes and goes among fundamentalist denominations that would make preservation and care of the environment a good thing. Mirecki criticized "fundies," and I'm also thinking he knows the differences. But in common parlance, "fundies" refers to people who are literalists. m PS I haven't finished catching up, but in one of the earlier posts, the beaters-of-Mirecki were referred to as "students." They almost surely were not. He described them as men "in their 30s or 40s." > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 10:22 AM > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences > Subject: RE: More on Mirecki > > On 8 Dec 2005 at 12:40, Paul Smith wrote: > > > > I also notice that respect among fundamentalists for > conservation of > > the environment seems to have grown recently from an odd > story in the > > NYTimes to a genuine phenomenon. There is, it seems, more here than > > meets the eye. > > > > According to Bill Moyers, the opposite is true. He says: > "millions of Christian fundamentalists may believe that > environmental destruction is not only to be disregarded but > actually welcomed - even hastened - as a sign of the coming > apocalypse." > > See http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/120504G.shtml > > Stephen > ___________________________________________________ > Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > Department of Psychology > Bishop's University > Lennoxville, QC J1M 1Z7 > Canada > Dept web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy > TIPS discussion list for psychology teachers at > http://faculty.frostburg.edu/psyc/southerly/tips/index.htm > _______________________________________________ > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
