calumny

very familiar word; but I need a refresher

Definition of calumny:
“A false statement maliciously made to injure another's reputation.The utterance of maliciously false statements; slander.” (answers.com).

Where I ran across it:
Frank Rich’s NYT Op-Ed column, “The All White Elephant in the Room,” dated May 4, 2008.

“…Mr. McCain says he does not endorse any of Mr. Hagee’s calumnies, any more than Barack Obama endorses Mr. Wright’s. But those who try to give Mr. McCain a pass for his embrace of a problematic preacher have a thin case. It boils down to this: Mr. McCain was not a parishioner for 20 years at Mr. Hagee’s church.…”

My two cents:
What a great word, calumny. Reminds me of calamity and alum – ok it’s dumb, but I can’t help my subconscious. Just thought I’d share.

We all know the “wise old saying” that warns about discussing politics and religion. It’s a wise old saying for a reason. It’s true. People are passionate. They have their beliefs – lots of different ones. When it comes to politics and religion, either one can make for a volatile conversation – even among friends. Together, they are capable of creating an explosive tête-à-tête that would make Oppenheimer proud.

The question is: how do we move forward and prosper as a civilization that grows together in understanding, forgiveness, unity, and strength if we don’t talk about these things and try to address them with intelligence, compassion and grace? The reality is: not everybody wants that goal. And it’s just darned hard to unite and find common ground with wackos. Witness: the Rev. J. Wright and the Rev. J. Hagee. What a Terrible Twosome. They are polar opposites, however they do share common ground. Both pious, and destructive, each one is a hot zone, a living, breathing exothermic reaction, a veritable, one-man nuclear explosion spewing hateful, toxic fallout that is spiritually and morally lethal. But hey, I’m not judging…

See, now I’ve foolishly gone and ignored the wise old saying already. It's a wise old saying for a reason.

Frank Rich’s article ignores the wise old saying, too, thankfully. Rich takes a “what’s good for the goose” approach as he wags a finger at both of these clowns of the cloth, but also at posturing politicians, the biased press, and the fickle public, concerning what gets attention and what (or who) doesn’t. Pretty darned interesting, and thought-provoking. But you should decide for yourself.

Go read. Discuss amongst yourselves.

Good luck.

And God bless.