Point/Counterpoint with David Barton at World Magazine

This morning, World Magazine is featuring an excerpt of Getting Jefferson Right: Fact Checking Claims about Our Third President along with a lengthy rebuttal from David Barton.  Our section is here and Barton’s article is here.
I have not read Barton’s response yet. I wanted to get the links up in order for readers to have some time to wade through the material.  I suspect some of what Barton has to say will be the subject of separate posts. We will have an opportunity from World to post a rebuttal to Barton in a couple of weeks.
So I invite you to comment at the World site and here.
UPDATE: I have read through Barton’s commentary. Although it may take a month, Michael and I will write a response to it for World.  It is hard to know where to start when there is so much to address.
Do I start with Barton’s claim that he welcomes appraisal of his work? Barton did not seem welcoming when he called Michael and me academic elitists and allowed without comment his Wallbuilder’s staffer Rick Green to say that his critics were using tactics of Hitler and Alinsky.  All that nastiness aside, his tone has improved for this rebuttal.
One of the clearest impressions I have after the first read is how Barton simplified our critique on most of the points. For instance, on the slavery question, we never said Jefferson could free his slaves at any time during his life with ease. We said there was a window from 1782-1806 when the laws had been relaxed to allow voluntary manumission of slaves. Jefferson indeed did free two slaves during that period. In that section, Barton gives a lot of dates for other slave laws but he gives no quotes from them.  Also, he cites examples (e.g., Coles leaving the state to free his slaves) that were outside of the window we identified. Throughout that section, Barton does not provide dates to place the requirements within context.
More to come…

WORLD investigates the Trinity Broadcasting Network

This story should cause a little concern among Christians who believe in the Seven Mountains teaching (the view that Christians must fill top spots in education, media, politics, entertainment, etc. in order to accomplish cultural renewal). Trinity Broadcasting Network is the largest Christian network and it has been plagued with scandal for years. WORLD’s Warren Cole Smith opens the door on another scandal at TBN working its way through the courts. Christians are not immune to the temptations which comes from wealth and power. Whatever the truth turns out to be, the inner workings of TBN, revealed in articles like this one, provide evidence that the fulfillment of the 7M teaching wouldn’t change much.

With this story, the articles on David Barton and past reporting (e.g., the Fellowship), WORLD fills an important niche among Christian media for investigative reporting.

Media reports regarding the APA sexual orientation and therapy report

In addition to the separate posts on the topic, here is some additional coverage. If time permits, I may add a comment or two of opinion to them.

USA Today

Christianity Today

World Magazine

Mother Jones

AP Radio Network

Associated Press

Los Angeles Times

Southern Voice

The Advocate

Citizenlink, Day 1

Citizenlink, Day 2

Washington Times

More on Ginsburg and unwanted populations

Ginsburg article wrap up regarding those “populations we don’t want to have too many of.”

World Magazine – Paul Kengor and I team up to discuss Ginsburg’s awareness of minority concerns regarding abortion and population control since at least the early 1970s.

Crosswalk – I take a little trip back to the 1970s and discuss the “population explosion.” Remember that? I grew up in Southern Ohio and remember thinking that we could get a lot more people in our neck of the woods. Also, there is a prophetic quote about health care from Richard Nixon in this piece.

Michael Gerson – Eugenics? Possibly; elitist and/or insensitive may better describe Ginsburg’s remarks.

Jonah Goldberg – Explores the question of eugenics.

On flip side, Andrew Sullivan takes Gerson to task for his contextual criticism. However, Sullivan provides no substantial exploration of Ginsburg’s remarks.