Linky Dinks
Nov. 21st, 2006 01:54 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kyburgFast and furious - a couple from the FL today:
Religion's only real commodity, after all, is its moral authority. Lose that, and we lose our credibility. Lose credibility, and we might as well close up shop.
It's happened to Christianity before, most famously when we dug in our heels over Galileo's challenge to the biblical view that the Earth, rather than the sun, was at the center of our solar system. You know the story. Galileo was persecuted for what turned out to be incontrovertibly true. For many, especially in the scientific community, Christianity never recovered.
This time, Christianity is in danger of squandering its moral authority by continuing its pattern of discrimination against gays and lesbians in the face of mounting scientific evidence that sexual orientation has little or nothing to do with choice. To the contrary, whether sexual orientation arises as a result of the mother's hormones or the child's brain structure or DNA, it is almost certainly an accident of birth. The point is this: Without choice, there can be no moral culpability.
This SO rocks. Check it:
Answer in Scriptures
So, why are so many church leaders (not to mention Orthodox Jewish and Muslim leaders) persisting in their view that homosexuality is wrong despite a growing stream of scientific evidence that is likely to become a torrent in the coming years? The answer is found in Leviticus 18. "You shall not lie with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination."
As a former "the Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it" kind of guy, I am sympathetic with any Christian who accepts the Bible at face value. But here's the catch. Leviticus is filled with laws imposing the death penalty for everything from eating catfish to sassing your parents. If you accept one as the absolute, unequivocal word of God, you must accept them all.
For many of gay America's loudest critics, the results are unthinkable. First, no more football. At least not without gloves. Handling a pig skin is an abomination. Second, no more Saturday games even if you can get a new ball. Violating the Sabbath is a capital offense according to Leviticus. For the over-40 crowd, approaching the altar of God with a defect in your sight is taboo, but you'll have plenty of company because those menstruating or with disabilities are also barred.
The truth is that mainstream religion has moved beyond animal sacrifice, slavery and the host of primitive rituals described in Leviticus centuries ago. Selectively hanging onto these ancient proscriptions for gays and lesbians exclusively is unfair according to anybody's standard of ethics. We lawyers call it "selective enforcement," and in civil affairs it's illegal.
A better reading of Scripture starts with the book of Genesis and the grand pronouncement about the world God created and all those who dwelled in it. "And, the Lord saw that it was good." If God created us and if everything he created is good, how can a gay person be guilty of being anything more than what God created him or her to be?
Turning to the New Testament, the writings of the Apostle Paul at first lend credence to the notion that homosexuality is a sin, until you consider that Paul most likely is referring to the Roman practice of pederasty, a form of pedophilia common in the ancient world. Successful older men often took boys into their homes as concubines, lovers or sexual slaves. Today, such sexual exploitation of minors is no longer tolerated. The point is that the sort of long-term, committed, same-sex relationships that are being debated today are not addressed in the New Testament. It distorts the biblical witness to apply verses written in one historical context (i.e. sexual exploitation of children) to contemporary situations between two monogamous partners of the same sex. Sexual promiscuity is condemned by the Bible whether it's between gays or straights. Sexual fidelity is not.
This is simple enough stuff, don't you think?
And because it's thanksgiving season (yes, this does exist), Xerox is doing something corporate and nice and kinda scary - go thank a soldier using kids artwork. Now, I have some serious issues about artwork that clearly is a copy of a magnetic yellow ribbon (here's your symbol, did I get it right? Whyyyyy not?) - but there are a couple that actually get the job done as intended.
You can also write your own message if the list of pretty well-written ones don't work for you.
In other news, the budget is spent for this holiday - if it ain't bought, it ain't gonna be. The only thing left is the cooking! (And that begins tonight, believe it or not.)
Religion's only real commodity, after all, is its moral authority. Lose that, and we lose our credibility. Lose credibility, and we might as well close up shop.
It's happened to Christianity before, most famously when we dug in our heels over Galileo's challenge to the biblical view that the Earth, rather than the sun, was at the center of our solar system. You know the story. Galileo was persecuted for what turned out to be incontrovertibly true. For many, especially in the scientific community, Christianity never recovered.
This time, Christianity is in danger of squandering its moral authority by continuing its pattern of discrimination against gays and lesbians in the face of mounting scientific evidence that sexual orientation has little or nothing to do with choice. To the contrary, whether sexual orientation arises as a result of the mother's hormones or the child's brain structure or DNA, it is almost certainly an accident of birth. The point is this: Without choice, there can be no moral culpability.
This SO rocks. Check it:
Answer in Scriptures
So, why are so many church leaders (not to mention Orthodox Jewish and Muslim leaders) persisting in their view that homosexuality is wrong despite a growing stream of scientific evidence that is likely to become a torrent in the coming years? The answer is found in Leviticus 18. "You shall not lie with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination."
As a former "the Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it" kind of guy, I am sympathetic with any Christian who accepts the Bible at face value. But here's the catch. Leviticus is filled with laws imposing the death penalty for everything from eating catfish to sassing your parents. If you accept one as the absolute, unequivocal word of God, you must accept them all.
For many of gay America's loudest critics, the results are unthinkable. First, no more football. At least not without gloves. Handling a pig skin is an abomination. Second, no more Saturday games even if you can get a new ball. Violating the Sabbath is a capital offense according to Leviticus. For the over-40 crowd, approaching the altar of God with a defect in your sight is taboo, but you'll have plenty of company because those menstruating or with disabilities are also barred.
The truth is that mainstream religion has moved beyond animal sacrifice, slavery and the host of primitive rituals described in Leviticus centuries ago. Selectively hanging onto these ancient proscriptions for gays and lesbians exclusively is unfair according to anybody's standard of ethics. We lawyers call it "selective enforcement," and in civil affairs it's illegal.
A better reading of Scripture starts with the book of Genesis and the grand pronouncement about the world God created and all those who dwelled in it. "And, the Lord saw that it was good." If God created us and if everything he created is good, how can a gay person be guilty of being anything more than what God created him or her to be?
Turning to the New Testament, the writings of the Apostle Paul at first lend credence to the notion that homosexuality is a sin, until you consider that Paul most likely is referring to the Roman practice of pederasty, a form of pedophilia common in the ancient world. Successful older men often took boys into their homes as concubines, lovers or sexual slaves. Today, such sexual exploitation of minors is no longer tolerated. The point is that the sort of long-term, committed, same-sex relationships that are being debated today are not addressed in the New Testament. It distorts the biblical witness to apply verses written in one historical context (i.e. sexual exploitation of children) to contemporary situations between two monogamous partners of the same sex. Sexual promiscuity is condemned by the Bible whether it's between gays or straights. Sexual fidelity is not.
This is simple enough stuff, don't you think?
And because it's thanksgiving season (yes, this does exist), Xerox is doing something corporate and nice and kinda scary - go thank a soldier using kids artwork. Now, I have some serious issues about artwork that clearly is a copy of a magnetic yellow ribbon (here's your symbol, did I get it right? Whyyyyy not?) - but there are a couple that actually get the job done as intended.
You can also write your own message if the list of pretty well-written ones don't work for you.
In other news, the budget is spent for this holiday - if it ain't bought, it ain't gonna be. The only thing left is the cooking! (And that begins tonight, believe it or not.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-11-21 10:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-11-21 10:40 pm (UTC)But...to some people, 'moral authority' is the only reason they go to church in the first place. You know this.
no subject
Date: 2006-11-21 10:43 pm (UTC)First, it reminds me of far too many of the "instilling propaganda through art projects" that I've seen around, including things like displays in the mall of kids' art showing how smoking/drugs/etc are bad (half of which were just obviously verbatim copies of some example picture somebody provided for them, and the other half are using cut-and-paste slogans). While in many cases the message may not be a bad one, the method of indoctrination is a disturbing one, in my opinion.
Then there's the actual propaganda being instilled in this case: Get all the kids to believe that "supporting the troops" is good and not supporting them is bad, and convince them that all the soldiers are off in Iraq doing great things for our country (instead of just dying for no constructive purpose). Combine this with the rampant propaganda floating around about how if you disagree with Dubya you're not supporting the troops, mix it all together in the heads of children not old enough to understand most of the subtleties, and bingo you've got a whole bunch of aspiring Republicans just lined up and ready to go!
Lastly, the whole idea of this site just feels rather dishonest somehow. Want to do something to feel good about yourself for supporting the troops? No need to go through the effort of writing out your own personal letter or anything, just click a button on a web site and send them a xeroxed copy of some random kid's artwork (who wasn't even compensated) and pretend like it actually comes from you. I'm sure the soldiers will like getting 50 copies of the same kid's picture much better than a note from a real person...
Now, I know that's a bit harsh, and really sending anything is a lot better than sending nothing, so I'm not saying it's a wholly bad thing. It just has some overtones that are a bit unsettling despite all of that, IMHO.
no subject
Date: 2006-11-21 11:20 pm (UTC)Good stuff
Date: 2006-11-22 04:38 am (UTC)As for the 'support the troops' idea, I find it hard not to support the poor soldier that is stuck with an impossible task dreamed up by some old fart in an office in D.C. who probably never served in combat. No, I think the idea of an all volunteer military is a great idea, but it don't work, placing too great a burden on the the few and the brave, while the rich and idle sit at home playing video games and having too much fun. Yeah, we need a draft, the equal opportunity lottery that determines who get shot at and who skates.
Re: Good stuff
Date: 2006-11-23 03:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-11-22 03:23 pm (UTC)God hates cripples! That's why Jesus never healed anybody.
:X
no subject
Date: 2006-11-23 03:53 am (UTC)Also, perhaps the torture and genocide of the First Nations, the witch hunts, the Spanish inquisition, co operating with the Nazis, etc etc. I think that religion claims any kind of uniform morality at all is pretty ballsy. Sadly, religion is no better than the people running it. Sort of like democracies.