Author’s note: I am a heterosexual cis male, married for 30 years to my amazing wife. I cannot begin to comprehend the issues experienced by my brothers, sisters, and non-binary family. I am trying, but even if I can intellectually grasp the things going on I will never fully understand. This piece is not intended […]
-
Pro-Choice
NOT Pro-Abortion
Continue Reading -
Seven Things The Church Can Learn From Bronies
My Little Pony Fans and living in a community of like-minded people.
Continue Reading
Thursday, June 21, 2018
Sunday, February 25, 2018
Sunday, January 28, 2018
I have a morning routine that I follow. Coffee, a little prayer/meditation time, manage the Facebook pages I admin, check twitter for news. Part of that is sometimes making a new image post for this page (Christianity Without The Insanity). Sometimes serious, sometimes satirical, sometimes just for fun. But lately, I’ve gotten into this pattern […]
Saturday, January 27, 2018
TRUMP WILL START THE END OF THE WORLD, CLAIM EVANGELICALS WHO SUPPORT HIM – Newsweek, January 12, 2018 “If you’re a Christian, you shouldn’t care about the end of the world, you’ll be in Heaven. Let Trump drop the bomb, I don’t care.” – paraphrased from several conversations I’ve had (and maybe you have […]
Monday, August 28, 2017
It started a while ago. Before the incidents in Charlottesville, VA. It’s been slowly seeping in around the edges of our society for a couple years now. Well, actually, it’s been a whole lot longer than that, but our current political environment here in the US has allowed it to gain more momentum and more […]
Wednesday, August 16, 2017
Once again our headlines are filled with stories and images of people, mostly 20-40 something men of European descent carrying banners with swastikas on them, flashing the Roman salute that has become forever associated with Nazi Germany, and other horrible things we thought we as people of the world had put behind us at the […]
Thursday, January 12, 2017
In the very early hours this morning, the US Senate voted 51 to 48 to begin the process of repealing the Affordable Care Act, or as it is commonly known, Obamacare.
There are many misconceptions about what the ACA is and what it does. Too many people think that it just taxpayer-funded health insurance. And while that is part of it (known as the Public Option, and the expansion of Medicaid), there is so much more in the Act that was intended to help and protect people, and repealing it, without something to replace it is not only dangerous for those that depend on it, but, honestly, unBiblical, and immoral.
As my title implies, I don’t think Jesus would, if he were a US Congressman, vote to repeal the ACA. Let’s look at what we know of Jesus from the Bible, the teachings of which many of the GOP (who want the ACA repealed) claim to follow:
There are 31 stories of Jesus healing an individual in the first 4 books of the New Testament (the Gospels), and there are at least 20 stories of Jesus performing ‘mass’ healings (more than one, often referred to as ‘multitudes’)[1]. Jesus cared not only for the spiritual needs of those who came to him, he cared for their physical needs, their illnesses, their blindness, their paralysis.
And on top of setting that example, Jesus also taught his followers to care for people.
On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
“What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”
He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”
“You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”
But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”
In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.
But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’
“Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”
The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”
Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”
– Luke 10:25-37(NIV)
I don’t think it’s an accident, or merely narrative tool that this parable is about a man that is in need of medical care. He could have mentioned a man in need of food or someone without a home, but Jesus chose to use a man that was dying. The Samaritan, henceforth known as “The Good Samaritan”, gave his time and his money to care for a man in need, and Jesus used this as his answer to the question “who is my neighbor?”, but also the original question “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
Which brings us back to the GOP and their wanting to repeal the ACA. Republicans like to say “this is a Christian nation founded on Christian principles”. And as such our government and laws should reflect that. But when it comes to things that actually help people the way Jesus did, they say, bafflingly, that “it’s not the government’s job”.
If our Constitution and laws make us a Christian nation (we can argue it doesn’t, but for the sake of this post, let’s just agree with Conservatives on that point), then shouldn’t the actions of the government set up by that Constitution reflect the actions of the Christ it supposedly represents?
The Affordable Care Act, while not a perfect piece of legislature, and something that needed to be tweaked and fixed from the start, was a huge step forward in protecting the life and liberty of American citizens. Providing health care for all harkens back to the very words of our founding documents. In the Declaration of Independence, it’s written “[men/mankind] are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”[2] And in the Constitution “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”[2] (Emphasis mine.)
So not only in the teachings of the Christ they claim to follow, but in the founding documents they claim to hold so dear, are Republicans facedwith concepts that show that repealing the ACA is not only a sin, but morally and ethically, and patriotically, WRONG.
Benefits of the Affordable Care Act
Now it can be argued that people shouldn’t depend on the government and the Public Option shouldn’t be in there giving people ‘free’ healthcare. And again, I am not saying that the ACA doesn’t have issued that needed to be fixed from the start (and, arguably, they would have if Congress had focused on doing so from the start instead of voting hundreds of times to repeal it.) But there is way more in there than the Public Option. Let’s look at just a few things in there that, if repealed, would do more harm than good:
Children covered by parents insurance until age 26[3]
Coverage under your insurance no longer ends when you child turns 18, this means your son or daughter is covered as they pursue their education or as they get their first job and enter adulthood, taking the pressure off of them so they can focus on become responsible adults and eventually able to obtain their own insurance.
Cannot be denied coverage based on pre-existing conditions[3]
You change jobs, or are transferred to a new state, or something else happens that forces you to change your insurance. But you have an illness, maybe even a very serious one. Insurance companies can no longer deny you coverage of that condition. This adds amazing security to cancer patients, or diabetics, or any number of people with an endless list of conditions. This gives you the confidence you need to find a better job, or move closer to loved ones.
No lifetime limit on coverage[3]
This is a personal one for me. 10 years ago, before the ACA became law, I became ill. Very ill. To this day we don’t know exactly what is wrong with me, but it involves a lot of crippling pain, weakness on my left side, and some brain issues. Before I was terminated from my job (because I couldn’t do the job anymore) and my insurance was still in effect, I had to have some very expensive tests done. All of which required approval from my insurance before they were done, so I thought they were covered because the insurance approved them. But then the bills came in, hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of bills that I will never be able to pay back. A call to the insurance company revealed a sad truth. They could set a limit on how much they pay out and can cancel my policy for reaching that limit, without warning and without covering procedures they had previously approved.
The ACA ends that despicable rule. The insurance must cover the things they agree to cover in your policy, for as long as your are paying your premiums and cannot set some arbitrary limit and put your health in jeopardy.
This is really important for cancer patients, whose treatment is literally life or death. And anyone else that needs lengthy and sometimes lifetimes of treatment. A car accident, like the one my mother was involved in, can lead to years of recovery. Now insurance companies can’t just cut us off.
Your premium must be spent (mostly) on your healthcare, you can even get a refund if you don’t use your insurance.[3]
The ACA sets a limit on how much of your premium is used for administrative costs. The rest MUST be used for your health care. Insurance companies can no long make monstrous profits by not providing the care they are supposedly in business to provide. In some states you can even get a refund on premiums you paid but didn’t use for health care. This ensures your money is used for it’s intended purposes – your health.
These are just a few of the things put into the ACA that benefit ALL Americans. These are the things that will be stripped away when congress and our new President repeal the ACA without replacing it with a new law that includes these (and many other) things.
To do so, to just rip away the protections of the ACA from American citizens, is not only irresponsible, it’s immoral.
Please call and write your congressmen (http://ift.tt/1HfhTwt) and tell them to do all they can to protect us, the American citizens, from this action. If the ACA is to be repealed, the consumer protections in it must be kept intact by replacing it with another law that includes them. We cannot put the lives and health of our fellow citizens, our neighbors who we are called to love, on the line for political statements.
[1] “31 Individual Healings of Jesus Christ”, http://ift.tt/2j59mty
[2] “America’s Founding Documents”, http://ift.tt/2eg4bEE
[3] “Key Features of the Affordable Care Act”, http://ift.tt/2ihp3Rc
Monday, September 26, 2016
This evening, Trump and Clinton will face off in the first republican/democratic debate of this election year.
Yippee. So thrilled. Really.
Disclaimer: Offically, CWOTI as an entity doesn’t endorse any candidate. Personally, I think it’s stupid for newspapers or any other organization to endorse anyone. Who cares? A newspaper can’t vote, so what difference does it make who they say they endorse?
And I have own opinion about who to vote for. But that’s not the point of this post. The point is the debates. And how pointless they are. Especially now.
Trump said he didn’t think debate moderators should fact-check the participants. And the executive director of the Commission on Presidential Debates agreed. It remains to be seen what the moderator of tonight’s debate or any other will do, but the ground is already laid for claiming that a moderator is biased against one candidate or the other if they fact-check ANYTHING.
As a result, tonight’s debate, and any that follow are pointless. If the candidates can say whatever they want without being held accountable IN THE MOMENT, then why bother?
Seriously, why even freaking bother? Oh, sure you can watch the debate while also following someone that will be fact-checking, but if you follow a Trump supporter, they won’t really fact-check Trump, and a Clinton supporter won’t really fact-check Clinton, so if you follow different people, you can get multiple “facts”.
But here’s the thing:
Facts are FACTS – facts, by definition, aren’t debatable. They aren’t things to argue about. Truth is truth. Reality is reality. These aren’t things our Presidential candidates, let alone anyone with half a brain, should be debating.
But that is exactly what will happen tonight and in the following debates. Facts won’t be presented, they’ll be argued. Worse, they won’t even be argued fairly. There will be a lot of hand-waving and interrupting and lots of wink-wink nudge-nudge to their supporters, but in the end, nothing will change.
Trump supporters will still support Trump, Clinton supporters will still support Clinton, and few, if any, undecided people will decide. (And honestly, who is still undecided at this point? The campaigns have been going on for years already.)
Bottom line is this: It doesn’t matter. The debates between now and election day don’t matter. Because you won’t learn anything, your opinion of your candidate won’t change, and both sides will declare that they won and that the other side broke rules or that the moderator didn’t do his job or blah blah blah.
Will you be watching? Let me know your thoughts in the comments.
Tuesday, September 20, 2016
It was a rough weekend, this third weekend of September 2016. Bombs, a suspect in custody, an innocent man gunned down for having his vehicle broken down. Politicians of all stations flapping their lips about refugees and terrorism and supporting law enforcement. All the talking head channels want us to think that everything they say is the most important ever.
And the stories trickle down to social media. And the rest of us talk about it. And boy do we talk. And boy do we love to claim that anyone that has a different opinion than us is stupid.
We love to say things like:
If you really believe that…..
….I’ve got a bridge to sell you….
….you’re as bright as a burned out light bulb…..
….dumber than a box of rocks……
….etc…..
Or maybe we’re less aggressive and instead use phrases like “I’m sorry you were triggered because I have a different opinion”. Or some other no-less rude phrase.
All because they disagree. Obviously, we’re smart because our opinion is the best, and everyone else is dumb.
When honestly, we’re all stupid. Few of us see the whole picture, or even try to, and all we really want to do is be right.
I have a picture of the world. An ideal picture of the world based on my experiences, things I’ve read, my religious and political beliefs, and an imagined vision of what the world could be. Based on that ideal picture, I have opinions on things. Stories in the news, things people say, shows on TV… my opinions are mine. Some change easily, like what my favorite movie is, others change less easily, like my political party affiliation.
My opinions are mine, so I believe they are right. Obviously, or I’d change them. And I will defend my opinions because I think they’re right. If I’m writing an essay like this, or giving a speech that’s easy. I state my case and I answer questions.
But social media is different. I can state my opinion in 140 characters or less, then pretty much abuse anyone that comments that they think differently.
I witnessed an exchange from a community member that went like this:
Magzine posts a link about refugees and terrorism.
Community member states the fact that in the case of the bombs in NY and NJ, the suspect was a nationalized American that came to the country when he was 7.
Troll states he was Muslim, that all terrorists are Muslims and therefore all Muslims are terrorist. It’s a ‘pattern’.
Community member states that a religion is not a pattern.
Troll digs in and passive-aggressively apologizes for ‘triggering’ but all Muslims are obviously terrorists.
And from there….
you’re stupid
you’re racist
you don’t know what you’re talking about
you’re an idiot if you think that
And so on.
We’ve all done it. We all will do it. We all will continue to do it.
Why?
Because we can. Because social media gives us the platform to be anonymous and terrible. Because our boundaries are ours to protect. And no matter how hard we try, at some point, someone is going to cross a boundary that we consider sacred. And that person is an idiot.
And then “love thy neighbor” and all the other rules we try to live by go right out the window. Because we can’t face the person we’re talking to, we can’t sit down with them and actually talk. So we whip out a sentence or two at a time, pretending we’re ‘debating’ when we’re really just wanting to win.
We’re all stupid.
Me included.
And I hate to say it, even ashamed to say it, but I must admit…..
I love it.
I LOVE it. I love feeling that I made a ‘zinger’ or that I hammered on someone to the point they started ignoring me, or the coup de gras: when I have made them so angry they block me.
Then I won.
I LOVE IT.
So help me, it’s rude, it’s wrong, it’s very un-Christ-like, but I love it.
It’s an addiction.
And I’m hooked.
I think a lot of us are.
And that, right there, is the real problem with discussions on social media. We’re addicted to winning. We are right, and we will be right and when we prove we’re right, either through our opponents’ admission or through getting them to quit, we win.
So let me offer a better way, for you and for me, than winning.
When I was in high school, there was a debate team. We had debate competitions. When we went to these events we didn’t get to choose the topic or the side we were on. For example, we’d go and the judges would have three envelopes. In one was the topic “women in the military” (this was the 80s), in another was “global warming” (yes, we talked about it back then), and in the last was “should Reagan run for re-election”. The judges would pick one at random. Then they’d flip a coin. The “heads” team would argue ‘for’ and the tails team would argue ‘against’. We’d have a heads up before the competition what the topics might be, but we’d have to be prepared to argue either side – no matter what our personal belief might be. You have to remember that this was in the days before the Internet. We had to prepare by doing the research before the event. And once the coin was flipped we had to a couple of minutes to prepare, but that was all. And yes, our goal was to ‘win’ but not necessarily be proving our point, but by being the better debate team.
To simplify, we had to win by knowing the topic better than the other team.
We had to KNOW the topic, both sides, better than the OTHER SIDE.
And social media makes it too easy to no know. It makes it too easy to assume the other side doesn’t know either and just go in guns blazing.
We need to stop that. We need to not jump into the discussion and INSTEAD stop, research, and know.
Even if you never end up responding, it is far better to KNOW. Even if you don’t agree with the other side, you NEED TO KNOW IT. Then, and only then, can you truly understand the issue and know, truly know if you are on the right “side”.
So here’s the challenge. The next time you feel compelled to respond because someone is wrong, stop, count to 10, then read something about the issue. Steer away from opinions and blogs and focus on finding out as much truth about the issue as you can. Take 10, 15 minutes and find as many fact-based links as possible. Then read as many as you can before you respond.
I know, that takes all the fun out it.
But you might learn something.
Saturday, September 10, 2016
The opinions expressed here are the authors and do not necessarily represent the moderators or members of the Christianity Without The Insanity community.
_____________________________________________________________________
I remember 9-11, 2001. I was working a sucky minimum wage job after getting laid off from the phone company where I was a software engineer. The post Y2K fallout put a lot of us tech types out of work and we took anything to make ends meet.
My commute was long, way too long for minimum wage, so, of course, I had the radio on. They cut in on the music to say a plane had hit the north tower of the World Trade Center. It had just happened and things being what they were in 2001, no one knew at the time even what kind of plane it was. The local radio folks speculated it was a little plane and not many people were hurt.
By the time I got to work at the big-box store the news was on every TV. We learned the details as they came in. It was a big plane. There was fire and smoke. Soon they were non-stop broadcasting a live feed of the towers.
And we watched as the second plane hit the south tower.
Our boss sent us all home right after that. He said he was closing the store and we needed to be with our families.
I got home to my homeschooling wife, always the teacher, telling the kids what was happening in calm tones. We watched together as they reported about the Pentagon. There were images of people jumping from the top of the towers. And then they fell.
And then they fell. First one, then the other.
And like every American, we wondered what would happen. We thought of those that died, and we prayed and we went to church that night because we didn’t know what else to do. And we heard about the firemen and the police and so many others that saved so many, yet so few.
And time passed. And there was war. And another war. Neither, it turned out, was directly related to the attacks on that day.
And time passed.
Now, here we are, 15 years later. We’re still reeling from the events of that day, in spite of the rebuilding. Our children, if they remember at all, have only vague memories and old images on TV. Freshmen in high school will study the events as something that happened before they were born.
And we remember. We remember the day with sadness, displays of patriotism, remembrances of those lost, the firemen and police and civilians. But also veterans for some reason, though the wars came later.
And that brings me to my unpopular opinion.
I respect and honor veterans. There’s a history in my family dating back to the Revolutionary war. Men and women in my family served and continue to serve. And they deserve respect. Especially those fallen.
But here’s the rub. And this is where I may lose followers and even make some enemies….
War is not a patriotic act. Not every soldier is “fighting for our freedom”. In fact, I will say that no soldier has fought for our freedom since World War II.
Now don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying the soldiers themselves are not willing to fight for our freedom, I’m not saying they’re not doing their patriotic duty. What I’m saying is that since the invention of the nuclear weapon, there hasn’t been a need to fight for our freedom. I am saying that Korea, Vietnam, and just about every military action that came after WWII has NOT been about freedom. No matter how ‘patriots’ want to romanticize military service, to insist that we stand during the national anthem to ‘honor’ veterans, and a whole list of other demands, US military actions since the middle of the 20th century have been more about politics, land, oil, and a lot of other things.
Just not about freedom.
And I think it’s wrong to insist that 9-11 be made another military ‘holiday’. Honor those lost. Remember the acts of terrorism. But don’t romanticize the military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq as some great patriotic act. We know now that neither country was directly involved in the acts of 9-11 and we’ve spent thousands of lives and trillions of dollars not just on the acts of war, but on making reparations for our hasty invasions, for our need for revenge.
And now we have more terror. Isis lurks around every corner – an organization (if you can call it that) that was birthed directly because of our actions in the middle east.
We messed up. And unless we admit that, unless we stop worshiping the war dead and making patriotism our national religion, unless we stop glorifying the mistakes of our collective past, we can’t move on, move ahead and listen to each other.
This year, 9-11 is Sunday. You might be reading this after the fact, but as I write this, there are hundreds on my facebook timeline insisting that as our National Anthem is played before the football games players and others currently participating in the protest started by the 49ers Quarterback Colin Kaepernick be FORCED to stand, rather than sit or kneel as is the form of their protest. Because veterans deserve the respect on ‘their’ day.
9-11 is not ‘their’ day. It’s not anyone’s day. It’s a day of mourning. Of remembering. But it’s not Veteran’s Day. Or Memorial Day. Or Flag Day, or 4th of July, or any other day we’ve chosen to ‘worship’ veterans.
We need to stop the cycle. We need to stop glorifying war-time military service. Honor those who served as is appropriate, yes, but not in excess, not to the degree that everything is about veterans.
The flag is not about veterans. The National Anthem is not about veterans. 9-11 is not about veterans. The first amendment is not about veterans. Nor is the second, nor any of the rest. (The second is all anyone cares to talk about these days.)
The most honorable thing we can do for current and deceased veterans on 9-11 is work to not make any more war vets.
My unpopular opinion may be mine to share because of the freedom I have, and there are events in this countries past that were acts of protecting and creating that freedom. But my unpopular opinion is that none of those acts have happened in my lifetime. Nor my parents’. And 9-11, especially, should not be used as an excuse to romanticize war and make excuses to squash the freedoms we claim veterans have served and died to protect.
Wednesday, July 27, 2016
Thursday, June 16, 2016
It’s been a while since I’ve been motivated to write anything here. But the events of this year, the last few days in particular, seem to have opened my brain a little and made me want to write some things down.
I like to rant. A lot. If you know me personally or follow me on facebook at all, you know that when something gets under my skin, I’m going to go off on a rant about it. The primaries and caucuses in particular have really got me going. And now the horrible stories out of Orlando have me talking about guns and gun violence and human rights and all that.
And for the most part, my friends and fans just let me rant, knowing that my heart is in the right place and that I will do what I can to make the world a better place with my actions and votes once I’m done ranting.
But almost every time, without fail, someone, usually several someones, feels the need to remind me that “this world isn’t our home” and “God’s kingdom isn’t an earthly one” and as a Christian I should “concern” myself “with heavenly things, not earthly ones”.
To which I invariably say “I know” and let it pass. But what I really want to do is get off on a rant.
Well-meaning Christians say this, implying that our ‘work’ is ‘more important’ than laws or elections and so on, that our work is for ‘souls in heaven’ not ‘presidents in offices’. They point to verses like John 15:19 (If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you…) and Romans 12:2 (Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.) and Philippians 3:20 (But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ).
And yes, the Bible does say that, in those isolated verses (and others) taken out of their textual and historical context.
But I don’t think they mean that when we become Christians we just shrug off all the issues of the world that we live in. If that’s what God wanted, then why are we still here? Why not just zap us to heaven as soon as we become believers?
But here we are. And here we remain. And in spite of numerous people saying as Christians we are “not of this world”, we are. We are of this world. And we have a duty to it, more than just telling people about the Gospel.
And that is one of Justice.
The Hebrew word most often translated as “justice” is mishpat. At its root, it carries the meaning of “to treat equitably”. But in use, it carries a connotation of giving people their due or ‘rights’. For example, the support for the priests in Deuteronomy 18 is their mishpat. The word comes up again when it talks about caring for widows and orphans and leaving the corners of your field for the poor. It’s their right, it’s what is due to them.
But why justice? Why is that our job? Aren’t we just supposed to save souls and that’s it?
Uh…. no. Why? Because it’s not what God wants. In spite of those ‘not of this world’ verses taken out of context, the broader story of how God wants us to live in this world is He wants us to defend the vulnerable.
Leviticus 19:18. Love your neighbor as yourself. Jesus expands on this in the parable of The Good Samaritan.
But did you notice in the story? The Samaritan isn’t the good guy. I mean, yes, he does the right thing when the ‘righteous’ do not, but the Samaritans were not ‘good’ people. They were ‘half-breeds’ that worshipped the wrong way in the wrong place. They were not only outcasts, they were the lowest of the low.
And what the Samaritan doesn’t do is as important as what he DOES do. He doesn’t ask the victim what he did wrong, or what temple he went to, he didn’t even ask if the victim was a Jewish man or a Roman or from some other place. That information isn’t even given in the story. Jesus just describes him as “a man”.
The Samaritan doesn’t concern himself with the victim’s spiritual needs. He doesn’t tend to his ‘soul’. He gives him his mishpat. His due. And what he is due at that moment is health care.
And it’s not just the Good Samaritan story where Jesus teaches this. Over and over when Jesus is asked “How can I get to heaven?” (or some variant) he always ALWAYS answers “Love God, love people”. He never says “pray this prayer” or “save that soul” or “go on that mission trip and baptize 20 people”. Love God, love people. Period. And when asked for an example, Jesus doesn’t say “if you love them, save their souls” or “if you love them, invite them to church” or “if you love them, stay out of politics”, the examples he gives – in word and deed, are the outcasts, the downtrodden, and yes, the sinful. Samaritans, servants, lepers, adultresses.
We need to do the same. With our words, our actions, our votes, our time, our money. There is way more to the Christian life than “saving souls” and just biding our time waiting for heaven. In fact, I would say heaven is not the point.
Let me say that again:
Heaven is not the point. Our citizenship may be heaven, eventually, but right here, right now, it’s HERE. HERE is the point. Loving people is the point. And that means giving them their mishpat. Not as part of a mission to get them into heaven, not to get their butt in a pew on Sunday morning, you just DO IT. Love God, Love People. The end.
And we do that by working HERE. By doing good HERE. Now. Not because we want to get them into heaven, not to get ourselves into heaven, but because it’s what we’re supposed to do. With out time, our money, our votes, our voices, our keyboards, our facebook accounts.
Rant over. Carry on.
Wednesday, October 28, 2015
“How can you be a Christian? Do you really believe what ‘those guys’ believe?”
I get that question a lot. Especially when I share a political position like being pro-choice or being in support of same-sex equality. “But you still believe x-y-z? Just like the Westboro Baptist guys? How can you believe that? Or how about Ted Cruz? And Mike Huckabee? They’re Christians, if you believe like them, then you’re either lying or you’re lying about that other stuff.”
First off, let me start by saying, I don’t really know what the Westboro Baptist folks believe, other than what’s on their picket signs, so I don’t know if we share belief in anything. Same goes for Pat Robertson or Dr. Dobson or Ted Cruz. I don’t really know what they believe except for the bits on the radio, TV, the web, or in the news. So do I believe what they believe? I don’t know. Most likely there is at least one thing we believe in common, things like “Jesus existed”, for example.
But often it’s in comparison to folks like that when I am asked “why and how you can believe in this thing called ‘Christianity’. You aren’t conservative, you have some very liberal leanings, and you’d never vote for ‘that guy’, so how you can you call yourself Christian? Why would you want to associate with them?”
Political crap aside, I am going to address the root question. “How can you be a Christian?”
That question isn’t as simple as it sounds. I could go down so many different tangents just to explain the question before I can give a full answer. Tangents like “why I don’t like the word ‘Christian'”. But I will do my best to answer the basic question. So here goes:
Yes. I’m a Christian. I believe in the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob as described in the Old Testament of what is known as “The Bible”. I believe in Jesus, son of the living God, who was given that none should perish but that all should have eternal life. There’s much more, but for the sake of brevity, that is enough.
The key word here is ‘believe’. It’s what I ‘believe’. I have ‘faith’. Many celebrity preachers would say that to believe something is to “know” it even though you can’t see it or prove it. I think that’s a really crappy way to describe faith. The letter to the Hebrews in the New Testament, chapter 11, verse 1 says “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.” And while that’s OK, I still don’t think that is really a good definition, it’s just another way of saying that you “know” something that you haven’t seen or heard.
Here’s how I see it. When I sit on a chair, I have faith that it’s not going to collapse under me and send me crashing to the floor. I also have faith that a monster from under the earth isn’t going to break the floor under that chair and drag me down to the molten core of the earth with it’s tentacles. There’s a million little tiny things we all have faith in every moment of every day. Some ridiculous, others mundane, others rather practical. Faith that the clock on the nightstand shows the correct time, faith that the TV show we’re watching won’t get switched off in the middle of the most exciting scene, faith that our employer won’t fire us today if we do our job, faith that our spouses are faithful, faith that our children are behaving themselves at school, faith that the car will get us to the grocery store and they aren’t out of toilet paper..
You don’t “know” these things, but you believe them. That’s faith. Some things you have more evidence for, so they’re easier to believe than others. The monster under the floor, for example. It hasn’t happened before, so the likelihood of it happening now is pretty slim, so it’s easier to have faith that it won’t happen. But if you’re sitting on a flimsy folding 20-year-old lawn chair, maybe you won’t have as much faith in it not collapsing as you do in the monster not showing up.
My journey in the Christian faith is like that. I don’t claim to “know” anything. In fact I will tell you that there are days when I am not even sure I believe anything at all. (“*GASP!* He’s a doubter!!!” Yes, I have doubts sometimes. Anyone who claims they don’t is a terrible liar.) I don’t “know” beyond a shadow of a doubt that God is real, that Jesus was real, or that any of the Bible is true. I can’t know. Short of historical and archeological evidence, there is very little that we CAN know. (Anyone know where to get a TARDIS?)
But still, I believe.
Just like the chair and the monster under the floor, there are some things that are easier to believe than others.
This is where things get tricky so bear with me as I ramble and rant through this a bit.
When I was young, it was easy to believe. Santa, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, Jesus. Kids’ imaginations are open to the possibilities of anything being true, especially when a parent or authority figure tells you it’s true. Some would argue that continuing to believe in Jesus into adulthood is like still believing in Santa into adulthood, and maybe some people hold on to their faith that way, but I am only speaking for myself. For me it wasn’t like that. It wasn’t until I was a teenager that I got my first real dose of faith, and not until I was in my 30s that I really started to understand what it is that I believe and why I believe it (and continue to believe). And not until my 40s that I understood that i’s OK or the things I believe and why I believe to CHANGE.
Part of the reason I believe the things I do is evidence. Yes, evidence. That might seem contrary to the concepts of “belief” and “faith”, but think about my chair metaphor. If a chair is heavy, made of metal and thick wood, then experiences you have had in the past with metal and wood will inform your belief about that chair. Metal and wood are strong, you’ve seen evidence of that, so your belief in a metal and wood chair will be built on that experience.
The same is true (for me) for belief and faith in the basics of Christianity. Granted there isn’t much in the way of concrete, provable archeological and historical evidence, I will concede that. But there is some. We have the writings of the Bible, some proven to exist long before the time of Christ. The Bible was collected and brought together even though it was written by many different writers. Setting aside whether some things in it are true or not, it EXISTS. Some will argue that since there is no reliable writings outside the Bible is proof it’s false (there are many writings in fact, but that’s a different story), but these things were collected into one place. It doesn’t prove that it’s true, but the fact that these writings exist and have existed for thousands of years is evidence. There is archeological evidence as well. Again, not a lot but some. References to the “house of David” dated to the time during and shortly after David would have been king of Israel. Many say, however, that it’s not enough, that because we can’t find Noah’s ark or The Cross or figure out how the Israelites crossed the Red Sea, none of it is true. But a little evidence is still evidence. In my faith journey, it’s another bit that leads to the whole.
Back to our chair analogy, even though we have experience with wood and metal, and we’re pretty sure the chair won’t collapse under us, it still could. Our experience tells us most likely it won’t. Experience informs our faith that the chair won’t collapse.
But there’s more.
Let’s say there’s a room full of these chairs. All the same materials and construction. Pretty much identical. Since we have sat on one that didn’t collapse, we have faith that none of the others, since they’re identical, will collapse either. However, there might still be a chance. With so many chairs, there might be one that is faulty. The more we try the greater likelihood that one might break.
Flip that around. If the chair did collapse, we have faith that the others will too. But one might sustain us. Our experience with chairs tells us they are made to be sat on, so in spite of our experience with one chair that breaks, we still have faith that one MIGHT allow us to sit on it, since that is what chairs are for.
In my faith journey, evidence for a thousand little things led to faith in bigger things and that led to faith in God, just like a thousand little things led to faith that one of those faulty chairs was still useable. I could bore you with all those little discussions and life experiences, and maybe I will one day (though hopefully it won’t be boring), for the sake of brevity in this post I won’t. I’m painting in broad strokes here.
Remember our monster under the floor? So we sit on the chair, it didn’t collapse. We sat there for a while, and the monster didn’t reach up and grab us.
But of those two, which was MOST LIKELY to happen? What about something else? Like the chair didn’t collapse AND someone didn’t walk into the room carrying a cake singing “Happy Birthday”? Which of those was MOST LIKELY to happen? But, at least in this case, the birthday celebration is possible (compared to the floor monster).
What is possible? Some things are likely, but other things, though less likely, are possible. Things that are possible are easier to believe in than things that seem outrageous. If I’m sitting in a restaurant, on my chair that didn’t collapse, it’s more likely that a birthday celebration will happen that if I’m sitting on that same chair alone in my house.
When it comes to faith in God and Jesus, what are things that are possible? What are the things we think are possible based on our experience and evidence, even if we don’t have experience or evidence of those things? Here the faith base widens. More than the evidence, we suddenly see things that could be, and in fact may certainly be, even though we have no previous experience or evidence that they are. Did the Israelites live as slaves in Egypt? There’s not much evidence they did, there is, however, evidence of the ancient Egyptians using non-Egyptians as slaves to build towns and monuments, so it’s POSSIBLE the Israelites were among them. This doesn’t make Israelite slaves TRUE, but it’s not a big leap to make from “what is known” to “what could have been”. And like the birthday in the restaurant, it seems likely.
But what about the big things? What about GOD, what about Heaven and Hell and resurrection from the dead and miracles and all of that?
This where things get ‘big’, this is what we call the “leap” of faith. From the “things that are known” and “things that are likely” to “things that are impossible to know” and seem very very unlikely, if not completely impossible to be true.
Let me try another metaphor. A foot bridge. It looks old and rickety. You’re not sure it can hold you. But you take a step. Then another. Your fear of it breaking and sending you plummeting to your death starts to ease up. By the time you get to the end, your faith in the bridge has been confirmed, you no longer doubt it. Each step erased a little doubt.
My faith in God is like that. Each little step led to more and more faith until I found myself believing in what, from the other side, seemed impossible.
How can I believe? How can I have faith? A little bit here. A little bit there. And more and more until I got to what I believe is real and true.
Does my belief MAKE it true? No. And again, I don’t claim, because I believe it, that I know it. But I believe.
And that’s enough for me.
Now, regarding Ted or Mike or The Westboro folks? I can’t speak for them. But I can say that even though we might, possibly, share common ground on one thing or another, it doesn’t mean we share everything, especially on political issues. My faith, in, maybe, the same God and Jesus does NOT mean I believe in the same things about how to treat people and money.
Claiming that all Christians are like them is like claiming that all followers of Islam are Isis or all Italian-Americans are in “the mob”, or all people that live in Hawaii like pineapple.
But that’s a blog post for another time.
Tuesday, September 22, 2015
On of our headline grabbing stories this week is former surgeon and Presidential candidate Ben Carson saying that a Muslim person couldn’t be President. He tried to roll back the remark and just made the matter worse (in my opinion) but supporters were quick to join the conversation, saying (among other things) that “Political Correctness is ruining this country!!”
Carson himself has a history of taking swings at “political correctness”, saying (among other things) that p.c. culture, not his remarks about Muslim people, are to blame for the outrage following his remarks.
Really?
I will say that there have been times I think that some groups want to push the boundry of political correctness to the point where it’s difficult to talk about anything, for the most part I think what we call “politically correct language” is important and necessary. At least with the broad strokes.
Take, for example, an issue that keeps popping up now and then. The Washington Redskins. Specifically, should they continue to be called the Washington Redskins. Politically correct pro-ponents will say “no, of course not. You can’t call them the Washington ‘N–words’, you can’t call them the Washington (pardon the word) slant-eyes, so you can’t call them the Redskins.” But others will say “let the market decide. If people are mad about the name they’ll stop spending money” (never mind the fact that the people mistreated weren’t spending the money in the first place, but I digress).
Political correctness gets it right on this, treating people right, treating people equal, that is what this country is about. That is what our Constitution is about. Tradition or not, long established or not, we don’t get to use a derrogatory term for a group of people as a sports mascot. (and yes, I feel that applies to the “Fighting Irish” too, in spite of my grandfather being a huge Notre Dame fan.)
To apply it to a more pressing issue, let’s look at the Syrian refugee crisis and the American people’s response. On one hand you have a number of human rights groups saying “throw the gates open, let them come” and on the other you have others saying “no. They’re Muslims. Just no.” and you have a few sort of riding the fence saying “let them in, but we better screen them all with a fine tooth comb.” (I say those are actually in ‘no’ camp, just trying to act concerned.)
The politically correct response is, of course, that these are people fleeing a humanitarian man-made crisis of Biblical proportions. We shouldn’t care about what they believe. Help first, deal with the rest later.
But the fear mongers want you to believe that Islam is the enemy. And everyone, men, women, children, teenagers that build digital clocks into pencil boxes, if they practice Islam, they are the enemy. And they want you to believe that there is no such thing as ‘moderate’ or ‘progressive’ Islam, Islam is the enemy, and therefore we don’t want them in our country and regardless of what the constitution says, they need to leave, even if they are American citizens.
That, not political correctness, is the real enemy. The idea that there is a ‘right’ way to think and believe and we need to remove the ‘wrong’ way, at the expense of all the people on the ‘wrong’ side…. that is what is to blame for the outcry against Dr. Carson’s remarks, not “political correctness”.
Today one of the most controversial figures in recent history is visiting the United States and our President: Pope Francis.
On the one hand, he’s made some really progressive strides in regards to the Catholic church’s positions on things like climate change, but on the other he seems to be avoiding issues like women’s rights and abusive priests. There are poeple on both sides that are applauding and criticizing the pope at the same time.
I bring it up because part of the pontiff’s visit is a reception at the White House. The President invited a lot of people. In the interest of being as inclusive (a word politically correct people love to use) as possible, to include a cross section of American people, Obama, among the others he invited, also invited some that are part of the LGBTQ community.
Some people lost their minds. To my knowlege the Pope, nor anyone else from the Vatican, has made a statement regarding these invitations. At the time of writing this, that reception was several hours ago, I still have not heard if the Pope or the church has had any comment on the issue.
But way too many are upset. Saying that the President has taken Poitical Correctness too far.
To them I say, so what. What you call too far, I say not far enough. . What you call offensive, I call inclusive and representing the euqality every single person in the country should feel from our governemnt. Regardless of our sexual identity, our religious identity, our idenity in any way it’s defind, we all deserve to be treated equal.
And actyually, it’s in the constitution.So it’s more than something we deserve, it’s the law.
And in spite of what many would have you believe, it’s what God does. Too many believe that people need to ‘get right’ with God before they should be treated like people. But that’s not what the Bible says. “God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” – Romans 5:8. It doesn’t say “God insisted we got right first, then Christ died for us”.
It doesn’t matter what eppole are. It doesn’t matter how they see themsleve. It doesn’t even really matter (in this sense)what they believe. God LOVES FIRST, then the rest comes later.
Love first. The rest comes later.
That is the definition of being politically correct.
Or as I like to say “correct”.
Tuesday, September 8, 2015
With the #KimDavis thing, a lot of people in and out of Christian circles are talking about what the Bible says.
One passage many are talking about is Romans 13:1-7. Here’s what it says:
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed. (ESV)
A few things to note here:
It says “Let EVERY person be subject to the governing authorities.”
It says “there is NO AUTHORITY except from God.”
It says “Whoever resist the authority resists what God has appointed.”
It says “those who resist will incur judgement.”
It DOES NOT say “but it’s OK to ignore the authority when you think it goes against what you think God says”.
This came up in a discussion at our church shortly before same-sex marriage became legal nationwide (it was already illegal in our state, but apparently that was besides the point.) One of our elders asked of the group “So what should you do when you think the government is wrong?” One of the folks in our group responded “well, then you just don’t obey them”. The elder didn’t respond.
But I really want to know, does it say anywhere in the Bible that it’s OK to ignore the governing authority since said authority comes from God?
Seriously, I need an answer.
Monday, July 6, 2015
I’ve started several posts over the last couple of weeks, but every time I do there seems to be a new development in the world. We have been living in crazy times over the last several days and it seems that there are so many different sides to all these different issues, it’s hard to make out what we all should be doing.
But here’s what I want you to do: Sit back, relax, take a deep breath, and repeat after me, “It’s going to be OK. It’s going to be OK. It’s going to be OK….”
Repeat as necessary.
No, we aren’t living in the very last days. (Well, figuratively speaking, we’re always closer to the last days than we were before…) The events of the last few days are not signs or symptoms of Armageddon. It’s going to be OK. Really it is. Let’s break it down.
I’m going to start with the tragic events in Charleston. On June 17, 2015, Dylan Roof allegedly entered Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in downtown Charleston, South Carolina and shot and killed 9 people. He was later arrested and is being held without bail.
And while this even is very tragic, what unfolded, and is continuing to unfold as of this writing, is…. different. Very different than the reactions that have happened after shootings in the past.
While there are a few that want to talk about gun control and that whole hot-button issue, most are talking about the possible racial motivations behind this massacre and that has led to a HUGE discussion over….
The Confederate flag.
Or more accurately, what we commonly call the confederate flag but is the battle flag of the Army of North Virginia during the Civil War. Today it’s become a symbol of…. well, many things to many people. And that’s why this has become such a huge thing.
It all started when authorities started looking into the suspect of the church shooting, Dylan Roof. Mr. Roof maintained a website laced with racist language and pictures of him venerating the confederate flag and others of him burning the American flag.
This triggered a national discussion. “What, exactly, does this flag stand for?” But the real ignition of this debate was when a South Carolina legislator suggested that maybe it was time to take the flag down from all state-funded, non-museum displays. Including the South Carolina state capitol.
Whoosh. Now it’s burning out of control like a forest fire. Pro-confederate-flag rallies are springing up all over the place. News sites are talking about it, blogs and twitter accounts are all abuzz. “Don’t ban the flag” some are saying, “Take down this symbol of slavery and oppression” others are saying. When TV Land took the Dukes of Hazzard off the air, some people lost their minds. Others responded with “What is TV Land?”
But I’m here to assure you, it’s going to be OK.
My personal opinion is that the flag belongs in a museum. But the first amendment right of free speech shouldn’t be squashed, not even for this. No one, except the state of South Carolina, is proposing that the flag be banned, and South Carolina is only saying “take it off the state capitol”, no one is saying that ordinary citizens are going to have it taken away.
It’s going to be OK.
Like all such things, this controversy will die down. Those that went out and bought hundreds of flags will stuff them into boxes in their basements and closets. Others will continue to use them as ad-hoc curtains and things will go back to normal. Though one can hope that society will be a little more educated and polite afterward.
It’s going to be OK.
The next thing has been lost in all the hoopla of other events, but politicos are still talking about it and it’s sure to come
Many saw this lawsuit as the Last Chance Hail Mary pass to kill the act. The suit focused on a few tiny words that seemed to say only states that had set up their own marketplace had access to certain funds mean to subsidize families and individuals purchasing health insurance. The challengers argued that the language meant that states that had snot set up their own exchanges yet shouldn’t have that money.
Long story short, the Supreme Court ruled against the challengers and the Act was allowed to stand. Of course, the Court was split along party lines, 5-4. And the dissenting justices wrote very scathing opinions, but Obamacare stands.
And, for a couple of days, people freaked out. New cries of “Legislating from the bench” and “Obama is a communist” and on and on.
But let me assure you, it’s going to be OK.
My opinion is that while the implementation of the Act has been troublesome (mostly due to insurance companies wanting ot make sure they still get paid), the Act itself is agood thing and in the long run it will be seen as the best thing any President has done since the Depression. Health will improve, people can work more, take care of their families, and things will overall improve for just about everyone.
It’s going to be OK.
Right on the heels of the Obamacare ruling, the Supreme Court dropped what is surely to be remembered at the 
And the country lost it’s mind.
Politicians, preachers, and pretty much everyone is chiming in on the topic. County clerks are quitting becasue they don’t want to issue smae sex marriage licenses. The LGBTQ community is celebrating, as they should. And people that don’t seem to have a clue are now saying they should be allowed to marry their dogs.
Let me once again remind you , it’s going to be OK.
The Supreme Court ruling only affects the civil side of a wedding ceremony. Long ago the government figured out it could make money by making people buy a license to marry. The Uniform Marriage and Marriage License act was passed in 1823 and it wasn’t until 1829 that all states had marriage license laws. Obergefell v. Hodges only applies to that part of a wedding. No one is forcing churches or chapels or any other privately owned facility to hold a wedding of any kind. The truth is that you don’t have to even have a wedding ceremony to start a marriage. You need a license, an official of some kind, and two witnesses. Churches don’t even have to be involved.
And one thing to keep in mind: it’s still legal for a church to deny a wedding ceremony for a “mixed race” couple. If that is still “on the books” then it’s going to take a lot before anyone canforce churches to do anything.
It’s going to be OK.
My opinion is that, overall, this is a good thing. I am a Bible-believing Christian, and I’m still very conflicted about what God’s opinion on homosexuality is. In spite of what many would have you think, the Bible is not crystal clear on many topics, including this one, when you look at the original language of the transcripts (as they currently exist) and the historical context of when they were written. There is no verse that says “Thou Shalt Not Issue A Marriage License To Same Sex Couples”. It’s just not there. The same goes for the so-called Biblical Definition of Marriage. Throughout the Bible there are cases of incest and polygamy and marriage-as-a-way-to-keep-you-landthat are presented as just a matter of business. Marriage in Biblical times was abhorrent by our modern view.
But my opinion doesn’t matter. What matters is the Constitution. Everyone should have equal rights. And whether God thinks it’s right or wrong isn’t the question the Supreme Court was trying to answer. It’s what the Constitution imples. And I think that in this matter they read the Constitution correctly.
And what we in the church need to do now is just let it go. Move on. All this time there are far more important matters that we should have spent our time and money on – homelessness, hunger, poverty, disease. We need to quit shutting our doors and telling people they are out when we should be flinging them wide and welcoming them with a cool drink and a meal.
It’s going to be OK.
Really. Honestly. It’s going to be OK. If you believe as I do, then you follow God. And if we follow Go we have to trust that He has things under contol. And if He has things under control, then it’s going to be OK.
Things change. all of us, religious or not, have to accept that. And above all we have to accept that things don’t always change fthe way we’d like them to. The longer you are set in your ways, the lests resistent you are to change. The churhc, above al others, has been set in it’s ways for too long. It’s been comfortable having a say in politics and there are many that are really going to hate to admit that it’s time we stop wrapping ourselves in the American flag and admit that we need need to focus on the Kingom of God and less on the Kingdom of man.
It’s really, honestly, truly, going to be OK.
Tuesday, September 9, 2014
Of course the big story on this front is the marriage of well-known actor Neil Patrick Harris (of Doogie Howser and How I Met Your Mother fame - among others) to his long-time partner David.
And I, as a Christian, couldn't be more.... happy for them. Yes. I am happy that one person that loved another person was able to have a warm and loving ceremony to celebrate their love. The world didn't end, lions didn't lay down with lambs, the walls didn't start bleeding, and life as we know it continues to go on.
But in the religious circles I run, there is outrage. "Horrible example!" they say. "Abomination! I will never watch his stuff again!" they say.
Why? Why are so many Christians and churches so outraged by homosexuality? Why? They point this this obscure text or that one and say "See? God hates gays!" And whenever a story like this comes out we see that so many in the church are just like the Westboro Baptist folks they claim they are not like. The only difference is they don't show up to funerals with signs. Other than that they agree pretty much 100% with their message that "God Hates F**s".
(For a really good approach to these verses from the Bible, check out this article: Clobbering Biblical Gay Bashing)
What is my take on all this?
Is Gay a choice? Is it something that can be "prayed away" or changed? Is it something that you can just 'not be'? What should we, as Christians, do about it?
Some say the answers are easy. I think, maybe, not so much. (I am in no way shape or form very knowledgeable on this topic. But I have friends and I have kids and I have talked about this with them, so what I present here is things that have been said to me.)
I think that there are people that are born gay. They are always attracted to the opposite sex. (Same is true for bi-sexuality). They just are.
But I also think that there are some, because of the conditions of their life or maybe a traumatic event, or who knows what, that are born 'straight' but become gay. These are the ones you hear about that claim to have been 'healed' of it or "found something they like better" in the opposite sex or a million other stories like that. Not all, but some.
And it gets more complex from there. Human sexuality, like almost every other issue in the world, is not black and white. It's not even fifty shades of grey, it's complicated and multicolored and messy. To try to push one group or another of people into some box or make them match some definition of 'right' or 'wrong' is just.... well, wrong.
But we also need to be aware of those, 'gay' or 'straight' that feel confused about their sexuality. As I said because of circumstances or events or other things, some might need help. They should be directed to specialists (and not anti-gay specialists, human sexuality specialists) to get the help they need.
And yes. We should pray for them. But not for the gay to "go away", but for them to be who they were created to be, no matter what that is. For them to be their true self. In fact, we should pray that for everyone.That is what our Christian response should be to homosexuality, or any human condition, for the people involved to be their true selves.
But what about all those verses from Moses and Paul and everything?
Well, what about them? The Bible isn't a sex manual. Nor is it a manual on "how to make people live the way you want them to". The Bible is PERSONAL, it's a message to YOU, not to other people through you - at least not on the issue of sexuality (or what they should eat or how they should dress, etc.) If YOU feel compelled to not be gay, then do something about it. If you feel compelled to not eat shellfish or have four tassels on your skirt, then by all means, then do what you think is right. But the Bible wasn't written for you to force other people to follow what you think it says.
One thing Bible reading people need to stop doing is STOP BEING SO OBSESSED WITH HOMOSEXUALITY. Seriously, there are hundreds, thousands, millions of other issues that need attention. Not the least of which is the fact that almost 8 million kids right here in the US don't have enough to eat. Or thousands of wounded and hurting military veterans need medical and psychiatric care. Or women all over the world in abusive and dangerous relationships. There are so so many way more important things we need to be dealing with instead of worrying about who is kissing who.
One final thought.
Arguably, Jesus never said anything about homosexuality. And most certainly he never said anything DIRECTLY about same-sex relationships. What He did say is probably much harder to deal with than the verses about homosexuality. "Love You Neighbor As Yourself".
Friday, July 25, 2014
 |
| Image Courtesy of http://www.pinterest.com/aphrahigham/ |
Everyone is on one side or another whether they acknowledge that they are or not. Either you think abortion is bad or you think women should be allowed to choose. There really isn't a middle ground (per-se). Either you want the right to choose kept legal or you want it taken away.
My position isn't popular among the conservative Christian friends I have. I am Pro-Choice. I have been accused of "choosing death" and "siding with evil" and many worse things that I can't really put in a public blog post. I did not arrive at my position easily, or comfortably. For much of my life I was very Pro-Life, convinced that all those poor babies deserved to live and that abortion was wrong and evil and.... and... and....
But guess what? My opinion on abortion, on it's horror and 'wrongness' has not changed. I am very very anti-abortion and I will be leading the parade when the last one is performed. Seriously. I hate it.
So many pro-lifers get this wrong. Pro-Choice does not mean Pro-Abortion. No one, not one person, not the doctors or nurses that perform them, not anyone, "likes" abortion. There is no one going around advocating that it's a good and necessary procedure. (If there is, they're insane). Abortion is a violent invasive procedure that does damage (albeit temporary) to a woman's body. Anyone that claims to "like" it is a crackpot.
I am Pro-Choice. I am anti-abortion. I want abortion to end. I want unwanted pregnancies to end. I want every child born in this country (and everywhere in the world) to be a wanted child, a loved child, a cared for child. But until that happens, I have to be pro-choice.
Why? Why do I feel I HAVE to be pro-choice? Simple. Abortion won't go away just by making it illegal. Illegal abortions were done before Roe v. Wade and illegal abortions are still performed in other parts of the world and when abortion is outlawed in this country illegal abortions will surge.
Do you know the story of Pandora's Box? No I'm not talking about the radio station or the jewelry company or anything like that, I'm talking about the original story.
The gods had placed all the evil that existed in a box. All the monsters and demons and death and disease and all of that stuff in a box. Locked away. Then along comes a woman named Pandora. She had been warned never to look in the box, but she couldn't help it, she had to take a peek. The instant she cracked the lid, all the evil escaped into the world. (I can't help but draw parallels with the Garden of Eden and the Fall of Man from a piece of fruit....) Once all the stuff was out, it couldn't be put back in.
That's abortion in our modern world. Pandora's box has been opened and it can't be shoved back in and locked. It's out there and it will stay out there. Legislation, constitutional amendment, whatever, it's not going to go away.
But we can limit the damage. We can prevent needless harm to countless women by keeping abortion legal, safe, and available. But... BUT... there's no reason it should be common. We can make it rare.
How? Start young. Teach young men and women about sex and conception and contraception and health choices and all of that. We need to make birth control extremely effective, painfully cheap (if not totally free), and above all EDUCATE EDUCATE EDUCATE.
The way to end abortion, the way to be truly pro-life is to make sure there is not one single unwanted pregnancy.
Is this a dream? A fantasy? Consider this:
Colorado claims contraceptive program caused big drop in teen birth rates
If this is true, it means that making free or nearly free contraceptives available WORKS to cut down on the number of unwanted pregnancies. Granted this article only looks at one age group, but even in that population a 40% drop is HUGE!! Carry this to it's logical conclusion and the light at the end of the tunnel is HOPE of an abortion free world.
So many people are fighting the wrong battle. Hobby Lobby, various Republican politicians, anti-feminists - they focus so hard on trying to get people to stop having sex. And while I am not advocating pre-marital sex of any sort, especially among teens, the reality is people "do it". You can't legislate morality (at least not when it comes to sex). What you can do is fight the right fight.
I am Pro-Choice. And proud. And I vote.
What do you think? Share your comments here or on facebook, twitter, Google+, etc. (Keep it polite please).
Popular Posts
-
Do you know what Bronies are? Bronies, as self defined, are adult, usually male, fans of the kids show "My Little Pony: Friendship ... -
Author’s note: I am a heterosexual cis male, married for 30 years to my amazing wife. I cannot begin to comprehend the issues experienced by...
-
It was a rough weekend, this third weekend of September 2016. Bombs, a suspect in custody, an innocent man gunned down for having his vehicl...
-
Almost 21 months of this. Fast approaching 2 years. All this time with all this shit. ARG! Trolls. So many f’ing trolls, on the internet and...
-
There have been a lot of books written from a Christian perspective on what pain is, what its purpose is, why God lets us experience it, so ...
-
Image Courtesy of http://www.pinterest.com/aphrahigham/ Abortion is in the news. It's always in the news. I don't know why but w... -
So here we are, a week from Christmas 2016. We made it. The year is almost over. Well, a lot of us made it, but it’s been hard, it’s been r...
-
In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earthmany have questioned whether this was a good idea in the first place… (apologies to D...
-
I read the news today – oh boy…. Unless you are not in touch with current events in the US, you’ve heard the story. Supreme Court Justice no...
-
Lately, I have been coming across a lot of quotes, just at random, on the topic of one’s purpose and passion. I’m not talking in a strictly...
