I am here watching the History Channel and wondering where on earth the James Dobson's of the world got the idea that the United States was founded by Christians. As a believer, I always heard it and believed it. It didn't cross my mind that those important people I looked up to would be either grossly misinformed or blatantly lying. Which one is it, by the way?
I also forsook to research the issue because not being an American I didn't feel compelled to. It makes me think that many misleading statements taught from the pulpit make it past our intellectual screening just because the stuff isn't interesting enough for us to research on our own. Yet we believe the underlying message, which in this case is that it was God Himself who made the United States into a great nation, by using "Christian" men from the very beginning--So, He can make me into a highly successful person as well.
Back to the Founding Fathers, according to the History Channel documentary, nine of the them were Free Masons with Humanistic tendencies. Instead of trying to make the country into a theocracy, they tried to create a Land of the Free, where folks could practice none or any religion they wanted. After all, Free Masons had been persecuted throughout history. These men did understand the need for religious freedom.
Not being an American or knowledgeable in the nation's history, I didn't realize that George Washington himself was a member of the Free Masons, a movement that today's fundagelicals demonize with countless claims of satanism and murder.
I am not here to defend George Washington's social group. My knowledge is so limited that I can neither attack them nor defend them. I am here, however, to express my surprise at the strange beliefs that fundamentalist Christians hold.
Hey, if they can twist and manipulate recent, richly documented history, it is no wonder they can come up with outrageous theories regarding 4,000-year-old myths, like the Bible.
.
.
Saturday, July 04, 2009
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Should Governor Mark Sanford Resign / Divorce?
I don't know. But after watching HLN this morning, I've started to think he should stay as governor of South Carolina.
Even after he's been cleared of using state funds to visit Argentina, callers are still demanding he quit, saying that he has no morals and therefore cannot be trusted.
I cannot defend him as a governor, knowing little about his performance in office--though I've heard things aren't going well. However, I highly doubt it that he cannot be trusted just because he committed adultery. If he were a CEO in the business world, he would have affairs, divorces, and re-marriages and nobody would care, as long as the guy runs the business smartly and honestly. Now, if they want to ditch him because he is doing a terrible job, they should say so. But they voted for him and should suffer the consequences of their democratic choice.
He isn't a church pastor. He is the governor. Why must a peccadillo tarnish his political career? I can't understand it.
For being a hypocrite that told his voters he was a decent churchgoing man? So what? Aren't all politicians hypocrites? Is part of the job description, isn't it? They have to be "diplomatic," don't they? Meaning, they must be able to spin ugly truths, making them look as pretty as possible.
If this were happening in Canada, it will make headlines for a couple of days and after that nobody would care. The BC premier was caught drinking-and-driving in Hawaii in 2003, during his first term, and is now in his third. Worthy predecessors of his, however, were ousted for bribery gifts--small ones--or other small-time money-related mistakes. Here, what politicians do as part of their job is what matters. What they do in the bedroom is boring and no-one cares.
It really is unfortunate that so much time, money, and energy is spent in the United States of America prying into politicians' private lives--all in the name of a God that nobody has been able to prove exists, and citing a book full of contradictions and mythological, immoral stories.
Shame. The USA is such a great nation.
What do you guys think, should he resign? Why or why not?
Should his wife divorce him? I say she should. Clearly, he no-longer loves her. She should move on with her life. But something tells me that she'll stay with him because "God hates divorce." Bullshit!
Guys, if you'd done something like that, should your wife forgive you? Why?
I would probably forgive my husband. But knowing that he loves somebody else, I would think it pointless to keep trying. Why not free him to pursue his new love and free myself to find someone who truly loves me?
.
.
Even after he's been cleared of using state funds to visit Argentina, callers are still demanding he quit, saying that he has no morals and therefore cannot be trusted.
I cannot defend him as a governor, knowing little about his performance in office--though I've heard things aren't going well. However, I highly doubt it that he cannot be trusted just because he committed adultery. If he were a CEO in the business world, he would have affairs, divorces, and re-marriages and nobody would care, as long as the guy runs the business smartly and honestly. Now, if they want to ditch him because he is doing a terrible job, they should say so. But they voted for him and should suffer the consequences of their democratic choice.
He isn't a church pastor. He is the governor. Why must a peccadillo tarnish his political career? I can't understand it.
For being a hypocrite that told his voters he was a decent churchgoing man? So what? Aren't all politicians hypocrites? Is part of the job description, isn't it? They have to be "diplomatic," don't they? Meaning, they must be able to spin ugly truths, making them look as pretty as possible.
If this were happening in Canada, it will make headlines for a couple of days and after that nobody would care. The BC premier was caught drinking-and-driving in Hawaii in 2003, during his first term, and is now in his third. Worthy predecessors of his, however, were ousted for bribery gifts--small ones--or other small-time money-related mistakes. Here, what politicians do as part of their job is what matters. What they do in the bedroom is boring and no-one cares.
It really is unfortunate that so much time, money, and energy is spent in the United States of America prying into politicians' private lives--all in the name of a God that nobody has been able to prove exists, and citing a book full of contradictions and mythological, immoral stories.
Shame. The USA is such a great nation.
What do you guys think, should he resign? Why or why not?
Should his wife divorce him? I say she should. Clearly, he no-longer loves her. She should move on with her life. But something tells me that she'll stay with him because "God hates divorce." Bullshit!
Guys, if you'd done something like that, should your wife forgive you? Why?
I would probably forgive my husband. But knowing that he loves somebody else, I would think it pointless to keep trying. Why not free him to pursue his new love and free myself to find someone who truly loves me?
.
.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
I'm back and I'm an aunt, again
Reno, Nevada was extremely hot, but we had fun. Driving down the American North West was fun, too. We stopped at the Oregon Wildlife Safari, again, and enjoyed watching the animals play and eat.
In Sacramento, California we visited the Old City, looked around the downtown area, and toured a couple of gold-rush era mansions. We ate excellent tacos, too.
Around Reno, we went to a hilarious musical (Menopause), the rodeo, Carson City, Virginia City, Genoa, the Car Museum (you were right, Sarge, it's awesome), and Lake Tahoe. Also, we ate Mexican, Salvadorean, and Basque food, as well as Nevada style BBQ. We went shopping for bargains and visited the Animal Ark, a place where animals in line to be put down were rescued from the needle to be cared for and seen. Didn't bother gambling.
We also bought antiques and an alpaca pillow case, for my husband to rub his arm on when reading the newspaper on his reclining chair. I rolled my eyes, but it's his money and should do with it as he pleases.
In Eugene, Oregon we went to the United Sates Track & Field Championships. Juniors and seniors were qualifying for their corresponding world competition (Trinidad, Berlin). It is always great to watch Olympic gold medalists and world-record holders compete. The $20 felt like a small price to pay.
Downtown Eugene has an outstanding rose garden and a charming river walk. Don't miss those if you ever visit. The tree-lined streets make the surrounding neighbourhoods look so upscale!
The only issue I had with our trip was that other than around big cities, in the isolated areas, only Christian stations could be heard. We were also "lucky" to find all kinds of right-wing talk shows. "And this is the American North West," I thought. "I definitely wouldn't want to live in the Bible Belt."
Now, I am back home. I came back to hold my brand new nephew, who was born while we were gone, the gorgeous little guy. I need to get busy helping my sister, the overwhelmed first-time mother. She cried telling me how she can never sleep for more than two hours. It seems like she'll have to get along with me now. These atheists arms will be her blessing (we live three blocks away).
I will add photos to this post later, when I have a minute.
.
.
In Sacramento, California we visited the Old City, looked around the downtown area, and toured a couple of gold-rush era mansions. We ate excellent tacos, too.
Around Reno, we went to a hilarious musical (Menopause), the rodeo, Carson City, Virginia City, Genoa, the Car Museum (you were right, Sarge, it's awesome), and Lake Tahoe. Also, we ate Mexican, Salvadorean, and Basque food, as well as Nevada style BBQ. We went shopping for bargains and visited the Animal Ark, a place where animals in line to be put down were rescued from the needle to be cared for and seen. Didn't bother gambling.
We also bought antiques and an alpaca pillow case, for my husband to rub his arm on when reading the newspaper on his reclining chair. I rolled my eyes, but it's his money and should do with it as he pleases.
In Eugene, Oregon we went to the United Sates Track & Field Championships. Juniors and seniors were qualifying for their corresponding world competition (Trinidad, Berlin). It is always great to watch Olympic gold medalists and world-record holders compete. The $20 felt like a small price to pay.
Downtown Eugene has an outstanding rose garden and a charming river walk. Don't miss those if you ever visit. The tree-lined streets make the surrounding neighbourhoods look so upscale!
The only issue I had with our trip was that other than around big cities, in the isolated areas, only Christian stations could be heard. We were also "lucky" to find all kinds of right-wing talk shows. "And this is the American North West," I thought. "I definitely wouldn't want to live in the Bible Belt."
Now, I am back home. I came back to hold my brand new nephew, who was born while we were gone, the gorgeous little guy. I need to get busy helping my sister, the overwhelmed first-time mother. She cried telling me how she can never sleep for more than two hours. It seems like she'll have to get along with me now. These atheists arms will be her blessing (we live three blocks away).
I will add photos to this post later, when I have a minute.
.
.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Christian women: submissive, controlling, or both?
Obviously, it would be unfair of me to characterize all Christian women one way or the other, since I haven’t met every single one of them, and I have no access to studies of the sort. I can only contribute my experiences with a number of devoted ladies I was friends with during my church days.
I must also clarify that since Christians are just people whose learned behaviour has been passed down by their parents, chances are that the rate of controlling women in churches is very similar to that of the general population. However, during the last 20 years, every annoyingly controlling woman I met was a devoted Christian.
But, what kind of lady am I labeling as controlling?
Example #1
Checking answering machine messages, I hear my father-in-law’s voice. "Hi, it's Dad…"
In the background, I hear my mother-in-law’s voice telling him word-by-word what to say. He sounds annoyed and repeats every word as instructed.
He is a retired engineer. She never finished high school. Yet she continually tells him where to go, what to say, and what to do, as if he were a five year old.
Example #2
Annchen and Dieter were German immigrants I met through their children, who for some reason followed me around church and loved spending time with me, often inviting me to their house without their parents’ consent.
If there is such a thing as a True Christian, Annchen was it. She told me many a story of how her husband was the head of her family and how the Lord led the family through him.
However, it was Annchen who wanted to have lots of children, so they did. She decided that having a TV set was a no-no. So they didn’t. She ruled her family at pleasure. Dieter was an onlooker who went to his brother’s house to watch TV and would’ve been happy with two children. Had it been up to Dieter, they would’ve been good Christians but not nearly as obsessive and legalistic as they were, but he had no choice.
The Men
The interesting aspect of the men exemplified above is that neither of them do any housework. The wife is the glorified maid. When it comes to big decisions, such as buying a house or a car, the wife has no say in the matter. Both men help with the kids but expect the women to take care of all things food and cleaning.
For instance, when my in-laws are having people over, if you arrive early, you will find him reading on the porch. You will find her running around trying to tidy up the house and cook.
The Problem
Both biblically sound marriages, these couples are highly dysfunctional. Annchen is on anti-depressants and Dieter just looks unhappy, as does my father-in-law, who lives with a woman who complains to anyone who will hear her that he doesn’t listen to her anymore.
To me, these people—and many others I know—prove that following the Bible when it comes to marriage is the wrong thing to do. It just doesn’t work. It makes people miserable. While I am sure that many Christian marriages are happy, I am also sure that they're so in spite and not because of the biblical teaching.
My marriage is far from perfect. After all, two humans are in it. But we make most decisions together, including what’s for supper. We’ve been known to argue about who is cooking. We both love to cook, so at times we throw the coin.
When having people over, we both cook and clean, and when it comes to traveling, he drives and I read maps. If we are decorating, he picks the shape and I choose the colour. And if we are going out to eat, we take turns picking a restaurant.
In short, we don’t follow any model, biblical or otherwise. We follow our strengths and preferences. If I can help it, in this marriage we will “all” live up to our potential.
But, I digress. I’d like to know what YOU think about the issue at hand.
The Questions
Thank you for reading. Please contribute a thought to the discussion.
Edit: I wonder if this Oregon man who disappeared for a week to take a break from his wife is married to a controlling woman. Hard to tell, but if I were married to someone controlling, I may do something like that, stubborn that I am.
I must also clarify that since Christians are just people whose learned behaviour has been passed down by their parents, chances are that the rate of controlling women in churches is very similar to that of the general population. However, during the last 20 years, every annoyingly controlling woman I met was a devoted Christian.
But, what kind of lady am I labeling as controlling?
Example #1
Checking answering machine messages, I hear my father-in-law’s voice. "Hi, it's Dad…"
In the background, I hear my mother-in-law’s voice telling him word-by-word what to say. He sounds annoyed and repeats every word as instructed.
He is a retired engineer. She never finished high school. Yet she continually tells him where to go, what to say, and what to do, as if he were a five year old.
Example #2
Annchen and Dieter were German immigrants I met through their children, who for some reason followed me around church and loved spending time with me, often inviting me to their house without their parents’ consent.
If there is such a thing as a True Christian, Annchen was it. She told me many a story of how her husband was the head of her family and how the Lord led the family through him.
However, it was Annchen who wanted to have lots of children, so they did. She decided that having a TV set was a no-no. So they didn’t. She ruled her family at pleasure. Dieter was an onlooker who went to his brother’s house to watch TV and would’ve been happy with two children. Had it been up to Dieter, they would’ve been good Christians but not nearly as obsessive and legalistic as they were, but he had no choice.
The Men
The interesting aspect of the men exemplified above is that neither of them do any housework. The wife is the glorified maid. When it comes to big decisions, such as buying a house or a car, the wife has no say in the matter. Both men help with the kids but expect the women to take care of all things food and cleaning.
For instance, when my in-laws are having people over, if you arrive early, you will find him reading on the porch. You will find her running around trying to tidy up the house and cook.
The Problem
Both biblically sound marriages, these couples are highly dysfunctional. Annchen is on anti-depressants and Dieter just looks unhappy, as does my father-in-law, who lives with a woman who complains to anyone who will hear her that he doesn’t listen to her anymore.
To me, these people—and many others I know—prove that following the Bible when it comes to marriage is the wrong thing to do. It just doesn’t work. It makes people miserable. While I am sure that many Christian marriages are happy, I am also sure that they're so in spite and not because of the biblical teaching.
My marriage is far from perfect. After all, two humans are in it. But we make most decisions together, including what’s for supper. We’ve been known to argue about who is cooking. We both love to cook, so at times we throw the coin.
When having people over, we both cook and clean, and when it comes to traveling, he drives and I read maps. If we are decorating, he picks the shape and I choose the colour. And if we are going out to eat, we take turns picking a restaurant.
In short, we don’t follow any model, biblical or otherwise. We follow our strengths and preferences. If I can help it, in this marriage we will “all” live up to our potential.
But, I digress. I’d like to know what YOU think about the issue at hand.
The Questions
- Does having to be submissive make the women controlling? (As in feeling that at least she has some areas where she rules)
- Do men pick controlling women because they need to be mothered?
- Do sons of controlling mothers find wives that are just like their mom?
- Is the Biblical model for marriage just wrong or is there some good in it?
- Are controlling women powerful leaders who would make great managers in the workforce?
- Should men stand up to their controlling wives?
- Do some men enjoy being micro-managed?
- Are controlling behaviours low self-esteem based, and is religion to blame for low female self-esteem?
Thank you for reading. Please contribute a thought to the discussion.
Edit: I wonder if this Oregon man who disappeared for a week to take a break from his wife is married to a controlling woman. Hard to tell, but if I were married to someone controlling, I may do something like that, stubborn that I am.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Carrie Prejean, Miss California, to lose her crown
This I wasn't expecting. Apparently, the Miss California organization has decided to pull the plug on Carrie Prejean.
They cite failure to fulfill her contractual obligations as the reason, thus providing us with more ammunition to point out the Christian hypocrisy in all this.
First, as a good Christian who wants to be "biblically correct," she should be doing the job as agreed to. And according to Bible Paul, she's failed her heavenly Master, too.
Ephesians 6:5-8: Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free.
Second is the issue of answered prayer. It is no secret that fundamentalist Christian churches all over the United States have been praying for her.
When Donal Trump first decided to let her keep her crown, I am sure the praying believers gave glory to God for showing the world that He was on her side.
Now that she is losing her crown, the faithful are not going to say, "The Lord isn't answering our prayers after all." Or, "She was a lousy worker and that's why she got fired."
No, they're going to say it is all persecution over her issues with gay marriage. In fact they're already crying foul over the cited failure to fulfill contractual obligations. "I didn't do it" is another possible response, obviously.
But if she is actually being wronged, that also means God failed to protect her. It does not signify persecution.
In the eyes of a brainwashed believer, however, good news come from God ad bad news from the Devil. Period.
We may find out soon, though, that her master hasn't abandoned her. When FoxNews hires her as a right-wing, pretty face news anchor, then God will get the glory again.
It is tiresome being a Christian. I know that much. You live on a roller coaster: one day you praise God and the next day you have to justify why He didn't show up to help you. Reading the mind of an invisible being who doesn't even exist is exhausting.
.
.
Sunday, June 07, 2009
It's Official: God & Allah Hate Women
An article from the UK’s Guardian, God is merciful, but only if you're a man by Ophelia Benson, reminded me of the subservient role women played in the fundamentalist Christian churches I came to know as a believer.
The article cites current instances from the three Abrahamic religions which clearly show how females are still deemed inferior in such circles.
I now understand why the “godly” ones treated me that way. According to the Bible and its enforcers, women are physically and intellectually inferior beings who must be submissive to ALL the men in her life: father, brothers, husband, pastor, elders, boss, and pretty much anyone with male genitalia.
This is a deeply ingrained belief that many of them aren’t even aware of. It is not that they consciously think, “Lorena said that. Lorena is a woman; therefore, what she said is wrong.”
It doesn’t work that way. The Christian men I talk about weren’t bad people. Many of them I did appreciate and admire. They were good, decent folks acting out biblical teachings they saw exemplified by their fathers, pastors, leaders, and fellow Christians. I am sure that it never did cross their minds that they were doing wrong or hurting anyone. I know they were kind because they went out of their way to protect me, shelter me, open doors, and treat me like the helpless person they thought I was. I thought they were patronizing me and they thought they were knights rescuing a lady.
I can open my own doors and protect myself. Thank you very much. What I want is intellectual equality, and that few Christian males are able to afford me.
Of course, not all women have a bad time in church. Females who play the role well and manipulate their way around can successfully find power and go under the radar of a male-dominated religious system.
Many girls are raised by fine-mannered mothers who teach them to behave like a lady. That is, always defer to a man who is expressing an opinion, but if she must disagree, she must do it kindly and artfully. Also, she should wait for her turn to speak and be appeasing (Yes, dear, you are right, but maybe you’d like to consider that…).
I was raised by a widow who had no qualms about asserting her place in the world. I rarely saw my mother trying to be mild or agreeable with somebody just because he was a man. She was the male in our house, and she acted like one. Not surprisingly, I grew up with the misguided impression that I had every right to the same jobs, opinions, and opportunities as any man.
Society would prove me wrong. But the church would make me shed bitter tears for my inability to be sweet, submissive, and sheeplike. Religious circles just aren’t friendly to a woman who thinks herself an equal.
The Guardian’s article brought back the awful church memories. In those days and during my earlier de-conversion phase, I was just angry and couldn’t understand why fellow Christian women would often tell me, “You shouldn’t say that,” or “You shouldn’t do that.”
It was like a prison inmate telling another to treat the guards well or else…
The problem with me was that I never did understand my biblical place. The other ladies did. As a female and a daughter of Eve, I had to pay for my ancestral relative’s sin of turning the earth into Satan’s kingdom.
After all, biblically, women were on par with slaves, both in the Old and New testaments: they could be bought and sold or used as currency in business affairs. Like slaves, women couldn’t have an opinion or speak up in a group of men. A husband could have other wives, divorce them whenever he wanted, and even have sex with the wife’s slaves. Almost forgot, if a man raped you and you were lucky, you got to marry him. Alternatively, and depending on the circumstances, your misfortune may have been enhanced by death.
The Christian men who look up to the Bible as the inspired, inerrant word of God have strong reasons to behave as they do. The Bible tells them so.
But, why are females famously more devoted than men? The Guardian’s article writer does wonder why.
Is it any wonder that at some point during my Christian life I started to feel as if God hated me?
---
About the author of God is merciful, but only if you're a man
Ophelia Benson and her colleague Jeremy Stangroom are the editors of butterfliesandwheels.com, a website dedicated to promoting rational thinking and to confronting myths via scientific truth. Writers Benson and Stangroom have also authored the books Does God Hate Women?, Why Truth Matters, and Dictionary of Fashionable NonSense, a Guide for Edgy People.
The article cites current instances from the three Abrahamic religions which clearly show how females are still deemed inferior in such circles.
The truth is that the God many people believe in - whether Muslim, Christian or Jewish - hates women. Take America's Southern Baptist Convention, which declares in its faith and mission statement: "A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband." That's fair enough, isn't it? After all, he's probably stronger than she is.I know that, as a Christian, not only did I feel intellectually mistreated, but I was also confused, failing to understand why nice guys indwelt by the Holy Spirit could be so nasty and blind. I say blind because, often, I expressed the same opinion as a man, and he was praised while I was treated like an intruding child trying to get noticed.
I now understand why the “godly” ones treated me that way. According to the Bible and its enforcers, women are physically and intellectually inferior beings who must be submissive to ALL the men in her life: father, brothers, husband, pastor, elders, boss, and pretty much anyone with male genitalia.
This is a deeply ingrained belief that many of them aren’t even aware of. It is not that they consciously think, “Lorena said that. Lorena is a woman; therefore, what she said is wrong.”
It doesn’t work that way. The Christian men I talk about weren’t bad people. Many of them I did appreciate and admire. They were good, decent folks acting out biblical teachings they saw exemplified by their fathers, pastors, leaders, and fellow Christians. I am sure that it never did cross their minds that they were doing wrong or hurting anyone. I know they were kind because they went out of their way to protect me, shelter me, open doors, and treat me like the helpless person they thought I was. I thought they were patronizing me and they thought they were knights rescuing a lady.
I can open my own doors and protect myself. Thank you very much. What I want is intellectual equality, and that few Christian males are able to afford me.
Of course, not all women have a bad time in church. Females who play the role well and manipulate their way around can successfully find power and go under the radar of a male-dominated religious system.
Many girls are raised by fine-mannered mothers who teach them to behave like a lady. That is, always defer to a man who is expressing an opinion, but if she must disagree, she must do it kindly and artfully. Also, she should wait for her turn to speak and be appeasing (Yes, dear, you are right, but maybe you’d like to consider that…).
I was raised by a widow who had no qualms about asserting her place in the world. I rarely saw my mother trying to be mild or agreeable with somebody just because he was a man. She was the male in our house, and she acted like one. Not surprisingly, I grew up with the misguided impression that I had every right to the same jobs, opinions, and opportunities as any man.
Society would prove me wrong. But the church would make me shed bitter tears for my inability to be sweet, submissive, and sheeplike. Religious circles just aren’t friendly to a woman who thinks herself an equal.
The Guardian’s article brought back the awful church memories. In those days and during my earlier de-conversion phase, I was just angry and couldn’t understand why fellow Christian women would often tell me, “You shouldn’t say that,” or “You shouldn’t do that.”
It was like a prison inmate telling another to treat the guards well or else…
The problem with me was that I never did understand my biblical place. The other ladies did. As a female and a daughter of Eve, I had to pay for my ancestral relative’s sin of turning the earth into Satan’s kingdom.
After all, biblically, women were on par with slaves, both in the Old and New testaments: they could be bought and sold or used as currency in business affairs. Like slaves, women couldn’t have an opinion or speak up in a group of men. A husband could have other wives, divorce them whenever he wanted, and even have sex with the wife’s slaves. Almost forgot, if a man raped you and you were lucky, you got to marry him. Alternatively, and depending on the circumstances, your misfortune may have been enhanced by death.
The Christian men who look up to the Bible as the inspired, inerrant word of God have strong reasons to behave as they do. The Bible tells them so.
But, why are females famously more devoted than men? The Guardian’s article writer does wonder why.
So why is it so often women who fill the pews? Is it a form of Stockholm syndrome? Religions do a good job of training people to be obedient and loyal to the authorities and women in particular are raised to be both devout and submissive. Religions are sticky: they are hard to abandon and that is doubly true for women, given that subordination and unshakable fidelity are their chief duties.
Is it any wonder that at some point during my Christian life I started to feel as if God hated me?
---
About the author of God is merciful, but only if you're a man
Ophelia Benson and her colleague Jeremy Stangroom are the editors of butterfliesandwheels.com, a website dedicated to promoting rational thinking and to confronting myths via scientific truth. Writers Benson and Stangroom have also authored the books Does God Hate Women?, Why Truth Matters, and Dictionary of Fashionable NonSense, a Guide for Edgy People.
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Anything to bring people to church, even guns
As a Christian, I was always bothered by promotional activities aimed at bringing folks in, as if churches were department stores advertising door crashers. Bring a friend to a fashion show, a dinner, or whatever, as if people were unable to watch fashion shows or find supper anywhere else.
But this Kentucky pastor really is going beyond anything I ever saw: he is inviting people to bring their guns to church for an Independence Day service. Security personnel will be checking your gun at the door to make sure it isn’t loaded, apparently.
Perhaps an American reader can enlighten me as to why folks may be encouraged to go to church just because they can bring their guns. I can’t understand it. I’ve never lived in a country where guns are so important as to make them the focus of attention. To me, a pancake breakfast makes much more sense.
Reads the article, “Taylor said Pagano assured her the event would focus on promoting responsible gun ownership and any proceeds would go to charity.”
The bigger question to me is, why is a church whose founder reportedly said “Blessed are the peacemakers …” advocating gun ownership, responsibly or not?
Why do they need guns anyway? Don’t they trust that God is taking care of them? Whatever happened to faith?
If they love their country so much and uphold the banknote slogan, “In God we trust,” why don’t they hold a prayer meeting instead of a show-your-gun service? At least praying, as ineffective as it is, will keep them out of trouble.
I, for one, wouldn’t take my kids or my elderly relatives to a church full of gun carrying people. Let’s not be naïve. There are lots of ways to smuggle ammunition in if somebody wants to cause trouble.
I am aware that many fundagelicals in Canada and in the United States support gun ownership. They say they need weapons for hunting and for protecting their farms, but why involve the church in a civil matter? Must churches be involved in all of our affairs?
I'm aware that most Christians will not endorse Ken Pagano's function, but as outlandish as his Independence Day party seems, it is only an example of the silly things Bible believers do and of a religion that always finds ways to justify crazy activities, biblical or not.
Frankly, I will never understand why evangelicals support violence of any kind, when they’re so vocal about the forgiveness, loving kindness, sweetness, and love-for-the-world of their beloved Jesus Christ.
I guess I will have to sweep this one under the rug as yet another contradiction of the Christian faith.
.
.
But this Kentucky pastor really is going beyond anything I ever saw: he is inviting people to bring their guns to church for an Independence Day service. Security personnel will be checking your gun at the door to make sure it isn’t loaded, apparently.
Perhaps an American reader can enlighten me as to why folks may be encouraged to go to church just because they can bring their guns. I can’t understand it. I’ve never lived in a country where guns are so important as to make them the focus of attention. To me, a pancake breakfast makes much more sense.
Reads the article, “Taylor said Pagano assured her the event would focus on promoting responsible gun ownership and any proceeds would go to charity.”
The bigger question to me is, why is a church whose founder reportedly said “Blessed are the peacemakers …” advocating gun ownership, responsibly or not?
Why do they need guns anyway? Don’t they trust that God is taking care of them? Whatever happened to faith?
If they love their country so much and uphold the banknote slogan, “In God we trust,” why don’t they hold a prayer meeting instead of a show-your-gun service? At least praying, as ineffective as it is, will keep them out of trouble.
I, for one, wouldn’t take my kids or my elderly relatives to a church full of gun carrying people. Let’s not be naïve. There are lots of ways to smuggle ammunition in if somebody wants to cause trouble.
I am aware that many fundagelicals in Canada and in the United States support gun ownership. They say they need weapons for hunting and for protecting their farms, but why involve the church in a civil matter? Must churches be involved in all of our affairs?
I'm aware that most Christians will not endorse Ken Pagano's function, but as outlandish as his Independence Day party seems, it is only an example of the silly things Bible believers do and of a religion that always finds ways to justify crazy activities, biblical or not.
Frankly, I will never understand why evangelicals support violence of any kind, when they’re so vocal about the forgiveness, loving kindness, sweetness, and love-for-the-world of their beloved Jesus Christ.
I guess I will have to sweep this one under the rug as yet another contradiction of the Christian faith.
.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
