“Moral” or “family values” does not mean “gays are evil.”
I pit the fundies who declaim that, and the non-fundies who let them get away with it.
If you let them appropriate “moral values,” that means you’ve lost. They don’t have moral values; they have self-righteousness. Which isn’t the same as actual righteousness – no one know who has that. Letting them make this into a “moral values means no gays!” versus “fuck your moral values, I have the right to be free from them!” means that you’ve lost. It’s “moral values means no gays” versus “actually, no, moral values means equality, love, and respect.” It’s about reading for intent and content, not details. God is not going to shit a brick if you make out with another girl. I get the feeling, however, that He’s not too happy with ministers holding up signs saying “GOD HATES FAGS” and singing “America, the Beautiful.”
Go back and read the Gospels. Think about what Jesus is saying. Then go read the historical context for Paul’s letters. Then read Paul’s letters. Think about how you should take those letters, in comparison to Christ’s teachings. Which one do you think should bear more weight in the way you live your life? Letters which are specifically intended to address the actions of small community churches in the northern Mediterranean? Or words which are meant to tell you how to be a good person? (Hint: the former is the one who talks about how the Christians need to start paying their taxes, because otherwise the Greeks will get mad and close the churches. The latter is the one that talks about loving and accepting everyone because we’re all God’s creatures.) Minutae versus big picture. Christ spoke in generalities because his words apply to everyone. Paul spoke in specifics because many of his words don’t apply to everyone. Read your text critically, and when you have, then come talk to me about “moral values.”
It’s an oldie but a goodie, and it’s still relevant: Hate is not a family value.
Christ didn’t teach hate. You’re called a Christian. Just think about it.
None of this is gonna affect on most of the fundies. They are unable to critically evaluate what the Bible says. They rely on whatever preacher/TV evalgelist/scam artist/fucking loon that happens to have their attention at the time.
If by chance one reads what you’ve written and thinks that it may make sense, the next thing they’ll do is to go straight to their favorite loon, who’ll doubtless quote this great debate about biblical interpretation:
Without, of course, having any fucking clue who wrote it, or what it means.
The meaning is in the irony. You could scarecely have selected a more controversial passage from the bard to fling at fundamentalist Christians. A miserly userer and extortionist is dressing down a man who represents the traditional Christian virtue of lending money without interest, who says of Shylock at the end of the scene, “The Hebrew will turn Christian: he grows kind.” I really don’t think antisemitic imagery is the way to go.
Yuh-huh. That’s what I’m afraid is causing most of this problem, is that there are lazy people everywhere. Or maybe just stupid.
I guess I just can’t figure out where they (meaning either the preachers/whoever or the other fundies) got the idea in the first place. I can see the misconception spreading, because, let’s face it, the Sodom and Gomorrah story is terrifying in the right hands, but I can’t figure out the genesis. So to speak.
Either way, what I REALLY Pit is that when you say “Christian,” people assume that you mean “crack-assed bigoted ignorant sheep.” Because there’s SO MANY BAT-FUCKING CRAZY fundies, and whenever they do something stupid or…stupid, there they are on the camera, talking about “God’s will be done” and coding their cult groups as “family associations” and shut the hell up, that is not what the Book says, you unutterable ignoramus.
…
I suppose this is more of an anti-stupidity rant than anything else, at the bottom of it, but then again, so are most.
How is it that you expect logical, rational thinking from a group of people that passionately believe in a fantasy dogma?
Next, you’ll be pitting that tree outside your window because it isn’t giving you enough emotional support. Or, you’ll pit your dog because he just can’t seem to grasp the idea of job responsibility.
“That DAMN telephone pole! It’s ALWAYS just standing there, with no ambition whatsoever!”.
Move AWAY from the Godders, my friend. They have abdicated the use of their minds in favor of a mental Lazy-Boy.
While I think that faith in supernatural entities is ultimately delusional, one has to admit that the religious impulse has given us Chartres Cathedral, Bach’s “St. Matthew’s Passion,” Tibetan mandalas, Aya Sofia, and other works of etheral beauty. It can inspire heartbreaking sacrifice and amazing acts of compassion and mercy.
But all that is lost on the born-again Pharisees who use their Bibles as blunt weapons (when they aren’t using the Bible as a masturbation device) to harm people whose only crime is to disturb the fundie’s simple-minded worldview.
Kiss off, booka. Like the typical college sophomore, you’re playing stereotype games that don’t connect to reality. (That last sentence was intentionally ironic, in case you missed the point.)
Tracy, I’ve found that it only occasionally has positive results, but that holding the Neopharisees to what they themselves claim to espouse will from time to time wake them up, or at least get them to see things in a new light.
“What did our Lord and Savior say were the two most important things to do? What else did He say summarized all the commandments? How did He define ‘neighbor’? How did He say to judge others, and how did He say that He would judge? What is your obligation towards your fellow man in consequence of all the above?”
Do you honestly think fundies could answer those questions without having to look them up? Do you genuinely think that the fundies will interpret Jesus’s wordsas in injunction to compassion? “‘Love mah neighbor as mahsayulf?’ But them homos and libruls ain’t my neighbors cuz ain’t none of 'em live on mah street!”
Agreed. It bugs me how the actual phrase ‘moral values’ has come to mean fundamentalist values. I mean, I vote on moral values - I vote for parties that support the legalization of same sex marriage, the only moral thing to do IMHO.
I’m sure you were in rant-mode in that post, but answering your rhetorical questions as actual expectations of an answer:
Do you honestly think fundies could answer those questions without having to look them up?
Yes – the majority of them are familiar with the Summary of the Law, and quoting it (especially in the Matthew version that explicitly says it comprises the intent of the entire Law in two sentences) at the others will often work.
** Do you genuinely think that the fundies will interpret Jesus’s words as [a]n injunction to compassion?**
No, not usually – but it’s an easy point to argue, given Jesus’s propensity for illustrating His points with parables. And I’ve had several people actually change their minds because they were taking Him seriously, and had never had the point He was making drawn out for them before. Little victories like that are what make arguing the issue worthwhile.
** “‘Love mah neighbor as mahsayulf?’ But them homos and libruls ain’t my neighbors cuz ain’t none of 'em live on mah street!”**
All you need to do is to explain what a Samaritan was, and why Jesus told that story to explain who one’s neighbor was.
Amen; I watch people argue using Leviticus and the rules in Paul’s letters all the time, while conveniently ignoring the other declarations, such as about mixed fabrics, having sex w/ your wife during her period, eating shellfish, and making women sit down and shut up in church (Paul’s letters). It’s really ridiculous. My least favorite example is the memorial Falwell had that commemorated the hate-killing of a homosexual as a holy act. HE MISSED THE FIFTH BLOODY COMMANDMENT! Thou shall not kill. That bloody simple.
I really dislike Falwell and his narrow-minded view of Christianity, but Falwell is not Robertson or even Wildmon. When Falwell spouts hatred, it tends to be of an institutional sort, not a personal attack on real people–especially murder victims. I would like to see some evidence that Falwell ever “commemorated the hate-killing of a homosexual as a holy act” because it seems more than out of character for him.