One thing that is continually striking about Christianists is their selective application of the Bible - particularly the Old Testament. In this cherry picking process, LGBT individuals always find themselves faced by a strict application of a few carefully selected passages while countless other passages are utterly ignored by the self-proclaimed "godly Christians." Why does this happen? In my view, because LGBT individuals are a relative minority whereas the ignored passages would apply across the board to all - including the Christianists themselves. God forbid that inconvenient passages be applied to the falsely sanctimonious who denigrate others while acting like the Biblical Pharisees. Bob Felton at Civil Commotion (who is far more unkind to Christianists than I am) looks at the hypocrisy of those who claim the Bible to be inerrant and "the inspired word of God" yet treat its supposed dictates like a buffet from which they can pick and choose:
Someone in the mainstrem media needs to ask Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann point blank whether they support these "inerrant" dictates of the Bible (which sound like something from the Taliban's version of Islam) or not. The public needs to know just how far out of the mainstream they and their supporters among the GOP base and Tea Party are in fact.
Rousas Rushdoony [the father of Christian Dominionism], for instance, once wrote an essay entitled The Sanctity of Life in which, despite the title, he upholds the death penalty and asserts that only the depraved object to it: . . . . from the Christian perspective capital punishment is not an option of the state, not a matter where civil government has a choice. The state has an ironclad law, the law of God, which it must obey, because the execution of criminals who incur the death penalty is required of the state at the penalty of the state’s own life if it disobeys.
Here are the Biblical death sentences:
■A man who refuses to impregnate his widowed sister-in-law
■Murderers
■Whoever strikes his father or mother
■Whoever steals a man is to be put to death
■A child who curses his parent(s)
■A stubborn and/or rebellious child
■A witch or sorcerer
■Anyone who sacrifices to other gods
■Adulterers
■Homosexuals
■If a man has sexual relations with both his wife and his mother-in-law, then all three of them must be put to death
■Those who commit bestiality
■A medium or wizard
■If a priest’s daughter becomes a prostitute, she is to be burnt with fire
■Blasphemers
■An unauthorized person who acts as a priest
■Anyone who causes someone to turn to another god
■A man is required to slay his friends and members of his own family who are guilty of worshipping another god
■A man who shows contempt for a judge or priest
■False prophets
■A betrothed virgin who is seduced in the city is to be put to death, unless she cried out
■Men and women who commit unnatural sexual acts
Someone in the mainstrem media needs to ask Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann point blank whether they support these "inerrant" dictates of the Bible (which sound like something from the Taliban's version of Islam) or not. The public needs to know just how far out of the mainstream they and their supporters among the GOP base and Tea Party are in fact.
2 comments:
Michael, it is not hard for me to understand your lack of regard for those you refer to as Christianists. I assume you are using the term "Christianists" to refer to those on the fringes of the religious right 'who use the Gospels to perpetuate their own aspirations for power, control and oppression.
As a somewhat more liberal minded Christian myself, I refer to these people as the Radical Christian Right. I have a number of problems with the Radical Christian Right and/or the Christianists.
To begin with, they have become and are increasingly becoming the face of contemporary Christianity to the world. This disturbs me greatly because Christianists still, in reality, represent only a small minority of Christians world wide.
Secondly, I see it as a significant problem for the well being of the United States of America that the Radical Christian Right seems to be coming ever closer to highjacking the Republican Party and making it nothing more than a political tool for those who are most intolerant in our society and for those who are not above imposing their view of God, country and family life on others for political and personal gain.
Finally, I have a major problem with the Radical Christian Right and/or the Christianists because they are anti science and anti intellectual and becoming more so with each passing year. For major, serious and well supported candidates for the Presidency of the United States of America to be able to say or imply that the world is only 6000 years old and to be able to say openly that evolution is nothing but a theory riddled with holes and to have a significant group of Americans applaud such idiotic statements is frightening.
Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Adams along with most of the other founding fathers would be appalled.
I was raised as a Southern Baptist. When I was a kid in the 1950's and 60's a MAJOR tenet of Baptist doctrine was "separation of church and state." At that time it was the church that feared being enslaved by the government. Now, just 50 years later, it is the government that is in danger of being enslaved by the Radical Right Wing Christians.
Religion is and should be a matter of personal faith. Religion, any religion whether it be Muslim or Christian or other, becomes a very dangerous thing when it becomes radicalized and used as a political tool.
Edmund Burke said, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." As a liberal minded Christian, I am speaking out every chance I get to denounce the Radical Christian Right. There is, actually, nothing Christian about them. They are the antithesis of the Gospel of Christ.
As a moderate Republican, in a party where signing pledges to impose ones religious views on others is becoming the norm, I long ago made my own pledge NOT to vote for any Republican who campaigns on the basis of his religious beliefs or who signs pledges rooted in religious ideals.
In my view there are only two ways a thoughtful person can see Michael Bachmann and Rick Perry. Either they are ignorant and stupid or they are hypocrites who are willing to act as if they are ignorant and stupid for political gain.
I fully understand your disdain for Christianists. I would warn you however, not to underestimate them. They are becoming a clear and present danger to this country.
I would also beseech you to not include the millions who see themselves as Christians of Grace in your list of enemies. These Christians of Grace share your views and your concern about the Radical Christian Right.
I am proud to be a liberal minded Christian. That said I fully and completely understand that my freedom to be a liberal minded Christian is inexorably tied to other men having the freedom to reject religion completely.
Given much that one sees in contemporary religious movements in today's world. I have no trouble whatsoever in understanding the rejection of religion.
Jack Scott
Jack Scott
Jack,
When I use the term Christianist I mean it in they way you use the Radical Christian Right. I do NOT include Christians of Grace within the term.
Like you I see the Radical Christian Right as a clear and present danger.
If I have any issue with the Christians of Grace it is that they remain too silent and are allowing the Radical Christian Right/Christianists to taint the entire Christian brand. Bad things often happen because good people - or in this case Christians of Grace - fail to act.
Post a Comment