Mourning the Death of America
I just arrived back home after traveling through the deep south for the past two weeks. My posts have been sporadic during that time, but I hope to settle back into a more normal schedule in the next few days.
I wanted to comment on my observations on driving through rural countryside of Alabama and Mississippi. The thing that struck me the most was the prevalence of religious symbols, everywhere you go, everywhere you look. There were lots of churches, of course. I think there were more churches than houses. I saw at least a dozen of them along a single mile of road. There were signs saying "Jesus loves you". There were billboards, many of them advertising a church, but more often simply making a statement about the glory of God or the wages of sin. Some asked me where I want to spend eternity, and some even provided me with a stark multiple-choice answer. But never did they mention a possibility that some other reality might be true.
And there were pictures of Jesus, with his blue-eyed smiling face so child-like and innocent (and Caucasian). How could anyone not trust in someone who looks like that? I wondered how many of the people around there were aware that if Jesus actually existed, he probably looked Middle-Eastern. He probably looked like someone they wouldn't trust at all.
And there were crosses erected everywhere along the highways. Some were small and simple, and others were large and ornate. I saw displays of dozens of crosses stretched for miles along the road. I saw one display of three large crosses, with the largest one in the center, and as I got closer to it, I noticed a smaller cross mounted on the center of the largest of the three. It occurred to me that this ubiquitous religious symbol, the cross, was an instrument of torture and death. It was the means by which the Romans executed Jesus and many others, reserved for the lowliest criminals and enemies of the state. I wondered how Christians could look at a cross and see something happy, rather than the pain and suffering it inflicted.
I also wondered how anyone in this part of the country could grow up without being totally brainwashed. With religion and religious messages always in your face, is it possible to have thoughts that are not infused with religious ideology? This is the bible belt. This is the part of the country that produced the likes of Judge Roy Moore, who equates the Supreme Court decision on marriage equality to Nazi war crimes, and Kim Davis , who refuses to obey her sworn duty to uphold the law of the land because her religious bigotry.
And I'm sure that's the reason for the most startling of all the roadside displays I saw. In someone's yard, there was a shrine with crosses and flowers and a thirty-foot flagpole with the flag at half-staff, and a large sign that read "In Memory of America". Obviously, this guy agrees with Moore and Davis. I had to ask myself, what is it about Christianity that makes these people so filled with hate? Why can't they be happy without forcing other people to bend to their bigoted beliefs? What's wrong with live and let live? And let's get one thing straight - it isn't just gays who are the targets of their hatred. They hate other religions (and that goes for Catholics, too), they hate liberals, they hate minorities, they hate atheists, and anyone else who doesn't meet their standards for what a real American should be.
These people can't help being mindless religious robots. It's the way they were raised. It's the message that was drilled into them from the moment they were born. They never had a chance to learn what it means to think for themselves. Given that the ideals upon which our country was founded have been so degraded by religion, I think I'm the one who should be mourning the death of America.
I had to ask myself, what is it about atheism that makes these people so filled with hate? Why can't they be happy without demanding that everyone else share in their their bigoted non-belief? What's wrong with live and let live? Why can't they just accept that believing in God in no way implies hatred of anybody, that it in fact insists on the opposite? ("He who says he is in the light and hates his brother is in the darkness still." 1 John 2:9, or even better "If any one says, "I love God," and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen." 1 John 4:20) And let's get one thing straight - it isn't just Southern, born again Evangelicals who are the targets of the atheists' hatred. They hate every religion (especially Catholics), they hate people who vote differently than they do, they hate traditionalists, they hate conservatives, and anyone else who doesn't meet their standards for what a real American should be.
ReplyDeleteAtheists can't help being mindless robots. It's part and parcel of being in a deterministic, materialist universe with no free will. It's the message they repeat to themselves every waking minute. They never had a chance to learn what it means to think for themselves, because consciousness and individual identity are, after all, illusions. Given that the ideals upon which our country was founded have been so degraded by moral relativism, it's no wonder people everywhere are mourning the death of America.
Please answer this: why does it hurt people like you so much that gay people are allowed to get married?
DeleteIt doesn't hurt me at all... as long as you don't compel me to say or believe it's a good thing, as long as you don't force me to take part in it, to approve of it, to be silent about it, to put my name to it, or to support it in any way whatsoever. It doesn't hurt me in the slightest as long as I retain my freedom of conscience and my right to engage in the political sphere in the hopes of reversing at some point this terrible miscarriage of justice (just as the equally horrible Dred Scott decision or Plessy v Ferguson were ultimately overturned), to contribute materially and monetarily to interest groups working towards those ends, and to engage in free speech opposing it without reprisal.
DeleteGrant me those things, and it doesn't hurt me personally in the slightest.
And I expect the same consideration for all others who do not wish to be forced to participate in it.
That's why in a functioning democracy the rule of law is paramount. And until such time sufficient numbers of the voting public rally a majority to change the law, observing the rule of law is an important precedent and a personal responsibility.
DeleteIsn't it great that same sex marriage is now protected under law. The wrongs of centuries of religious bigotry have now been righted. Democracy works even against the hegemony of religious intolerance.
Bleat your head off Plank. In a democracy you're allowed to do that. And to suggest the Dred Scott decision or the Plessy v Ferguson case resembles anything like the same sex marriage decision is simply drivel. You've been reading too much from the Huckabee manifesto. A reversal of the same sex marriage decision is highly unlikely given the strength of the fair-minded public on this issue. Ain't gonna happen, Plank.
If you truly believe this, then why all the attempts to shut down debate with (totally false) cries of "bigot" and "hater"? Why the demands that people be forced out of their jobs if they "bleat their head off"? Why the legal persecution of honest business men and women who do not wish to participate what they sincerely regard as a grave social evil? Why all the effort to deprive them of their livelihoods? Why the death threats and hate mail? (And here I thought we were supposed to be the "haters".)
DeleteThose do not sound like the actions of people interested in a functioning democracy.
Ain't gonna happen.
Is this another of your famous predictions? Well, two can play at that game. You ain't seen nothing yet! Just as Roe v Wade gave birth to the Pro-Life Movement, so will this Supreme Court decision result in a similar decades-long struggle against an unjust law. This fight is just beginning, and neither you nor I will likely live to see its end.
And finally, I believe that much good can actually result from this latest judicial abomination. Already Christians are waking up to the opportunity it presents us to clean up our own house. I predict that there will arise a nation-wide (world-wide?) campaign to strengthen and enrich actual marriages (you know, the ones with a husband and a wife), to lower the scandalous divorce rate, to end spousal and child abuse, and to curtail out-of-wedlock sex and parenthood.
"as long as you don't compel me to say or believe it's a good thing"
Delete- check
"as long as you don't force me to take part in it, to approve of it, to be silent about it, to put my name to it, or to support it in any way whatsoever"
- check
"as long as I retain my freedom of conscience and my right to engage in the political sphere in the hopes of reversing at some point this terrible miscarriage of justice"
- check
"to contribute materially and monetarily to interest groups working towards those ends, and to engage in free speech opposing it without reprisal"
- check
"Grant me those things, and it doesn't hurt me personally in the slightest."
- You have all those rights.
"And I expect the same consideration for all others who do not wish to be forced to participate in it."
- Everybody has the same rights
"then why all the attempts to shut down debate with (totally false) cries of "bigot" and "hater"?"
- I'm not shutting down debate. Furthermore, just as you demand the right to be heard, so do I.
"Why the legal persecution of honest business men and women who do not wish to participate what they sincerely regard as a grave social evil? Why all the effort to deprive them of their livelihoods?"
- They have a choice. They can run a public accommodation in compliance with the law, or they can seek other employment, if they feel that public accommodation laws are unbearable. Nobody id forcing them to do anything.
"Why the death threats and hate mail? (And here I thought we were supposed to be the "haters".)"
- Just as you have the right to express your hatred, so does everyone else.
"Those do not sound like the actions of people interested in a functioning democracy."
- That is the constitution at work. It's not just for your benefit. It's for all of us.
"I predict that there will arise a nation-wide (world-wide?) campaign to strengthen and enrich actual marriages (you know, the ones with a husband and a wife), to lower the scandalous divorce rate, to end spousal and child abuse, and to curtail out-of-wedlock sex and parenthood."
- As much as you would like to impose your beliefs on everybody, that's precisely what the constitution is meant to prevent.
I'm not shutting down debate.
DeleteYou really ought to read this.
Nobody is forcing them to do anything.
Considering they're faced with the "choice" of either prostituting themselves to an institution they know to be evil or abandoning their hard earned livelihood, you have a really strange definition of "not forcing". I guess the Syrian exiles in Europe weren't "forced" to flee a war zone. After all, they had the choice to stay.
Just as you have the right to express your hatred
Ahhh... but there's the rub. I have no hatred to express, whereas you prove with every posting that you are filled with it. The OP at the top of this conversation is Exhibit A. You apparently think there's something wrong with Southerners freely choosing to erect as many churches as they please, or to erect signs and religious symbols on their own property proclaiming their beliefs. So I have to wonder about you - why cannot you just "live and let live"?
Finally, I simply can't resist repeating myself here. You disapprovingly call these good people "mindless robots", all the while loudly proclaiming that that is precisely what we all are, with no free will, an illusory consciousness, and no personal identity. I'm surprised you're not cheering on mindless robotry.
"You really ought to read this."
Delete- I think you should read it. In defining bigotry ("Bigotry is not simply disagreeing with what someone else believes; it is an unwillingness to tolerate or accept the person who holds those beliefs."), it agrees with what I have said before. You have a right to believe what you want. But if you advocate curtailing the civil rights of others, you are a bigot. If you want to deny people equal access to public accommodations, you are denying them their civil rights. However I deny the premise of the article: "Postmodern liberals cannot comprehend the idea that one could simultaneously reject a belief and accept the person who holds it." I know the difference only too well. But you apparently don't. You can't claim to accept gays, and at the same time deny their civil rights. If you actually want to put your anti-gay beliefs into practice, that's bigotry.
"you have a really strange definition of "not forcing"."
- As a mature, thinking person, you need to understand that there are conflicts between your rights and the rights of others. It is both childish and unreasonable to think that everything should go your way. If exercising your religious beliefs entails that you deny the civil rights of others, something has to give. But the fact is that you DO have a choice. You can be as bigoted as you like, but not while running a public accommodation. If you are unwilling to fulfill the job requirements (as prescribed by law) of your chosen line of work, then it's time to grow up and admit that you're not suited for the job. Sorry, kid - that's life.
"I have no hatred to express, whereas you prove with every posting that you are filled with it."
- Well, it seems to be a matter of perspective. I think it is indeed hateful for anyone to deny others their civil rights. But I would challenge you to show where I have ever advocated such a thing.
"You disapprovingly call these good people "mindless robots", all the while loudly proclaiming that that is precisely what we all are, with no free will, an illusory consciousness, and no personal identity. I'm surprised you're not cheering on mindless robotry."
- You have not read, or do not understand my position. I think people are mindless robots if they submit their will to religious authorities or dogma. I have never said that people don't have a will to do what is in their interest, nor that consciousness and personal identity are illusions. Those are straw man views that theists love to pin on materialists because they have absolutely no understanding of what materialism entails. However, I do believe that your supposed immaterial soul is an illusion.
"It occurred to me that this ubiquitous religious symbol, the cross, was an instrument of torture and death. It was the means by which the Romans executed Jesus and many others, reserved for the lowliest criminals and enemies of the state. I wondered how Christians could look at a cross and see something happy, rather than the pain and suffering it inflicted."
ReplyDeleteSo many a true word said is jest. Comedian and satirist Lennie Bruce spotted the farce most accurately and with deep intuitive understanding: "If Jesus had been killed twenty years ago, Catholic school children would be wearing little electric chairs around their necks instead of crosses."
Imagine a giant fibreglass wired-up chair astride a mountain. Heh! Heh!
Better still if he was killed by today's method of choice. Christians would be worshiping hypodermic needles.
DeleteBut if Jesus lived today, he'd probably be condemned by Christians for failure to live up to their Christian ideals - maybe even for failure to hate gays the way they do.
You two are so silly. It was no accident of history that Christ died on a cross.
ReplyDeleteSee here.
What a bizarre story.
DeleteGod creates man as an innocent, not knowing right from wrong. Then he sends someone evil to tempt man to partake of the knowledge of good and evil. Naturally, man gives in to the temptation, because he doesn't know any better until after he eats the fruit. But God doesn't care about that. He holds man to be guilty of a grievous sin. And not just the one who committed this supposed sin. He holds man's progeny accountable into perpetuity, because, you know he is perfectly just. And not only, that - he demands blood sacrifice for it. If he doesn't get his blood, people will suffer for all eternity, because, you know he is perfectly just. But hey, no problem. He doesn't need my blood - he just has to have some blood. If it's OK to hold me accountable for the sin of an innocent person, I guess it's OK to take blood from another innocent person in payment. And that somehow settles the debt that I never incurred for a sin that was never committed. All I have to do is abandon any pretense of reason and believe that all this makes some kind of sense.
So silly of me not to believe this. But you see, I still have the brain that this God gave me.