Ark, Ark, Ark

I have just read about Ken Ham’s Ark, constructed in Kentucky following Biblical standards, and am totally, jaw-dropping flabbergasted, amazed and bewildered.  In a time when information is so readily available how can people possibly spend so many resources pursuing such fictions?  But, I am getting ahead of myself, so I shall back up.

Do you believe in and worship a God?  What are the attributes of your God?

If you believe in the Judeo-Christian God, the God of the Old and New Testament, then I suppose there is a chance that you still believe the story of Noah’s Ark.  That chance could only be based on a lack of information and reflection.  To build a vessel in the Bronze Age capable of housing two of every kind of animal on the planet is a preposterous and impossible task.  There are 7.7 million types of animals on our planet, and science guesses we have identified about one-half of all the life forms here.  If we eliminate all the animals that live in water and all the bugs, then we are down to a mere 2 million animals.  The very most conservative estimates the types of animals and birds is 60,000.  There is no way to build a wooden vessel capable of housing, much less feeding two pair of that many life forms.  Ken Ham claims he built it to house 1,300 pairs of life forms.  Well, OK, but that is a drop in the 2 million life forms bucket.  If it were true that Noah took 1,300 pairs of life forms into a closed environment we now know two things Noah didn’t know.  First, the only way it could possibly be true is to argue for evolution postulating that somehow those 2600 creatures evolved rapidly into the 2 million we know today.  Sadly, Ark believers “believe” the scientific fact of evolution is false, so that cannot explain it.  On the other hand, if it were true and these became the only existent creatures on the planet, then having a gene pool of two specimens damns the life form to become extinct very shortly, not to mention the incest that would have to occur for reproduction.  Noah’s Ark is a fiction.  A fiction that depends on ignoring the knowledge we have accumulated in the past 4,000 years. 

But what is most amazing to me is that the point of the entire Noah story is lost on Ham.  The story is about the wrath of God.  God got so mad at humans that he drowned every single living thing.  Millions of people.  All kinds of animals.  It was genocide and extinction across a life-form spectrum we cannot imagine.  It was a temper-tantrum of universal proportions.  But because the ancient writers could not yet fathom evolution, there had to be a way to tell the story of a mean, wrathful God willing to wipe everything out and start over while explaining the diversity of life even those writers observed.  Hence the Ark.  Hence Noah.  Hence the sideline story of how God in his wrath saved himself the trouble of re-creating all the animals he had already created.  The problem, of course, for humans today is that we know the fiction is impossible, and if true, reveals an attribute of a God more worthy of prosecution than worship unless the worship is based on fear.

And the great flood was not a stand-alone event.  We have Sodom and Gomorrah, entire cities destroyed because they did not follow the rules as prescribed 3,000 years before Jesus.  Once again, a wrathful, mean God shows his true colors.  We have the banishment of Adam and Eve from the garden, not only punishment for Adam and Eve for disobeying this wrathful, mean God, but the punishment continues to this day.  Would a loving and forgiving God carry a grudge for what would have to be hundreds of thousands of years?   

The God of the Old Testament is not a God I could worship.  He demands unchallenged control of human life and is willing to execute any number of people if we do not comply.  And the rules he set up to follow are absurd:  stoning to death of humans who are not virgins on their wedding night, children who disobey parents, prostitutes, homosexuals – in fact, anyone who does not toe the line.  If those are attributes you are willing to worship, then I lament the fact that your faith is founded on such a negative supernatural being.  Superman becomes a better role model than God.

Some say that the New Testament in many ways replaces all the rules of the Old Testament via the sacrifice of Jesus.  OK.  The basic premise haunts me.  Prior to Jesus animals were sacrificed to God.  In the New Testament, not only is there human sacrifice, the human to be sacrificed is God’s son.  Really?  In terms of moral behavior has God moved to higher ground in the New Testament moving from animal sacrifice to human sacrifice?

Worse in my mind is the implication that the God of the New Testament is not very bright.  Here is a God that created everything.  He did it in 6 days.  He mapped out all those life forms he later saved on the Ark.  He was brilliant.  He was omnipotent.  But he gets really stupid in the New Testament because he cannot figure out a way to forgive humans for their sins except by the torturous death of his only son.  Amazing.  He would have a better image had we stuck with animal sacrifice.  Is the sacrifice of our children a behavior we should emulate?  Should I love my neighbor so much I am willing to kill my son?  Such a godly requirement is not one I can follow.  Why didn’t he send Jesus to perform miracles and simply announce that the punishments administered to Adam and Eve are now over for anyone who worships God?  I suspect the number of believers would be huge if believers did not have to toil and there was no pain in child birth for those who believe.  Why didn’t he simply allow Jesus to live forever on earth preaching love and forgiveness?  Why all this continued death and destruction in the name of sacrifice, anger and jealousy?  Worse, these deeds do not align with the words:  Love thy neighbor, unless of course, he does not do what God told him to do.  Even God approves a death penalty for those who disobey him, and the ultimate death penalty is an eternity in hell.

So, if you are of the Judeo-Christian heritage you worship a God who is wrathful, angry, willing to kill humans and entire species if we do not behave.  You worship a God that could not see a way around sacrificing his own son to implement forgiveness.  You worship a God who holds a grudge for a very long time.  You worship a God whose basic tenets in many cases go against the scientific rules of reality; rules that he theoretically created and implemented.  You worship a God who says one thing and does another.  You worship a God that supports slavery and no rights for women.  You appear to worship an all-powerful, supernatural being who has consistently demonstrated all the behaviors we abhor most in our fellow man. 

Or, it is all just a great story, a marvelous fiction written to promote certain beliefs and behaviors.  In that case the Ark is no more real than Paul Bunyan and his big blue ox, Tinker Bell and Never-Never Land, or even Oz.  In fact, if you heard that someone worshipped Tinker Bell and spent millions of dollars in the lab to create fairy dust so that we could all fly and never grow up, I suspect you would be totally, jaw-dropping flabbergasted, amazed and bewildered. 

And even though it is so sad, you would laugh, and your laughter would sound like, “Ark, ark, ark.” 

Bible Dilemma

I suppose the very first question should be, “Do you believe that the Bible is the holy word of the Lord, written and/or inspired by God and should be taken literally, verbatim, just as we have it today?”  Or, “Do you believe the Bible is a guide, subject to interpretation and that you (or other humans) have the authority to decide which verses are real and you will believe those verses, and which verses are not real today and we are not obligated to believe them?”  The first group that views the Bible as the literal, infallible word of God, I shall refer to as Type A Christians.  The second group who revere the Bible but do not take it literally I shall refer to as Type B Christians.  From where I sit, both groups have an intellectual dilemma that cannot be resolved.

Type A’s must believe everything in the Bible.  They must believe the earth is flat.  They must believe the sun orbits the earth.  They must believe the earth is about 6,000 years old.  They must believe it is better to offer your virgin daughters to a group of men than allow those men to have sex with other men.  They must believe that if a woman is not a virgin on her wedding night she should be stoned to death.  They must believe prostitutes should be stoned to death.  They must believe homosexuals should be stoned to death.  They must believe that God created everything and evolution is a theory that cannot be proven.  And they must believe that Jesus believes all these things as well because Jesus said he did.

The intellectual dilemma for the Type A’s is that we know so much more about the universe than the authors of the Bible knew.  We know for a fact that the earth is not flat.  We know for a fact that the sun does not orbit the earth.  We consider it a crime to promote your children to have sex with men, stone women for not being virgins, stone homosexuals, and stone prostitutes.  We know for a fact that evolution is not a theory in the common use of the word, it is a scientific fact that has been confirmed over and over again.  In fact, there is no evidence that contradicts evolution and every new piece of data we get confirms it even more.  If there was evidence contrary to evolutions then scientists would be the first to say that this theory does not work because we found an exception.  Whether the Type A’s believe God dictated the Bible, or God whispered in the ear of those men who could write in that age, their dilemma is, much of the Bible is false.  (If God inspired the Bible, I wonder why He did not throw in some anti-slavery, pro-human rights verses.  Did He know it was coming?)  The Bible in many cases is confirmed by scientific fact to be false.  Type A’s now have a problem with clinging to the word of God if we prove God wrong.  Can we believe in an all-knowing, all-powerful God when we know he was wrong? 

Type B’s are much more laid back and much less bull-headed about the Bible.  They see the Bible as a holy work, but believe it must be adapted to the times.  Verses that advocate stoning, advocate treating women as second class citizens, support slavery, condemn homosexuality, etc., etc. must just be ignored.  Those were the rules in the Bronze Age and they no longer apply.  We choose not to follow those passages that conflict with our current social beliefs.  OK.  Type B’s are much more open and comforting and tolerant.

But the intellectual dilemma for Type B’s is that someone gets to just say, “I do not believe this verse to be true today,” and act as though it is irrelevant.  They have made the Bible as false as the Type A’s.  God must be wrong, so we have updated Him.  Even harder to resolve is the question if any passage can be declared inappropriate and inaccurate, who is to say that the virgin birth and the resurrection cannot be declared the same?  Are they not in the same book from which we have chosen only the verses that comply with our thinking?  If we can do that, then this becomes our book and not God’s book, and we declare, once again, that God must be wrong and this book cannot be holy, or at least not worth reading until we have corrected some things.

Perhaps there is a Type C, but I cannot fathom what that belief system might be.  If you believe it all you are wrong and so is God.  If you get to cherry pick which verses you want then it is not a holy book, you could simply ignore anything you wanted to because we have given permission to do so, and the book becomes superficial.

So, where does all that leave us?

If the Bible and our common history of Jesus disappeared, would we re-discover God as we have discovered evolution, gravity, human rights, the order of our solar system, the history of our solar system, our planet and our universe, etc.?  If we forgot all we knew, would we re-discover what we currently know based on science and math?  Yes.  But I suspect we could not and would not discover God.  We would not be as wowed today with burning bushes, parting of seas, water into wine, etc.  We would look for the causes and explanations of such phenomenon and would not make the de facto assumption that they were magical events.  In fact, we would probably look to the authors who described such things as the culprits thereby rendering one more piece of evidence that the Bible cannot be true when we know authors made stuff up.  The question should be, “What factual evidence do we have to support the stories and claims made in the Bible?”  If any are shown to be false, are they all false?  If any are shown to be false should we base an international belief system on this book?  And sadly, it will be up to the Christians to prove it happened not the non-believers to prove it did not happen.  Believing it is true is not the same as knowing and showing it to be true.

Therein is the Bible dilemma.

My God Moment

I was in the 7^th grade, sitting in the Astrodome with my friends and peers from church.  We traveled there to hear Billy Graham.  The Dome was full of the faithful, the curious, the saved and the sinners.  I could smell popcorn and beer though the concessions stands were closed and the confession stands were open. There were many musical performances prior to the main event, warming up the crowd.  Graham finally emerged and the crowd went wild.  I was curious.  As he spoke in his distinct drawl about God loving even me, forgiving even me, I felt a warmth I had not felt before.  It was a glow, a sense of being worthwhile.  I knew I was a sinner.  My sins were easy for me to list and worry about.  I did not know it at the time, but I was depressed.  I felt worthless.  I felt unloved.  I felt incomplete.  All my teenage urges were overpowering and “sinful.”  The message that there was a supreme, supernatural being that loved me anyway was incredibly powerful.  I was so ready to hear such a sermon.  I was so needy of love. 

When Billy asked those who felt the spirit moving to stand, I stood.  Tears rolled down my cheeks.  He asked us to make our way from wherever we were sitting to the floor of the Dome.  I left my group, wandered down ramps and emerged on the Astroturf with hundreds of other people.  Many were crying.  Many were smiling and laughing.  A man met me as I stepped on the turf.  He asked me what was going on and I told him I felt the spirit of the Lord, I wanted to let Jesus take my life.  He got my name, address and phone number, and I was dismissed.  I was now on the roster of converts.  I was now on the mailing list.

While others at the microphone continued to urge folks to let Jesus in and come on down, while gospel music blared, I wandered upstream back to my seat.  My peers looked at me either as though I had lost my mind or with a warm smile of approval.  Adult church sponsors came to sit by me and praise my new commitment, my conversion, and my born-againness. 

Life quickly returned to normal.  There was school, church, girlfriends, sports and I detected nothing different.  I prayed fervently.  Nothing happened.  I asked for things but did not get them.  I asked to be relieved of things that remained with me.  I began to feel more and more like the fool.  I kept all this buried deep within.  For the religiously fervent in the church I was now a real member, an insider.  For everyone else I was still just Bob.

So, after my 7^th grade God Moment in the Houston Astrodome at the feet of Billy Graham I have wondered if I am now officially “saved,” once and for always no matter what I do.  That makes no sense to me.  My prayers remained un-answered and un-recognized.  My depression lingers.  I may have been touched by God, but what I really wanted was a life-long embrace.  I remain un-hugged by the supernatural.  The God Moment came and went and life went on as usual. 

It must be my fault.  I hear God does not make mistakes.  

Lee Strobel’s The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel is promoted as an investigative search into the evidence that supports the existence of Jesus Christ, his death and his resurrection.  Strobel is a lawyer and a journalist.  I believe if he practiced either profession while scrutinizing his own book he would trash it and recant.  Now that all my Christian Evangelical friends and Christian Apologist friends are jumping up and down and reaching for their blood pressure meds, please allow me to re-state the above in a different context.

Tom Brady, quarterback for the New England Patriots, was accused by the Indianapolis Colts of masterminding a plan that reduced the volume of air in the footballs he used as quarterback during the 2015 AFC Championship game.  The scandal became known as Deflategate.  Less air in the balls, better grip, more accurate pass, etc.  Camps of the Brady faithful immediately lined up to say this must be poppycock and balderdash.  The Tom Brady they know would never do such a thing.  Others, noticeably pro-Colt fans, believe Brady was involved.  Others who question the priority placed on professional sports in our country were aghast at the hurrah around ball psi.  This group says it doesn’t matter what the pro-Brady camp says, it is football, and football is harmful whether air was reduced from balls or not.  If footballs were deflated, then show me evidence because I believe anyone who plays ball is a crook and shyster and will do anything to win.  And Tom Brady must have either done it himself or orchestrated the air loss to support the football win.  Let’s call Brady the anti-Christ and the Colt fans the believers that he did it.  Brady fans believe he did not do it.  Did Brady deflate balls?  Did Jesus rise from the dead?

Into the fray marches Lee Strobel, lawyer and journalist.  Lee will get to the bottom of the issue and help all of us, both pro and con Bradyites, know what really happened.  Lee will bring his array of formidable skills to the task, but implies right up front that he believes Brady did it.  (Jesus arose.)  Strobel is not a Brady supporter.  He is a Colt believer.  Strobel conducts his investigation by conducting a series of interviews with experts in the field.  His printed product is a recounting of those interviews, and sadly I am still laughing.

The only experts Strobel interviews are those who support the notion that there is evidence that Tom Brady did it.  He only interviews Colt fans!  Each so called expert is in fact asked if he is more convinced Brady did it after his scholarship than before, and each expert says yes.  Each expert provides a series of anecdotes regarding Brady, and Strobel confuses anecdotes with evidence.  Each expert implies what he says is accurate because they each know a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who knows Brady and believes that Brady did it.  Therefore, Brady must have done it and Strobel is a best seller.

Now just a minute.  The lawyer in Strobel should have pointed out that the only witnesses that were interrogated for this trial were witnesses for the prosecution.  The only case we hear is the state’s case that Brady did it.  The journalist in Strobel should have realized that hearsay and second hand sources are not admissible in this debate.  Further, many of the expert witnesses should likely have recused themselves because they so deeply believed Brady did it.  I am convinced if Strobel turns either his lawyer’s eye or his reporter’s ear to his own book he will recognize there is no real evidence here, and if so, it is perceptual and one-sided.  Strobel concludes Brady did it after consulting not one single argument to the contrary.  This is hardly hard core investigative journalism or court room witness extraction.  This is a one-sided sales pitch.

That’s what Strobel did in The Case for Christ.  He interviewed believers.  He heard tales and anecdotes and arguments that those who believe in Jesus just must be right because it makes sense to other believers that they are right.  If you engage in this book hoping for a meaningful discourse on the reality of Jesus, his death and resurrection, you will only hear one side.  Amazingly, as I read other reviews, Christians love the book because, well, it was written by Christians.  Skeptics will scoff and go in search of real evidence.

I am left with the feeling that the Christian belief is so strong in some that they simply cannot perceive another way of thinking.  I am left with the feeling that the support of Christianity as described by the Apologists is unacceptable in a court of law and is pretty slim for any rational person.  The Patriots will never believe Brady did it, and the Colts cannot conceive of any other outcome.  Christians will always believe that Jesus rose from the dead, and skeptics will never believe such a thing.  And as for Strobel’s heavy arguments, it turns out that air has little weight.

A Model Prayer to God

At some point, fairly recently, I opened my eyes and began to think about the liturgy in church.  I stopped saying prayers and creeds by rote, and started thinking about what I was really saying.  For instance:

The Lord’s Prayer, Mathew 6: 9-13.  I have said this prayer almost every Sunday for as long as I can remember, though I grew up Presbyterian and said “debtors” the shift to the Methodist “trespasses” was not tough.  But as I said the words this past Sunday my brain was in gear.  I had thoughts.  That means I had problems.  Why is this the “Lord’s Prayer?”  Is this the prayer the Lord says?  Is this the prayer Jesus said?  Is this a prayer that should serve as a model for humans to address a God?  If so, shouldn’t it be called “The Model Prayer to God?”

“Our Father.”  Really?  Is God my father?  Is there a DNA or paternity test we can run?  If he is my father, than am I his son?  If so, this whole sacrifice your son to abate our sins gets really complicated for me.  Why didn't Jesus simply say, “God, my father,” or something similar?  As a father I would do anything for my kids.  Why is it that God allows such pain and cruelty among His kids?  Not sure I can call Him Father as I look at war, starvation, childhood cancer, etc.  Or is this simply another reference to God as the creator of all.  If so, God becomes father to ants, mosquitoes, snakes, etc.

“Who art in heaven.”  OK, now I am really stumped.  We do not know where heaven is, but evidently that is where God is.  Is he here on earth too, as in omnipresent?  If so, why say who art in heaven?  Why not simply say “who is everywhere”?

“Hallowed be Thy name.”  OK, so his name is sacred or holy.  Isn’t that a no-brainer?  If I am praying to some deity it seems stupid to pray to one who is not sacred or holy.  And, what’s in a name?  And which name?  There are 102 different names listed in the Bible for God.  Which one, or are all hallowed?  If one has 102 handles, sacred is not the word that comes to mind.  More like an identity crisis, or an IMDb listing for God.

“Your kingdom come.”  Is that what we really want?  The kingdom of God established on this planet?  What would that be like?  What would it be like if we take the Bible literally and deny divorce, stone women who are not virgins on their wedding night, do away with medicine and psychiatry and simply practice faith healing?  Is that what we want? 

“Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.”  What is Thy will?  Sounds like the question I have been asking and praying about for years.  What do you want me to do?  If you have a plan for me why do you keep it a secret?  If you have a plan for all of us, why keep it a secret?  Just tell me what you want.  After I am told I will decide whether to pray for that will to be done.  God’s will may be terrible for humanity.  As I see the worldwide bloodshed in the name of some deity I wonder if that is in fact God’s will.  If so, I want no part of it.  If heaven knows and lives God’s will, then surely we deserve a glimpse.

“Give us this day our daily bread.”  As long as we are asking God for stuff, food seems OK.  Why not ask for water?  Why not wealth and health?  Why not a great sex life?  Why not my team winning Super Bowl?  Nope, just bread.  Seems like the prayer prescribed by Jesus is woefully short on the list of things humans need most to thrive.  How do we explain all the people starving on this planet who pray this prayer?

“And forgive us our debts/trespasses.”  If God has influence in personal finance, then His forgiveness of our debts would be great.  I don’t see that happening after years and years of Christian praying.  If the term should be trespass, are we talking boundary violations, rule breaking?  OK, I’d get seeking forgiveness for that, but looks like there are a lot of people in prison who have been praying this prayer and are still in prison. 

“As we forgive our debtors/those who trespass against us.”  The economy would freak and banks would collapse if all humans forgave the debt others owe us.  Would be nice for the debtor, not so much for the lender, but I do not see it happening.  If this means something like someone owes me a favor, then I can see forgiving that.  People who have violated my boundaries, or the boundaries of my loved ones are much tougher to forgive.  If I am to simply forgive debts and trespasses by just announcing that I have done so, why doesn’t God do the same thing?  Why did He have to go through sending his only son to earth to die a terrible death?  If that is the cost of offering forgiveness, then I am not going to pray for that.

“Lead us not into temptation.”  This phrase angers me.  If I were to design and create humans in my image why would I build in temptation?  Is God tempted?  If He doesn’t want me to lust, covet, eat too much, drink too much, and gamble too much, etc., why did He build in the urges in the first place?  Seems terribly unreasonable to construct a being with temptations then tell them not to go there. 

“But deliver us from evil.”  If we pray this second phrase are we relieved of temptation?  I don’t think so.  What evil are we to be delivered from?  The evil of other religions hence all the holy wars?  The evil of physical pleasure which we are hard wired to seek?  Why would God wire us to rush to evil?  These two phrases make no sense to me.  Why not just say help us do good things and avoid doing bad things.

“For Thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory forever.”  Right back where we started.  Where is this kingdom and what is it like?  If He has all this power then why isn’t this prayer answered all the time?  If He answered it all the time, then He would likely receive more glory.  Otherwise, we have a hard time convincing others that our invisible man in the magic kingdom is very powerful and worthy of glory. 

Amen.

Superman v. God: Dawn of Reason

(Apologies to Warner Brothers and “Batman v Superman:  Dawn of Justice.”)

OK, before I get started I assume you know Superman is a fictitious character.  Right?  There is no such Kryptonian on earth named Clark Kent who has super powers and flies around in a red cape with a big S on his chest.  I also assume that for many of you, God is a fictitious character.  There is no such omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent being as God and there is no such person on earth today named Jesus walking around in robes and sandals.  Some of you may believe that one or the other of these characters is real.  That’s fine.  You can believe what you want.

I am a big fan of Superman, (a.k.a. Clark Kent and Kal-El).  He has never claimed to be all powerful.  He has never claimed to know everything.  He has never claimed to be everywhere all the time.  He has never claimed responsibility for creating anything.  And he has never, ever asked to be worshiped or adored.  If anything, he seems shy and is reluctant to reveal his true persona so he hides out as Clark Kent.  He emerges as Superman, however, whenever there is a wrong that needs righting or bad guy that needs busting.  Most of what he does from my point of view is miraculous, though he does not claim those actions to be so.  Kal-El has never claimed to be a deity.  He never claimed that his father, Jor-El, was a deity.  It is interesting to watch Kal-El struggle with human emotions and desires even though he is not of this earth.

God, on the other hand, insists that we worship Him, in fact that we worship Him first and foremost.  He claims to know everything, see everything and be everywhere at once.  He does not perform miracles in front of the press, but expects us to believe he performs miracles.  Superman’s sweetie is a reporter and much of what he does is public covered by audio, video and print media.  God’s son, Jesus, was sent to earth to die, just the opposite of Jor-El who died sending his son to earth so that his son may live.  Superman seeks to serve humans.  Jesus wants us to serve him.  In Siegel and Shuster’s gospel, Kal-El makes mistakes and fumbles, but consistently seeks to work for the better good and to save and protect humanity.  Further, no Superman comic book ever claimed to be inerrant and dogma inspiring.  In the Bible’s Gospels we read that a few disabled people were healed, water was turned into wine, fish and loaves were multiplied, fish were caught, water was walked on, storms were calmed, and a dead guy was raised.  Hard to see how those acts were anything but self-promotion rather than acts for the betterment of humankind. 

It is believed that God answers prayers.  I have no personal evidence of that, but others claim to.  Superman has super hearing.  Many times folks in trouble call out and it is Superman who physically responds and deals with the problem.  If God and Superman were both real, which one would have shown up to save the passengers on the Germanwings flight that crashed into a French mountain?  I think I know.

If you do not do what God wants you to do He will send you to a place of torture for eternity.  If you do not do what Superman wants you to do he will either lock you up for breaking the law, or allow you to be a human being and make up your own mind.  He fights for freedom.  In fact, he stands around and hears people criticizing him to his Clark Kent face.  Jesus was never so forgiving.

So, if there is a contest between Superman and God, and the winner becomes real, who would you vote for? 

Sorry God. Superman really is a better deal than you.  He is more powerful, more accessible, more forgiving, and more supportive and he arrived in modern times, not the Bronze Age.  Plus, he could not be crucified.  The nails would bend rather than penetrate, and he never would have sat still for that anyway.  Martha and John Kent raised no fool.

I vote for Superman to be our god at the dawn of reason.

Better, if I form an organization to worship Kal-El, all my property will be tax exempt, my income will be tax exempt and anyone who gives me money will have a tax deduction.  What a deal!  Plus, for such status no organization has ever been asked to prove that the deity they worship is real.

Religious Freedom = The Right to Discriminate?

(The topic of this post straddles the line between one-eyed bob and one-eyed bob on god, so I am posting on both sites.)

I am a bigot.  I am sure I am.  I must suffer from prejudice when it comes to religious affiliation or lack thereof, or race, or gender, or sexual preference, or handicapping condition, or ethnicity, or height, or weight, etc.  I cannot image any human who is totally free of prejudice.  That is not what we do.  As humans we look for differences, and we look to find folks who look like us, think like us, believe like us, and act like us.  Multiple birds with multiple feathers all seeking to nest with other birds who possess feathers like our own.  If I prefer a certain feather over some other feather then I must have prejudicial feelings about all those who do not share my favorite feather’s attributes.  Simply said, but very difficult to amend.

I am aware of a few of my prejudicial feelings based on my reaction to folks.  When I see someone with purple hair I do a double-take.  When I see someone covered in tattoos I do a double take.  When I see someone with jewelry displayed from a variety of holes punched in their skin I do a double take.  When I see someone driving slowly in the left lane I do a double take.  When I see an obese person I do a double take.  All those double takes result from my brain identifying differences between my sense of standards for humans and the human I see before me.  I discriminate.  I recognize the differences.  And I tend to judge people based on superficial characteristics.  I hate that I do, but I do.

So, if I am a bigot with tendencies to discriminate should my discriminatory behavior be protected by law under the guise that I should have the right to prejudge people?  For me, the answer is not just “no,” it is hell no.  It is very clear that we do not want the government to tell us what to think and not think, what to believe and not believe.  Our inner belief system must absolutely be protected by law.  But acting on those beliefs is an entirely different question.  If I believe young children should handle poisonous snakes I have the right to believe that.  I do not have the right to ask young children to handle poisonous snakes.  If I believe the US government should be overthrown and a new government be established be it fascist or communist, I have the absolute right to believe such a thing, but the day I take up arms against our government I have crossed over from belief to action on the belief.  Such action will be stopped.

Does that answer change if I claim that the deity I worship discriminates and I am only following what my deity says?  You have got to be kidding me.  As if we need one more example of how religious beliefs are tearing the world apart.  If you believe that Black people are inferior to white people, women are inferior to men, homosexuals are inferior to heterosexuals, Muslims are inferior to Christians, and people who watch either reality TV or the food network are inferior to everyone else then you have the right to believe all of that nonsense.  What you do not have, should not have, is the right to practice such narrow mindedness that results in other humans belittled or denied because of your limited mental capacity.

And so I sit in wonder as North Carolina, Tennessee, Mississippi, Indiana, Michigan and Texas have passed or are attempting to pass “religious freedom” bills that protect groups who discriminate based on their religious beliefs.  Yes, this is the United States.  Land of the free, home of the brave, as long as you are a person like me.

Discrimination is discrimination.  If your god tells you to discriminate then I believe you should seriously consider finding another god.  If you do not want to provide services to people who are different from you then you are a bigot practicing bigotry.  Practicing bigots should never be protected by the law.  Not in this nation.  Clearly in other parts of the world lives are actually lost if one does not believe as the majority believes, but that should never happen here.  An effort to make it OK to discriminate based on your religious beliefs does not increase the freedom of humans in our nation, it dramatically reduces such freedom. 

If we decide to allow private enterprise to discriminate in the name of religious belief does not make such a decision morally right.  It is a source of damnation for such beliefs and their practices.  Religious freedom bills that pervert the notion of freedom of religion are the saddest oxymorons I know.

Judge not.  Discriminate not.