![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Some Stuff about Faith and Stuff.
I'm going to re-date this so it will go back to the top because there were some serious formatting errors and things that I discovered that caused large sections to be deleted and some to be repeated. I'm sorry about the cut too. I'm STILL trying to get that to work right, and I don't know why it will not cut correctly. I imagine with the formatting errors, and lack of a cut that may be why I didn't get much feedback on the topic. or... maybe people just aren't as interested as I thought they might be.
Recent events in New York and a discussion about it by Keith Olbermann. "Every year the margin by which this country supports this grows," says Keith O. "And within a decade, or perhaps less, it will be universal in this nation. Period." He went on to say, "the opponents will be revealed for carrying water for a larger kind of orthodoxy. Their church is opposed to same-sex marriage because same-sex marriage means diversity, and diversity means peaceful interactions between members of different groups and religions, and peaceful interactions means fears and prejudices are diminished, and the diminishing means those churches' cartel in the religion business is jeopardized." He further stated, "If you think big league religions are only about faith and not at all about business or about keeping people scared, then you have not been paying attention in church or out."
I shared the link on my FaceBook, and a good friend of mine while he agrees with the concept of equality, raised the question, "will political agitators on the left use the right to marry as a weapon to shut churches down?" I initially said I didn't think that would happen. He pointed out that small poor churches had been driven into bankruptcy when they'd been forced to try to comply with new laws and install ramps doors and handrails in bathrooms to meet new accessibility laws. Then he mentioned that "A church in Virginia was closed because they wouldn't marry an interracial couple."
I disagree with that church's view and the stand they took, however, they did not deny the couple their right to marry, or to have their marriage recognized in any part of the secular US. Only in that particular church. To be honest, why would they want to be married in a church that wouldn't validate their own marriage by faith? It doesn't make sense to me. BUT having said that, I don't think that church individually should have been shut down, nor forced to change what THEY believe. The state should not have interfered with their church policy. A church is not a public organization. Those people had the right to a legal marriage anywhere else that would have been considered 100% valid in every state. This is not currently the case with same sex couples. Yes they can now go to one of several states and be married and have their marriage recognized, however, they must then make the choice to live there or in another state that recognizes their rights. My friends in Ohio, can now go to New York to be married. They can't come back and live in Ohio and have that marriage be recognized as any two sex couple can expect to do. So if Gay marriage passes, in any given state, or nationally, I also don't believe that a church should be forced to practice something that is against the moral code taught within that church. As long as they aren't out in the political world trying to force that view on the secular world by making it impossible everywhere, and not just within the walls of their own sanctuary, and within the confines of their own faithful. If I were gay, I would not want to be a member of a church that taught that I was practicing evil, or that something was very very wrong with me because of how my god had made me any way. I'd seek a church that taught more according to my own faith (and I did as you may have noticed.)
Thinking on that broader spectrum, though, got me thinking about how some people view their faith, their god and their churches. We are living (thankfully) in a society with guaranteed religious freedom. (that is freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion btw) that has secular laws, as I feel it should, that are 100% separate from any church bylaws, be they Biblical Law, Sharia Law, Wiccan Rede or whatever. Secular law may mirror some of those concepts, but it does so based on common sense and the greater good. "Thou shalt not commit murder" (btw, this does NOT translate to "thou shalt not kill"). Well, how many religions do NOT have some sort of prohibition against the murder of one individual by another. And I should point out that yes, there is a difference between murder and killing. The difference is HUGE, and unfortunately there are a lot of people who actually don't see the difference. The point here is that Secular Law is based on common sense and the greater good and because some Religious Law is also based on common sense and the greater good there are parallels. They should still be considered 100% separate from each other. Laws against murder are not part of secular law because religious law, any religious law forbids it. It is on the books to protect society and individuals from undue harm, just like traffic laws that say you must stop when the light is red so you don't accidentally kill someone with your car.
As far as political agitators shutting down churches on a broad spectrum. People need their faith, but they need their faith to be a positive influence as it is supposed to be, not a source of fear and hatred. Westboro baptist comes to mind, and I would love to see them shut down. However, having said that, as much as I revile their practices, their vitriol and the disgusting political statement they make every time they hold up a sign regardless of which one it is. "God Hates Fags" or "Thank God for Dead Soldiers", the later of which does not celebrate (as it should) the freedom that those soldiers died for (the freedom for them to spread their disgusting hatred) but instead a celebration that they are dead because their disgusting 'god' hates them because gay men and women are allowed to serve their country just like everyone else (or at least in as much as they don't discuss their sexual orientation). I am even able to see that the ruling in regards to Westboro's hateful speech is correct. They do have the right to say it. Thankfully we also have the right to do everything to counter protest, to block or shield the people it is directed towards from having to see it. Thank the Goddess for groups like Patriot Guard and other counter-protest groups that arise at need.
Now having said that, I am starting to be of the opinion that if churches (themselves, not the individual members) are going to get involved in politics, spending fortunes in support of or against issues that no individuals could afford to spend, and which not everyone in their congregation might favor or oppose and who have little or no voice in the matter (much like unions), often for fear of retaliation within the group, then those churches need to pay taxes just like everyone else with a political voice. I also do not agree with churches being used as polling places for this reason. Historically this was done because a church was often the only gathering place in a community, serving both as a church and a school house and meeting house. Now that is not the case, and it is no longer appropriate for political elections to be decided there.
Just as an example, (and I'm not saying anything against LDS either it's just a good example) Look how much money the Mormon church spends on advertising. When it's to pass on the good word about their own church, their own faith and beliefs, it's for the greater good of their church, I'm okay with that, though I think the money could be better spent helping the very poor within their own faith base and maybe others. When it's brought into a political fight in favor of something as odious as Prop 8 in California, that's way outside what their money should be spent on. If they don't believe in gay marriage, then that message should be preached in the church, not on the streets and certainly not in the political forum, spending money that was meant for the church. What Gentiles do does not effect what Mormons do, unless as Keith O. said, the church fears that they will lose their own membership, as people leave in favor of more progressive views regarding faith.
For me, the concept of fear is very alien when it comes to the deity. It's something I did not understand as a Baptist.. "Fear God" or "Fear Jesus" seemed so wrong to me. I always felt "Respect", "Honor", "Love", "Cherish", "TRUST"... feelings and emotions that I associated with a parent. My own upbringing supported that. I had no reason to fear my parents either. They were not perfect, but they were always as fair as they knew how to be, I respect them, honor them, love them and cherish them. I TRUST them. I did not fear them, because I knew they would never do something to me that would cause me harm. I expect the same out of my deity... though obviously I also expect my deity not to make human errors or judgment, so I can absolutely TRUST that the path laid before me is the right one, even if it is difficult, if I falter, if I fall down. I know I will be taken where I need to go.
Having said that, I think in a way I have a very unique understanding because I had the parents that I do (did -- My father passed on in 2006, but my mother who is 80 is still in very good health). They had about the most perfect relationship with each other that two people could have. They did something that most parents do not do when raising children. They were loving, reserved and patient with us, and *aware of their own flaws*, and of things in their own ideology that they recognized as probably incorrect, but hard to overcome in their own thinking (racism and prejudice for example, raised as poor rural southerners, this ingrained concept was very difficult for them to overcome though on a certain level, they understood that it wasn't the right thinking) which they worked very hard not to pass on to us. It allowed us to have a clean perspective on those issues, and this is something that most parents did not do. Many parents put a lot of effort into teaching their children to think and believe exactly as they do and leave very little of their thoughts and beliefs up to the child's own perception as they grow. Our parents guided us on right and wrong, but also to form our OWN opinions about the world around us based on our OWN experiences.
I have to say that I'm very thankful to have the perspective that I do. Thank goodness I don't have narrow thinking. Thank goodness that I am able to forgive people, even ones who have done great wrong against me. Thank goodness I am able to let go of grudges and move forward. Thank goodness I live in a world where I am treated more or less as an equal. I no longer have to hide my faith completely. Is it perfect? No. Am I still discriminated against? Yes. Sometimes. People will always be like that. People tend to group themselves with people who think like they do, look like they do, talk like they do, act like they do, believe as they do. People will always tend to do one of two things when confronted with things they don't understand. Either they will ask questions until they understand it, or they will reject it out of hand. Sometimes even after asking questions to understand they will find it too different and still reject it, but usually the questioner will accept it as different even if they don't agree. Thank goodness, I have the capacity to look past those who cannot, and are unable to see outside of their own world. While I will do everything legal to assert my rights against someone who is discriminating against me in public, such as in the work place, or public office, or government, I accept that within private organizations, such as churches (yes, even the large ones) that they have the right to practice their own beliefs which by their nature may wholly disinclude me. That's fine. It's their loss anyway, isn't it? Maybe I won't be welcome at their gathering, but they will still be welcome at mine. Thankfully, I have only very rarely been made to feel unwelcome in any church that I attended with a friend, or when attending a church function, or event held within a church, attended by primarily members. I am able to find things of faith, and parallels of belief almost anywhere I go, even if I cannot necessarily accept the entire doctrine. Very few people actually are able to say that they are 100% in agreement 100% of the time with their church doctrine. We all question things at all times.
Recent events in New York and a discussion about it by Keith Olbermann. "Every year the margin by which this country supports this grows," says Keith O. "And within a decade, or perhaps less, it will be universal in this nation. Period." He went on to say, "the opponents will be revealed for carrying water for a larger kind of orthodoxy. Their church is opposed to same-sex marriage because same-sex marriage means diversity, and diversity means peaceful interactions between members of different groups and religions, and peaceful interactions means fears and prejudices are diminished, and the diminishing means those churches' cartel in the religion business is jeopardized." He further stated, "If you think big league religions are only about faith and not at all about business or about keeping people scared, then you have not been paying attention in church or out."
I shared the link on my FaceBook, and a good friend of mine while he agrees with the concept of equality, raised the question, "will political agitators on the left use the right to marry as a weapon to shut churches down?" I initially said I didn't think that would happen. He pointed out that small poor churches had been driven into bankruptcy when they'd been forced to try to comply with new laws and install ramps doors and handrails in bathrooms to meet new accessibility laws. Then he mentioned that "A church in Virginia was closed because they wouldn't marry an interracial couple."
I disagree with that church's view and the stand they took, however, they did not deny the couple their right to marry, or to have their marriage recognized in any part of the secular US. Only in that particular church. To be honest, why would they want to be married in a church that wouldn't validate their own marriage by faith? It doesn't make sense to me. BUT having said that, I don't think that church individually should have been shut down, nor forced to change what THEY believe. The state should not have interfered with their church policy. A church is not a public organization. Those people had the right to a legal marriage anywhere else that would have been considered 100% valid in every state. This is not currently the case with same sex couples. Yes they can now go to one of several states and be married and have their marriage recognized, however, they must then make the choice to live there or in another state that recognizes their rights. My friends in Ohio, can now go to New York to be married. They can't come back and live in Ohio and have that marriage be recognized as any two sex couple can expect to do. So if Gay marriage passes, in any given state, or nationally, I also don't believe that a church should be forced to practice something that is against the moral code taught within that church. As long as they aren't out in the political world trying to force that view on the secular world by making it impossible everywhere, and not just within the walls of their own sanctuary, and within the confines of their own faithful. If I were gay, I would not want to be a member of a church that taught that I was practicing evil, or that something was very very wrong with me because of how my god had made me any way. I'd seek a church that taught more according to my own faith (and I did as you may have noticed.)
Thinking on that broader spectrum, though, got me thinking about how some people view their faith, their god and their churches. We are living (thankfully) in a society with guaranteed religious freedom. (that is freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion btw) that has secular laws, as I feel it should, that are 100% separate from any church bylaws, be they Biblical Law, Sharia Law, Wiccan Rede or whatever. Secular law may mirror some of those concepts, but it does so based on common sense and the greater good. "Thou shalt not commit murder" (btw, this does NOT translate to "thou shalt not kill"). Well, how many religions do NOT have some sort of prohibition against the murder of one individual by another. And I should point out that yes, there is a difference between murder and killing. The difference is HUGE, and unfortunately there are a lot of people who actually don't see the difference. The point here is that Secular Law is based on common sense and the greater good and because some Religious Law is also based on common sense and the greater good there are parallels. They should still be considered 100% separate from each other. Laws against murder are not part of secular law because religious law, any religious law forbids it. It is on the books to protect society and individuals from undue harm, just like traffic laws that say you must stop when the light is red so you don't accidentally kill someone with your car.
As far as political agitators shutting down churches on a broad spectrum. People need their faith, but they need their faith to be a positive influence as it is supposed to be, not a source of fear and hatred. Westboro baptist comes to mind, and I would love to see them shut down. However, having said that, as much as I revile their practices, their vitriol and the disgusting political statement they make every time they hold up a sign regardless of which one it is. "God Hates Fags" or "Thank God for Dead Soldiers", the later of which does not celebrate (as it should) the freedom that those soldiers died for (the freedom for them to spread their disgusting hatred) but instead a celebration that they are dead because their disgusting 'god' hates them because gay men and women are allowed to serve their country just like everyone else (or at least in as much as they don't discuss their sexual orientation). I am even able to see that the ruling in regards to Westboro's hateful speech is correct. They do have the right to say it. Thankfully we also have the right to do everything to counter protest, to block or shield the people it is directed towards from having to see it. Thank the Goddess for groups like Patriot Guard and other counter-protest groups that arise at need.
Now having said that, I am starting to be of the opinion that if churches (themselves, not the individual members) are going to get involved in politics, spending fortunes in support of or against issues that no individuals could afford to spend, and which not everyone in their congregation might favor or oppose and who have little or no voice in the matter (much like unions), often for fear of retaliation within the group, then those churches need to pay taxes just like everyone else with a political voice. I also do not agree with churches being used as polling places for this reason. Historically this was done because a church was often the only gathering place in a community, serving both as a church and a school house and meeting house. Now that is not the case, and it is no longer appropriate for political elections to be decided there.
Just as an example, (and I'm not saying anything against LDS either it's just a good example) Look how much money the Mormon church spends on advertising. When it's to pass on the good word about their own church, their own faith and beliefs, it's for the greater good of their church, I'm okay with that, though I think the money could be better spent helping the very poor within their own faith base and maybe others. When it's brought into a political fight in favor of something as odious as Prop 8 in California, that's way outside what their money should be spent on. If they don't believe in gay marriage, then that message should be preached in the church, not on the streets and certainly not in the political forum, spending money that was meant for the church. What Gentiles do does not effect what Mormons do, unless as Keith O. said, the church fears that they will lose their own membership, as people leave in favor of more progressive views regarding faith.
For me, the concept of fear is very alien when it comes to the deity. It's something I did not understand as a Baptist.. "Fear God" or "Fear Jesus" seemed so wrong to me. I always felt "Respect", "Honor", "Love", "Cherish", "TRUST"... feelings and emotions that I associated with a parent. My own upbringing supported that. I had no reason to fear my parents either. They were not perfect, but they were always as fair as they knew how to be, I respect them, honor them, love them and cherish them. I TRUST them. I did not fear them, because I knew they would never do something to me that would cause me harm. I expect the same out of my deity... though obviously I also expect my deity not to make human errors or judgment, so I can absolutely TRUST that the path laid before me is the right one, even if it is difficult, if I falter, if I fall down. I know I will be taken where I need to go.
Having said that, I think in a way I have a very unique understanding because I had the parents that I do (did -- My father passed on in 2006, but my mother who is 80 is still in very good health). They had about the most perfect relationship with each other that two people could have. They did something that most parents do not do when raising children. They were loving, reserved and patient with us, and *aware of their own flaws*, and of things in their own ideology that they recognized as probably incorrect, but hard to overcome in their own thinking (racism and prejudice for example, raised as poor rural southerners, this ingrained concept was very difficult for them to overcome though on a certain level, they understood that it wasn't the right thinking) which they worked very hard not to pass on to us. It allowed us to have a clean perspective on those issues, and this is something that most parents did not do. Many parents put a lot of effort into teaching their children to think and believe exactly as they do and leave very little of their thoughts and beliefs up to the child's own perception as they grow. Our parents guided us on right and wrong, but also to form our OWN opinions about the world around us based on our OWN experiences.
I have to say that I'm very thankful to have the perspective that I do. Thank goodness I don't have narrow thinking. Thank goodness that I am able to forgive people, even ones who have done great wrong against me. Thank goodness I am able to let go of grudges and move forward. Thank goodness I live in a world where I am treated more or less as an equal. I no longer have to hide my faith completely. Is it perfect? No. Am I still discriminated against? Yes. Sometimes. People will always be like that. People tend to group themselves with people who think like they do, look like they do, talk like they do, act like they do, believe as they do. People will always tend to do one of two things when confronted with things they don't understand. Either they will ask questions until they understand it, or they will reject it out of hand. Sometimes even after asking questions to understand they will find it too different and still reject it, but usually the questioner will accept it as different even if they don't agree. Thank goodness, I have the capacity to look past those who cannot, and are unable to see outside of their own world. While I will do everything legal to assert my rights against someone who is discriminating against me in public, such as in the work place, or public office, or government, I accept that within private organizations, such as churches (yes, even the large ones) that they have the right to practice their own beliefs which by their nature may wholly disinclude me. That's fine. It's their loss anyway, isn't it? Maybe I won't be welcome at their gathering, but they will still be welcome at mine. Thankfully, I have only very rarely been made to feel unwelcome in any church that I attended with a friend, or when attending a church function, or event held within a church, attended by primarily members. I am able to find things of faith, and parallels of belief almost anywhere I go, even if I cannot necessarily accept the entire doctrine. Very few people actually are able to say that they are 100% in agreement 100% of the time with their church doctrine. We all question things at all times.
no subject