Monday, November 21, 2011

Why Christians get a raw deal

You may have noticed a lot of anti-Christian sentiment these days.  The reason for this, not surprisingly, is the behavior of many Christians.  It is said that Gandhi once said “I like your Christ.  I do not like your Christians.  They are so unlike your Christ.”  Religion in general and Christianity specifically can be a wonderful thing, or a very ugly thing.

I’ll start out with two well known Freds.  First we have the notorious Fred Phelps, pastor of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, KS.  This is a group that insists that America is doomed because of its acceptance of homosexuals, among other things.  They often protest funerals of soldiers with signs such as “Thank god for dead soldiers.”  They are using religion as a vessel of hatred, which is not at all what I gather the message of Jesus was.  Naturally this is an over the top and thankfully rare example, and perhaps they are only trolling for lawsuits (many in the family are attorneys) but I have a feeling that Jesus wouldn’t applaud them.

Jesus was a man who, in his own words, pretty much said that forgiving others is not only a good idea, it’s mandatory.  Matthew 6:14-15 reads “If you forgive those who sin against you, your heavenly Father will forgive you. But if you refuse to forgive others, your Father will not forgive your sins.”  And really, how else would we determine the message of Jesus other than his own words?  

Jesus was also suspiciously silent on the subject of homosexuality.  Sure it is touched on a bit in the Old Testament, but if god so hated homosexuals, you’d think he would have instructed his son to really drive that point home in his teachings.  And even if it is a sin, remember that part where he said you must forgive?  

Another Fred you’ve probably heard of is Fred Rogers, famous for his role as Mr. Rogers.  Mr. Rogers was a man of deep religious conviction.  You may not have known this, as he was never one to go around thumping others with a bible, especially not during his children’s show on PBS.  He was an ordained Presbyterian minister.  

Mr. Rogers followed what I believe is the true message of Jesus.  He chose to use his faith to do a great service to children everywhere.  Not once did he convey a religious message, he simply taught children lessons about everyday life and made sure that they knew that they were special and each and every one of them had worth.  I think if Jesus saw his works, his reaction would be two thumbs up.

Mr. Rogers was so passionate about what he did that he testified before congress regarding funding for PBS as well as keeping the VCR available so that children could watch his shows at any time.  Truly a man that any faith and the irreligious alike should respect and admire.

There are many out there much like Fred Rogers, but very few get recognition.  The media has a bias toward the story that sells.  For every Islamic radical that flies a plane into a building, there are thousands using Islam’s 5 fundamental pillars to do great works.  I read recently about a man in Cairo who frequently sets out a feast in the street for all who are hungry.  His faith compels him to do this in the name of charity.  You will not hear about him or his kindness via a CNN breaking news bulletin.

Likewise when a Christian bombs an abortion clinic, it makes the headlines.  When a Christian church sets up a soup kitchen to feed the homeless, it does not prompt a Fox News Alert.  I believe that people of faith as well as the irreligious are generally good, the very few that aren’t are simply the ones that get the most attention.  

I don’t believe much of the backlash against Christians in the United States has to do with terrorism, it’s just not that common.  I believe most of it comes from the fact that many Christians aren’t content in having their own faith.  Many insist on budding into the lives of others, mostly through government.

Take gay marriage, for example.  Marriage can be defined by the church however it wants to define it.  Churches have the option to refuse to perform homosexual wedding ceremonies, nobody wants to take that right away from them or force them to participate in anything they believe is morally wrong.

Marriage as a legal instrument, however, is merely an exclusive contract entered into by two natural persons.  To deny one to enter into that contract based on gender is nothing short of discrimination.  I’m actually quite surprised that the courts haven’t demanded homosexual marriage be permitted on the grounds of equal protection.

There is no compelling reason whatsoever to prohibit homosexuals from marrying.  Religious groups, however, insist on lobbying for its prohibition based on what I believe are misguided religious reasons.  That tends to rub a lot of people the wrong way.  Certainly homosexuals, but also the ever growing number of people such as myself who are not homosexuals but fully support equal rights for them.

To us, what you’re essentially saying is “I don’t want other people to be happy, I want to stand in their way because the bible says homosexuality is a sin.”  Do these people not read their bible or something?  Deuteronomy 32:35 reads To me belongeth vengeance and recompence; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste.  God pretty much tells you that it isn’t your business to judge.  Matthew 7 begins with Judge not, that ye be not judged.  It doesn’t seem as though Jesus would want the church involved in the government either.  Matthew 22:21 reads Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's.

It’s not unlike anti-sodomy laws, trying to codify their moral values into law.  I have some news for them, the average person doesn’t care what consenting adults do behind closed doors.  Maybe two guys want to have sex.  Maybe they want to bring a midget in.  Perhaps they want to dress in duck costumes.  If they are all consenting adults, what business is it of anyone other than the consenting parties?  As long as it’s behind closed doors, after all, such a law couldn’t effectively be enforced anyway.

For a group of people so opposed to homosexuality, the Catholic church sex abuse scandal delivers a bit of irony.  I’m not sure that generates a lot of anti-Christian sentiment but it certainly doesn’t make them look good.  It isn’t something that’s uniquely Christian, that sort of abuse and cover up can happen in any organization, as evidenced by the recent scandal at Penn State.

Then there are the Christians who aren’t content with teaching creationism in the church.  Instead they insist on teaching creationism along side with evolution or even in place of evolution (if they had their way) in schools.  Most of us (including many Christians) believe that school is a place for science, not faith.

On that note, I’m not sure why some Christians are compelled to believe that creationism and evolution can’t both simultaneously exist.  The Bible says that god created the universe, but it doesn’t go into great detail as to how.  Sure there’s the whole 7 days if you really want to take that literally, but there’s no reason not to believe that god created the universe and the system by which evolution would take place and lead to man.  

So-called young earth creationists believe that the Earth is 6000 years old, but that number doesn’t appear in the bible.  It was determined by an Archbishop in 1634.  Many biblical scholars disagree with his conclusion.  Some cite other numbers, while others believe that it can’t be determined.

The overreaction to persecution that doesn’t exist also drums up a lot of anti-Christian sentiment.  Despite what some will tell you, there is no war on Christmas.  If a company drafts a policy to say “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas”, they are not doing this as an affront to your faith.  They are doing this for the same reason a company does anything, it’s a business decision.  They feel that the more inclusive terminology will be more pleasant to non-Christians.  It’s not an attack, it’s a decision made in a board room based solely on their bottom line.

I’m not sure how much of the distaste for Christianity comes from the door knockers or those passing out leaflets (as Mitch Hedberg said, it’s like they are saying “Here, YOU throw this away.”)  Such intrusions can be annoying, but politely declining is always an option that ends the encounter at once.

This is only going to apply to a few Christian sects, but most people have a strong distaste for those who would withhold medical care from their children on religious grounds.  Some sects will not accept a life saving blood transfusion, others will not get vaccines.  It’s one thing if an adult makes this choice, but to force it on an innocent child, well that’s where personally I would draw the line when it comes to religious freedom, but that’s just my opinion.

Refusing medical care on religious grounds never made any sense to me.  I’m reminded of an old parable told in the church I grew up in and probably countless other churches around the world.  A man is on his roof during a flood and a boat comes by to save him.  He waves them off saying “Oh no, god will save me.”  Two more boats come by and with each he waves them off, insisting that god will save him.  He drowns.  He meets god and asks why he didn’t save him.  God said “I sent three boats!”  When one is praying for healing, perhaps god sends skilled doctors and other medical professionals to handle it.

A good deal of the ire probably comes from the issue of abortion.  Many on the Christian right would say that most abortions are performed for convenience.  While I don’t doubt that may happen, I suspect that very few fall into that category.  Abortion is a very unfortunate choice made by women in very unfortunate situations.  Perhaps Christians would be better served trying to attack the social problems that lead to abortions being necessary in the first place.  Of course some churches even oppose birth control, which is one of the biggest things out there that could make fewer abortions necessary in the first place.

Many Christians tend to pick and choose the parts of the Bible that they like, often the ones that reinforce their political views or other opinions on things.  Too many like to quote the Old Testament while ignoring the message of Jesus Christ.  If I’m not mistaken, Jesus Christ is the central figure in Christianity.  Why do so many fail to follow his own teachings?  I’d guess it’s because they are self-serving people with a lot of hatred in their hearts and little capacity for empathy.

These are all fair criticisms of the actions of some Christians, and people have a tendency to paint with a broad brush.  I can tell you from personal experience that not all Christians are like that.  There are plenty who choose to have faith quietly in their church and lead a humble, loving life and bring joy and peace to others.  They just don’t make a lot of noise.

It’s no different than it is with atheists.  Foaming at the mouth combative atheists make all the noise and give them a bad rap as well, while your average everyday atheist just goes about their own life, just as your average everyday Christian does.  

In any case, the world would be a lot better if we had more Fred Rogers and fewer Fred Phelps.

1 comment:

  1. I don't think you can usefully separate christianity from the christians. You could, offcourse, insist that christianity is what the bible says, and only that, in which case you find some good stuff and some horrible stuff. You also find zero difference between (say) Catholics and Protestants, they believe in identical bibles, thus you'd be forced to conclude they're identical, which isn't true in the real world.

    I think a "religion" really consists of the followers and the things they say, do and believe. The bible is only a small part of christianity, much more important is what the actual followers actually say, what they actually do, and what they actually believe.

    An additional problem, offcourse is separating the opinions, beliefs and actions of the *church* from that of the *believers* (example: the catholic -church- in USA believes contraception and pre-marital-sex is a sin while catholic individuals in USA overwhelmingly do NOT believe think) But even here, if someone is willingly a silent member of a church with bad policies, they deserve critique for that.

    I actually don't think christians gets a raw deal. Sure, the actions of a few bad apples occasionally reflect poorly on them, but for example the Pope isn't just "anyone" in the catholic church, he's their supreme leader. If the supreme leader of a organization do horrible things, and the large majority of the members say nothing, and silently remain members, I think it's *fair* to attach blame to them. (even if they themselves didn't actively do anything. All that's needed for evil to prevail, is for good men to do nothing)

    Witness this very week the repulsive letter from the Pope, wherein he attacks American nuns for being too focused on helping the poor, and not spending enough time and energy preaching hate towards homosexuals.

    Was there a grass-roots protest against this bullshit in churches all over USA ? Did many priests bother protesting publicly ? Bishops ? Or was silent acceptance the most common answer ?

    I actually think the religios people who gets the rawest deal currently are muslims living in tyrannies. They get the joy of being suspected terrorists, yet often *cannot* do much to protest it without literally risking their lives. (what is the risk to a catholic bishop that defends the nuns ? Losing his job while enjoying a massive boost in popularity ?

    ReplyDelete