Out Bible 'em

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

The anti-gay marriage squad really have four verses they rely on as proof that God totally hates the gays. These verses are:

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their blood guiltness is upon them"

For starters - Leviticus is a total fucking joke in the bible world. Leviticus is the Old Testament's version of that crazy homeless guy in your neighborhood who screams shit at the top of his lungs while listening to a Sony Walkman. I'm pretty sure breathing is an abomination in Leviticus so, you know, good luck with that shit. And then we have good 'ole Paul:

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

And that's all they got. Out of thousands of pages a handful of sentences that somehow translate to ZOMG JESUS HATES FAGS YOU FUCKING FAG NO YOU CAN'T MARRY!!!111

Prop-8: The Musical tried to pick apart the Leviticus quotes and more power to them but, end of the day, no Christian of Moral Stature gives a shit about Leviticus. It's Paul, baby. Paul and Revelations - that's what a Good Christian cares about. So let's go to Paul, and see how we can out-bible these cunts. Here are some God Approved lines you can use to counter the bible-thumpers - and they're all from Paul's first letter to the Corinthians!

1 Cor. 7:1, "Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry."

1 Cor. 7:8, "Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am."

1 Cor. 7:25-28, "Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy. Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are. Are you married? Do not seek a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife. But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this."

11 Cor. 7:32-35, "I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord's affairs—how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord's affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband. I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord."

Here's the truth, kids. Paul hedges the SHIT out of his bets. Paul honest-to-God woke up everyday and thought that Jesus was going to come back YESTERDAY and KILL HIM so, you know, you might as well not do anything that could in any way be moderately offensive to God. INCLUDING MARRIAGE OF ANY KIND. So, if you want to be so true to Paul, you probably shouldn't have gotten married in the first place. Man-man, woman-woman, man-woman, man-dog, whatevs - all marriage is KIND OF FUCKED UP.

And then there's the issue of who really wrote the letters from Paul, whether it was actually Paul or Paul just signed off on letters drafted from his mission. The tone and advice varies wildly from letter to letter and who knows if the homosexual stuffs was just an edit from a self-hating closeted homosexual. The two quotes these nutcases use could be the equivalent of a $148,950 earmark for the Montana Sheep Institute. Of course, that argument would never win because it uses LOGIC.

So out bible them. Now go forth and preach the gospel.


posted by Jason at 1 Comments

Bad Christians

Friday, October 24, 2008

I consider myself to be a Christian, I don't feel the need to hide that. I'm probably not as active as I should be and I don't go to church every Sunday but I appreciate the good causes that certain aspects of the community are involved with and I also believe having faith in something is important for me. Maybe it's my science background - the more things are described in elegant equations and theories makes me further appreciate the thought that there's something bigger behind it all. Sometimes the world just seems too perfect to happen solely by chance and the idea of a catalycst behind it all is comforting. I can also see it coming from personal experiences. As a young adult there was a lot of hardship in my life. Three family members dying of AIDS-related complications (including a young cousin that received a bad blood transfussion), an uncle that died unexpectadly over the Christmas season, and other family members that passed away too young from unfortunate circumstances. It's comforting, to me, to think there's something out there for these people. It helps me move on.

Having said that, I'm the last person to impose any sort of belief on anybody, mainly because I'm a realist (I realize that might seem contradictory). I don't believe in a literal interpretation of the bible at all. I'm fully aware of the inaccuracies and the impossibilities of a lot of the text. I believe it's audacious to look at this universe, look at our insignificant roll in how it all works, and believe that there's a force out there that meddles in our day-to-day lives and looks out for us simply because we believe that it exists. I believe more in karmic rewards, that good people are good people no matter what they believe in. I believe that this reality is here for us to appreciate and learn about - that God is a builder and he wants to show off what he's built. He wants us to understand it and learn from it. But he doesn't get involved - and why should he? It's like us getting involved in the lives of ants and asking them to worship us.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of Christians out there who believe in the exact opposite. And that brings me to this video:

The smugness of the woman in that video disgusts me. The judgemental, holier-than-thou attitude is as un-Christian as you can get. The eye-rolls, the hatred, and the superiority complex that she carries is the reason why a large portion of our population is so fucked-up right now.

Here's the thing. This woman is evil. There's really no other way to put it. Look at her - from this short clip we can tell that she's guilty of four of the seven deadly sins. You can tell she's gluttonous and slothful just by looking at her. You can tell she's wrathful and full of pride just by the way she carries herself. And yet, for some reason, despite the fact that she is a sinner by the definition of the church she attends, she has the audacity to believe that God's going to look out for her.

Assuming I'm wrong. Assuming God does get involved in our day-to-day lives provided that we strictly follow the rules set-forth in some ancient text. How on Earth can this lazy, hateful woman believe that God's going to look out for her? What is this Christianity that she knows?

I've been thinking a lot about this lately. I think Religulous kicked the whole thing off. Robin and I walked out of the theater and I said, "Kind of makes you feel like an asshole, doesn't it?" I've loosed up a bit since then, since my own faith is a very personal thing and not something I use as proof of knowledge or superiority. Hell, my faith is what I use to keep humble and remind myself that we'll never know all the answers. So I don't think I'm destructive because of my beliefs, but the movie certainly opened my eyes a lot more to the people who are destructive in the name of their faith.

And, of course, like all things I can't help but tie it to politics. The evangelicals and southern baptists and Pentecostals and other denominations that tend to make up the religious base of the Republican Party are the first people to decry liberalism on moral grounds, usually pointing to abortion and gay marriage as the main reason why liberalism is evil. Abortion - ok, I can get that moral dilemma. It's not an easy thing to resolve if you're a person of faith. I believe in a woman's right to choose, myself, but I kind of see a cut-off (extreme circumstances aside) when it gets to the point that the baby can survive without the mother which, as of writing this, is around 22-weeks. Which is really what we have in place right now, anyway. The gay marriage issue, however - I firmly believe that being against gay marriage is un-Christian. It's not like churches are going to be forced to marry homosexuals so, you know, why the hate?

Those two things aside - the rest of liberalism is Jesus' teaching, practically verbatim. The same "moral majority" that decries liberalism would also use the GOP sound bites like "socialism" and "state-sponsored welfare." Isn't the main goal of Christianity to take care of those less fortunate than you? Would't things like lower taxes for the poor, higher taxes for the rich, universal health care, welfare, unemployment, higher minimum wages, peaceful resolutions, the belief in rehabilitation, etc be in-line with Jesus' teachings? Wouldn't tax breaks for the rich, wars, the death penalty, and the abolition of social programs be more in line with the people Jesus was rallying against?

How can a true Christian believe that the GOP's the right call? I can see someone of faith not standing strongly behind either party, or going solely for centrists, but the Republicans? Really?

In my mind I keep coming back to one term: Bad Christians. There are way too many of them in this world. They look at the bible and think it's written permission to do whatever they want and say whatever they want as long as they believe that Jesus died for their sins. One of these Bad Christians would read this and probably classify me as a sinner simply because I don't subscribe to their particular version of Christianity. Despite the fact that I do more good in this world than they will ever do, despite the fact that there are the same fundamental beliefs unifying us to an extent, despite the fact that I'm actually reaching back to the bible to justify my own political leanings, I'd be a sinner.

It's a shame. A community as large as the Christians could do so much good for the world. And they do, don't get me wrong. But it seems like there are the fringe members that do nothing but good, the fringe members that do nothing but evil, and the one's in between that do jack-shit and assume the Lord's looking out for them. The latter two types of Christians are the bad ones, and they're unfortunately the ones that are growing in number.

Labels: , ,

posted by Jason at 1 Comments

The GOP and The Evangelicals

Friday, September 05, 2008

I’ve been thinking about evangelicals today. I find it odd how an entire community can be moved to vote for two issues: constitutional amendments that ban abortion and gay marriage. Reagan was the first person to rally this voter base, get them to the polls, and have them cast their votes for conservative Republicans that want to overturn Roe v. Wade. George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush managed to follow in Reagan’s footsteps and put a strong-hold on the Midwest and South that only Bill Clinton was able to break and, admittedly, Perot was a big factor, pulling fiscal-minded Republicans to him in several key states.

Regardless, we’re talking 20-out-of-28 years of Republicans in the White House thanks largely to the evangelical vote. Being that people can be easily motivated to fight against something and it’s harder to get them to fight to preserve something, I ask myself why the Republicans would ever overturn Roe v. Wade. Why would they stack the deck and give the Evangelicals what they want if the Evangelicals keep voting for them to give them what they want? Let’s look at our current Supreme Court justices:

John Paul Stevens appointed by Gerald Ford
Antonin Gregory Scalia appointed by Reagan
Anthonu McLeod Kennedy appointed by Reagan
David Hackett Souter appointed by G.H.W. Bush
Clarence Thoma appointed by G.H.W. Bush
Ruth Bader Ginsburg appointed by Bill Clinton
Stephen Gerald Breyer appointed by Bill Clinton
John Glover Roberts, Jr. appointed by G.W. Bush
Samual Anthony Alito appointed by G.W. Bush

We currently have six Justices that were appointed by vocal opponents of abortion. Gerald Ford appointed one sitting Justice but he didn’t really have an agenda to overturn Roe v. Wade, he thought it was a state issue. The Great Baby-Killer William Jefferson Clinton only appointed two Supreme Court Justices. I have to think that if the Republicans were really motivated to overturn Roe v. Wade we’d have six people sitting on the bench willing to hear the appropriate cases and get the job done. But it hasn’t happened yet, and the Republicans are still saying that they need to win this election in order to appoint the Justices that would overturn Roe v. Wade.


It’s just another example of an entire community being strung along and lied to so that they can be manipulated to vote a certain way. The Democrats do it too, don’t get me wrong, but we really don’t have any ace up our sleeve like the abortion issue. What a cash cow Reagan stumbled upon when he put that one into the national arena.

Maybe my assessment is incorrect and, if so, I’d love to hear from folks that have some of the information that I’m lacking. Is Roe v. Wade really being threatened this year?

Fun Fact Of The Day: As governor of California, Ronald Reagan signed a bill legalizing abortion in 1967. He claims to have had a crisis of faith after signing the bill, but doesn’t it make more sense that he found a way to keep the GOP in power? Looking at the Supreme Court appointments over the past 28 years, I’d say the latter is true.

Labels: , ,

posted by Jason at 0 Comments

jason rodriguez is an eisner and harvey-nominated editor and writer. email him. or become his digital BFF below:

follow JayRodriguez at http://twitter.com

Jason Rodriguez's Facebook profile

This is a Flickr badge showing public photos and videos from Eximious Pictures. Make your own badge here.

a few of my favorite things
barack obama cracked salon slate funny or die arlington libraries quarterdeck italy trickster bethesda writer's center sam cooke road trip america new york mets bell's two-hearted ale heidelberg pastry shoppe arrowine busboys & poets greenberry's arlington hard times cafe rhodeside grill ray's the steaks arlington cinema & draft house mediabistro galaxy hut washington post young liars scalped cotes du rhone cafe asia smithsonian institution san deigo five guys burgers and fries puma definitive jux dan the automator prince paul dj bc thomas pynchon william faulkner orson welles tallula rfd perry bible fellowship nerve big brothers/big sisters rebel xti

Previous Posts