One of the big "headline" controversies these days is gay marriage. Many religious people resort to passages from their "holy" books to back up their view that gays are variously misguided sinners, poor souls apart from God or even abominations. Some even shake their head sadly, as if their bigotry wasn't their idea...they're just following God's instructions. Some are indignant that there are those who will criticize then for their bigotry, as if this criticism is infringing on their First Amendment rights of free speech and free exercise of religion. I'll start by looking at things from my own experience.
For many years I was part of a religious group that, among other things, preached that homosexuality was the most heinous of sins and that homosexuals were the "lowest of the low". This was interesting in that the initial teachings that you encountered with this group made a big point that there was no degrees of "badness" with sins: sin was sin. But somewhere along the line, preaching against homosexuality became a focus, even to the point of a purge of those who supposedly had "homosexual thoughts" or were, as the leader called them "homo sympathizers. Now, despite there being a host of other non-biblical beliefs and behaviors that the leaders of this group classified as sin, homosexuality bore the brunt of their hatred and vitriol. The way that this translated down to the unwashed masses of this group seemed to depend on how homophobic they were to start off with. While I admit that I had swallowed the interpretation of the bible that condemned homosexuals and homosexuality during this time period, I had been friends with and associated with gays and lesbians before this became a major focus, and quickly repudiated this mindset after I left the group. Many people that I knew in the group seemed to take it to heart mucway too enthusiastically. From what I could see they had always had a revulsion against homosexuality, but now they had a divinely sponsored excuse to engage in their prejudice.
This doesn't mean that all religious people are like this. There are some, maybe even a majority, or at least a significant minority, who for one reason or another have not chosen to put their interpretation of the bible first and foremost - above common sense, reason, or even evidence to the contrary. These are people, absent anything that they heard in their churches, who would have no problem at all with their gay neighbors.
This rant is also not meant to suggest that homosexuality is the only area affected by this mindset or that Christians are the only people who practice this spiritually sanctioned idiocy. Look at the areas dominated by fundamentalist Islam. This part of the world is characterized by relegating women to, at best, second-class citizenship, or at worst, non-person-hood, without rights or recognition. Women in many of these regions are wrapped up in layers of cloth, sometimes with only their eyes visible, sometimes not even that, ostensibly to protect them from men who would be moved by lust if they happened to see any female flesh. In some situations, men who sexually assault a woman who is not dressed "modestly" are not at fault...the woman is. All of this in the name of some god.
While none of this would be reasonable under any circumstances, it would at least be consistent if the holy writings of these religions were unambiguously understood in the same way by all adherents. But as we all know, this isn't the case. Hard core religionists in both Christianity and Islam insist that the writings are plain and it is only the ungodly who come to conclusions and interpretations differently than they do. Those who come to different conclusions are not "real" Christians or "true" Muslims. No one really has a good answer to the question of why there are so many different interpretations, other than the damn things aren't as plain as the true believers think that they are.
Both the Bible and the Koran are claimed to be "inspired by God", which the fundamentalists in both religions understand to mean a word-for-word dictation by God to the writers. Much has been written about the origins of the Bible and the problems found therein, but there are just as many problems with the Koran, although most Muslim scholars are unwilling to question the myth of its origin. What many people do not know is that Mohammed, assuming that he existed in the fashion that Islamic history says he did, did not write down anything. He was apparently a combination religious-political-military leader, and it was only after his death that his successors sought to compile his sayings into one book. In the early days of Islam there were competing versions, until eventually all versions that did not have official sanction were burned.
So getting back to the competing versions of religious faiths, I believe that people gravitate toward versions of their religion that reflect what they already believe, and mirror their pre-existing prejudices. For every scholar who insists that the Bible condemns homosexuality, another can make a perfectly good case that it does not. For every Muslim mullah who insists that women must be covered and prohibited from driving, another can make a perfectly good case that women should be treated as men's equals. So, with two interpretations of your holy book floating around, what would be the rationale for following the group that espouses the more hateful stance? In my view it's because the more hateful position "makes more sense" to you, because of your own predisposition to the hateful point of view.
You're not taking a principled stand against the ungodly and defending your religion from outside attack, you're using your version of religion to defend your myopic and unreasonable hatred.
Good luck with that
No comments:
Post a Comment