Monday, October 11, 2004

Twisted Scriptures?

[See my Author's Note for background information about this post.]

Believe what you want about the use of scripture. Here is a fact: Just as many serial killers list the Bible as their source for inspiration (or instructions) as do folks with a more heroic tendency. It's all in the reading and personal interpretation, is it not? Or, perhaps, the mindset in which the readings are received.

But back to the point of the post in question, which asserts the following:

He [Kerry] is for abortion which the Christian church is against. He [Kerry] is for Gay unions which God is against.

First, let me examine the statement that "[Kerry] is for abortion which the Christian church is against." I will submit that the Christian Church is against abortion -- both the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church are quite vocal in their opposition. And I suppose there is some support for the argument that God is against it. But there are Christians who support abortion, or who at least do not voice an opposition. For more information, I would direct readers to the following sites:

And there is quite a debate raging between so-called "Choice" and "Life" Christians. I myself do not voice an opposition to the practice as I believe that both the "pro-choice" and "pro-life" (misnomers if ever I heard one) camps are only dealing with a symptom rather than the actual cause or, if you will, dis-ease. But that is a subject much too long for this comment.

Second, I will examine the statement that God is against Gay Unions. Here, I think the poster generalizes a bit too much. It is true that most churches are against the concept, but the Bible, and therefore God, is somewhat silent on it. Oh, I know you can trudge out the Old Testament bits about Sodom and Gomorrah (sic?), but those stories were dealing with LUST, not love. Throughout the scriptures, God blesses love, but condemns lust -- even heterosexual lust. As long as we are on the subject, here are a few resources dealing with homosexuality and God ...

Think about it ... if Christ were walking the streets today, with whom would he break bread? A rabid homophobe ... or the gay couple who lives down the street? I wonder...

Third, I will bring this back to what I think the main point is. The post in question not only points out what he believes God opposes, but also states that Kerry goes quite the opposite way and supports Abortion and Gay Unions. I would propose that John Kerry is not so much FOR abortion and gay unions as he is AGAINST legislation that would ban either of them.

Now, I could be wrong about all of this. But we are both entitled to read and interpret scriptures for ourselves, are we not? I would fight for your right to do so. :)

And please note that I do not offer any of the above sites as some kind of ultimate authority on the issues in quesiton. Nor am I making an effort to change anyone's mind. I just thought you might like to see some opposing -- and well thought out -- views.

Thank you for your time.

----------------------- AUTHOR'S NOTE:

The above commentary is my small attempt to summarize a response I posted at PoliticalStrategy.org. My intent in re-posting it is two-fold: First, I want to clean it up and render it in one complete post. Second, I want to have a copy on my own blog.

Some more background: On September 27, 2004, an individual had posted about being "struck by the parallels between George W. Bush and the rich man [in Luke 16: 19-31]." Those parallels being President Bush's "unwilling to listen, unwilling to show compassion, entirelyfocused on his own misguided path." Now, I thought this was an interesting insight -- maybe not the most profound statement levied against GWB, but interesting nonetheless. Another reader, however, felt differently:

I can't believe that you would use a scripture in that way. John Kerry has so much more money then George W. has and he stands for many things that the Born-again Christian community are against...

And I felt differently than he did ... and now you know why.

No comments: