Symbolism

It’s been a banner week for angering conservatives. The biggest story, of course, is the ruling on marriage equality. I’m not going to talk about that here, as I’ve made my position on that abundantly clear in previous posts (In fact, “patio furniture” is the most frequent phrase I hear when people talk to me about my writing). Instead, I’d like to address the uproar over the removal of the Confederate battle flag from the South Carolina State Capitol, as well as the removal of the Ten Commandments from the Oklahoma State Capitol.

I’m going to come right out and say it: neither the Confederate flag nor the Ten Commandments belong anywhere in, on, or about a government facility. The base reason for both is the same. Government facilities belong to all citizens, and should not be hostile or preferential toward one subset of those citizens.

The Confederate flag is a powerful symbol. However, it is the symbol of a failed ideology. Yes, failed. The South (spoiler alert) lost the Civil War. I can't think of another example of a defeated flag carrying as much weight or being held onto as fiercely as this. That flag still has its place, and that place is a museum. Other than that, it’s just a symbol for slavery and deeply-held racism for most of the rest of the country, - if not the world - despite your “Heritage, not hate” bumper sticker.

If I wore a t-shirt with a giant swastika on the front, I would almost certainly be confronted and called any number of names by passers-by on the street, despite the fact that the swastika predates the Nazi party my many thousand years. Even having the arms of the swastika bent to the left, rather than the right, would most likely not reduce the tongue-lashing I would undoubtedly receive. Why? Because it’s an inflammatory symbol. So is the Confederate flag. It’s time to let it go.

Now. The Ten Commandments. Prominently displayed in, or in front of, a government building, implies that the institution holds to those precepts. But given the fact that the Ten Commandments comes from the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy, only Christians and Jews are represented by the symbolic placement. Every other religion is marginalized by this symbol. When (depending on your preferred numbering scheme) four or five of the Commandments dictate religious concerns, the decision to remove them from a state capitol seems to be a no-brainer. And let’s face it – the religious commandments aren’t even enforced by our legal system. They simply don’t belong.

If you, personally, believe in and abide by the Ten Commandments, great! More power to you. I don’t think you should shake your fists and throw a tantrum because not everyone agrees with you. Your religious freedoms are not being taken away from you. The state just isn’t marginalizing its other citizens to make you feel more in control.

I think it’s high time that we dial down the rhetoric several hundred notches. Just as no one is implying that removing the Confederate flag is a magic bullet to end racism once-and-for-all, no one is saying that you can’t go to church anymore because a statue of the Ten Commandments no longer sits on the steps of the capitol building. It’s time to acknowledge that symbols have power and meaning, and that here in America – a country built on the inclusion of all – we should take care not to allow our symbols to hurt, intimidate, or marginalize our fellow Americans.

It's Not (Necessarily) Hate

Amidst a Facebook newsfeed largely comprised of red equal signs, I saw a phrase that I took some exception to: Str8 Against H8 (Straight Against Hate).  On the surface, there's nothing wrong here.  I am also straight and am not particularly pro-hate.  I understand that equal marriage rights are a huge deal right now.  Personally, I don't care if you marry your patio furniture.  It doesn't change my marriage in any way. 

No, the problem I have is this wholesale appropriation of the word "hate" by the LGBT community to label anyone who doesn't agree with them.  It's certainly an effective political tool, and one that I'm certain has rallied more than a few to their cause.  I mean, let's be honest - who wants to be viewed as someone who HATES an entire subsection of our society?  Anyone?  Probably not.  From a purely psychological standpoint, I bet there a good number of people who look at this propaganda-esque usage of the word and jumped on board, just to escape the label.  Very clever, LGBT community.

However, I'm going to go ahead and cry foul here.  I am not a stupid person, and I understand that this "hate" label is largely being leveled at Christians, right-wing-ers, evangelicals, fundamentalists, and whatever other groups are not on board with gay marriage, regardless of reasoning.  This lack of concern for the reason of one's opposition is my problem, and I'm going to say this loud and clear:

Religious conviction is not the same thing as hate.

It just isn't - regardless of willy-nilly application of labels.  As I've already stated, I'm not a stupid person.  I am sadly aware that some (perhaps many) people who oppose gay marriage do hate homosexuals.  It's unfortunate that, if these people who do hate - and do so in the name of God - are ignorant and are also, quite frankly, doing it wrong.  Scripture tells us to love each other many more times than it condemns homosexuality.  Actually, in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, amongst the people who are listed as not inheriting the kingdom of God are, yes, homosexuals.  Right alongside them are: the sexually immoral (which is a BROAD topic), idolators (anyone who places anything else above God), adulterers, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, and swindlers.  Certainly, most of us (myself included) fall into one or more of these categories - even the Christians.  The only hope any of us have is the salvation as noted in v. 11 - sanctification in Jesus Christ.

Now, where am I going with this?  Mostly, I just think it's unfair for everyone who disagrees with a particular issue to have this "hate" label applied to them.  For a group (the LGBT community) who is trying so hard to be accepted and normalized in society, this approach seems a bit counter-productive to me.  As I've said in other posts - if you're asking for tolerance and acceptance, try practicing a little.  Casting anyone who doesn't agree with you as an enemy does not foster acceptance.  Instead, it makes people defensive.  If you really want walls to come down in relationships, you have to bring yours down, too.

We'll all be better off when we can learn to disagree on principles without personal attacks on those who may be against us.  We're all human.  We all want to be loved and be free to live our lives in the way that we best see fit.  Let's all try to be a little cooler and not create hate where it doesn't exist.

Planks And Specks, Vol. 2

Recently, no fewer than four of my Facebook friends posted a link to this comic (there are some bad words in it, so follow at your own risk) :

How To Suck At Your Religion

I won't copy it into my page because 1.) I don't like it, and 2.) I don't want to get in any kind of legal trouble.  So, you can follow the link.

I take issue with this for a number or reasons but, chief among them is the inherent hypocrisy of it in the first place.  Drawing up a comic, or any other form of expression, couched in the delivery and language that this is, taking (mostly) Christians to task for being hateful and judgmental, is blatantly hypocritical.

Here's the deal, Atheists (or is it "atheists"?  Is it capitalized?) - we all get that you don't believe in God, Allah, Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Yoda, etc. ad nauseum.

We believe in something that you don't. We get it. We really do. However, taking every possible opportunity in your lives to lambaste others for their beliefs doesn't really make you right. It just makes you kind of a jerk. If you're going to call theists judgmental and hateful and pushy, maybe you should take a little more care that you don't exhibit these same traits yourself.

That's what gets me. The hate directed towards telling theists how hateful they are. It's a real "fight fire with fire" approach, and I don't think it really accomplishes anything.

Maybe that's what I'm so bothered about: What are you trying to accomplish? Are you trying to convince theists that you're right? Has a hateful theist won you over? No? I didn't think so. Is it some masturbatory reflex to get other atheists to pat you on the back and tell you how clever you are and how you really stuck it to the Christians? Are you so sad inside that you need that validation?

Tolerance.  Tolerance and diversity.  That's all you scream about.  The Christians are SO hateful because they say that I'll go to Hell if I don't sign on with their Imaginary Sky Daddy.  Yet, you can't have an honest discussion about it without resorting to ridicule.  You want tolerance?  Practice a little.  And that free-thinking you so value?  Why do I have to freely think exactly what you think in order to not be ridiculed?  Guess what?  I used to be a militant atheist, just like you.  Free thinking led me to faith in Jesus Christ.  Um, is it not supposed to work that way?  Did I do it wrong?  Geez.

There's more to say here, but I'm tired and want to close this before it gets way too long.  I'll close with this question:

When did our egos get so fragile that we can't tolerate anyone who doesn't think exactly the way we do?

Planks And Specks

"And why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?  Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove the speck from your eye'; and look, a plank is in your own eye?  Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."  --Matthew 7:3-5

I am a Christian.

This is an important preface to today's topic.  I feel that, a lot of time, people like to criticize people with whom they have nothing in common, therefore lack any kind of empathy with them.  Atheists criticize theists.  Republicans criticize Democrats (and OH SO vice versa).  Chocolate criticizes peanut butter.  It's a madhouse, and everyone thinks that their own opinion is the only one in the world that matters, feelings and thoughts of others be damned.  My problem with this - and I'm almost certainly guilty of it myself, and need to try very hard to stop - is that by criticizing groups with which you have no affiliation robs you of perspective necessary to formulate a good argument.  You can very easily, wholeheartedly, nay-say, but I think you lack a decent foundation for debate.

I think our energies would be better spent dealing with our own mess, either personally, or as a collective.  It's very difficult to change others.  Seriously, think of the last time that someone screaming at the top of their lungs really changed your mind.  Take a minute.  It's OK.  I'll wait.  Got one yet?  Were you walking past a Westboro picket line and suddenly exclaimed, "You know what?  You're right.  I bet God really does hate homosexuals!  (yes, I self-censored the f-word.  it's ugly)  Hand me a sign".  Yeah, I didn't think so.

So, where am I going with this?

I've noticed that most non-believers' problems with Christians, completely aside from Christianity, is that many of us come off as judgmental, bigoted, loudmouth idiots who are trying to force their views on others.  Largely, I think that's an unfair stereotype, perpetuated by a minority of loudmouth idiots.  Come to think of it, look at a lot of our stereotypes.  How many of those are based on a minority of loudmouth idiots?  Since I've moved to Germany, I've come to know a number of Muslims.  Guess what - none of them has ever tried to blow me up for being a Christian or an American.  In fact, every single one of them was/is a delight to be around.  Did you know that for every ONE Christian who will bomb an abortion clinic, there are literally thousands who would like nothing more than to see you alongside them in Heaven and, in the meantime, share a table full of Mexican food and a few large glasses of sweet tea with you?  It's true.

However.

The loudmouth idiots DO exist.  Today, they landed in my personal circle of influence.  I'm terribly disappointed that they feel that they need to push their views on others.

In my relationship with Christ, I desire authenticity above all else.  My favorite person in the Bible is the second thief, crucified alongside Christ.  Grab a Bible and read Luke 23:40-43.  That guy is my hero.  He's like the perfect Cliff's Notes version of our salvation story.  He admits his sin, confirms Christ, and is told - by Christ Himself - that he will be with Him in Heaven.  Seriously, it brings tears to my eyes every time I read it.

The key part of that is that this thief admits that he is guilty - that he is the broken one.  Certainly not the kind of guy that would try to pretend he was something he was not.  Also not the kind of guy that would compare your life to his and, finding yours lacking, would attempt to force you to emulate his.

To close this already-too-long post, my points are two-fold:

1.  For the Christians: attend to your planks.  You look like a jerk and ruin your witness, and the witness of others, when you don't.

2.  For everyone else: we're not all like that.  Most of us just want to love you and see you sitting with us in Heaven.  If Mexican food and sweet tea is involved, all the better.