Showing posts with label agnostic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label agnostic. Show all posts

Saturday, November 3, 2012

Christians, Politicians and Rape: The Holy Trinity

 




I never thought so much about rape as I have in the past month.  I had always perceived it as an aggression perpetrated by men who would dominate, demean and dehumanize their victims with sexual violence. 


But now I realize that rape is more than that.  Rape, or at least proffering one’s perspective on rape, is now of political importance.  Invoking it is almost a prerequisite to establish a politician’s credentials as an under-educated  God fearing Christian fanatic misogynist expert of misinformation, and cheerleader for bad science and insensitivity.


Rape has evolved beyond a heinous crime and mutated into a political sport. Rape now has its self appointed referees, expert analysts, apologists, technical directors, color commentators, and quacks. 


I've
 learned a lot about rape from these amateur religious rape enthusiasts.  I've learned that there is “legitimate rape”, thus presumably illegitimate rape.  I've discovered that men who would control a woman’s right to reproductive self determination have no problem espousing the fable of long discredited non-science that rape itself is a veritable contraceptive, thus rape victims rarely become pregnant. 

I've discovered that a rape is “God’s will,” or if it’s not then certainly the pregnancy of that attack is God’s blessing to that woman. I've learned that when a sperm enters an egg it is a human being and that doing anything to prevent the full term development of that two celled, four celled, eight celled, etc., product of rape is tantamount to “contract murder.”


I've come to appreciate the magnanimity of the enlightened self appointed male keepers of the uterus who

declare that they have taken the maverick stance and parted ways with the party platform - condescending not to seek to make abortion for rape victims illegal.  

Yes, I've been schooled about rape. More accurately, I've been enlightened as to the shallowness and grotesqueness of the minds of the Republican Party in general and the Religious Right Tea Baggers in particular. How it perceives women.  How it demeans women. How it seeks to control them. How it diminishes their very humanness by espousing false science and holier-than-thou-male dominated-penis waving-sperm worshiping- God invoking ignorance.  


I keep waiting for a Democratic candidate, or an Independent, or one of their supporters; or an atheist, or an agnostic to stumble blindly into this morass of rape rating declaration and Fallopian introspection. But I won’t hold my breath.  Fortunately it seems the obsessive verbal diarrhea over rape is uniquely the purview of the GOP politicians and their supporters. 


What else would we expect from Americans who get their talking points from a god, and their ability to reason from their anus?

 

Thursday, March 15, 2012

Letter from an Agnostic

Usually I have more questions than answers. Maybe that is part of the reason that I lean toward being an agnostic.
I have had debates with atheists about the definition of agnostic so I know that people define that word in different ways. I know many atheists think the evidence strongly leads to the belief that there is no God.
Part of my agnosticism entails being flexible with the definition of god. I think that many times people are intentionally vague about god. They don't have and can't offer a definition. Why would anyone want to interrogate someone about his definition when it might lead to animosity? Why not let it be vague? Why not interpret the word god within the context of his sentence? Sometimes people may mean inspiration, placebo effect of hope, the web that holds society together, the strength of the camaraderie of the group, the awesomeness of mother nature, or some vague delusion that helps them make it through some dark period of life.
I might answer my own question in a couple of different ways:
1. They might know something that I don't know
2. I should not let people hang on to stupid beliefs
3. I love the good debate
I think those three reasons are perfectly acceptable reasons for asking someone for her definition of god after she uses the word in a sentence. I, however,still plan to resist the temptation. I do not think the following is a good reason for asking someone to define what she means by god: Everyone needs to agree on the definitions of all words before a conversation can be meaningful. Again I would like to emphasize that I think that few (if any) can define the word god satisfactorily. I feel it is better to just use a definition that makes sense to me when I hear the word god used in a sentence. Interrogating someone about his definition of god might lead to animosity. As I grow older, I want to learn to communicate in such a way that animosity isn't created during the dialogue.
Sometimes I will interpret the meaning to be inspiration whereas another time I might interpret the meaning to be the placebo effect of hope. Perhaps I might say "would you mind if I use the word inspiration instead of god when I interpret what you are trying to tell me since I am an agnostic?" If the context of the sentence calls for another interpretation then I might substitute something more appropriate for inspiration. One of the uses of God that completely baffles me is when someone tells me she bases her morals on God. That seems a dangerous statement. Whenever anyone uses the term god in an attempt to control or condemn other people then the wording has gone beyond the benign. It has become dangerous although I still believe that a skilled
communicator can discuss morals without debating the definition of god. If the person means that god speaks directly to him then I would assume he means the voice in his head. We all have that inner voice and we have to discern which ideas are good and which are not so good.
If people mean that god speaks to them through a holy book or another person, then I guess I would have two follow up questions:
1. Do you follow the advice even if it makes no sense?
2. Could the person (giving you advice) be wrong?
I am reading a book called Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong by J. Mackie. It has me thinking that the discussion about morals, values, and/or ethics is a serious one with serious consequences to our society. I hope that free thinkers will join in that discussion without getting lost in the god debate. It isn't about god. As I said in the beginning, I believe that most people use the term god in a very vague way. If you get stuck in
debating god's existence, then you may never move forward to the really important stuff.
Susan Ert-Ker
http://www.meetup.com/philosophyclub/messages/boards/