A quick word on Christmas. . .

Those of you who are pushing the religious angle on Christmas should remind yourselves that Christmas was set on December 25 as a way to preempt pagan winter celebrations. Christ was, most likely, born during spring when shepherds would sleep outside with their flock. So, lighten up about Christmas. If you want to nitpick, nitpick over Easter, which is far more Biblically centered. The whole chocolate bunny thing is complete bullshit (though the eggs, ironically, are based in the Christian tradition - Mary Magadalene supposedly explained the Resurrection using a colored egg).

First Religion Post

As you might have noticed, the title of this website is "Politics and Religion," but all I've ever posted about is politics.  There's a reason for that - politics and religion are the two topics you are never supposed to talk about in polite company, and this blog isn't about being polite.  Still, when this came across my desktop, I had to comment. 

According to the Conservative Bible Project, "Liberal bias has become the single biggest distortion in modern Bible translations."

Now, generally speaking, I'm not what many would consider a Christian.  I don't go to church, ever.  I swear, I drink, I try to fornicate (which is apparently the same as adultery, though I completely disagree with that notion) as much as possible, and I can be a real prick, even to the ones I love.  I'm also a cynic and a firm believer in science.  Man evolved from apes.  How that happened is still up for discussion (I like the aquatic ape theory, personally), but that's another story.

Maybe its my upbringing, or the theology classes, but there is some remaining sense of Christianity left in me.  I know my theology, and during the whole Da Vinci Code deal, I convinced myself that the Gospel of John should be titled the Gospel of Mary Magdalene.  So, I find the idea of changing the Bible - to the extent of taking out sections of the Gospels because they don't adhere to your political beliefs - to be anathema to core Christian beliefs. 

For those of you who aren't up on your Biblical studies, the New Testament basically has two parts: the Gospels, which describe Jesus' life, his teachings, and his death, and the second part is composed of letters by various Christian writers (like St. Paul) to other Christians about how to be good Christians.  So, at least in my opinion, the Gospels are much, much more important than the other stuff. 

So what chaps my ass in all this is that these Conservatives are seeking to change the Gospels, and, in some cases, take words out of Jesus' mouth.  And they aren't doing this because they believe Jesus didn't actually say them, but because they don't agree with what Jesus is saying.  I call bullshit. After all, being a Christian is about believing in that Jesus Christ was God the Creator Incarnate.  Whatever he said is literally the WORD OF GOD.  And to be honest, I can't think of anything more heretical than modifying the WORD OF GOD.

Again, this is in contrast with the rest of the New Testament, which you could basically throw out - writers like Paul and Timothy were learned scholars, and while their writings are learned and somewhat well-reasoned, they're the words of dudes, not the WORD OF GOD.  For those of you keeping track WORD OF GOD > word of dudes. 

Ironically, the conservative position on the Bible is that it is literally the WORD OF GOD, and as such, it has to be read literally.  (*Side note - the Koran is also supposed to be the WORD OF GOD, and has the benefit of having one writer/prophet, and has a disclaimer which states that the WORD OF GOD can't possibly be understood fully by mere mortals, and as such, reading the Koran literally is foolish*)  Thus, homosexuality is unclean, etc.  But how can the Bible be the literal WORD OF GOD when you can't agree what the Bible is supposed to say?

Doing Something Old School to "Protect Marriage"

One of my favorite blogs is the Slog, the blog of the Stranger, Seattle's alternate weekly, and edited by the sex advice columnist Dan Savage, who writes Savage Love, and with the help of his readers gave relatively innocent words like "pegging," "saddlebacking," and "Santorum" alternative meanings, all of which have something to do with anal sex.  Google these words if you want to know what I'm referring to.  Anyway, Dan Savage is gay and so same-sex marriage is important to him. 

In one of his blog posts yesterday, he found a new initiative to "protect" marriage in California.  Check out this website: RescueMarriage.org.  Like most liberals, I opposed efforts to prohibit same-sex marriages, for a variety of reasons - consenting adults should be able to love who they want to love.  While most so-called "Christians" strongly oppose same-sex marriage, it should be noted that Jesus wiped away the old law (Leviticus), and the only part of the New Testament that refers to homosexuality comes from Paul.  And while Paul should be respected, his word isn't law.

On the other hand, Jesus arguably opposed all divorces.  In fact, that's why even today the Catholic Church does not sanction divorce.  Instead the Catholic Church annuls marriages, that is, it declares that the marriage never existed.  And to some degree, I have to agree with the Catholic approach.  Of course, I'm a lawyer, and so the legalistic approach speaks to me on very deep levels.

That said, I don't think that divorce should be illegal anywhere.  Keeping two people together who don't want to be is a recipe for very bad things.  We all know of people who are together and shouldn't be, and in those instances, divorce is a godsend (no pun intended).  But if we're going to use Christian law to govern our relationships, then let's be consistent.