I'm just going to say what's on my mind, because I respect you too much to mutter every time I read one of your posts on this sort of topic.
I'd rather you spoke your mind.
I love you and don't want to end up resenting the bandwidth you use. Your posts on religion usually read as extremely narrow minded, to an extent that stuns me, given what an open minded human you are, generally.
I have strong opinions on the matter, which I am definitely stating in a blunt fashion, without a lot of respect or concern for the feelings of people who have deep feelings of faith or are active in their churches. I am sorry - it's not my intent to offend, and yet I'm obviously not making any effort to NotOffend either. I'm certainly aware there are many faithful people here (including my wife).
I'm really not narrow minded on the issue. I recognize the near infinite variety of human experience in faith, and how people act on that in their lives. Close friends, writers I cherish, family members - many, many people in my life (including you) who live in accordance with their faith, and their values. I am not dismissive of those people or their beliefs.
I have no excuse for being so rudely blunt on the subject. But, I also think there are things which require/insist on voicing your moral outrage. I know you are deeply invested in moderation, compromise, respecting and creating a middle ground. But I hate what my country has become - and most of what I hate has been driven by the religious right. Suspension of habeus corpus, justifying torture, war mongering, oppressing dissent, disenfranchising gays, disenfranchising blacks. These aren't just political issues. The Conservatives have grounded these choices in their religious beliefs. And a very large (though perhaps un-monolithic) portion of this country shares those values.
I have huge amount of rage towards the Catholic Church (a source of no little tension in my marriage). I think it is completely indefensible organization - utterly morally bankrupt.
I don't see very much of the Bible (which I have read, and derived spiritual sustenance from) in the Christianity which is most dominant in this culture.
I don't have any respect for creationism (sorry, vw). It's willful, anti-rational ignorance. Teaching it is profoundly wrong - Orwellian. Pre-enlightenment.
While Christianity is not monolithic about sex, the dominant strands, the pervasive impact has been massively damaging on this issue. I think it is absolutely fucked up in the extreme. I don't have any respect for the Purity movement. None. There is nothing I've heard from any of the refugees from the various FAC's which has made me think anything except that they are mind-controling cults which get a pass from scrutiny because they're Christian.
Within the context of this board, it is probably unjustifiable for me to vent my anger so much about religion. But you know what it feels like? That thing that Jon Stewart is always exposing - how Fox news will bring some extreme right winger on espousing the most ridiculous notions, and then positing some reasonable leftie on the other side, and treating them as if they are both equally reasonable.
And they're not. This is the danger of moderation, Cindy. Treating unreasonable, damaging ideas as if they were worthy of respect. As if they were just another point of view.
Creationism isn't just another reasonable idea. It's anti-scientific. It's wrong. I don't and can't act like it is anything but fucked up.
Sure there are sexy Christians with their sexy and healthy ideas about sex. That is not the legacy of Christianity about sex in this country, though, and I don't think any one can make a persuasive case that Christianity has promoted a healthy idea of sex.
Still. I do respect your faith and your religious values and actions, Cindy. And I am genuinely sorry that my rage on these issues runs down the line as a personal attack on your values.
I should probably just bite my tongue on the issue. (continued...)
( continues...) Though very honestly, there are times when that discretion feels more like a immoral act of omission. I don't think the Catholic Church would be having a massive, institutional scandal about raping children if people hadn't bitten their tongues for centuries. You bite your tongue often enough and you cut off speech. But I'll try to err on the side of discretion. Because (among other things) I love you enough that I wouldn't want to hurt you, or tar you with such a broad brushstroke.
I don't think waiting is a stupid choice. It's just a choice, like eating meat or not eating meat. You go where your belief takes you.
I do think, however, that US culture gives us some seriously mixed messages about sex, to the point that even those of us raised without religion can find ourselves feeling the pressure to remain chaste, and then feeling dirty when we don't.
(Of course, mass of contradictions that I am, I also feel that most people have sex long before they're ready for it emotionally.)
I'm pretty sure Jim Elliot (the missionary who started this conversation) went to my college.
Wheaton, maybe?
I think the culture treats sex as if it were as significant as a Kleenex.
Interestingly, my best friend and I were talking about this last night.
Heh. That happens to me a lot--something comes up somewhere, and then I hear it in a bunch of very separate places, for a few days. How did you get on the subject?
Paul was, actually, not a woman-hating bastard, and I can explain further if anyone likes, or you can wait for JZ.
Gee, I wish you would, Teppy. Every time I start, I end up shutting my browser window in frustration, and not just because I itch when we hold historical figures to today's standards, but that's a part of it.
OK, I guess he can get partially quoted like anyone. Or, admittedly, I could be saddling him with stuff that's Augustine's or Luther's because I'm underinformed about those things, comparatively. Go for it, if you want, Tep.
I don't know...I think we're caught in the middle, a little, between both extremes, our prudish past and a rather commodified present.And I'm not sure how much the media, being created to sell stuff, really reflects real feelings, barring stuff like "Buffy" and "Homicide".
And I admire Hec's rant muchly.
I have my own baggage about religion from the crazies telling me I have demons, my grandparents fleeing their backgrounds...stuff like that.
Maybe one day, I need to devote some time to that.
But it doesn't feel safe to now(not here...country-wide)
Hec, I think you should surprize JZ with a dress from this page
She has been complaining that it's been a long time since wardrobe updates.
I'll bet Hec would look good in a dress.
I looked very fetching in a skirt.
I do think, however, that US culture gives us some seriously mixed messages about sex, to the point that even those of us raised without religion can find ourselves feeling the pressure to remain chaste, and then feeling dirty when we don't.
Then there's the opposite side, which makes it sound like you're some sort of 'loser' if you haven't had sex before age 20. Yes, this is an exaggeration, but it's there.
I don't think waiting is a stupid choice.
I didn't put this in my post because it seemed like a slightly different topic, but being pregnant with a baby girl has made me think a lot about what I want to tell her about sex.
I guess I do believe that sex is a simply a choice. It ought to be something you do because you want to. And yet, only with DH was sex ever something that I did because I wanted to *have sex* (so I guess I married the right guy). With other people, it just seemed like it often got tangled up in other stuff. That's what I want my daughter to avoid.
I've typed and erased about ten different thoughts here, so I guess I have no overall point, except that I'd better figure something out by the time she's a teenager.
I think the culture treats sex as if it were as significant as a Kleenex.
Actually, I disagree completely.
Yes, sometimes our entertainment (which is not our culture, just part of it) sometimes depicts sex as being significant as kleenex (though I would also argue that frequently that same entertainment depicts nasty consequences for treating sex as significant as kleenex, just like the Bible does).
But the sheer fact that nothing, not even horrible violence, is as guaranteed to get a large number of Americans all up in a tizzie as the depiction of any kind of sex, significant as kleenex or otherwise, is evidence enough that our culture does not, in fact, treat sex as significant as kleenex.
