Are You Christian? Part Duex

I've asked the question. And....no one can really give me a sufficient answer. Thus far, we are so wrapped up in what "it" is and how it applies to our lives and, in truly long winded moments, how it is similar and cohesive with other world view/religions, that, I have failed miserably to get a sufficient answer. It's a simple question. Are....You....Christian? (Cart blanch, you can define it as you will, for our purposes we will call it those who believe in Christ. Period.) AAAAAnnnd, WHY do you believe that you are Christian? In this case the more important aspect is the WHY?

We all have beliefs. But, the majority of us really don't know WHY. No, seriously, we don't. What we know is the rhetoric that has been spewed at us since birth. And some of us have had volumes of it spat at us. Within than voluminous amount of rhetoric there fails to be a small but important aspect. Critical thinking and counter argument. We generally get only one side. In most cases that one side is filtered and white washed for our listening and viewing pleasure.

Christianity is a sticking point in this country. Whether a true sticking point or conjured for our sensationalistic media appetites, it is a sticking point. We are stuck under the fallacy that this country was founded on Christian "principles". That the authors of the Constitution were themselves, Christian. No. No. No. No, and again, no. And, they did not dream of the Christian right taking the reigns and dictating the moral majority for the rest of us. NO!! They didn't. And, like some of us, they didn't believe that morality and ethics were and can only be driven by religion. In this case the "right" religion.

Mitt Romney felt it important to state his "beliefs" on December 6, in order to appease the Christian right and clear up the media frenzy of crap about Mormons and Mormonism. There is a laundry list in the speech that bugs me. Oh well, it doesn't apply to politics. Just to his religion and for those of us in or with a history in the religion, we're the only ones who "get it".

Romney did say that "Freedom requires religion." What?!?! Hmmm, so, to be free we need religion. And I suppose in this case we need Christianity or better still, Mormonism? I'm not going to have any hair by the time the primaries roll around. This is getting ridiculous. Where's my fuckin wand! Last time I checked I didn't need religion for a moral compass and high integrity. And good values, ethics and high morals seem far more important to lead us in a free society. Which allows us to be....free! Than what religion you subscribe to.

The fact that he stated this as a Christian and a Mormon fries my butt! It translates very simply to, "You need religion to be free and I'm Christian so you need Christianity, to be free." Ay, yih, yih! Does anyone know their Roman history? Ladies and Gentlemen, we're screwed.

I agree with Richard J. Rosendall:

With all due thanks, I feel free to say that the former governor's statement is absolute rubbish. Organized religion has a long, bloody history of being an enemy of freedom. Granted, it depends on what the meaning of "freedom" is. Romney's version of the First Amendment, like that of Democrat Joe Lieberman before him, says that we are guaranteed freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.

So, we get the freedom to choose which religion it is that we practice, or don't. But we are still stuck with our neighbors questionable religious practices. As long as they don't infringe upon our right. And, if the next President is religious, fabulous. But, it does NOT make him/her more righteous, honest, ethical or moral. I don't have room to list examples. Some of whom are in my own family tree!!Scandalous!!

David Brooks of the New York Times fired back on December 7th,

"In Romney's account, faith ends up as wishy-washy as the most New Age-y secularism. In arguing that the faithful are brothers in a common struggle, Romney insisted that all religions share an equal devotion to all good things. Really? Then, why not choose the one with the prettiest buildings?"

Rosendall ties it beautifully for me...Laugh at the end of the first paragraph, IT'S FUNNY!!

The GOP candidate follies are the Bush-Rove strategy come home to roost. The desperation and disconnect of the religious right’s war on popular culture is illustrated by recent attacks against The Golden Compass, a movie based on the first volume of Philip Pullman’s fantasy trilogy, His Dark Materials. Catholic League president Bill Donahue states, “This is pernicious. This is selling atheism to kids, and it’s doing it in a backdoor fashion.” Considering Donahue’s assertions that the sexual abuse of children by priests was not done by pedophiles but by homosexuals, he knows all about backdoor attacks.

That fantasy literature can provoke such fury from the religious bullies shows their fear of the imagination—which is fear of freedom. Pullman responded on Nov. 2, “I prefer to trust the reader.... As for the atheism, it doesn’t matter to me whether people believe in God or not, so I’m not promoting anything of that sort. What I do care about is whether people are cruel or whether they’re kind, whether they act for democracy or for tyranny, whether they believe in open-minded enquiry or in shutting the freedom of thought and expression.”

We should not let exasperation at right-wing excesses prompt us to throw out the religious baby with the fundamentalist bathwater. For one thing, champions of liberty ought to show more tolerance than the fundies. For another, many secularists are religious. I was reminded of this on Dec. 6 at the home of Pastor John Wimberly of DC’s Western Presbyterian Church, who hosted an ACLU discussion of liberty and security. When we accept the theocrats’ characterization of secularism as hatred of religion, we concede more than they deserve.

I don't NEED religion to tell me what is right, wrong or necessary. I CHOOSE to have a religious philosophy, but it doesn't guarantee that I am honest and ethical. If you have "it", great. Pat yourself on the back. But, do not tell me that in the course of human events, it makes it mandatory for me or, the leader of this country. Or true, or right or necessary...BuuuullllShhhiiit!!!

As you near the end of my rant, your thought may be, "how dare she attack religion!". Ah Yes, that bastion of virtuosity...(note the heavy hint of sarcasm.) Bertrand Russell, in "Why I Am Not Christian", let's us know, that the truth hurts.

One is so often told that it is a very wrong thing to attack religion, because religion makes men virtuous. So I am told; I have not noticed it....

You find as you look around the world that every single bit of progress in humane feeling, every improvement in the criminal law, every step toward the diminution of war, every step toward better treatment of the colored races, or every mitigation of slavery, every moral progress that there has been in the world, has been consistently opposed by the organized churches of the world...

My own view on religion is that of Lucretius. I regard it as a disease born of fear and as a source of untold misery to the human race. I can not, however, deny that it has made some contributions to civilization. It helped in early days to fix the calendar, and it caused Egyptian priests to chronicle eclipses with such care that in time they became able to predict them. These two services I am prepared to acknowledge, but I do not know of any others.