What gives, ladies?

Nicholas Kristof recently wrote an Op-Ed in the NY Times about women and religion, illustrating the oppressive nature that religion continues to exert upon women, excluding them from hierarchies and rituals and failing to denounce blatantly sexist and oppressive practices and passages in their primary source documents.

In fact, one could effectively argue that religion has been more universally damaging to women’s rights than any other institution. 

Jimmy Carter, working with religious leaders on the issue of women’s rights, recently said:

“Women are prevented from playing a full and equal role in many faiths, creating an environment in which violations against women are justified.  The belief that women are inferior human beings in the eyes of God gives excuses to the brutal husband who beats his wife, the soldier who rapes a woman, the employer who has a lower pay scale for women employees, or parents who decide to abort a female embryo.”

It’s hard for me to argue with Kristof or Carter.  From the barring of women from the priesthood to the segregation of men and women in conservative temples, I have seen this forced inequality with my own eyes.  And while I could easily cite a hundred passages from the Bible, Torah or Koran that call for the subjugation, physical abuse and and murder of women at the hands of men, I won’t list any of them here.  The passages are easy enough to find, and I suspect that you are aware of them already, considering their plentitude.  

As a result, I find it odd and inexplicable that most of my male friends who attend church or temple regularly are encouraged, coerced or forced to do so by their wives, despite the historically oppressive force that these institutions have been.

Even the most liberally-minded religious institutions continue to teach from and adhere to texts with clearly promote the oppression and degradation of women.

So I ask: What gives, ladies? 

Why would so many of you so hell-bent on dragging your husbands and children to institutions that have been so destructive to womankind over the years? 

And by all my friends’ accounts, you do so without so much as a peep of protest over the patriarchal doctrine, rituals, or texts that are so clearly oppressive to you and your daughters.

Explain.  Please.

How convenient. You and God believe the same thing!

Regrettably, I am one of the growing numbers of Americans who do not believe in God. I say regrettable because I would very much like there to be a God and hope to one day discover that my lack of faith is errant and misguided. 

Just as long as God is not as angry and vengeful as The Bible depicts him.

Despite my lack of faith, I have read The Bible, front to back, three times in my life, and I recently began a fourth reading for a new project that I’m working on. As a result, I often find myself possessing more knowledge of Christianity’s primary source document than many of the Christians who so vehemently affirm their belief in the religion based almost solely upon this book.

In fact, I think one of the surest ways to create an atheist is to ask a person to read The Bible from cover to cover. All it takes is the discovery of two different Genesis stories to kindle doubt.   

I’ve asked my religious friends why they’re weekly church service doesn't entertain the idea of spending a year reading from Genesis to Revelation rather than choosing random passages of Scripture each week. I know these passages are meant to support the sermon, but wouldn’t it be nice to know that your congregation has actually read the entire Bible at least once?  

But I suspect that the ministers and priests know what I know:

The Bible does not tell a pretty story, or even a consistent one. 

This is why I am not surprised by recent studies indicating that those with a belief in God subconsciously bestow him with their own opinions in order to “validate and justify” them.

It’s fascinating research seeming to indicate that people assign their own moral compass to God, regardless of what The Bible actually says. 

But as I said, I am not surprised. In the past, I’ve met Christians who believe in reincarnation, karma, multiple Gods, a vengeful, eye-for-an-eye Jesus, and even idol worship. In all these cases, I’m willing to guess that these people did not take the time to read The Bible from cover to cover, because if none of these things can be found in the book, which is supposed to be the word of God.    

This is not to say that I think people should avoid reading The Bible or abandon their faith just because the book is potentially flawed. Even though the story that The Bible tells doesn't not always mesh well with the religion that it supports, it’s a great book full of epic heroes, dastardly villains, and inspirational text. 

Four out of five stars.  And I’m a tough critic when it comes to rating books.

Uncommonly bad advice

My wife is Jewish. I am not.

I have agreed to raise our daughter in the Jewish tradition, though for my wife, this tends to lean more on the culture aspects of the Jewish faith rather than the actual religious dogma.

I support this decision, though I have also made it clear that when our daughter approaches me at the age of seventeen, declaring herself a Buddhist, a Pastafarian or an agnostic, I will tell her to follow her heart and do what she thinks is right (and hide from her mother).

Even though I am not a Christian, I continue to celebrate most of the traditions associated with Christmas, because these are the traditions in which I was raised. The tree, the stockings, the music, the late afternoon NBA game and even the beauty of midnight mass all bring me back to a time when my family was whole and I was young and innocent and everyone seemed immortal.

I may not associate the holiday with the birth of Christ, but I love it just the same.

My wife has embraced the Christmas tradition with even more enthusiasm than I have managed for her holidays. She adores decorating the tree, has already become enamored with our ornament collection and attends midnight Mass with friends each year. Her enthusiasm for Christmas is so great that I often feel guilty for my lack of equitable excitement over Jewish holidays like Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah.

Of course, if her holidays included flying reindeer, twinkling lights, rampant commercialism, and the NFL, my enthusiasm might be a little more… enthusiastic.

Either way, I feel blessed that we have managed to merge our two traditions into one that we call our own. It makes for a full and diverse holiday season.  Last week we wrapped up Hanukkah and this afternoon we plopped our daughter on Santa’s lap.

In the end, I think that Clara is the biggest winner of all.  She’s getting the best of both worlds.

This is why I find Emily Yoffe’s advice to a woman who is looking to do a similar merging of tradition to be disappointing and, dare I say, a little biased, considering she is Jewish.

In the video below, Yoffe informs a Chinese American who wishes to celebrate Christmas as a secular holiday (as her family has always done) that her Jewish boyfriend probably has a better understanding of Christmas than she, and therefore his feelings must be respected.

I find this bit of presumption to be a bit... presumptuous, but it’s her last bit of advice that rubs me the most wrong. She says, “If you want to marry a Jewish man and raise Jewish children, it doesn’t seem quite kosher to force him to celebrate a holiday that makes him uncomfortable.”

A holiday that makes him feel uncomfortable?

This woman is not sacrificing chickens or asking her boyfriend to don a burka. All she wants, quite literally, is a Christmas tree in her house. She’s agreed to forgo presents and even decorations if she can just have the tree.  This hardly amounts to “celebrating Christmas.”  and even if it did, I can’t help but ask what kind of man is made uncomfortable about the prospect of a Christmas tree in his living room. Even if it somehow represents the birthday of a two thousand year old demi-God, I ask:

What kind of a man (and I use the word man with the most misogynistic of tones) can’t muster enough inner fortitude to let his future bride have a Christmas tree for a couple weeks in December?

If he was my friend, I’d be quoting Don Corleone from The Godfather:

“ACT LIKE A MAN!  What's the matter with you? Is this what you've become, a Hollywood finocchio who cries like a woman? ‘Oh, what do I do? What do I do?’ What is that nonsense? Ridiculous!”

Of course, anyone whose faith and conviction is threatened by a Christmas tree has probably never seen The Godfather.

While I often agree with Yoffe, who can be no-nonsense and tough as nails, she is way off in this case, and perhaps too close to the situation to see it clearly.

Thoughts?

Leadership begins with the Lord. And castration.

Article 6, section 8 of the North Carolina state constitution states: “The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God.”

This law, deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, might still prevent Cecil Bothwell from being seated as a City Council member in Ashville, North Carolina. 

Bothwell is an atheist.   

In looking for North Carolinian politicians who were guilty of crimes more heinous than the denial of the existence of an omnipotent, almighty ruler, I came across Robert Potter, a man whose life was almost too fantastic to believe. 

Among his more notable milestones include:

Potter was a two-term Congressman, serving with distinction until forced to resign after castrating two men whom he believed to be having an adulterous relationship with his wife, one of whom being his wife’s cousin.  For this crime, he paid a fine and served six months in prison. 

Castrating two men?  How does one even go about this?

The incident received sufficient celebrity that the term "Potterized" became euphony for such an act. 

His wife soon divorced him.  After all, it was her cousin. 

Undeterred from a life in politics. he then went on to serve in North Carolina’s House of Commons until his expulsion in January 1835 either for "cheating at cards" or "for brandishing a gun and knife during a fight over a card game."

Still undeterred. Potter became Secretary of the Navy during the Texas Revolution under interim President David Burnet.

While in Texas, Potter married Harriet Page after convincing the woman that her marriage to Solomon Page, who was off to war, was not binding since their wedding ceremony had not been performed by a priest.  After Potter’s death, their marriage was found to be non-binding by the court, leaving Harriet impoverished and destitute.   

Potter then participated in the Regulator-Moderator War in East Texas as a leader of the Harrison County Moderators. On March 2, 1842, his home was surrounded by a band of Regulators led by William Pinckney Rose. He ran to the edge of Caddo Lake and dove in, his body sinking to the bottom after being shot once in the back of the head while swimming away.

Potter County, Texas is named after this illustrious man.

Quite a life.  Not all of it terribly honorable, and at least one part violent and horrific, but don’t worry.  He believed in God, so all was well.

Out of the mouths of babes (Psalm 8: 1-2)

The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it will be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city doesn't change a proposed same-sex marriage law, a threat that could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and health care.

Does this strike anyone else as a little tone deaf and not entirely in the spirit of goodness and angels and Christmas miracles and all of that?

The Church’s complaint centers on a new city ordinance that would require religious organizations to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against homosexuals.

Basically, the Church is threatening to end their financial and managerial assistance to tens of thousands of impoverished DC citizens (many presumably its own congregants) because Church officials may no longer be permitted to discriminate with impunity against a specific segment of the city’s population.

Again, doesn’t this strike you as just a little bit mean, regardless of how yucky they find gay people to be? Doesn’t the collateral damage that would result from this decision (hungry children, closed homeless shelters, and a decrease in health services to the elderly) seem like less than a measured response?

A little harsh even?

The equivalent of fire-bombing an entire city in order to destroy one bullet factory?

And in the same week that the Church throws its hissy fit comes news of ten-year old William Phillips, who has defied school policy by refusing to pledge allegiance to the flag as a means of protesting the illegality of gay marriage, stating, “I really don't feel that there's currently liberty and justice for all.”

How does one kid get it while so many do not?

Old fashioned book burning: Follow-up

The North Carolinian book burning went off last week without a hitch, and I have yet to hear back from minister to whom I sent a copy of SOMETHING MISSING for review.

Did it go up in flames along such heretical texts as modern translations of the Bible and books by Mother Teresa?

Was it well received and placed along side the King James Bible, the only true Bible according to these book-burning religious fanatics?

Or was it simply ignored, recognized for the bit of authorial amusement that it was meant to be? 

I wish I knew.

Old fashioned book burning

A Baptist Church in Canton, NC is hosting a good old fashioned "Halloween book burning" in order to purge the area of Satan's works, which include all non-King James versions of the Bible, popular books by many religious authors and even country music.

In all fairness, I am not religious (and could do without most country music) and therefore am less concerned about the burning of religious texts than I am books like Huckleberry Finn, but it would seem to me that the burning of any book is a little ridiculous and just flat-out stupid.

After all, why would anyone want to engage in a practice that is synonymous with the Nazis?  What’s next?  Tiny little mustaches and three day jaunts through Belgium?  

According to the church’s website (which was taken down once the media reported on how stupid these people are), attendees will also set fire to "Satan's popular books" such as the work of "heretics" including the Pope, Mother Teresa and Billy Graham.

Again, I’m not a fan of the world of religious literature (though I have read The Bible in its entirety three times , which is more than can probably be said for most of the FOURTEEN parishioners of this lunatic church), but is the burning of Mother Teresa’s book really necessary?

The best news of all is that in addition to burning books, the church will be serving "bar-b-que chicken, fried chicken and all the sides."

Apparently doing the good Lord’s work can make a lunatic hungry.

In an effort to probe this congregation’s line of thinking a little deeper and achieve a better understanding of their lunacy, I will be mailing them a copy of SOMETHING MISSING today, requesting a close reading of the text and some expert analysis in order to determine if my book is also Satanic in nature.

This should be fun.