I've been thinking about this for a while - not terribly long, perhaps a few weeks - and this post from my blog-brother Rick Moran appears to be what I needed to get off my rear end and actually write. Actually, although Rick's post is the spark, there are a few other topics I wanted to write about, so I'm probably going to start with what he has to say, and then wander off into my own territory... So... read on if you dare!
Rick discusses religion and politics, and makes the excellent point that both the far left and the far right are guilty of villifying each other, and frequently presenting their opponents' arguments in caricature. Rick - who openly calls himself a "befuddled athiest" (I'd argue with the "befuddled;" he's anything but) - reminds his readers that religion and politics have been intertwined in this country since its founding. And, he states, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Religion has been the foundation of many good reforms - even if those reforms got off track or were hijacked by other interests.
But America is not such a religion-saturated culture that we are really interested in some sort of theocracy. Rick says:
Religion and politics in this country are joined at the hip. But that doesn't mean that our citizens are drunk with it - the "drug" that Communists believed religion to be. Americans look with an equally jaundiced eye at politicians who profess their faith too vigorously as well as those who give short shrift to any kind of religiosity. Part of this is certainly due to our Puritan roots, a movement against the outward manifestation of religion, reacting against the rites and rituals of the Church of England. But it also reflects the eminently practical side of the American citizen; the majority of us don't think about religion that much and when we do, we tend to be surprisingly tolerant of how someone else worships their god.
Yes. We are. We are extremely tolerant of just about everything, so long as you don't scare the children and don't bother us.
Rick goes on to talk about the attacks between the two ends of the political scene, moves to discuss the scathing anti-Christian article by Cenk Uygur at the Huffington Post (no, I'm not going to link them. Go read Rick's article.):
But there is one number that stands out among the rest as absolutely unbelievable. Twenty-five percent of Americans believe that Jesus Christ will return to earth in 2007. TWENTY-FIVE PERCENT! IN 2007!
These people are nuts. There's no polite way of saying it. If I sound superior, too bad. Sanity has its advantages.
[...]
You people are seriously disturbed. You think a magic man is going to appear out of the sky and grant you eternal bliss. If the man's name was anything other than Jesus, that belief would get you locked up as a psychotic. And the fact that you have given him this magic name and decided to call him your Lord doesn't make it any more sane.
Imagine for a second if instead of Jesus, some psycho was waiting for a magical creature named Fred to come save him this year and suck him up into the sky. Now, who doesn't think that man needs serious counseling and perhaps medical supervision? Now, you change Fred into Jesus, and you have 25% of the country.
Sometimes the world scares me. It is full of psychotics who go around pretending to be rational human beings. You think that's offensive, then prove me wrong. I dare you. Show me Jesus in 2007 and I'll do whatever you demand of me.
Well, yes. As Rick discusses in his post (he did his research), it is certainly possible that Jesus returns this year. Orthodox Christian theology has always taught, as Jesus did, that He could return any moment - before I finish writing this, or even a thousand years from now. We don't know. But the Bible says very clearly that His children are to be busy doing the tasks He has set before them: loving Him with all their hearts, minds, souls, and strength; and loving their neighbors as themselves. We are to be diligently advancing the Kingdom by living righteous lives, showing His love through our actions, and proclaiming His return in judgment.
However, Jesus said that only the Father knows that day. At the end of Matthew 24, after Jesus has answered the disciples' questions about His return and what signs shall be present, Christ concludes:
"But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only. ... Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming. But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.
So, I am automatically suspicious when someone sets a date for His return... and of course, Mr. Uygur may have taken the statistic out of context.
And here's where my mind and discussion take a large leap to a tangental discussion...
You know what? I'm about as far right as you can get. My preferences, politically and culturally, are (not, of course, an exhaustive list):
- that the government gets its sticky hands off of my stuff and leaves me alone as much as possible
- that parents be required to discipline their children properly and lovingly
- that boors and cretins who cannot formulate an argument without ad hominems and profanity ought to be scorned and barred from any chance of association in Polite Society, until they mend their ways
- that abortion is illegal except in real medical emergencies
- that kids be required to actually learn reading, writing, 'rithmatic and real history in school - and not all this self-affirming, "culturally sensitive" and politically correct claptrap
- that people are responsible for their own actions in their own lives, and can't go around blaming and suing others
- that all men (that's the classic, generic for "all men and women" for thouse of you who are PC crippled) are created equal, and that America's job is to do the best we can to make sure every one has equal opportunity... NOT equal results (that's where personal responsibility and talent come in)
- that not all opinions are equally rational and logical, and therefore not all opinions are equally valid
Here's some more interesting stuff I believe in:
- I rather like Sunday blue laws
- I want school vouchers
- I admire honestly religious politicians (well, not just politicians), who use their faith honestly
- I like courtesy and respect and a gracious manner to be displayed by both sides of an argument
- I LOVE the First and Second Amendments - and wish we'd start enforcing the Tenth
- I believe that homosexuality is a sin... But so is surfing around on the 'Net when I ought to be taking care of my family, so is poor stewardship of the posessions God has given me, and so is driving five miles an hour faster than the speed limit. We are ALL sinners; no one of us is better than another in God's eyes
- I believe the Bible *is* the inerrant, infallible Word of God in the original documents, I believe that what we read today in most modern versions is well translated and accurate
- ...And I believe in a six day creation!
Man, I'll get flack for that last one, if anyone reads this far...
Oh, or how about these (content alert for the faint of heart)
- You shall have no other gods before Me.
- You shall not make for yourself a carved image--any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them.
- You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.
- Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God.
- Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the LORD your God is giving you.
- You shall not murder.
- You shall not commit adultery.
- You shall not steal.
- You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
- You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.
So, yes, I'm pretty far out on the fringes of the "religious right." But here's a little tid-bit: I know I can't get all these things, because not everyone agrees with me. I know I have to compromise.
Sure, it's not my "perfect world" - but then, it's on one else's, either!
And therefore, I can tolerate people with whom I disagree. Ooooo, there's a word! "Tolerate" -
TOL'ERATE, v.t. L. tolero, from tollo, to lift. To suffer to be or to be done without prohibition or hinderance; to allow or permit negatively, by not preventing; not to restrain; as, to tolerate opinions or practices. The protestant religion is tolerated in France, and the Roman Catholic in Great Britain.
Crying should not be tolerated in children.
The law of love tolerates no vice, and patronizes every virtue.
(That's actually also - in those exact words - in my copy of Noah Webster's First Edition of the English Language, which was originally published in 1828.)
Note that to tolerate something, I do not have to condone it. I do not have to promote it, and I do not have to approve of it. I simply put up with it. I have to tolerate you - particularly when I think you're wrong - and you need to tolerate me. We can argue and discuss and attempt to persuade, but we must both realize that we may have to agree to disagree.
Are we always going to like it? No, of course not; we want to persuade people to our way of looking at things. But that's not going to happen very frequently. So, we have to live with it, and in the process, learn to get along in spite of our differences and in spite of our opposing ideas.
The trick is doing it with tolerance, grace, and civility.
Anyway, that's been on my mind recently. It's a bit garbled and the train of thought doesn't run along a nice, smooth path, but I wanted to get it down and posted before I decided I didn't feel like taking the trouble. Sometimes, you've just gotta post what you're gonna post - at least so YOU remember what you wanted to say!
Wow Kat...that is an awesome list. I should do this. I really should.
Clarifies many things. LOL....I knew this stuff about you anyway, but to new readers here at your site- this is an awesome "ABOUT ME" kind of post. One of my resolutions for this new year is to be more...tolerant...and all that- of those who don't see it my way. No longer is it- MY WAY or NO WAY kind of thinking.
Excellent post friend!!
Posted by: Raven | January 02, 2007 at 05:33 PM
Excellent post!!!
I posted something very similar to this once and got excoriated by the liberals for it. Tolerance doesn't mean "free speech for me, none for thee", nor does it mean having a mind so open that your brain falls out.
It's the public square. Richard John Neuhaus (editor of First Things) talks about this idea quite often. I'm a firm believer in agreeing to disagree while still making the point. Not everyone is a fanatic, after all!
Good stuff. Glad you wrote it.
Posted by: Shaun Kenney | January 02, 2007 at 05:47 PM
Raven, Shaun - from the two of you, I'll accept the compliment with gratitude! Feedback like this from two people I respect and admire is to be treasured!
Thanks!
-- Kat
Posted by: Kat | January 02, 2007 at 06:29 PM
Virginia's culture isn't derived from the Puritans. We don't have Puritan roots. It's been different since the slowpokes showed up in 1620.
Jim Webb does a good job in his book, Born Fighting, describing the two sub-cultures in Virginia - the Tidewater and Scot-Irish. Of course, now NoVa is a whole different thing - and evolving as we blog. Webb describes the culture of New England too - and it isn't us.
I appreciate your forthright statements - hooah.
Posted by: James Atticus Bowden | January 02, 2007 at 11:47 PM
Virginia's culture isn't derived from the Puritans. We don't have Puritan roots. It's been different since the slowpokes showed up in 1620.
Jim Webb does a good job in his book, Born Fighting, describing the two sub-cultures in Virginia - the Tidewater and Scot-Irish. Of course, now NoVa is a whole different thing - and evolving as we blog. Webb describes the culture of New England too - and it isn't us.
I appreciate your forthright statements - hooah.
Posted by: James Atticus Bowden | January 02, 2007 at 11:47 PM