I'm curious, who really gets to shape reality? Is it those who have the power, or those who want the power? You want my personal opinion? I think it is the later. To be even more specific: I no longer think truth and control of acceptable values is as much an issue of power as it is "a need to justify before the world strange personal desires and aberrant wants." We live in a culture where most people believe we should be allowed to do what we want to do without (1) anyone telling me no, and (2) anyone pointing out that what I may be doing is dangerous and harmful. I think we even have reached the cultural tipping point that Isaiah 5:20 warns us all about. Actually, this verse is the easiest way to tell if your society is sick: "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter." I think we have arrived at this point - - and let me show you why. In the past two days, I read two different articles that I believe bring to light how "those who want to justify bitter actions" are trying to convince the world to accept them as sweet. Article One: Oliver Springs vs. Tennessee Dept. of Environment & Conservation The city of Oliver Springs is pumping polluted water into Poplar Creek, a fresh water supply used by both the local community and livestock. One official says he found, "used hygiene products, solid excrement and unused pills flowing out of the sewer drains." Local residents near the creek claim that the sewage is in plain sight and the smell is unmistakable. After testing the water, officials claim that "they found E. Coli, ammonia and solid waste in the water. Even some livestock have birthed stillborn calves and cows have died after drinking the water." The city has spent over $250,000 trying to solve the problem and have not yet adequately fixed it. Their delay has prompted the state to fine them $175,000. The Department of Environment & Conservation declares, "this has been going on long enough." Do you think the Tennessee Dept. of Environment & Conservation is right to fine them? Is sewage being poured into drinking water a bad enough problem that it needs to be "targeted" and "punished if not fixed?" Or would it be better for the state to simply stop criminalizing the leaders of Oliver Springs; and stigmatizing "the act of pumping sewage into fresh water" as a bad thing? Here is a possible solution to avoid such harsh judgment: Let the city keep dumping solid excrement and pills into the river, while at the same time trying to find a medicine that will cure E. Coli and make the ammonia taste sweet? What they need is more research dollars to find a cure so the city can keep polluting. Right? Wrong...because dumping sewage into a perfectly fine river is sick! I think most sane people would agree that the city of Tennessee is right to criminalize it. It is obvious logic. But this logic is lost when it comes to personal morals and sexual practices. Let me show you... Article Two: World Health Organization Warns of HIV/AIDS Pandemic A new finding by the World Health Organization last Friday warns that "we must stay vigilant in fighting the HIV/AIDS epidemic because the progress gained over the past few decades can easily be lost." The article states that incidence among certain groups is putting the overall battle against the deadly disease at risk. They go on to describe the certain groups who are in the especially high risk category: - "men who have sex with men, transgender people, prisoners, people who inject drugs and sex workers together account for about half of all new HIV infections worldwide. This group is 19 times more likely than the general population to be infected by HIV." - "transgender women and injecting drug users are around 50 times more likely than the general population to contract HIV." - "Sex workers have a 14-fold higher chance of getting infected." This report is from an unbiased source, the UN. This is not the findings of some whacked out Christian fundamentalist group...it's the UN! And what did they find? Homosexual men, transgenders, drug users and prostitutes are the main carriers and spreaders of the disease. Again, this is the UN. So how do we process this? What if we were to use the same logic to stop HIV/AIDS as the Dept. of Environment & Conservation to stop the dumping of sewage into fresh water? What did they do? They got mad at the behaviors and actions that produced the problem. So wouldn't you think the World Health Organization should do the same thing: warn people to STOP the behaviors and actions that produce the epidemic? Well.. no, of course not! They can't do that...so instead, here is what "enlightened" WHO advises the rest of us to do: "Decriminalizing and destigmatizing these groups would greatly help bring down HIV infections among them," WHO said. "Promoting condom use, wide-spread voluntary HIV testing, treating at-risk individuals with antiretrovirals, voluntary male circumcision and needle exchange programmes figure among the other WHO recommendations for battling the disease." In other words, keep dumping sewage in the water while we look for treatment against the E. Coli. Why aren't we allowed to say that these "listed" behaviors are dangerous and deadly to humanity? It's simple: People want the right to do these things, they are enjoyable, they are private matters and "You have no right telling me who I can and cannot sleep with or do drugs with."
Yeah, but the state can tell a whole community to stop dumping sewage into creek water. Some of you reading this will get mad at me for using logic. Accusing me of being "homophobic and judgmental." All I am trying to point out is that "God has great reasons for telling us the moral way to live is the best way to live, the righteous way to live. Jewish Rabbis (it's cool to listen to Rabbis these days) call living under God's commands as 'Shalom.' And when we ignore him, and try to determine the right way to live by our libidos, we will reap what we sow!" Here is my suggestion: Let's stop celebrating sewage, and we need to quit calling it sweet water. Because IF we don't, we will all get sick!
15 Comments
Sara
7/16/2014 11:27:17 pm
I don't know if I read the same article as you, but what I read points out that the groups of high-risk individuals have overlap - in other words, someone who injects drugs might also have sex with a sex worker.
Reply
Christopher Weeks
7/17/2014 12:02:05 am
Oh, I agree that most sex workers are brought into the trade against their will...I understand that and yes we need to keep doing all we can to work on cures. But my point was simple, we glorify in America a lifestyle that is both exploitative and destructive. Homosexuality in America is not accurately portrayed. Especially male with male relations, it is mostly about quick pick ups and one night stands of unprotected sex and intoxicated romps. My point is to quit glorifying it!
Reply
Sara
7/17/2014 02:31:04 am
As a person of faith, I would say that the environmental issue you raise (which I would argue IS a moral one) is sin. It is sin that we pollute God's creation. It is sin that we have a system that views its bottom line as the highest value. It is sin that we have so little value for human life that we are willing to go to these measures to increase profit. If you are going to make a stand that Christians have a role in advising people sexually, then it is perfectly logical to take that same stand that Christians have a role in advising people environmentally. (Incidentally, if you're interested in environmental inequality I highly recommend the book Dumping in Dixie - it is a HUGE problem.)
Reply
Chris
7/17/2014 04:38:35 am
When has Mardis Gras and Fulton Street been promoted as a normal, safe lifestyle? People know Mardis Gras is blatant debauchery...Sarah, seriously, how can you put a small minority of billionaires on the same plain as thousands of people who walk into bath houses? You are missing my argument; the gay lifestyle in our society is never to be questioned at all. It is actually now promoted and defended (and your argument makes my point). Date rape is never promoted and called healthy, c'mon. Frat parties are seen as debased and depraved populated by stupid idiot men who never grow up and treat women as objects, this is not promoted as healthy and normal. Sarah, the normal gay life really is dangerous, gay parades do promote sex, and they are being pushed on us as "pride," something normal and healthy. What you want is for people like me to admit that the normal gay life is another healthy option to a heterosexual life. What I am saying is that is so far from the truth, especially for men. The several friends you have do not justify the average majority who are running after sexual partners. And you also know hundreds of very healthy heterosexual relationships - - but for some reason you love to point out the failures (so you can justify your several friends). Average gay life is not your friends, it is the bath houses. Average heterosexual lives are not Mardis Gras and date rape. Also, I do believe in God's design for a family, and the need a child has for a female mother and male father. But to defend people's rights and individual decisions, we have changed God's design and go on the attack against people who are trying to promote his clear design. Finally, I thought WHO's point was to say that their are certain lifestyles that are dangerous...but their solution is to treat only the disease, but ignore any way to help educate them to stop the behavior that spreads the disease.All destigmatization means is to just ignore it and look past it. Destigmatization is a dodge.
Reply
Sara
7/17/2014 09:30:26 am
Actually, it's not me that equates the billionaire "lifestyle" with sin. Jesus does it in Matthew 19:
Jared
7/17/2014 10:57:56 am
"In fact, Jesus says a lot more about how to treat the poor than Jesus says about homosexuality (which is, actually, nothing). According to Jesus, standing with God is directly associated with treatment of the marginalized. If you're looking for an evil place, Wall Street is actually a great place to start."
Reply
Joel
7/17/2014 03:40:22 pm
Arguing from silence that Jesus never said anything against homosexuality can be quite the shaky foundation. Because then you have to go to the historical-cultural background of the Jewish region (Palistine)l during the time of Christ. I'm sure you realize that the Jewish nation was still living under the Mosaic covenant age, which explicitly condemned homosexuality. 2nd Temple Judaism (the period between 516 BCE-70 CE) literature and Rabbinical teaching continually makes the point that homosexual activity is contrary to nature. Also, if we argue from silence that Jesus never said anything about homosexuality, we can also say that Jesus never said anything about rape or bestiality or pedophilia. I'm sure you would agree that his silence on rape, bestiality or pedophilia would not equal approval for Jesus.
Reply
Sara
7/18/2014 05:08:00 am
I'll grant that it's possible Jesus said something about homosexuality, but it seems dangerous to me to assume he did. Attributing words to God that we don't have recorded is a much shakier foundation than an argument from silence. That seems awful close to - literally - putting words in God's mouth. If we're going to start talking about the things Jesus might have said, there's a lot I'd personally like to put in that category. :-) Especially for those of us who hold to verbal plenary inspiration, I think that if God wanted Jesus' accusations of people who are gay remembered and recorded, they would have been. Alas, there is nothing like that in the Gospels.
Reply
Joel
7/18/2014 11:46:13 pm
Sara,
Reply
Sara
7/19/2014 12:57:37 am
I only have a minute now, so this will be brief and I have some other thoughts for later.
Reply
joel
7/19/2014 03:46:10 am
Sara,
Reply
Sara
7/19/2014 12:10:09 pm
Unfortunately, all my Bible reference materials are buried in a box in the storage room for now, so I'm going to refer you here: http://www.matthewvines.com/transcript/ You can watch/listen to the Youtube, or read the transcript. Matthew Vines left Harvard to study the Bible and homosexuality and wrote a book called God and the Gay Man. This particular speech addresses every instance homosexuality is referred to in the Bible, one by one (including Ezekiel 16:50 referencing abominations). It's a great introduction to this theological interpretation.
Reply
Christopher Weeks
7/19/2014 12:34:03 pm
Thanks Sarah, Joel, and Jared for having the willingness to share in a mature and honest manner.
Reply
joel shaffer
7/19/2014 03:11:43 pm
I just have one more comment and then I will bow out. I will check out the resources, although I have skimmed through Matthew Vine's book already. What I find uncompelling about his book is that he readily admits that he is not a Biblical scholar so he relies on scholars whose expertise is far greater than his But the scholars that he relies on do not hold the Bible as authoritative nor that the all of the Bible is inspired by God. Rather they bring their 20th and 21st century cultural baggage from the modern and post-modern western thinking when it comes to sexual orientation and projects it onto the Bible. And at the same time, all of the 2nd Temple Judaism and Rabbinical literature that would display Jesus' belief in following the Torah's sexual ethics are dismissed as primitive, revealing their chronological snobbery that somehow the 20th and 21st century's progressive stance on the total acceptance of homosexuality is somehow more loving and mature.
Reply
Jack
7/22/2014 07:36:33 am
I haven't read all these statements so if I'm repeating something that has been said before I apologize.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
August 2018
|