Christianity needs a divorce. The marriage between theology and politics that the evangelical right embraces needs to come to an end. I am finding myself increasingly frustrated by the comments coming from religious leaders on the right side of the political spectrum, and I find myself needing to push back against their version of Christianity because it is NOT my version. Let me say that everyone has a right to believe as they choose and vote based on their personal beliefs. I respect everyone's right to choose how they want to live, personally. I have a serious problem, however, when people try to tell me how I should live and that I am a bad person and doomed to hell because I don't buy into their particular brand of Christianity. As such, I would like to address a few BIG problems that I have with those on the Christian right.
Chick-fil-a and Starbucks
Up until a few weeks ago these two businesses were just that, businesses. Then some in the media (not necessarily the right-wing media) decided to make a big deal out of comments that Dan Cathy made expressing his support for "traditional marriage" and it turned into a big mess. Some people starting talking about no longer eating there, but I never saw anything advocating a nationwide boycott of Chick-fil-a because of Cathy's comments. As a response, Mike Huckabee decided that there needed to be a "Chick-fil-a Appreciation Day" to show how much America supports Cathy's stand for "traditional marriage" (yes, I know that I am simplifying the story here). Now we have a major story and Chick-fil-a has gone from being a company that makes a very good chicken sandwich to a political statement on gay marriage. Eating at Chick-fil-a = opposed to gay marriage. It's really that simple and so I won't be eating there (more on the why later).
On the other side of the coin Starbucks, Target, JCPenney and other companies have made statements or used spokespersons that indicate a support for gay rights and so there is some talk of boycotting those businesses. One Million Moms already launched a boycott of JCPenney for their use of Ellen DeGeneres as a spokesperson. The big issue here is that I do not want my shopping choices scrutinized for their political ramifications. If I shop at Target that does not automatically mean I support gay rights; it means that I like the quality of the products that they offer. If I don't shop at JCPenny, that does not automatically mean that I oppose gay rights; it means that I don't really like their selection and price compared to other clothing stores. If I eat at Chick-fil-a, I do so because I like their chicken sandwich and waffle fries, NOT because I am trying to make a political statement. Sadly, eating a Chick-fil-a is now and for the foreseeable future an overt political statement on the issue of gay rights.
Gay Rights and the First Amendment
"Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion..."
That is the first part of the 1st Amendment, the part guaranteeing freedom of religion. When it comes to the civil rights of gays in this country there is no secular, non-religious argument to support banning gays their due civil rights. Every argument I here starts with a basis in the Bible. Opponents of gay rights want to quote Leviticus and Romans and 1st Corinthians as reasons to ban gay marriage. Okay, fine, your church does not have to recognize their marriage and you can deny them communion. However, that is strictly because of your religious views. When people want to deny gay rights because the Bible says it is wrong, they are making a purely religious argument that flies in the face of the 1st Amendment.
Let me be clear, I do not have a problem with churches that do not want to recognize a religious blessing of a gay union. I do have a problem with people who want to deny gays the 1,100 civil benefits available to heterosexual couples. Why should a deeply committed, monogamous, homosexual couple be denied the same rights that my wife and I have? Why should the homosexual survivor not get the death benefits from the military that a heterosexual spouse would get? Why should a homosexual couple be denied the tax breaks for married couples? How about the ability to make end of life decisions? If I am on life support, the ultimate authority rests with my wife as to when to pull the plug. Why should a gay couple not have the same rights?
Sharia Law and the First Amendment
I find it absolutely hysterical and pathetic that Tennessee is considering a ban on Sharia Law. Do these lawmakers not understand the part of the 1st Amendment that I quoted earlier? If, and that is a VERY BIG IF, Muslim believers managed to gain a position within a government (local, state, national) where they would be in a place to enforce Sharia Law on individuals outside their faith, then it would immediately be challenged by the ACLU and every Christian leaning political group in the country and I have no doubt that the courts would strike it down. If Muslims want to follow the tenets of Sharia Law in their own personal lives, that is their right. Not too many people have a problem with Jews following their laws of a Kosher diet, so why are we making such a big deal out of people who want to follow Sharia Law in their own lives.
At the same time that evangelicals on the right seem afraid of Sharia Law being imposed upon them, they seem completely oblivious to their own actions. The right-wing evangelicals are actually trying to do the exact same thing. They are trying to pass legislation that comes as close to banning abortion as possible; they want to severely restrict birth control; in short, they want to pass laws based on their religious views. They have this crazy idea that any attempt to deny them the ability to pass these laws is the same as denying them their 1st Amendment rights. ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Passing these laws would actually violate the 1st Amendment rights of every individual that doesn't agree with them. If you don't believe abortion is right, then don't have one. If you think all forms of birth control are wrong, great, you don't have to use them. But, you have no right to tell others that they cannot use birth control or that they cannot get an abortion.
Culture Wars and the "Proper Christian" Loyalty Test of the Week
One final big point for this post. Why is the legitimacy of my faith based solely on how I answer a few specific questions? In order to be a "Christian" as the right-wing evangelicals would define it I must hold to all of the following statements:
1. Abortion is wrong in all cases and should be banned
2. Homosexuals are sinners and should not be given any civil rights
3. Environmentalists are wrong, we don't have a global warming issue.
4. We need to get prayer back in schools and teach a proper Christian perspective of history
5. Our nation is a Christian nation and the Founding Fathers were great Christians
6. Always and only vote for Republicans.
Failure to agree with all of these statements and a few others that they choose to toss out there from time to time are essential to being a Christian. If I agree with the first two statements, but disagree with #3, too bad, I'm not a proper Christian and I am going to hell. If I should vote for a Democrat, I'm eternally damned. The problem here is that many people who believe in Christ and call themselves Christians do not support all of these statements.
In fact, some of us disagree with most, if not all, of these statements. Some of us would argue that the stance taken by many Republicans actually goes against Biblical teaching. Republicans seem to have this idea with regards to money that "what's mine is mine, so go get your own." The problem here is that this idea seems in direct conflict with the story of the rich man. When he asked Jesus how to get into heaven, he was told to sell everything and give it all to the poor. Note that in this story Jesus makes no statement about which poor people should get the money. There aren't any tests for who deserves the charity. One could argue that the Republicans efforts to restrict and even eliminate welfare means they are damned to hell. Personally, I won't argue that because it is not my place to judge strictly based on a few political positions or answers to certain questions. It would be nice if the right-wing evangelicals understood that as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment