Why is it that some in the U.S. Congress thinks it is their job to tell women what to do with their bodies? Do you think that men would tolerate women in Congress telling them what they must do to their bodies? Why is it that men think they know what is best for women? Finally, what gives legislators the right to impose their religious beliefs and moral standard on others?
The U.S. Congress and most state and municipal legislatures and governing councils are mainly made up of men. In fact, only about 20% of the U.S. Congress are women and even fewer among the Republicans in Congress, Yet, for many men in office, their main goal is to penalize women for being women. The Speaker of the House, John Boehner, said his goal "Is to make abortion a thing of the past". However, it takes two to create a fetus. Women can't do it alone, yet many men are trying to force women to suffer the consequences of an action in which they themselves take part. Let's have a reality check. If religious men are so concerned about the potential of an abortion, why didn't they wear a condom, get a vasectomy and/or insist that their partner practice some type of birth control?
In fact, those who are so-called "pro-life" (who is not pro-life?) are religious hypocrites. They want to protect the unborn, but are willing to kill living people while bombing abortion clinics. They want poor women to not get abortions yet they also want cuts in funding for child medical care, food stamps, government child support, etc., for poor children. Apparently, they skip over the statement by Jesus in which he referred to children when he said, But whoever causes harm to one of these little ones, it would be better if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were drowned in the depths of the sea. (Matthew 18:6 ) About that, they do not concern themselves.
Contrary to popular opinion, The United States of America is NOT a Christian nation. It is a nation of many about 700 faiths. The U.S. was in part born out of the desire for religious freedom. So why are so many people on the political right trying to push Christian morals onto people of a variety of faiths? The answer is a simple one. It is because they can do it and get away with it. The conservatives and their Catholic and Christian Fundamentalist allies, quote the Founding Fathers and take their words literally. Yet, a substantial number of them like Jefferson, Franklin and Paine were Deists, skeptic, and/or opposed to organized religion. They maintained that religion has no place in governance.
Contrary to popular opinion, The United States of America is NOT a Christian nation. It is a nation of many about 700 faiths. The U.S. was in part born out of the desire for religious freedom. So why are so many people on the political right trying to push Christian morals onto people of a variety of faiths? The answer is a simple one. It is because they can do it and get away with it. The conservatives and their Catholic and Christian Fundamentalist allies, quote the Founding Fathers and take their words literally. Yet, a substantial number of them like Jefferson, Franklin and Paine were Deists, skeptic, and/or opposed to organized religion. They maintained that religion has no place in governance.
The political right are religious hypocrites. The Ten Commandments says, Thou shalt not kill. Yet, they bomb clinics. And, they do not object to wars without a cause, capital punishment, etc. They do not want the U.S. to intervene in feeding both starving children or in genocides in Africa. What Bible are they reading? Apparently one in which it does not says, Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” To the contrary, if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink…. Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. (Romans 12: 17-21)
It seems to me that the religious right picks and chooses which things are right in the eyes of their God. Men should be able to have all the sex they want but the woman should suffer the consequences. How many so-called "religious politicians'" cheat on their wives which is against their religion? How many have had children as a result of their infidelities?
How many conservative Christian, Catholic priests and fundamentalist preachers have been involved in sex scandals? And, they are the tip of the iceberg because they were the ones who got caught. How many never got caught? It is truly a hypocritical and very cruel joke.
*
At almost any time in the news, someone has been caught in an outrageous act of hypocrisy. Take, for instance, Ted Haggard, an anti-gay pastor who was the leader of the National Association of Evangelicals until it was found out that he hired a male prostitute for oral sex and bought drugs from him. Haggard was removed from his church and is spending three years in "soul-searching" . He is now starting a new church. Of course, Haggard is not alone. There are many others. The details are often different, but the stories stay the same: a man gains notoriety, a following and makes a great deal of money for decrying the "sins" of others while ignoring that Jesus said, Let he who is perfect cast the first stone. That is, until he gets caught having illicit sex. Politicians who come to Washington espousing "family values", like Senator David Vitter of Louisiana (who was caught using the services of a D.C. Madam) or Senator Larry Craig of Idaho (who was arrested for soliciting male sex in a airport men's room). Both Republican Senators railed against sexual immorality for religious reasons until they got caught. Then, they went on television with their so-called "supportive" wives and blamed the "liberal media".
People become infuriated by the hypocrisy. Sometimes the anger comes from our own personal memories being betrayed in a relationship. Or, sometimes we work for the rights for same-sex couples and get fed-up when we see that the person on the other side of the issue has a closet the size of a five-car garage. Upon seeing a famous preacher fall into this trap, some people reject Christianity altogether because they say that it's just full of hypocrites. Others see lying politicians, and they lose complete faith in our political process. So, frustration, anger and disappointment cause people to throw the baby out with the bath-water.
*
The problem is that people fail to understand that Christians invest too much control over them by the head of their church. They abdicate their ability to think on their own and use the brains that God gave them. Instead, they blindly follow a leader because they assume that the leader has special insights or connections to the Almighty. Then, when the leader says something inane or does something smacking of hypocrisy, they feel let down. People fail to realize that the relations to the Infinite is much bigger than any mere mortal. A case in point is the Pope.
The Pope (Latin: papa, a child's word for father) is the Bishop of Rome and the head of the Catholic Church. Catholics view the Pope as the successor of Saint Peter, the first Bishop of Rome. However, Peter never used the title of Pope and the word came into use three centuries later. Over the centuries, papal claims of spiritual authority have been increasing and more firmly expressed, culminating in 1870 with the proclamation of papal infallibility in matters of faith and morals.
From where did the idea that the Bishop of Rome was the head of the church come? It came from a statement from Jesus in which he supposedly said, And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matthew 16.18) Peter was the 1st Bishop of Rome and many consider him the first Pope, although the word was never used to refer to Peter nor the questionable authority said to be given to him.
Concerning the quote, first, Jesus is playing a verbal game in this quote because "Peter" (Latin: ) means "rock". So, he is really saying You are now called Rock, and upon this "rock" I will build my church… But, wait a minute. "Church"? There were no "churches" at that time, so why did Jesus use the word, church? Moreover, Jesus also said, Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill it, thereby implying "not to create a new religion or "church". Finally, there remain two questions: If the quote was said by Jesus, did he mean that Peter was the only one upon whom his church would be built or was it every person who followed Peter too. And, given the fact that Matthew's gospel was written about 70 years after Jesus died not by St. Matthew who had long since died, but by a non-eye-witness anonymous source, did Jesus ever say the quote at all?
Catholic Church teaching is that the Holy Spirit guides the bishops in the choice of the Pope or that the Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals. Jesus never said or implied that. So, where did these notions come from? They came from theologians, bishops and Popes. If the Holy Spirit guides the selection of the Pope, how come many of them were responsible for graft, corruption, self-aggrandizement, licentious behavior, and even murder? Did the Holy Spirit make mistakes? As to the Doctrine of Infallibility concerning faith and morals, how come so many Popes were wrong on matters faith and morals. Examples: The New Testament clearly says that James was Jesus' brother, but the Church says that Jesus had no brothers. And, how moral was Pope Pius XII who never condemned the Nazis for killing six million Jews. And, why did a former Nazi who became Pope almost immediately re-institute prays for the conversion of the Jews, prayers which smack of anti-Semitism. Finally, why did two Popes and their surrogates, the bishops, indulge in cover-ups of the pedophile priest scandal? And, why did the Pope reward Cardinal John Law of Boston who part of the pedophile priest cover-up with major position in Rome instead of dismissing and him. How do the Popes and bishops reconcile Jesus' quote harming children (see above) with so-called infallibility in matters of faith and morals?
But, the Catholic Church is by no means unique when it comes to this type of hypocrisy.
*
People tend to function using extremes. When they become disillusioned, they gravitated to the opposite. In matters of religion, they tend to be in two camps, hyper-religious or atheists. But, maybe there is a rational middle ground.
Real spirituality does not depend on irrationally following a leader who says he or she knows more than you do. It does not demand that you leave your brain at the church door. And, it is not about angels or talking to the dead. Instead, real "spirituality" involves a never-ending journey of constantly looking within ourselves to see who we are and of striving to make ourselves and world more just. This is hard work and it is much easier to unquestioningly and blindly follow a spiritual leader. And, while religion is certainly not necessary for this process, if it is presented well, it can easily help support that journey through communal support and through language to articulate it. Maybe rather than rejecting God and religion, it is more valuable to create a hypothesis about how God acts in the world and then check our experience against it. Always remember that religion is a means to an end and not an end unto itself. And, no one has a monopoly on religious truth and religion is much bigger than the views or dictates of any mere mortal. If all of that means people need to change their world-view and theology, so be it.
