Nature or Nuture

Does being born homosexual really matter in the fight for equality, or is it a way of framing the argument so that homeobigots have one less arrow in their quiver of reasons to discriminate?

I don’t think it matters one bit whether you choose to be gay or are born gay. However I can see the powerful argument to be made if people are born gay, particularly against religion. If we are born innocent and without sin, and we are born gay, then we are following in the path that God chose and homosexuality cannot be a sin or unnatural. However, if we choose to be gay, then we can repent and become heterosexual through choice. (Remember- this is all coming from a mostly straight agnostic).

But what if we frame it differently. What if we frame it the same way we do religion. Religion is a choice, yet we have legal protections in place that prevent people from discriminating on the basis of religion. If you’re an employer you can’t fire all the protestants in your company because you’re an Irish Catholic with a grudge. States cannot set laws baring people from certain religions from marrying. Churches may bar them, but the churches DO NOT provide any legal protections for married people, only states do. (Polygamy is a whole different can of worms- marriage gives two adults permission to speak for each other in case of an emergency and equal responsibility for each other’s well being, in polygamy no clear chain of responsibility can be established fairly. A church may marry more than 2 people to each other, but only one marriage will be recognized as legal and will get the legal benefits of that union.) States can’t even bar two people of different religions from marrying.

My flag decal turned upside down – what I should have said


OK, so back around July I posted this image on my myspace page.

As you can see, it consists of a US flag turned upside-down, The writing is quoted from the New Testament – Mostly the Sermon on the Mount – things Jesus said that pertain to being one of his followers, and how that relates to such things as power, money, war, revenge

Now i’m not a “flag-waver” most days (4th of july excepted, and no, I don’t think that’s hypocritical) but I do believe in the principles that flag is supposed to stand for. I don’t think we have any “good old days” to hearken back to where those principles were anything more than a wonderful dream of what could be. But I haven’t given up on the good ol‘ US of A just yet.


In nautical terms, a flag turned upside-down is a distress signal – a sign that all is not well aboard the vessel flying the colors. That’s how I interpret this, and how I think many people who are currently displaying the flag upside down intend it. The ship of state has been boarded by pirates masquerading as patriots.

I posted it to get a reaction, and maybe spark some discussion in my small circle


Well, I got a reaction.


One of my friends is a guy I’ve known for several years. His mom is a family friend, he & Sis went to camp together, and attended the same church for a while, we’re both in the same passion play off & on.


He’s currently in Iraq, doing “private security”. I don’t ask, don’t want to know, & when he comes home the rich man he hopes to (if he comes home in one piece) I don’t know if I’ll ever be able to look him in the eye. I don’t think I want to see what I think I would see there.


He sent me a message, asking me to take it off my default picture, saying it was “disrespectful” to those who have given their lives defending it.

I moved it from my default, out of respect for my friend, and shared some of my thoughts about why i had it on my page. I challenged him to consider the “religious wording” (his phrase) in the image in relation to some of the polices that were being promoted under the flag.

And I asked him about something he had posted on his page about all things being fair in love and war.

He replied with the complaint that the war was so politicized that they can’t do their jobs as effectively as they could if they could, say fire on civilians instead of worrying about offending the Muslims, who want us all dead, and how pulling out of the war now would mean that those who died already will have died in vain.

Now this is a guy who’s over there. now. in the middle of this hell. He’s there by his own choice, and being handsomely compensated (PSCs make in a month about what the average soldier makes in a year), yes, but in more than one way, he’s family. On the one hand, I want to shake him up with just what kind of evil he’s actively helping to perpetrate. On the other hand, I don’t want to mess with his head in a way that could literally get him killed.

So I told him that i wasn’t going to argue firehouse politics with a man inside a burning building. That I hope he gets home safely, sooner rather than later.


And I can’t help feeling that in that agreeing-to-disagree, I have failed my friend, and the cause of peace, and God.

I can’t help feeling there’s more I should have said.

I SHOULD HAVE SAID that they didn’t fire on civilians because they’re supposed to be the “good guys”

I SHOULD HAVE ASKED why he didn’t recognize Jesus’ words as anything more than “religious writing”

I SHOULD HAVE SAID that the blind nationalism so common in evangelical circles lately is dangerous, not only politically, and materially, but spiritually.


I SHOULD HAVE SAID that he will have to reckon with God about this eventually, and that I pray that he doesn’t wait till he’s on the other side of an IED.

I SHOULD HAVE SAID that I fear for his soul.

Kyrie eleison. Christe eleison. May God have mercy on us all.

Taking my head out of the sand

Way back when my brilliant cousin started this blog, she invited me to participate, partly as supplementary estrogen, and partly because “someone who could write from a liberal christian perspective would be an interesting contrast to all us secular agnostics and atheists.”

So some time near the beginning, by way of introducing myself, I posted a blog on what I mean by Christian. DeeK posted a response that at the time, hit me rather hard. Maybe he took my post as a clumsy attempt at evangelism, maybe he was just sharing his own perspective….I don’t know, and I suppose I lacked the courage to ask. Writing or talking about my faith among people who don’t share it is something that’s still a challenge to me. I’ve never been anxious to proselytize (something that gave me tremendous guilt pangs in my fundy-lite phase) even when I wanted to be a missionary (maybe i shoulda joined the peace corps instead…) and it’s hard to put into words what I wear under my skin.

The brand of Christianity I chose to identify with for much of my adolescence and young adulthood sometimes emphasized “The world hates us” so heavily over “God so loved the world” that any disagreement us youngsters encountered with non-believers was hailed as “persecution.”

I thought I had grown beyond that.. or that I was “too smart” to have internalized it very much. My fantastic liberal-Catholic-raised parents taught me better. I could argue the left-hand side of Christian politics with people 20 years my senior. Hot-headed and underinformed, but unwavering in my conviction that Jesus was a liberal.
But when DeeK said:

“I guess this is way of saying I accept the need to embrace others as wonder attempts, but I would like to leave the Jesus part out of it.”

I heard “Leave the Jesus part out of it.” Imperative. command. period. end of sentence.
I
completely missed that he also said I accept the need to embrace others as wonder attempts
And I assumed he was saying “your superstitions are not welcome here you deluded irrational fool”

For that misperception, DeeK, I humbly ask you to forgive me.

Unlike my gutsier relatives, I’ve always been a “nice girl”. And I was new around here. And I thought I had offended. And my feelings were hurt, so i took my toys and went home like a big baby, at least where spiritual/religious matters were concerned.

How hypocritical that I accused Jovial of the same thing in comments some months later. I hope you will also forgive me.

Trouble with that is, my belief in God-what I really believe, that thing i struggle to put words to, not the knee-jerk prejudices I’m trying to unlearn in light of Truth- inform every part of my thinking, and to avoid that is to strip all my convictions of their meaning. This is not to say that I can’t participate in a discussion without regurgitating a bunch of random Scriptures – as a matter of fact I rarely quote the bible to make a point in a discussion with people who don’t accept it as authoritative(partly because I’m no biblical scholar and partly because I detest seeing proof-texts quoted out of context).

But I’ve discovered I feel almost as out of place among secular progressives as I do among conservative Christians, and for the same reason. Because the “natural” assumption in both groups seems to be that progressivism and Christianity(or ANY monotheistic faith, really) are so diametrically opposed as to be mutually exclusive; that I must be insincere in one or the other; that I am, in short, a “liberal” in spite of my belief in Christ. I don’t know how to respond to this sometimes.

So I’ve avoided the Red Queen’s many attempts to call me out & get me to do my job. Please forgive me, for having kept my head down when the wingnuts brought out the big guns. And please continue to call me on the carpet when I fall silent.

Apparently sometimes God talks to Christians through snarky agnostics, reminding us that hanging onto power in this world was never part of the plan.

Meanwhile I rant to my mom about how the power-mad maniac brigade currently claiming to operate in Jesus’ name looks more like the Antichrist than the Son of God. To which she invariably replies that I should write about it, talk about it, after all, I’ve been given a forum to do just that…..

Martin Niemöller, who learned firsthand the danger of being, literally, a “Good German”, put it this way:


In Germany, they came first for the Communists,
And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists,
And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews,
And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.

I know, I said I don’t usually throw bible verses around without context, but here’s one I probably ought to remember:


James 4:17 Remember, it is sin to know what you ought to do and then not do it.

May my God forgive me for my complacency, and may the Spirit keep reminding me to do what I ought to do…

DEAR GOD, NO

H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007

`Subtitle J–Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism

`SEC. 899A. DEFINITIONS.

    `For purposes of this subtitle:

      `(1) COMMISSION- The term `Commission’ means the National Commission on the Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism established under section 899C.

      `(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization’ means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.

      `(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism’ means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

      `(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence’ means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual’s political, religious, or social beliefs.

Porn

So I had to write a quick response paper on a video about porn. Since I am swamped with homework and cleaning, I thought I’d share it with you all (all 3 of you out there).

Remember, it’s a quick academic paper so there is no snark.

As a feminist, I am torn on the issue of pornography. On one hand I believe that anyone has the right to do whatever they wish with their own body provided it does not hurt another person. I also know that the only industries where women consistently make more money than men are sex work and modeling, and I am loath to take away that opportunity from someone when they may have no other opportunities to support themselves or their families. On the other hand, most women who work in the sex industry are treated atrociously and that treatment only seems to get worse as women in general acquire more sexual agency in the world. The more control women have in their own sexual choices, the more violent and degrading porn becomes towards women.

Porn is part of culture and a reaction to it. Every culture seems to have it’s own niche in the porn world. In America porn, gangbangs and violent blowjobs are common enough to make up the bulk of mainstream pornography. Female gratification rarely enters into the mix. In Latin America, porn often focuses on men performing oral sex on women, something that is rarely seen in American porn. The Latin idea of machismo may play into that by making female desire and orgasms taboo and therefore erotic. In America where women have more agency and female orgasms are (hopefully) a regular part of sex, porn pushes the limit by punishing women for having sexual agency. It is as if they are saying “you like having one penis- here have 12 and see how you like that”.

Porn is profitable, but it is only profitable when it provides something that people cannot get on their own. When sexual mores are such that only missionary penis in vagina intercourse is acceptable, profits will be made by having porn that includes oral sex and varying positions. Where women are considered to not like or want sex, women in porn will be sexually assertive “bad girls”. Where women are allowed to own their desire and expect mutual satisfaction, porn will punish women for being assertive. It is no more surprising to me that big business is involved in porn than it is that the robber barons of the early 1900’s made money off the opium trade. The difference now is that porn is as easy to get as checking your email, and that makes porn aesthetics much more prevalent in general society.

You can see the influence of porn in our current society by the prevalence of pubic hair removal in both men and women. What started as a way for porn movies to show more detail in close ups has become almost a requirement for women. They are now marketing waxing and hair removal kits to girls as young as 12, girls who hopefully have neither seen porn or had sex. Also profitable are clothing lines that claim to empower girls while they dress like porn stars and classes for girls in pole dancing (all marketed to children). The blowback from this has been “modesty” movements that seek to return girls to the status of being sexual gatekeepers with no sexual agency of their own. Neither of these situations is acceptable.

Thanks DNC, for helping our votes not to count

I’m on the way out the door, but this just makes me mad.

It’s now even more useless to vote blue in this reddest-of-red states.

Here’s a vastly oversimplified timeline:

  1. GOP-controlled Florida Legislature decides to play the “we wanna hold our primary first” game.
  2. Florida Dems decide not to hold a whole separate election even though the existing date would have us voting ahead of the “approved” early voting states.
  3. DNC punishes Florida voters by stripping our delegates (yes, kiddies, that means Florida Dems have no say in who runs for Prez) and telling the candidates not to campaign in the Sunshine State

ARRGH!

i’ll write more later, i have more to say, and i’m sure there’s more to all this that i’m not informed about, but right now it’s just one more reason I’m disappointed in the Democrats.

Hallefrickenluha!

I aced my econ midterm. I made nice with my professors. I got a shit load of stuff done. I was also given a documentary about porn by one of my proffs to watch and write a response paper on over the weekend. Sweet.

Anyways, when I was in Mexico the Naughty Professor and I got a guilty little kick playing a game called “spot the racist advertising”. This is a game that will not disappointed my friends. For example…..For the non-Spanish speakers- the sign is supposed to say Precios Chinos, Precios Baratos (or Chinese prices, cheap prices) but instead they go for racism as humor and make fun of a Chinese Spanish speakers accent by replacing all the Rs with Ls. How very Jerry Lewis of them. (Picture is of a scoreboard for a Mexican baseball field- I cannot recommend Mexican baseball games enough. They have much better food).

But it gets better. Today I found an Italian version of a commercial I saw in Mexico that made me drop my jaw and say “Ningún usted no!” (Oh no you didn’t!)

Sorry for the crappy link to Youtube- there wasn’t an embed link and I am not as tech savvy as I like to pretend

Privilege means never having to say “I’m an idiot!”

Sitting in the hallway outside of the econ classes today were two young white women.

YWW1 :Did you read that thing for class?
YWW2: It’s not due till tomorrow.
YWW1: No, it’s totally due today.
YWW2: Fuck! What was it about?
YWW1: It’s about how white people are privileged and get all the stuff.
YWW2: Seriously, that’s like so so so biased! Oh my god!
YWW1: It’s even worse- it was written by a white woman.

I think this should alleviate some conservative fears about the indoctrination methods of the uber-liberal ivory tower. You can lead the privileged white girls to water- but you can’t make them think!