Sorry I have not posted anything in a while; I've been working on a political campaign.
I recently came across the idiom "God is Love," which I believe refers to a requited loving relationship between the biblical God and his (or it's, because why would God have a gender?) worshipers, i.e. if you promise to love God, he/she/it/them will love you in return. Instead, I began thinking about this phrase in what could be it's most literal meaning: God, or a belief in God, is in fact love.
I suppose I'll have to have a different definition of love than is typically adhered to; love, in this sense, would represent a feeling or acknowledgement of belonging and acceptance regardless of personal or physical faults, traits that are often mocked or scorned in society. The fact (as claimed by proselytizers) that God would accept a person regardless of their downfalls is a comfortable feeling, almost like being wrapped up in the arms of a lover. That someone, whether they are a supernatural deity or not, is willing to accept the totality of a person means that those who consider themselves faulty will have some chance at redemption, since God is all-forgiving and understanding (at least in some beliefs).
Thus, the feeling of embracing the notion of a God is one of love- acceptance, comfort, a jovial quid pro quo of love and forgiveness.
One would wonder whether this would set a bad precedent, i.e. if one's relationships always fail, there is always the love of the intangible God to fall back upon. Does that mean that instead of attempting to improve one's acknowledged faults, one would simply turn towards the comfort of a supernatural being? Does this negate human love in any way? Would a love (a true love instead of a superficial one that many hold) of God require a diligent and constant devotion towards maintaining the preternatural relationship? There are too many open-ended questions for my taste.
Being the ardently Socialist-Communist-Jedi-Lennonist (not misspelled) Atheist that I am, the consideration of a relationship with an omnipotent being doesn't concern me. I go about my life as anyone else- seeking comfort, warmth, love, friendship, happiness, prosperity, etc. If I do, mazel tov; if not, tough luck.
Anyway, there's my two cents on that. In other news, I need to study for the GREs. They're in a month. Hooray.
That's all for now,
Das Flüg
Showing posts with label jedi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label jedi. Show all posts
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Proposition ∞
Prop 8 was recently overturned in California. For those who don't know what Prop 8 is, it is a mandate to ban gay marriage. Of course, the decision will be appealed, most likely leading to what will become one of the more momentous Supreme Court decisions of this new century. The battle is, of course, being waged by whom one would imagine it would be: the more religious, conservative people on one side ardently pushing against the more liberal on the other. That story seems almost ubiquitous in every political situation now. What's my opinion on this, you ask? (I assume you asked. If not, well, I'll tell you anyway because I'm sure you want to know.)
To understand the religious reasoning behind the conservative argument, one has to know why the bible urges only men and women to be together, while forbidding homosexual relationships. The main reason, as could be repeated by any historian with knowledge of the time period, was the high mortality rate of children between the 1st-10th century AD (and even beyond then, until hygienic practices became standard). In order to continue the species (emphasis on continue), humans must propagate as much as possible. If only 20% of children survive after 2 years of age, make sure you try at least 10 times. Sure, the emotional devastation of losing 8 kids might be too much, but it's for the continuation of the goddamn human race. Having homosexual relationships undermines the idea of that continuation, and thus the church thought to forbid it. (On a side note, most of the "rules" in the bible are common sense aphorisms to ensure that people have as few problems as possible in life, because we all know that screwing around with your neighbor's wife can get you killed.)
As for the fallacious statements that some organizations tout which usually decry that children raised in homosexual relationships have more problems in life, they are exactly that: fallacious. They have little to no statistical evidence, or really any evidence of any kind. In fact, in my sociology class, I read a study that homosexual relationships are statistically more stable than heterosexual relationships. Shove that in your pipe and smoke it, Palin.
My opinion, as an uber-liberal, somewhat Socialist Jedi, is that each and every person has the same rights as the other. That's it. If one person has the right to marry whoever they wish, then a different person, no matter their gender, race, sexual orientation or thoughts on Batman, has that exact same right. That's it. Equal protection of the law is embedded in the Constitution of the US. Deal with it and move on.
I prefer to avoid the normative arguments about how love is universal, since this is more a matter of equal rights than equal love. Personally, I'm glad that Prop 8 has been turned on its side. It's a victory for equal rights and a step toward a better future for the US. With the erasure of Prop 8, maybe, hopefully, eventually the conservative and mundane will realize that love and equal rights are infinite and not beholden to any restraints.
That's all for now,
Das Flüg
To understand the religious reasoning behind the conservative argument, one has to know why the bible urges only men and women to be together, while forbidding homosexual relationships. The main reason, as could be repeated by any historian with knowledge of the time period, was the high mortality rate of children between the 1st-10th century AD (and even beyond then, until hygienic practices became standard). In order to continue the species (emphasis on continue), humans must propagate as much as possible. If only 20% of children survive after 2 years of age, make sure you try at least 10 times. Sure, the emotional devastation of losing 8 kids might be too much, but it's for the continuation of the goddamn human race. Having homosexual relationships undermines the idea of that continuation, and thus the church thought to forbid it. (On a side note, most of the "rules" in the bible are common sense aphorisms to ensure that people have as few problems as possible in life, because we all know that screwing around with your neighbor's wife can get you killed.)
As for the fallacious statements that some organizations tout which usually decry that children raised in homosexual relationships have more problems in life, they are exactly that: fallacious. They have little to no statistical evidence, or really any evidence of any kind. In fact, in my sociology class, I read a study that homosexual relationships are statistically more stable than heterosexual relationships. Shove that in your pipe and smoke it, Palin.
My opinion, as an uber-liberal, somewhat Socialist Jedi, is that each and every person has the same rights as the other. That's it. If one person has the right to marry whoever they wish, then a different person, no matter their gender, race, sexual orientation or thoughts on Batman, has that exact same right. That's it. Equal protection of the law is embedded in the Constitution of the US. Deal with it and move on.
I prefer to avoid the normative arguments about how love is universal, since this is more a matter of equal rights than equal love. Personally, I'm glad that Prop 8 has been turned on its side. It's a victory for equal rights and a step toward a better future for the US. With the erasure of Prop 8, maybe, hopefully, eventually the conservative and mundane will realize that love and equal rights are infinite and not beholden to any restraints.
That's all for now,
Das Flüg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)