Monday, March 19, 2012

Not in God's Image

I always find it interesting when a leader who claims to be Christian decides that he or she can pick and choose what parts of the bible are important, and which aren’t. Which of the teachings of the prophets, or even Jesus (Remember that guy? The one that died a slow and painful death for you?) is relevant to human life. I’m not going to waste time talking to the moron in question this week. Instead I want to talk to other Christians... real Christians.

First, I should let you know that I am not a Christian. I’m Asatru, a believer in the ancient gods of Asgard. But, I have read the bible. In fact, I’ve read it more times than the average Christian. So, I find it very easy to look at things from a what is supposed to be a Christian point of view. I know what the most sacred precepts and tenants of the Christian faith and life are supposed to be. Foremost among them is that Man was created in God’s image.

Now, having said that, I would like to talk about Georgia State  Representative, Terry England. Here is a man who wants to make women carry stillborn babies to term, or at least until they go into ‘natural labor’ like “cows and pigs do.” I know what you’re thinking. It’s either A) he’s an ass, or B) it’s God’s will.

If you answered A you’re right... and I’m not talking to you. You don’t need a talking to. You’re head is screwed on right. But, if you answered B then we need to have a discussion. Sit. Down.

I know it’s tempting, and even seems logical to go with “God’s will”, but I would like to ask you something. How is it God’s will? We’re not talking about abortion here. We’re talking about a baby who’s heart has stopped beating, it’s neurofunction is flat, it is dead. I’m going to say that again... we’re talking about removing a baby that is already dead. God has already spoken. He has already made His decision and decide that that particular child would not enter the world. How is it God’s will to make a woman continue to carry it?

Let’s examine what excuse Mr. England used. He pointed out that cows and pigs do it. Tell me, as a Christian, does that make sense to you? Every single version of the bible says that you were made in God’s image and that you are above the beasts of the land and sea. But Mr. England says that’s if it’s good enough for a cow or pig then it’s good enough for you or your wife. Cows defecate in their own beds and pigs bathe in mud. These are animals with hooves, not hands and feet, which the bible squarely says are not equal unto Man. So, why would a good ‘Christian’ like Mr. England say such a thing?

Well, lets examine the options. First, he’s probably one of those people that think women fall into the same category as animals, that they are not human, therefore not part of mankind. Or, he’s betting that you’ve forgotten that part about being above the animals of the land and sea. Maybe he doesn’t believe that any of you, male or female, were created in God’s image. I tell you though, I’m kinda hoping that it’s not option one. After all, if it were then that would mean that he believes that he, and every other heterosexual man on Earth, was fornicating with farm animals. Maybe he thinks that’s a good thing. Maybe Mr. England gets off on it. (Suddenly homosexuality doesn’t seem so bad, eh?)

In the end, his motives are not clear, only his implications: that you, your wives, your sisters, and your mothers are no better than the animals of the land and sea. His implications are that you are not divinely created, and especially not in God’s image.

Next time you hear sacrilegious crap like that call it for what it is. Almost makes me wish ya’ll would bring back stoning people to death. Almost.

1 comment:

  1. Living one's life based on a bronze age book of stone age stories is backwards at best; it isn't quite as backwards as living one's life based on an iron age book of stone age stories, as islamists do, but it's backwards nonetheless.