Hitchens on God

I’ve been browsing through “God is Not Great” from Christopher Hitchens over the weekend (first 3 chapters down).   The book’s title includes the phrase: How religion poisons everything.  I do not yet ascribe to that idea entirely.  I think religion is a little more complex than Hitchens has made it seem in the early part of this text.  It’s also important to distinguish that ‘religion’ is not necessary the same as spirituality, faith, or belief.  

Anyway, the general idea has been on my mind lately.  I’ve long loathed the intersection of organized religion and policy-making- that loathing has only intensified as of late.  And the more I dwell on the public policy destruction often wroght by ill-conceived pressure from organized religion, the more I can sympathize with Hitchens determination that religion poisons everything.

First, from discussion with some Springfield pals, but for two last minute phone calls from orthodox Jewish rabbis to a north-side Illinois Senator, we would already have civil unions for gay couples in Illinois.  The rabbis’ reasoning didn’t rest on any actual public policy concerns.  They didn’t cite any studies, projections, or examples of the downsides of the policy.  Nope.  They just said that God was opposed to homosexuality.  Game-over.  End of conversation.  

Second, this weekend I had a pair of discussions with two family members who had sent along a request to “support the Mormon church from the hate attack launched by the gays.”  When I engaged them on the merits of their position, we had a civil discussion that ended the same in both cases.  The first concluded with “I have Gods word, and I know what He says is right and wrong, and If it means losing our tax exempt status, to continue our beliefs in Him and what He has taught us then SO BE IT.”  The second ended with a long copy and paste quoting the book of Genesis.  Game-over.  End of conversation.

I do not doubt the sincerity of the rabbis or of my family members.  In the case of my family members, they are decent, honest, compassionate folks who I love.

But when religious dogma devolves a conversation on public policy into a dead-end, we have a problem.  It has no business in policy-making.  In that way, it is a poison.

Oh, Walmart

BTW, I think the biggest failure is not the person who picked the sale price, but the one who designed the shirt.

“Satan is bad, Jesus is good.”    I mean, honestly.  Are our Chrisitian brethren even trying anymore?

And look at the Jesus.  I’m not sure if the artist drew it blindfolded, but a Jesus it is not.  I say it’s either an anorexic Santa Claus on his day off OR a deranged street person/zombie looking for a meal.

 

Gobble

Thanks to everyone for the thoughts, inspirations, comments, suggestions, compliments, critiques, jokes, and warmth this year.  

 

Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours.

A Reporter Gets A Taste of the Bird

Remind you of Hitchcock’s classic?

Why the Word Matters

Via Andrew Sullivan:

Yesterday I called a woman’s spouse her boyfriend.

She says, correcting me, “He’s my husband,”
“Oh,” I say, “I no longer recognize marriage.”

The impact is obvious. I tried it on a man who has been in a relationship for years,

“How’s your longtime companion, Jill?”
“She’s my wife!”
“Yeah, well, my beliefs don’t recognize marriage.”

Fun. And instant, eyebrow-raising recognition. Suddenly the majority gets to feel what the minority feels. In a moment they feel what it’s like to have their relationship downgraded, and to have a much taken-for-granted right called into question because of another’s beliefs.

 

Releasing the Peace Dove

Race & Sexual Orientation

JK and I had a quick email exchange regarding comments made by Mike Huckabee last week. Watch it HERE.  Essentially, Huckabee feels that its not appropriate to compare gay rights with the civil rights struggle of black Americans, because black Americans have suffered much more.

My initial response is that he is entirely right but also entirely wrong.  Unquestionably the struggle of black Americans to break free of slavery, secure equal rights on all fronts, and barrell through the cultural insecurities held by many Americans has lasted much longer, been more violent, and affected many more people than the gay rights struggle.  No rational person would say otherwise.  

But all of that is irrelevant.  The comparison between the two have nothing to do with figuring out which minority group has suffered more.   It has everything to do with the political logic, reasoning, and rationale behind denying each of those minority groups equal treatment under the law.  In that regard they are very much similar.  He glosses over the fact that the institution of marriage denying interracial couples the right to marry for hundreds of years.  Allowing interracial marriage changed an institution.  Huckabee’s comments (echoed by many others) are red herrings that distract from wrong-headed policy.  He is smarter than this.

 

Some of JK’s thoughts on Huckabee are below…

   I agree he means well and seems likable.  I guess I have an issue with the way he discusses marriage.  He points out that marriage is an institution and going about redefining that is different than racism, and he has a valid point.  But to counter, there needs to be a difference between the institution of marriage and the sacrament of marriage, and right now the two are too deeply intertwined and that’s why so many religious activists are up in arms about redefining the institution.  For them I don’t think they see a difference and that’s the problem- that difference is key and needs to be clear to them.  No one is saying that the way their religion defines marriage needs to change or that the way their religion defines it is wrong. But it’s wrong for the government to endorse a religious definition when it discriminates against and eliminates the rights of the citizens it promises to protect.

If I learned anything from my psych and soc classes changing an institution is a bitch, but not impossible (think Pintar’s class…).  I know I wandered off topic about the suffering, but I agree with your comments.  Keeping with my “institution” theme, I think that was part of Huckabee’s point- since racism and discrimination was (and still is) so deeply ingrained in many of our institutions, the fact that our country elected an AA President is overwhelming and inspiring.  But that’s the difference- racism was a factor in the institution, not the institution itself.  Does it make this fight harder or easier? I don’t know…but I think it makes them harder to compare.

Chicago Fact

An interesting factoid from my indominable Property professor Mr. Hammerin Hank Rose…

 

In 1830, Chicago was known as Fort Dearborn with a population of 31 people.  Sixty years later, in a single lifetime, it was the 5th largest city in the world.  Few cities in the history of the planet have ever grown faster.

Sometimes the Little Guy Wins

The Blip in the Generational Pyramid

One steady empirical refrain has echoed in almost every poll/study on support for gay rights in America: the older generations are less likely to approve of gay equality.  18-24 year olds are the most supportive, 25-35 are a little less so, 35-45 a little less than that, and on and on.

However, there is an exception that I didn’t know about.  A New Republic author explains and provides his guess as what causes the exception:

 

But, in the exit polls, there was one age group that interrupted the steady pattern of the data: Those between 50 and 64, while narrowly rejecting gay marriage, 51-49, were actually eight points better on the issue than those between 40 and 49; and they were one point better than even those between 30 and 39.

What could explain this? I have a theory, albeit one that I can’t prove: The 50-to-64 group are the parents of the 18-to-29-year olds who have experienced the sea-change of the past ten years. While they themselves grew up with more conservative attitudes on homosexuality, some now find themselves with gay sons and daughters, gay nieces and nephews; and many more have seen their straight children come of age with close gay friends. Those in the 40-to-49 range, by contrast, are mostly too old to have grown up with legions of out gay friends, but mostly too young to have seen their children experience the new culture being created by people in their 20s–a culture in which it is perfectly normal, even unremarkable, to be gay.