Tag Archive for 'faith'

The most hated people in America

Ah yes, time for me to have fun with every blogger’s favorite punching bag: Fred Phelps and his extended family–ah, I mean Westboro Baptist Church.

I’m not going to go terribly in depth today. Rather, I’m going to attack their use of the word “fag” to describe anyone and everyone who supports gays, is gay, or simply isn’t a member of their church.

The other day, I was thinking about how the word “fag” (or “faggot”) used to mean a bundle of sticks. It made me chuckle to think that WBC was railing against sticks. I knew I couldn’t have been the first person to think this, so I cautiously ventured on to their website to find out their own reason for using the word.

Their reasoning is…rather strange. Apparently, some Bible verse (in the book of Amos of all places) says, “I have overthrown some of you, as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and ye were as a firebrand plucked out of the burning: yet have ye not returned unto me, saith the Lord” (Amos 4:11), and it is this verse upon which they base all of their usage of “fag.”

Now, they claim that the word “firebrand” is translated from the Hebrew word “uwd” which means “to rake together.” Through some convoluted and rather iffy logic, they conclude that God was talking about homosexuals in a metaphorical sense, in that “they fuel God’s wrath, they burn in lust, and they will burn in hell” (straight from their site). In other words, firebrand can be replaced with faggot, which they use primarily to reference homosexuals.

Strangely enough, they say that this verse is talking about Soddom and Gommorrah. However, this is patently not the case. If any of them had graduated from the third grade, they’d realize that the “you” preceding firebrand is actually referring to the Israelites, who God is giving a really hard time and wondering why they aren’t returning to him (read Amos 4 and you’ll see what I mean). Now, the good folks at WBC claim that anyone who turns from God automatically becomes gay (I’d like to know how they back that up theologically), so I suppose the intent of the verse means the same thing to them as if it was talking about Sodomites. Doesn’t make them any more right (or even credible), so I can still make fun of them.

Anyways, now that I know the real reason they use the word fag, I don’t need to pretend they hate sticks. They’re just poor linguists who reference the most obscure Bible verse ever to justify hating everyone. Right.

Sphere: Related Content

Faith and politics

I am not a man of faith. In fact, I’m quite the opposite. I’m not ashamed to say this because it’s the truth and I feel no need to disguise the fact that I am borderline atheist. Not really, but close. As such, it really, really bugs me when people support a political candidate because they’re religious. I hate it. I don’t mind that politicians are religious, but I fail to see why people care that much about it.

Case in point: Barack Obama. He recently announced his plans to run for president in 2008, which pits him against two much more popular Democratic candidates: Hilary Clinton and John Edwards. But everyone who’s heard of Obama likes him. He’s young, he’s fresh, he’s clean and articulate (if Joe Biden is to be believed), he’s black…and he’s very into his faith. Great! …why does that matter?

Faith, from what I know about it, is a personal thing. Gerald Ford had it right when he said he would not use his faith to sway voters in the 1976 election, which some blame for his loss to Jimmy Carter, very much a “family values” kind of guy. Ford was as well, but he felt he shouldn’t have to tell that to people. He wanted to be elected for his merits as a politician, not because he was Christian or family friendly. And I think that’s how it should be.

Unfortunately, few people think like that. They want a leader with morals. That’s always nice, but one needn’t be Christian in order to have morals. Christians are just as fallible as the rest of us. Everyone makes mistakes; they aren’t going to lead the country better if they believe in God because belief in God does not make one a good politician, or even a good leader. Plenty of great leaders were not Christian. I shouldn’t even need to name them.

Personally, I would think a secular president would be a better leader. Most voters would, erroneously, associate such a person’s lack of religion with a lack of morals. However, a secular president would be more focused on improving the country as a whole without getting bogged down in issues conflicting with his or her beliefs. Take gay marriage for instance. Any religious president will most likely have trouble accepting gay marriage, since it would conflict with his or her beliefs. A secular president, on the other hand, would really have no reason to oppose gay marriage. He or she would recognize gay Americans as being no different than other Americans and thus allow them the rights they deserve.

Needless to say, this would offend a great deal of Americans, which is very unfortunate. Too many people associate religion with being a good president, which is not necessarily true. A good president leaves his beliefs out of legislation. A good president does what’s best for the country, not just what fits his beliefs. They can be whatever religion they want, I really don’t care. But I won’t vote for a candidate who thinks he or she can be voted in solely on the fact they’re religious because candidates who overemphasize their faith during their run for the presidency will keep that emphasis in office, which will inevitably lead to legislation based on that faith.

The United States is a secular nation. Let’s keep it that way, eh?

Sphere: Related Content




Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States