--someone smart
"Popular ideas do not need to be protected by free speech laws."
--someone else smart
One of my closest friends is just
about the most avid supporter of Ron Paul as you would care to find.
Personally, I don't care much for Ron Paul, so we have had a number of debates
about his policies and the effects that they might have on our current system of
government. Every time we argue (i.e. "discuss"), we end up on the
point that Ron Paul, a doctor, doesn't believe in evolution, and whether or not
this will affect his policies on education. I firmly believe that beliefs
inform our actions, and this unsupported belief, which runs contrary to modern
biology, will undoubtedly influence Ron Paul's actions. My friend disagrees.
To my friend's credit, however, he
acknowledges that this is an area where he doesn't agree with Ron Paul. This
is important. I find it hard to take seriously someone who believes someone
else implicitly, or who agrees with someone else on every point. To do
so would be to claim infallibility of the other person. This is how demigods
and tyrants (and prophets) come about.
The mentality of infallibility by
virtue of the divine is inherent in religion. One might say it is where religion
begins. Unquestioning obedience is flaunted as a virtue. My Mormon youth
leaders made this very clear. It is OK to ask questions, but to persist after receiving
a mediocre answer is pushing it. This devotion to leadership is reiterated in
"temple-recommend" interviews, prior to admission into Mormon
temples. In fact, they take it one step further and inquire about affiliations
outside of the church, which may run contrary to the church's teachings (i.e.
activist groups, gay support groups, etc.).
To speak out about injustices
towards a community facing discrimination within the church, such as
homosexuals, is to bring chastisement upon yourself. Even trying to bridge gaps
between seemingly hostile communities, like disgruntled "ex-Mormons,"
can call your loyalty and testimony into question, or even call for disciplinary
action.
Fraternizing with ex-Mormons can
expose you to anti-Mormon literature (i.e. "anything that contradicts the
church"), and this can challenge your testimony or lead you to sin.
Religion is no stranger to censorship. After all, religion takes the saying
"beliefs inform our actions" one step further by saying that "thoughts
inform our actions." Merely thinking something can send one down a
perilous road to iniquity and damnation.
Indeed, thoughts can be as dangerous as actions according to some religions. This is why the Bible and the Koran condemn
disbelief and apostasy with eternal torture and death, respectively (I'll let
you decide which is the greater punishment). In fact, Jesus himself employs
censorship, by stating that uttering certain things is unforgivable. In Mark 3 Jesus is accused by the Pharisees of being
possessed by an evil spirit, and Jesus responds by laying out the law of
blasphemy. According to Jesus it is forgivable to speak ill of a person, but
speaking ill of the Holy Spirit is not:
"28 Verily I say unto you, All
sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever
they shall blaspheme:
29 But he that shall blaspheme
against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal
damnation:
Nothing wins arguments like "eternal
damnation."
In past posts I have referred to
videos and sites from John Dehlin, although I don't think I properly credited
his name. He started a group called "Mormon Stories" which tries to network
active Mormons with ex-Mormons. Dehlin believes that in order to truly help
ex-Mormons come back to the church or deal with a loss of faith, etc., active
Mormons should try to genuinely understand their concerns and why they left the
church. Sounds reasonable in principle, but as I mentioned above, many people
feel that associating with ex-Mormons will put them in a bad position
spiritually, and thus are hesitant to come anywhere near an ex-Mormon forum.
Now, I'm not convinced that such a bridge is necessary, but
I do admire Dehlin's efforts to open the dialog. However, not everyone is on
board with this; some church higher-ups have attacked Dehlin and condemned
his efforts. This is shown in an article addressing the position Mormonism has
taken in the mainstream. The article points out that one such person had
intended to release a "100-page take-down of Dehlin," but someone
even higher-up than he stepped in, and, fearing that a smear campaign would look
bad for the church, stopped the report. You may be tempted to say "crisis
averted," but it doesn't end here. Dehlin's son has recently turned eight
years old and, per Mormon custom, is going to be baptized into the church. Normally,
the father would conduct this rite of passage. But, in the case of Dehlin, his
bishop has denied him this privilege simply because of his podcast. By
opening a discussion, Dehlin has become the face of censorship in the Mormon Church
today.
BONUS MATERIAL:
And now, the KKK speaks out against the Westboro Baptist Church:
No comments:
Post a Comment