Reconciling the imposition of the "White Man's" religion

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
134
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Dr. Dilznick said:
*sigh* A nigger's been MIA for a couple weeks and a gift awaits him:

"Hello Dr. Dilznick it appears that you have not posted on our forums in several weeks, why not take a few moments to ask a question, help provide a solution or just engage in a conversation with another member in any one of our forums?"
That's adorable. You've been missed.

So, here's a post:

The Christians that slaughtered native Americans, established the slave trade and destroyed centuries of knowledge proclaiming it pagan, did all these acts with a bible in hand. If the Bible were continued instead of ended, they would be added as further victories of God's will.

God's will:

"Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man." - Numbers 31:17-18

Etc.

Now we're getting to the "meat" of the matter. I concur with you 100% and not (though I didn't quote it here) what you say is your mother's take. Hers seems more 'excusing' to suit present needs Dilz.

Europeans didn't exactly invent the idea of using religion to conquer as much as the world as you can.
No. They didn't. But historically I'd say they were the most proficient at it.

It had little to with race or continent.
This is the point on which I categorically disagree with you. It had everything to do with race and a perception that one was more "evolved" than the one it chose to subject and dominate.

Violence and conquering mentality are the default in the absence of a rational social system. Back in the time period we're talking about nobody had one. I wouldn't say there were many groups that had a "humane" look on life.
Tibetan Buddhism is an exception historically.

I still blame Paul and his followers who wrote the New Testament (especially Luke, whoever he actually was), not "The Man." Paul was a snake who was willing to do anything to sell his new religion to Romans. Dude already had won during his lifetime and original Christianity died with James's death.
I blame that bastard Paul too. Are you sure you weren't raised an Episcopalian?? Great observaiton about Paul.

btw? Hell's frozen over. We agree.:cool:
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
134
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
BronxBombshell said:
This is what I tried to illlustrate though Stronzo chose to reject it. For me, for my family, for most of my congregation, for its leadership, there is nothing to reconcile.

I didn't reject it. I thought it not germane to my initial question as I stated at the time.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
134
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
BronxBombshell said:
Are you kidding me? The only choice? I said of their original congregation that it was the first Episcopal church, not the first church of any type, or only church around when they were founding their own congregation. Even if I excuse you (and I of course do) for not knowing more about the history of the architecture and buildings of Manhattan, I cannot understand your departure from logic. I know you are aware that the English were not the first Europeans to settle Manhattan. I know you are aware that being so full of ports, Europeans from all over were starting new lives on that one tiny island, and that most of them were not going to worship with Anglicans, or anyone similar. The first R.C. church in (America? New York? I don't know.) is directly around the corner, for example. At the time, before the Millenium Hilton was built, before the Fulton St. subway station was laid in, when the road was cobblestone (or maybe still dirt), the Catholic church was diagonally accross the street from the Episcopal Church's graveyard. And that's just one example. Of course they could have simply hunted around for another congregation with which to worship. Of course they could have tried to find another denomination which might not make it so rough for them to start their own congregation. But they were determined to be Episcopalians. I imagine they had similar reasons for staying as I do. Only I have much less passion.

You asked about how some black people (you did mean some, right) can look back at a history of intolerance, religious oppression, (history meaning past) and then take the same religion by which their ancestors were oppressed and use it as justification for oppressing (-ing endings indicating present progressive ) others, especially those in the gay community.

I though you might find it interesting to see a deviation from that formula. I thought you might be curious about a small (in the grand scheme of things, anyway) group of people who do not share that same history (as the antebellum whites in the original church were indifferent at best, and against at worst to the presence of slaves in their worship services) and do not behave that way in the present. Instead, you deign to completely disregard my testimony, as if you could know the story better than I. How arrogant. My church is an official landmark. I was trained as a tour guide when I was 8.

Yikes. Cool down. I didn't mean to hit some nerve. I disregarded nothing. You're entire post here is anger-inpspired and reactionary. Please don't respond with such acrimony. It makes you less credible.

I told you I found what you wrote interesting. And no, I'm not 'kidding'. I think your lengthy explanation to justify the Christian church is a dodge tactic. Just my take mind you.

b.c. said:
This is what they were trying to tell you, in relating their personal experiences.

**sigh**

I've reiterated several times that I get that part. But their own present-day 'experience' (though nice to know) is NOT the phenomenon I address. It's much more historically ancient than today. Please get that.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
134
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
b.c. said:
Such is the nature of religion. It is divisive, it is conflicting, but also inspiring. Whether Kwoth, God, Allah... one name just as good as another.

In other words, the answer to your question: their is nothing to reconcile.

To me that's incredible. Of course historically there's something to reconcile! I spoke very specifically about the initial peoples brought here. It's to that experience only I addressed this thread topic. To not address how enslaved native Africans were brought here by the shipload and stripped of their backgrounds only to somehow "find their way" to the 'only game in town' (Christian church) is a question - to this writer - of overt denial and selective reasoning at best (hence my indifference to the stories of how BronxBombshell's Episcopal church founded itself). It's, again, about the 'only game in town' people.

Any thinking person, of necessity, would have ask himself.

Hell, I'm that nasty old thing they call an "Anglo" and I question its imposition on me! Perhaps the real answer from so many I thought would understand the nature of the question is to be found in the mainstreaming of black Americans to the Christan church per se. Your inclusion is a "done deal". Mine is not.

As I recounted in my intial thread starting post I don't have the advantage of incluscion since I'm a big homo.

See the difference? I feel nothing to defend or justify in this Christian church and most of my Massachusetts ancestors were fire and brimstone Anabaptists from Boston and Plymouth.

Aside:

I wish, BronxBombshell, you'd weighed in as vehemently on Lex's Homosexuality and the Church thread. I'd have welcomed your input there. But you were no where to be found at the tmie.

As I pmed to Lex... I find it endlessly confounding that people weigh in so aggressively and defensively when the bias is race related but far less so when the bias is homophobically-inspired. Odd reality that.

I see zero difference in the two biases. One's as bad as the other. But board history tells me that many do not share my passion for equal rights across the board (literally and figuratively).
 

Shelby

Experimental Member
Joined
May 17, 2004
Posts
2,129
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
258
Location
in the internet
The beauty of the civil rights movement was that, against all odds, it made whites see the hypocrisy of calling our society democratic. Feminism was an inevitable offshoot. Now homosexuals want on the bandwagon.

But so far mainstream America isn't buying into the idea.

disclaimer - the above is an observation not a judgement




 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
134
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Shelby said:
The beauty of the civil rights movement was that, against all odds, it made whites see the hypocrisy of calling our society democratic. Feminism was an inevitable offshoot. Now homosexuals want on the bandwagon.​
Yup we do.

But so far mainstream America isn't buying into the idea.

Thank you SHELBY! Finally someone gets it.

disclaimer - the above is an observation not a judgement

Certainly I don't see it as one... but it's one helluva'n observation.







 

Matthew

Legendary Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Posts
7,296
Media
0
Likes
1,625
Points
583
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Lex said:
there I go, picking on white men again. Silly me.

Ooh! Ooh! Pick on me!!!

In the last couple decades, amazing strides have been made in the US "mainstream" regarding awareness and positive opinion of gays and gay rights. This has been accomplished by nothing other than a visible and loud movement first against AIDS and later explicitly for equal rights (such a radical concept).

Is there backlash? Yup. Comes with the territory. A long way yet to go? Hell yeah. Thank goodness we didn't listen to the apologists who say "America just isn't ready" -- we would never have come this far.

Thanks to all of those who conquered fear and stood up to make life better for us all.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
97
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
Lex said:
There's a bandwagon for equal treatment? Who knew?

Opps, there I go, picking on white men again. Silly me.

*eyeroll*
Amazing, isn't it, that in the 1960s, it was called Civil Rights, not Negro Rights. Now another marginalized segment wants some equality, and opponents call it Special Rights, not Equal Rights. Hell, even when women started demanding civil and social equality, the whole issue centered around the Equal Rights Amendment (which, by the way, was a bad description.)


And by the way, most of the opponents of Negro Emancipation, way back when, were "good, god-fearin', church-goin' christians."
 

Shelby

Experimental Member
Joined
May 17, 2004
Posts
2,129
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
258
Location
in the internet
As I see it homosexuals should refocus their efforts away from demands for equal treatment and towards the idea that homosexuality is as natural and unavoidable as skin color or gender. The posts since my last one take this as a given. The majority of Americans still do not.

Once that hurdle is cleared I think equal treatment will follow naturally.

fwiw
 

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,609
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
Stronzo,

To help answer your question, let's look at today. In the fundie Baptist churches, women are allowed NO voice. (This does not include Prep's church or the American Baptists Churches). Woman in those churches are to "remain silent." There are some of those fundie churches right around where I live.

And guess who the stronges supporters of this are: Women of the church. Yes women. They go on an on how men are "anoited" to do God's work and theya re the be the help mate and on and one ad nauseum.

To really find the answer to your question you can't go back an interview the people back then. And slaves weren't allowed to write to keep records. But you can look at how the very same thiing is happening today and look and see how it is done. It may give you some clues.

As for me, I don't understand it. Quite often,the women who profess to believe this crap about women having no role at all in the church are the ones with the loud mouths at home and their husbands end up doing their wives bidding.

If you had the time to be in the south for a few months and visit African American churches here: If you had the time to be in the South and visit the "fundie women are inferior" churches; you would find some of the answers you are lookiing for.

Why do fundie supposedly devout Muslims who beieve suicide is a striaght guaranteed trip to hell blow them selves up as suicide bombers? Why is President Bush, the great Repunblican who wnats less government interference in our lives, trying to gain the most interference in our lives of any president on record? Why are these things so?

It is a paradox. Believe me. I do know. The very people you need to interview are dead and left no written records courtesy of the slave masters.

But by studying people who are doing the same thing, you gain sme insight.

I have done that myself. These fundie people may be wrong, but are they ever devout. They have had a "personal encounter with Jesus" which is better than anyone else's "personal encounter with Jesus"

I can tell you that in the African American churches I have been in, the theme is "Going to the Promise Land like Moses lead the ancient enslaved Hebrews. The comparison is extremely evident in most African American churches I have attended. And nearly all the old African American music reflects the "Promised Land" theme.

My take is that these slaves believed at death, they would be free and live in a mansion as equal to Jesus himself. That was their hope. That is what they held on to.

This is what I see hearing African American preachers preaching and the music saying right now 2006. I'm sure it was even more pronounced in slave days.

Stronzo, I know we aren't giving you all the answers you are looking for. We do our best. I'm not sure there is enough historical record left to really answer your question. regarding African American slaves some 300 years ago.

Regards,

Freddie
 

Dr. Dilznick

Experimental Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Posts
1,640
Media
0
Likes
4
Points
183
Age
46
Sexuality
No Response
Stronzo,

Agreed. What I meant was that people in power are evil everywhere you go. Of course, millions upon millions of individuals worldwide are one mass consciousness of embodied absolute evil, which lies in low melanin counts.

DC_DEEP said:
Welcome back, Dilz... I've missed your incisive, witty banter. Just cuz you have a newbie in your house, that does NOT give you a sanctioned leave of absence.
Thanks... you are the only one. Actually, the only reason I'm logged in now is because there isn't anything for me to respond to on MySpace, or the board I moderate. But things should pick up soon.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
97
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
Shelby said:
As I see it homosexuals should refocus their efforts away from demands for equal treatment and towards the idea that homosexuality is as natural and unavoidable as skin color or gender. The posts since my last one take this as a given. The majority of Americans still do not.

Once that hurdle is cleared I think equal treatment will follow naturally.

fwiw
That methodology seems a bit backward to me. I doubt we will ever be able to change the mindset of the fundies until our government shoulders its responsibility to ensure that we get our 14th amendment rights. The way I see it, once the government ensures that every citizen (not just homosexuals) are afforded equal protection under the law, then more people will see us as natural and unavoidable - individual opinions notwithstanding. With racial and gender discrimination now against the law in the federal government, the district of columbia, and all 50 states, there are still people who don't like it... but they gotta deal with it. As it stands, 12 states plus the district of columbia prohibit sexual orientation discrimination. The remaining 38 states, and the federal government, do not.
 

Lex

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Posts
8,253
Media
0
Likes
118
Points
268
Location
In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Shelby said:
As I see it homosexuals should refocus their efforts away from demands for equal treatment and towards the idea that homosexuality is as natural and unavoidable as skin color or gender. The posts since my last one take this as a given. The majority of Americans still do not.

Once that hurdle is cleared I think equal treatment will follow naturally.

fwiw

I see what you mean here, Shelby, and the probem is that, even in the face of substantial evidence (research into twins, homosexuality found in nature), people still won't see it as a "unalterable characteristic" (that term was used in Brown v. Board to end segregated schools).

We see dogs stuck all the time, from fucking each other in the ass. And penguins (which partner for years)--there are two documented male-male couples in the US right now.

Still, people see what they want to see. Unnatural they say even as it exists in nature. HA!

My disposition was not something forced on me or learned (except than I am learning to love myself and accept it). I was BORN THIS WAY. Stronzo, Matthew, Mindseye were also born this way. I can love men AND women--that is no FLAW--that is a GIFT. I have TWICE the capacity of most people on the planet. That is to be celebrated and enjoyed--not shunned and stomped out. Imagine what I could teach males about being emotionally available to other people (men and women) if I were not shunned by everyone all the time.

If people could see that homosexuality is not a disease to be caught and transmitted, perhaps we could get somewhere. But no--seeing it as natural would force a LOT of people to reexamine their own supressed and repressed urges. And we can't have that can we?
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
134
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Freddie53 said:
Stronzo,


I can tell you that in the African American churches I have been in, the theme is "Going to the Promise Land like Moses lead the ancient enslaved Hebrews. The comparison is extremely evident in most African American churches I have attended. And nearly all the old African American music reflects the "Promised Land" theme.

My take is that these slaves believed at death, they would be free and live in a mansion as equal to Jesus himself. That was their hope. That is what they held on to.

This is what I see hearing African American preachers preaching and the music saying right now 2006. I'm sure it was even more pronounced in slave days.

Stronzo, I know we aren't giving you all the answers you are looking for. We do our best. I'm not sure there is enough historical record left to really answer your question. regarding African American slaves some 300 years ago.

Regards,

Freddie

Hi Freddie and thanks. Always the soul of reason.

Yes. I know I won't get the answers I look for here or anywhere. I, again, have that unenviable (maybe not) personality trait of instantly putting myself in the other guy's shoes with regard to the social woes of the time. This runs the gamut from racial to gender and then, of course, to sexual orientation.

I've done it - nearly as an "outsider looking in" my entire life. I don't truly recall ever looking at the world from any other perspective than that of an odd ball who didn't quite fit anywhere. Did I look the right way? Yes. Did I "come from he right people"?? I was told I did. Was I raised in privilege? Certainly. But none of it really took in a social way.

I'll recount something deeper which will illustrate my point:

When I was 7 (no older) my mother and brother and I were driving to Nantasket Beach (just south of old Boston). It was a day trip and about 40 minutes from our home town. My brother and mum were in the front seat and I was listening intently to the converstation they were having. David (brother) was three years older and he was a hero of mine. So when he and my mother and I were together we had the "world by the balls". She's still a great friend of mine my mum. She has the views of a latter-day Susan B. Anthony or Cady Stanton. She comes from generations of suffragettes. But she's totally feminine. She has immense personal appeal.

At any rate, we were nearly to the beach when the subject of homosexuality was broached on some Boston talk radio station. I'd never heard it articulated in the way it was that day in that car. The tone was derrogatory and my brother asked my mother a question: "Mum? Why do men sometimes like to sleep with men instead of women?"

My mother said; "dear, it's always been that way. Society as you can tell by what they're saying on the radio has a very hard time with it. Anyone who's homosexual has a very different and unique path to follow in this world. My best friend growing up was a gay woman and Helen's life has been interesting but difficult."

My brother said "does that mean it's bad?"

My mum said, "no but it means that anyone who finds he's (read he or she) homosexual kind can rather expect to feel very isolated and I should think it a very hard thing to be going through life".

I sat spellbound not saying a word (uncharacteristically) during this whole exchange. If I haven't quoted verbatim it's damned close to the dialogue that day in that hot summer car. I was left with two insurmountable feelings: loneliness and isolation. You see, I realized they were (inadvertendly) speaking of me. I ingested both the dialogue on the radio (utterly negative and condemning) but more specifically my mother's softening take on those words and simply dwelled on it for what seemed months. I'm sure it was months and it's never left me.

In that very same sense, I realized like someone had given me an epiphany pill - albeit an unconcious one - that I was going to lead a life separate from that of my peers. I'd sensed the difference long before that certainly but there it was; finally spoken.

Years later when I came out to my mother she asked me if I'd "be ok". I said I had no choice but to be. But in that same way I instigated this converstation about racial bias based in age-old impositions I recount my own personal story of my greater experience in this American society. When we only know selective pieces of those to whom we credit our identity I think we fall short. "Facts ma'am. Just the facts"

The way this societly bullshits us all is so blatantly hypocritical at times it nearly makes my want to yell "are you all totally fucked or what??" Assuming I'm that stupid innately but subliminal imposition is monstrously angering to me.

But I don't get angry anymore (honest Lex!!) I simply become more resolute. Such is the nature of societal denial on all levels. Indeed when I came out to my dad shortly thereafter he wasn't surprised in the least and said "boy? (yes he called me that until I was over 20) I know what you're doing and I've been there too, but remember there's nothing like a woman". HUH???

Well knock me over with a feather. Beacon Hill John Wayne (in the guise of my old man) has had gay encounters!! Fuck me then... cuz I haven't a clue why we lie to ourselves so. It's the old "don't ask don't tell thing" eh? Gotcha. Well not for this dude.

So please Freddie and others understand that when I pose the 'White Man's religion' question at the very beginning of this thread it was solely in an effort to glean a greater understanding of the nature and genesis of all those this society would attempt to marginalize. For in that understanding I believe there's a cure for what ails us all. And remember I can only look at this thing through my eyes and in these eyes I see a Stronzo who (were he of African descent from those early days of 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th century arrival) who I'm damned certain would be asking himself the Christian question I first posed here. And so I do. I ask it with respect to my sexual orientation too - hence my "irreligiousity".

For this writer the two are, ultimately, irreconcilable.

There now. Most cathartic. I've gotten to tell my lil story to everyone who, I suspect, couldn't care less. :rolleyes:

Big hug, Stronz
 

naughty

Sexy Member
Joined
May 21, 2004
Posts
11,232
Media
0
Likes
39
Points
258
Location
Workin' up a good pot of mad!
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
Stronzo said:
Hi Freddie and thanks. Always the soul of reason.

Yes. I know I won't get the answers I look for here or anywhere. I, again, have that unenviable (maybe not) personality trait of instantly putting myself in the other guy's shoes with regard to the social woes of the time. This runs the gamut from racial to gender and then, of course, to sexual orientation.

I've done it - nearly as an "outsider looking in" my entire life. I don't truly recall ever looking at the world from any other perspective than that of an odd ball who didn't quite fit anywhere. Did I look the right way? Yes. Did I "come from he right people"?? I was told I did. Was I raised in privilege? Certainly. But none of it really took in a social way.

I'll recount something deeper which will illustrate my point:

When I was 7 (no older) my mother and brother and I were driving to Nantasket Beach (just south of old Boston). It was a day trip and about 40 minutes from our home town. My brother and mum were in the front seat and I was listening intently to the converstation they were having. David (brother) was three years older and he was a hero of mine. So when he and my mother and I were together we had the "world by the balls". She's still a great friend of mine my mum. She has the views of a latter-day Susan B. Anthony or Cady Stanton. She comes from generations of suffragettes. But she's totally feminine. She has immense personal appeal.

At any rate, we were nearly to the beach when the subject of homosexuality was broached on some Boston talk radio station. I'd never heard it articulated in the way it was that day in that car. The tone was derrogatory and my brother asked my mother a question: "Mum? Why do men sometimes like to sleep with men instead of women?"

My mother said; "dear, it's always been that way. Society as you can tell by what they're saying on the radio has a very hard time with it. Anyone who's homosexual has a very different and unique path to follow in this world. My best friend growing up was a gay woman and Helen's life has been interesting but difficult."

My brother said "does that mean it's bad?"

My mum said, "no but it means that anyone who finds he's (read he or she) homosexual kind can rather expect to feel very isolated and I should think it a very hard thing to be going through life".

I sat spellbound not saying a word (uncharacteristically) during this whole exchange. If I haven't quoted verbatim it's damned close to the dialogue that day in that hot summer car. I was left with two insurmountable feelings: loneliness and isolation. You see, I realized they were (inadvertendly) speaking of me. I ingested both the dialogue on the radio (utterly negative and condemning) but more specifically my mother's softening take on those words and simply dwelled on it for what seemed months. I'm sure it was months and it's never left me.

In that very same sense, I realized like someone had given me an epiphany pill - albeit an unconcious one - that I was going to lead a life separate from that of my peers. I'd sensed the difference long before that certainly but there it was; finally spoken.

Years later when I came out to my mother she asked me if I'd "be ok". I said I had no choice but to be. But in that same way I instigated this converstation about racial bias based in age-old impositions I recount my own personal story of my greater experience in this American society. When we only know selective pieces of those to whom we credit our identity I think we fall short. "Facts ma'am. Just the facts"

The way this societly bullshits us all is so blatantly hypocritical at times it nearly makes my want to yell "are you all totally fucked or what??" Assuming I'm that stupid innately but subliminal imposition is monstrously angering to me.

But I don't get angry anymore (honest Lex!!) I simply become more resolute. Such is the nature of societal denial on all levels. Indeed when I came out to my dad shortly thereafter he wasn't surprised in the least and said "boy? (yes he called me that until I was over 20) I know what you're doing and I've been there too, but remember there's nothing like a woman". HUH???

Well knock me over with a feather. Beacon Hill John Wayne (in the guise of my old man) has had gay encounters!! Fuck me then... cuz I haven't a clue why we lie to ourselves so. It's the old "don't ask don't tell thing" eh? Gotcha. Well not for this dude.

So please Freddie and others understand that when I pose the 'White Man's religion' question at the very beginning of this thread it was solely in an effort to glean a greater understanding of the nature and genesis of all those this society would attempt to marginalize. For in that understanding I believe there's a cure for what ails us all. And remember I can only look at this thing through my eyes and in these eyes I see a Stronzo who (were he of African descent from those early days of 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th century arrival) who I'm damned certain would be asking himself the Christian question I first posed here. And so I do. I ask it with respect to my sexual orientation too - hence my "irreligiousity".

For this writer the two are, ultimately, irreconcilable.

There now. Most cathartic. I've gotten to tell my lil story to everyone who, I suspect, couldn't care less. :rolleyes:

Big hug, Stronz

Actually,
I care deeply. I am so sorry you had to go through that.I was just talking to Lex about the same thing. How we all are so intolerant of each other. THough we want others to take the high road quite often we dont ourselves.
 

GoneA

Sexy Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2005
Posts
5,020
Media
0
Likes
38
Points
268
**Oh Gawd, the best threads always happen when I break**

Firstly Stronzo, I would like to thank you for bringing such a topic to the fore. Considering the weight of this subject, I gather it’s something you’ve pondered for quite some time.

The versatility of Christianity and the fluidity of its principles have acquired over the years a bittersweet savor. The ‘sweeter’ side of its flexibility is found in its capacity to adapt to our differing needs. The more bitter aspects of Christianity comes into play when it is used as a means to pour scorn on and condemn any faction of humanity with which the practitioners of this faith might not see eye to eye. Simply put, when religion [Christianity] is used to promote our own agenda! Does the end justify the mean? Certainly not.

In the scheme of things, there is a great deal of truth behind your line of thought and is even discussed in Lex’s thread on homophobia in the Black churches. What I attempted to submit in Lex’s thread and will again in this one is: the problem lies with the usage of this very influential religion. Homophobia is rampant, and people will use whatever they can to not only shield themselves from homosexuality, but go a step further to ‘thwart’ it. When you think about it, the most effective way to do this is through religion, because not only is it influential but it carries with it a certain element of subtlety that relieves people of the burden of guilt and accountability that often comes along after we’ve disparaged and/or condemned someone or something. That is, it becomes a lot easier to sleep at night it people can use their faith as a means to justify and unjust loathing for a particular group of people. As influential as Christianity is, it’s quite upsetting to see that is hasn’t influenced people the way it was designed to initially.

Understand also, that this is not something inborn in the Black race … but it is the way things have unfolded. It quite unreasonable (just for clarification, I’m not saying you’ve suggested this) to think all Black people should disavow their bond with Christianity because many have become hypocritical in their practice. As you quite sagaciously point out Stronzo, Christianity has been a strong, central avenue of support within Black (and of course many other races) communities and arguably, one might say having been exposed to religion caused a large degree of cohesion and coherence amongst a race burdened with despair and confusion. So if anything I would encourage people to continue on with their religion, just chose a different path within this very pliable faith and understand it for what it is really.

Consider, if you will, women and how the workforce for a long period of time was, as it were, against them. After much fighting to gain their correct status in the working world, we find women now who are not above displaying workforce discrimination. The women who don’t discriminate in the workforce don’t necessarily need to reconcile any feelings, but recognize the good that the workforce has done for them and strive to make it a better place.

The same is true with Christianity, I do not think we need to reconcile anything within ourselves, but we must simply strive to make a better name for the faith than what it has received lately. As much as the Christian faith speaks about the whole of mankind, it just as much focuses on the individual and how they must live their own life. If every Christian lived their life accordingly, they would condemn others a great deal less and become more welcoming as a people … this, of course, would be reconciling our way of life to the one the bible has dictated.

The reality is it’s easier for religious people to wear the judge’s hat when they’re sitting high and looking low. However, Jesus often spoke about the inherent hypocrisy and ultimate ineffectuality of judging one another when the judger himself isn’t faultless … can you see how this would escalate into a vicious cycle? Therefore, if one is going to profess Christianity, I don’t think it is so much a matter of their faith being handed down to them as it is a matter of how they conduct themselves within their life and the type relationships they choose to fashion with other people.

Again, thank you Stronzo for food for thought. And thank you Lex for showing that you value my opinion. Freddie, DC Deep and Matthew, I think your contribution were especially insightfully intelligent. Thanx – I’ll be gone for a few more days! I’m out huntin’ wabbits (read: fundies).
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
134
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
GoneA said:
**Oh Gawd, the best threads always happen when I break**

Firstly Stronzo, I would like to thank you for bringing such a topic to the fore. Considering the weight of this subject, I gather it’s something you’ve pondered for quite some time.
You're welcome and yes thanks, it is something I've pondered for a very long time.


In the scheme of things, there is a great deal of truth behind your line of thought and is even discussed in Lex’s thread on homophobia in the Black churches. What I attempted to submit in Lex’s thread and will again in this one is: the problem lies with the usage of this very influential religion. Homophobia is rampant, and people will use whatever they can to not only shield themselves from homosexuality, but go a step further to ‘thwart’ it. When you think about it, the most effective way to do this is through religion, because not only is it influential but it carries with it a certain element of subtlety that relieves people of the burden of guilt and accountability that often comes along after we’ve disparaged and/or condemned someone or something. That is, it becomes a lot easier to sleep at night it people can use their faith as a means to justify and unjust loathing for a particular group of people. As influential as Christianity is, it’s quite upsetting to see that is hasn’t influenced people the way it was designed to initially.

Hence my immense frustration with the institution.


Understand also, that this is not something inborn in the Black race … but it is the way things have unfolded.
Please be confident I do understand that. I realize the power of the thing.

It quite unreasonable (just for clarification, I’m not saying you’ve suggested this) to think all Black people should disavow their bond with Christianity because many have become hypocritical in their practice. As you quite sagaciously point out Stronzo, Christianity has been a strong, central avenue of support within Black (and of course many other races) communities and arguably, one might say having been exposed to religion caused a large degree of cohesion and coherence amongst a race burdened with despair and confusion. So if anything I would encourage people to continue on with their religion, just chose a different path within this very pliable faith and understand it for what it is really.
Consider, if you will, women and how the workforce for a long period of time was, as it were, against them. After much fighting to gain their correct status in the working world, we find women now who are not above displaying workforce discrimination. The women who don’t discriminate in the workforce don’t necessarily need to reconcile any feelings, but recognize the good that the workforce has done for them and strive to make it a better place.
I attempted to truncate your post GoneA but so much of it is pertinent I had to include it.


The same is true with Christianity, I do not think we need to reconcile anything within ourselves, but we must simply strive to make a better name for the faith than what it has received lately.
Unequivocally not! I'd never suggest it and I'm glad you wrote that for all to see.



Again, thank you Stronzo for food for thought. And thank you Lex for showing that you value my opinion. Freddie, DC Deep and Matthew, I think your contribution were especially insightfully intelligent. Thanx – I’ll be gone for a few more days! I’m out huntin’ wabbits (read: fundies).

I'll hand you the ammo :wink: Thanks GoneA for weighing in. Amazing insight and truly appreciated.

Best.
 

Lex

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Posts
8,253
Media
0
Likes
118
Points
268
Location
In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Dilz-- hope the break was good for you.

GoneA--I totally value your opinion. This is a thread about faith and I know you have it. Thanks for finding time to chime in. Please do get on IM once and while so I may find you there (as well as here).

Stronzo--Please see GoneA's post. We have had some good discussion as a result of this thread. I am glad you started it. We have all, again, learned more about each other.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
97
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
GoneA said:
...When you think about it, the most effective way to do this is through religion, because not only is it influential but it carries with it a certain element of subtlety that relieves people of the burden of guilt and accountability that often comes along after we’ve disparaged and/or condemned someone or something.
Wow. I really have missed, you, GoneA! Amazingly intuitive. And not only does it relieve people of the burden of guilt for oppressing, it is (sadly) often used to make the faithful feel guilty if they DON'T condemn others. It is powerful because it is ingrained, and unproveable (to the advantage of those like jerry falwell)
...As influential as Christianity is, it’s quite upsetting to see that is hasn’t influenced people the way it was designed to initially.
<sigh>
As you quite sagaciously point out Stronzo, Christianity has been a strong, central avenue of support within Black (and of course many other races) communities and arguably, one might say having been exposed to religion caused a large degree of cohesion and coherence amongst a race burdened with despair and confusion.
Of course, you cannot discount one of the subtexts of christianity - the message of hope, redemption, and deliverance - which would, of course, have been very attractive to generations of enslaved humans. Unfortunately, over centuries, the powers that be within the church only use that subtext when fishing for converts to fill the coffers.<insert my standard boilerplate disclaimer here>
If every Christian lived their life accordingly, they would condemn others a great deal less and become more welcoming as a people &#8230;
I know there are just a very few of those types of christians, but I won't hold my breath for the majority to jump on THAT bandwagon.