Tolerance needed in espousing religious views
Hypocrisy on the part of evangelists who pick and choose what sins are bad sends the wrong message to the public.
Deb Bertlesman
Issue date: 4/30/09 Section: Opinion
"Did you know the Bible condemns gay people?!" a Bible verse chalker shouted at the group I was walking with outside of Mary Jemison Dining Hall one evening, definitely unprovoked.
Coming back from a community builder with some resident assistants and our residents, we were all shocked at this sudden outburst.
After the silent confusion had left my companions, we all spoke about the obvious responses to that question:
"Did you know Jesus was accepting?"
"Do you know the context in which that is said?"
"Do you know how and who the Bible was written by?"
I am a firm believer in freedom of speech, but it made me deeply question the true motives of the religious chalkers. When the verses first appeared on campus I remembered thinking how it was great to see such a faithful person's perspective, but after the incident, I began to wonder where belief in words ends and acceptance of humanity begins.
The words - some of them inspirational and beautiful, juvenilely and innocently drawn with sidewalk chalk - suddenly become a little more hateful, burning with less diversity and more criticism.
As someone who was raised very religiously and is good friends with many religious people, it made me upset that a terrible stigma was now attached to words that were meant for good.
I was always taught to believe in God as loving before persecuting. Of course the issue of the Bible being written by men with "divine intervention," not directly communicating with "God," leads to falsehoods. Against the more romantic Psalms that have been written on the concrete, the closest thing the Bible says to condemning homosexuality is that "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
The Bible also uses the word "abomination" when referring to dietary restrictions against eating creatures with four legs, certain fowl and shellfish.
I am sure that Bible verse chalker has had a turkey sandwich from the building he was standing in front of, and hope that he prays for his own beefy abominations when he does for lesbians before he sleeps at night.
To clarify; I don't condemn religion. I believe that good things are misrepresented and misunderstood. I don't hate the religious chalker, and I could have misunderstood him. But I will "rejoice and be glad" because it rained Tuesday night.
Deb Bertlesman is a sophomore English major who likes Muddy Waters a lot.
Coming back from a community builder with some resident assistants and our residents, we were all shocked at this sudden outburst.
After the silent confusion had left my companions, we all spoke about the obvious responses to that question:
"Did you know Jesus was accepting?"
"Do you know the context in which that is said?"
"Do you know how and who the Bible was written by?"
I am a firm believer in freedom of speech, but it made me deeply question the true motives of the religious chalkers. When the verses first appeared on campus I remembered thinking how it was great to see such a faithful person's perspective, but after the incident, I began to wonder where belief in words ends and acceptance of humanity begins.
The words - some of them inspirational and beautiful, juvenilely and innocently drawn with sidewalk chalk - suddenly become a little more hateful, burning with less diversity and more criticism.
As someone who was raised very religiously and is good friends with many religious people, it made me upset that a terrible stigma was now attached to words that were meant for good.
I was always taught to believe in God as loving before persecuting. Of course the issue of the Bible being written by men with "divine intervention," not directly communicating with "God," leads to falsehoods. Against the more romantic Psalms that have been written on the concrete, the closest thing the Bible says to condemning homosexuality is that "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
The Bible also uses the word "abomination" when referring to dietary restrictions against eating creatures with four legs, certain fowl and shellfish.
I am sure that Bible verse chalker has had a turkey sandwich from the building he was standing in front of, and hope that he prays for his own beefy abominations when he does for lesbians before he sleeps at night.
To clarify; I don't condemn religion. I believe that good things are misrepresented and misunderstood. I don't hate the religious chalker, and I could have misunderstood him. But I will "rejoice and be glad" because it rained Tuesday night.
Deb Bertlesman is a sophomore English major who likes Muddy Waters a lot.
Viewing Comments 1 - 7 of 13
Mari
posted 4/30/09 @ 8:44 PM EST
Good points. I think it's also important to note how the vast majority of the bible has nothing to do with homosexuality anyways; it really does not seem like Jesus meant for everyone to harp about gays all the time. (Continued…)
anonymous
posted 5/01/09 @ 2:13 PM EST
... We do go to a PUBLIC school. That's why the greens and quads are PUBLIC property, and free speech in PUBLIC must be tolerated. I am far from saying that I agree with these people, but if you want the right to have free speech you should recognize that that includes free speech for bigots. (Continued…)
Mari
posted 5/02/09 @ 1:05 PM EST
Hey Jess, can you learn how to quote? That isn't me that said that, and I'm not even sure why you did that since it wasn't like theirs was a reply to mine. (Continued…)
Matt
posted 5/03/09 @ 12:17 PM EST
Mari, the misquote is nothing more than an artifact of the quoting system, not an intentional act or even her own error. So relax - there is no campus-wide conspiracy to besmirch your good name, and believe it or not, the campus doesn't revolve around you. (Continued…)
anonymous
posted 5/03/09 @ 8:30 PM EST
I don't agree with Bible chalking.. but I know the people who did it. I didn't go with them because I didn't agree with it but I know they're not stupid enough to shout that. (Continued…)
Mari
posted 5/03/09 @ 8:43 PM EST
"
As far as walking over the words of God, I think that's a personal hang up. As far as I know, its not a sin to walk on a chalked bible verse. Plus, you can take solace in the fact that what's being chalked is an English translation of God's word, not the real thing. (Continued…)
Rusty
posted 5/04/09 @ 10:28 AM EST
Arguing that "more tolerance is needed is espousing religious beliefs" is, itself, an intolerant statement. People in Geneseo seem to view Christians as the evil biggots that need to be hidden away from view so the secular-humanist (minority) can prance freely through campus. (Continued…)
Post a Comment