Letters to the Editor
Rosenkavalier
Published Letters: 785 Editor's Choice: 42
-
doubt and assurance
[Read the article: Something to believe in]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sadly, in discussion of religion, the moderate voices are often drowned out by extremists on both sides. Both fundamentalists and mean-spirited atheists function in the same way: They declare that anyone who does not perfectly ascribe to their own personal convictions is evil or devoid of intelligence, and they absolutely refuse to acknowledge that they aren't capable of knowing everything. They refuse to meet with their fellow man on a level of mutual humility, acceptance, toleration, outreach, and general interest in the other person's point of view and experience. I have found that I have great ease living with and loving people of wildly disparate beliefs. It is not usually the content of a person's beliefs that turn them into a dogmatic, mean-spirited evangelist, but the manner in which they present them to other people, and the manner in which they treat other people. My friends are atheists, Jews, Muslims, agnostics, univeralists, Buddhists, Christians of every flavor, but above all they are kind and empathetic.
I apologize if this sounds as though it has little to do with the article itself, but I feel that so-called religious discussions online, which typically amount to little more than name-calling and false prophecying (whether of "god" or "science"), are rife with the sort of dismissive, ignorant people who distract from the real issues at hand.
This time last year, my fears, doubts, and religious compulsions were so strongly mixed together that I was in physical and psychological pain throughout the Easter weekend. It was a culmination of thoughts and emotions that had been building for six months, and those same feelings continue to today. It did not help that I go to college at a religiously-affiliated school: Therefore we were on break, and I was almost completely alone on campus. But doubt, fear, and pain are not the end of the story, just as my pastor/friend/former professor told us at the Good Friday service last night. I am surrounded by people who understand that faith is not a weapon or a tool or a bribe. Faith is a way of life, ideally a life in which the practice of love for mankind becomes habit and a relationship with God stays fresh and new.
I have come to terms with my faith, regardless of whether or not other people think I am nuts for it. Sometimes, I think I'm nuts. I often wonder about the sort of person who thinks they're totally rational all the time. But I also know that my faith, fraught with episodes of doubt and (rarely) assurance, more richly informs my life and my relationships than mere resignation to any dogmatic, heartless approach, whether it be pure science or literalist cultism.
Love is irrational. Faith is irrational. God is irrational. Christ on the cross is irrational. Suffering is irrational. Hate is irrational. Life is irrational. So-called "rationalists" are willing to accept that life is full of irrational things... they just choose for themselves which they will accept. Non-believers and believers... we are the same thing. We are all believers. It just depends what we choose to believe.
I don't know whether I have chosen to believe that Christ literally died on a cross and rose again some two milennia ago. I have certainly chosen not to believe that the Bible was ever meant to be interpreted literally or as a set of guidelines for life. But I have, as Niebuhr once wrote, chosen to identify with the cause of Christ: That cause is merely the reconciliation of man to God and God to man, and so also of reconciling men to each other.
If you choose not to believe in God, and even if you choose to believe that people like me are insane for believing so, I have little argument with that. But let us not end there: Let us not allow the dialogue to end with that. That would be the real sin. Let us speak to each other as brothers and sisters of humanity with the common goal of understanding each other, bringing an end to pointless suffering, and silencing self-righteous Pharisees of all stripes. Maybe Christ did not die on the cross two thousand years ago. But let the image of a God who so loved us that he would love and suffer and die among us compel us also to love and suffer not by ourselves, but with all of mankind.
For whether or not a man rose two thousand years ago, He is risen indeed.
In God's love,
Rosenkavalier
-
eh?
[Read the article: Say it loud: I'm elite and proud!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What is this, the Ann Coulter of the left? All rhetoric and no documentation... this shit may or may not be true but all I can think of is whether Maher expects anyone to take him seriously as a journalist.
I read Salon for news and editorials, not unsourced, inflammatory garbage that barely rises to the level of "writing." Is it any wonder that Salon continually acts shocked that its "breaking" stories never get picked up by the evil MSM? This stuff is as bad as Coulter and probably even more sloppy. Jeez.
-
well well
[Read the article: Say it loud: I'm elite and proud!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I have no idea who Maher is, but this is Salon, not Comedy Central. I was expecting serious reporting, or at least intelligent parody. This 'piece' is not funny, enlightening, or even interesting.
My real question is, why the hell does everyone assume that anyone here who doesn't agree with them is a right-wing Nazi? I don't like Bill Maher and compare him to the equally unfunny Ann Coulter, and somehow that makes me one of "her" ilk. No wonder people hate 'elitist liberals.' You guys are so busy patting your own backs, whining about how dumb everyone else is, and laughing at crappy humor that people as incompetent as Bush can wipe the floor with your asses when it comes to, um, conquering the world.
And it's pretty sad that I'm the one who has to say this, because until I started reading anonymous internet bilge, I thought I was the most liberal person I knew.