I’m cutting/pasting today, but giving mad props to the author, because he’s saying everything jumbled up in my head that I can’t squeeze out.
————————————————
Not Another Word on Gay Marriage Until They Execute an Adulterer
by Cenk Uygur
The religious right picks and chooses which parts of the Bible they want to apply. And they choose based on which outsider group they would like to hate next. First, they emphasized slavery in the Bible when they wanted to hate black people. Now, they emphasize the parts condemning homosexuality so they can hate gay people.
They are completely and utterly disingenuous. They don’t mean a word of it. They don’t give a damn what the Bible says. They just want to use it as an instrument of hate.
The Bible says eating shellfish is an abomination. Yet there are no Red Lobster Amendments. The Bible says you shall not wear two different types of cloths at the same time. Yet there are no Propositions against cotton and wool combos.
The Bible says you should leave your family and join Jesus Christ. The religious right pretends that Jesus was about family values. He wanted you to abandon your family. Read the Bible.
The religious right pretends that the Bible says marriage is between one man and one woman. But that is a bald faced lie. Have any of these people ever read the Bible? The Bible is full of men taking on second wives, servants, prostitutes and concubines. And all the while, God heartily approves. How many wives did King David have? Eight? Twelve? Let alone his possibly gay lover, Jonathan.
Now the Bible says that a man shall not lie with another man. That is true. But it also says, in the same exact book, that adultery is an abomination. And the just punishment for this sin is execution. So, who will execute the first adulterer? Please step on up. May the one without any Biblical sin cast the first stone.
Here is a question no one can answer — and lucky for the right wing, the media never bothers to ask — why do you only focus on the part of the Bible against homosexuality but not on the part against adultery? It’s one thing to say you’re against adultery; it’s another to take away their rights. How come no religious figure in this country has mounted a campaign to take away the rights of adulterers? Let alone execute them.
I’ll tell you why. Because there are too many of them. Their followers are adulterers. They don’t make for good scapegoats. They are not an easy target to ostracize and focus your hatred on. Gays are perfect. They are a small enough percentage of the population and different enough from the rest of us to be able to get people to focus their negative, barbaric instincts on them. The Bible is only a tool for this tribal, ugly tactic.
But I am tired of hearing people saying that homosexuality is a sin in the Bible when they never quote the rest of the Bible (probably because a great majority of church goers have never independently read the Bible or they have built up a reservoir of excuses for the parts they find inconvenient). So, from now, I would like to tell the Rick Warrens of the world, you are perfectly allowed to say how much you would like to take gay people’s rights away from them based on the Bible so long as you agree to do one thing first — execute an adulterer.
If you can do that for me, then I’ll believe that you actually believe in the Bible literally and will accept your literal argument against homosexuality. Fair is fair. Step on up.
Watch The Young Turks Here
PS — In case anyone is a maniacal literalist, please do not actually attempt to execute any adulterers or anyone else. Check yourself into a mental hospital instead because the seven headed dragon in Revelations could be out to get you.
————————————————
*bowing to greatness*
Tuesday, Jan 20, 2009 – to some, the first day of Hope. To others, the first day us liberal Kool-Aid drinkers are letting Hell rise up.
