We must not be
hampered by yesterday’s myths in concentrating on today’s needs
- Harold S. Geneen
Ideally,
although many religious followers' oppose same-sex marriage and/or the right to
abortion; most religious followers’ opinions on these two social issues seem to
derive solely from their religious teaching, upbringing and/or bias opinions. And
even though the First and Fourteenth Amendment of the United States
Constitution enables all American citizens equal protection under the law, as
well as the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Seemingly,
most religious followers’ disregard these Constitutional laws and rights, and
instead; adamantly seek political positions of influence in an effort to impose
religious idealism upon the rest of those in American who do not believe in one religion or another. Question is: Why does America need to extend the
constitutional right to religious belief in the first place? After all,
according to most religious followers’, God is in charge of our nation. So, why
does the law have any correlation with religious regulations? Congress shall
not support any establishment of religion. However, this doesn’t explain why the
First Amendment enables all American citizens the right to religious belief in
the first place. Yet for years, the Supreme Court has been called time and
again to implement fair judgments against religiosity that seeks to strike down
the freedoms instilled by the law. But when the forces of today’s leading top tier religious organizations', such as: Judaism,
Catholicism, Christianity, and Islam, embody followers’ and/or supporters’, who
have deep pockets to influence political decisions and persuade majority votes
in favor of religious beliefs, the end results often back fire and cause a
terrorizing affect on us all. This is why I wrote this essay; to continue a dialogue on an issue that hasn't been resolved, as well as to encourage
religious followers' AND theologians, who refuse to share this truth with others', they are entrusted to educate,
and those who seek to understand what is happening in today's political climate of
Constitutional rights and religious beliefs. Therefore, in an effort to convey
why I strongly oppose organized religious advocacy in political affairs, I’ve
compiled peer reviewed scholarly research from university professors, theologians, Bible
publishers’, and historical philosophers’, who played a key role in helping us
better understand what all the fuss is really about regarding religions' around
the world and their view of same-sex marriage.
Interestingly,
the first research tool, I discovered while studying world religions', was that “Christianity has had a
continuous and complex history of development through the early Church Councils
that formulated the Creeds (brief statements of religious belief), the
emergence of the Papacy ( the position or authority of the Pope), the schism
between Roman and Orthodox Christianity in the eleventh century, the Protestant
Reformation in the sixteenth century, the Catholic Counter-Reformation, and
many more developments and splits since” (Leslie S. & David, H. 2009,
p.108). Moreover, research compiled by Professor Mary Fisher, author of Living
Religions, conveys, “in the ninth century, the Church produced documents
old and new believed to legitimate the hierarchical authority of the papacy
over the Church, and the Church over society, as the proper means of
transmitting inspiration from the divine to humanity. Those who disagreed could
be threatened with excommunication and lose their benefits of the Church’s
secular power” (Fisher, M. 2008, p.331).
And
even though the Church secretly still plays a key role in much of societies
regulations today, the true power
holders in this race for secular control and religious indoctrination, are
those who over see the publication of today’s religious documents. But what
gives these stake holders the authority to manipulate religious followers’ with
fear, through their revised doctrine that's controlling the thoughts, actions and/or
viewpoints, of not only religious followers but the viewpoints of the non-religious?
After all, historical doctrine introduces the ideal that most religious documents were written by men.
And when examining history, especially during eras in which most religious history accounts
for (ninth-nineteenth century), I grew driven to understand what each
religion’s doctrine actually conveys. Shockingly, what I learned was not only
enriching, but mind boggling. For instance, Judaism had no
single founder and/or central leader of group making theological decisions;
instead, Jewish people have always turned to the” Tanakh (a different version
of which Christians call “the Old Testament”)” (Mary, Fisher, 2008, p.236), as
their primary source of religious teaching. However, Catholicism, Christianity,
and Islam were each established by men. In fact, according to Professor Mary
Fisher, “The Roman emperor passed an edict (an official public proclamation
issued by authority) that all Christians were to recognize the authority of the
Bishop of Rome. And the strongest of
Church administrators during these early centuries was Gregory I (“the Great”),
who died in 604 CE. Wealthy by birth but ascetic by choice, he devoted his
personal fortune to founding monasteries and feeding the poor” (Mary, Fisher,
2008, p.331).
Yet, it
wasn’t until, I began combing through Christian Church religious doctrine,
did I find a discrepancy, I strongly felt needed to be addressed. Take for
instance; world renowned Bible
publisher Thomas Nelson has a long standing reputation for publishing and
disseminating spectacular Bibles. Surprisingly, when I examined three of their best selling
Bibles, I learned that in most of their Bibles, verse I Corinthians 6:9, convey
a message that- homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God. Yet shockingly,
each Bible this publisher has published over the course of years, reads differently. In fact, in one Bible, I Corinthians 6:9 reads: Do you know that
the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived,
neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals…” (Thomas
Nelson, 1982, p.770.) Then, in 1984, the same publisher revised the same
scripture to read: Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the
kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor
adulterers, nor effeminate, nor extortionist, nor abusers of themselves with
mankind” (Thomas Nelson, 1984, p.673). Of course, in another Bible published in
2001 & 2006 titled Extreme Teen Bible, the same Scripture has been altered
from its chronological order verse 9 thru 10. And instead, verse I Corinthians 6:9
is now listed as I Corinthians 6:10; Scripture 9 has been completely omitted.
Still, despite this fact, this edition of this Scripture, too, reads: Surely you know
that the people who do wrong will not inherit God’s kingdom. Do not be fooled.
Those who sin sexually, worship idols, take part in adultery, those who are male
prostitutes, or men who have sexual relations with other men, those who steal,
are greedy, get drunk, lie about others, or rob-these people will not inherit
God’s kingdom”(Thomas Nelson, 2006, p.1346). Obviously, this publisher has no
true remorse for this crime against humanity. But when, we honestly examine
what I’ve shared, who is to blame? After all, people volunteer to become active parts of
religious organizations. Once we become adults, we each have a right to choose our path. We also have a right to relinquish those ideas rooted in our minds, by our parents and friends, especially regarding religion. It is our responsibility as religious followers, to investigate what it is we are learning and from which we learn that data from. After all, the devil seeks to deceive us all.
Now,
while there are countless religious followers’, including myself, who find the Scriptures
enriching and filled with wonderful words of inspiration. One cannot evade the
misrepresentation pointed out above. After all, with laypersons (Bible
committee members and publishers) controlling what the Scripture conveys to
the public, should evoke all religious followers’ to open their eyes and realize what
has been going on throughout history. I say this because,
both Catholicism and Islam’s doctrine are published and disseminated
the exact same way Christian religious doctrine is. Funny thing though, such
doctrine can only be obtained via religious bookstores, online, and in brick
and mortar stores, such as Barnes and Nobles. Is this how God really intended for us to gain knowledge of
HIS existence? If so, why are we subject to cost? Not only must we pay for
religious doctrine, in many religions, we are forced to give a portion of our
money to the organization. This is primarily why the law has been more or less, forced to play a
key role in the on-going development of today’s religions'. Without the law, our
society would be even more chaotic; and religion, would have an even greater
hold on the infrastructure of political policies. Sadly, the one group that continues to be entangled
in religious warfare and bias opinions, is the LGBT community. Like myself and many others, who practice one
religion or another, there is a great divide on the issue regarding, if LGBT
people should be allotted the civil liberties the Constitution has always
rendered to American citizens', since it was signed. However, it seems such
regulations continue taking a back seat to the prominence of organized
religions' and their religious itinerary. Because of this and for many more
reasons not mentioned, I strongly feel organized religious groups' should
not be allowed to influence political decisions of today’s political leaders.
In
fact, because of the high level of religious intolerance towards homosexuals
and lesbians in America, many religious followers’ refrain from embracing
homosexuals and lesbians, because they believe such people are an abomination
(digesting). Moreover, such individuals believe allowing women the right
to abort their child is condoning killing an innocent person. Yet when the
government erects a barrier that makes it more difficult for members of one
group (homosexuals and lesbians) to attain the same benefits as another group
(heterosexuals), the injury is the denial of equal treatment resulting from the
imposition of the barrier. In this case, denying same-sex loving people equal
protection under the law and disenabling them to wed, nationally, despite
Supreme Court rulings and state rebuttals against this fundamental right; not
only is the government disregarding its Constitution, but each state that
denies same-sex loving people the right to wed, is also denying same-sex loving
people their U.S. Constitutional right. However, if any religious follower from
any organized religion actually took time to investigate what they are studying
and/or have committed their lives too, they would conclude that “past”
religious leaders and/or politicians have imposed personal bias viewpoints
within the framework of many religious documents, to restrict our lives and condone who is worthy of God's love, but denying homosexuals the right to God's love,
altogether. After all, most religions have committees that oversee the
development and/or revisions of its religious documents. This is another reason why, I strongly oppose organized religious groups from
being allowed to act as political advocates, because their primary focus should
be on the spiritual needs of people.
After
all, additional research convey, the rise of Constantine to imperial rule
in the early fourth century CE, evoked opposition to turn against the embracing
of Christianity (2008). Moreover, it wasn’t until Constantine claimed that God
showed him a vision of a cross in the clouds, that Christianity was tolerable
to be embraced as a religion, alongside the state cult, of which Constantine
was chief priest of (Mary Fisher, 2008). Unfortunately, followers of each religion failed to
comprehend what revisions (hermeneutics) actually mean. This field of theology
study is an attempt to interpret the Scripture. But how can anyone interpret
the Scripture, especially when no one living over the past 100 years, can give
an honest account for what really happened during the pre-Christ era and
beyond.
Perhaps, this one of the primary reasons why so much
scholarly research has been conducted on the countless errors and fallacies
exposed within today’s religious doctrine. Still, despite such findings, many
religious followers’ maintain their beliefs and idealisms in the religion of
their choice, because they strongly feel they are right in their assessments.
And because of this, many religious organizations that do embrace both same-sex
marriage and abortion, without discomfort, gain more followers’ than those
religions and denominations that oppose such liberty. In fact, within the
21,000 independent Christian Church denominations, falling under 156 main
groupings, the Unitarian church not only embraces same-sex love, but conducts
same-sex marriages. Meanwhile, “American abortion attitudes have remained
remarkably stable since the 1970’s; there is a solid consensus supporting the
legalization of abortion” (Michele, D. & Savage, S, 2006, p.7); even
though, “Southerners and rural Americans are more likely than others to
disagree with abortion” (2006).
Surely, after examining the evidence I've presented, those who
seek clarity on the issue of homosexuality and religious doctrine, should
honestly evaluate the evidence, without bias. Doing so, will help Americans'
begin rebuilding their foundation of hope and faith, on facts that cannot be
ignored when questioning the existence of a divine Creator. After all, no man
birthed the fish in the sea or helped in the development of cats, birds and/or
flowers. Therefore, in conclusion, I must point out that, “conservative variants
of Christianity teach adherents that religious scripture is inerrant and
authoritative over human affairs, and that it is the yardstick against which
all other sources of information and insight should be evaluated (Hempel and
Bartkowski, 2008. p.1647-74). And
as a person who was introduced to the Christian Church, at an early age; over
the years, I’ve learned the value and importance of conducting research on the
history of today’s top tier religions'. In doing so, not only have I gained
essential knowledge on how each religion was established and/or who established
these religions; I’ve learned how many religious followers' actually lack
clarity on each religion, they profess to follow and/or support. Because of
this lack of knowledge, many in the body of religion suffer tremendously. So
much, many of those who seek to find a place of salvation and comfort, disregard
the Church and/or other religious organizations as safe havens, simply because, there has been and continues to
be an increased level of corruption entangling people in misinformed data
published by today’s religious doctrine publishers. Luckily, most of today’s history
conveys a rich understanding on the key ingredients any religious follower
needs to consider, in order to attain the level of peace and happiness most
religious followers' seek. And despite the seemingly endless outcry for
salvation and peace, many religious followers’ continue to spew negative
idealism, strongly opposing same-sex love and the U.S. Constitutional right to
abortion and equality for LGBT people. Due to this, and for many reasons more,
I strongly feel organized religious advocacy has its place within the structure
of social and moral perimeters. However, those perimeters should not impede
upon the civil liberties of non-religious followers’ and/or supporters’. Not
because doing so is a direct violation of an individual’s Constitutional right,
but because all Americans' have the right to worship their God as they see fit.
No one, regardless of their religion of choice, should be given the authority
to force those who do not believe in any religion over another and/or embrace
religion at all, to live in compliance to the regulations imposed upon
religious followers’, by the religious leaders, religious followers' “willfully”
place their trust in. Religion should be the cornerstone of all religious followers' essence of human peace and intelligent understanding...
Reference
Stevenson, L. and Haberman, D., (2009). Ten Theories
of Human Nature: Confucianism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Plato Aristotle, the Bible,
Kant, Marx, Sartre Darwinian Theories, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, p.108
Fisher, Mary, (2008), Living Religions: Seventh
Edition, Pearson Education Inc. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, p. 236
Fisher, Mary, (2008), Living Religions: Seventh
Edition, Pearson Education Inc. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, p. 331
Fisher, Mary, (2008), Living Religions: Seventh
Edition, Pearson Education Inc. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, p. 376
Hempel, Lynn M., and John P. Bartkowski, (2008),
“Scripture, Sin, and Salvation: Theological Conservatism Reconsidered”, Social
Forces 86:1647-74
Michele, D. & Sarah, S. (2006), Values and
Religion in Rural America: attitudes towards abortion and same-sex relations.
The Carsey Institute at the Scholars’ Repository, New Hampshire, CT. p.7;http://scholars.unh.edu/carsey/12/?utm_source=scholars.unh.edu%2Fcarsey%2F12&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages
Nelson, Thomas, (1982), Holy Bible: New King James
Version, Thomas Nelson Publishing, Nashville, TN. p. 770
Nelson, Thomas, (1984), Holy Bible: King James
Version, Thomas Nelson Publishing, Nashville, TN. p. 673
Nelson, Thomas, (2006), Extreme Teen Bible, Thomas
Nelson Publishing, Nashville, TN. p. 1346
