Sunday in Outer Blogness: Blasphemy Edition!
I’m not sure what’s up — maybe we’ve been too civil lately? — but it seems like the folks of Outer Blogness have been out to blaspheme (and otherwise offend the sensitive) this week! (Perhaps as Holly argues the entire world is kryptonite to Mormons, and helping them to fragilize their “spiritual immune system” isn’t doing them a favor.)
To start off, just look at these pictures of Jesus! And his alter–egos. We have a claim that apologists for the gospel are like apologists for Star Wars, not to mention a highly irreverent poem about Sarah Palin. (Actually, while we’re in apologist mode, can you find any errors in the Christian description of Mormon beliefs found here?) Then Galatian claims that these hot mishies are gay! (Actually, is that blasphemy or a compliment? The grand dilemma of the straight woman — on the one hand, we want our guys to be attractive, OTOH, we’d rather not accidentally wind up on the receiving end of this.)
Then, from the playful, we wander into the territory of the seriously offensive. Suicidal gay people are terrorists? Christians burning the Quran because it’s supposedly sending people to hell (note the terrifying response)? And can this possibly be for real?
OK, moving on from the truly offensive to the items that are just kind of sad. Like celebrating revisionist history about the handcart companies (just read the diary entries of a man named John Oakley, who detailed the deaths of those who were so faithless as to collapse and die along the trail!). And the whole tragic story of George P. Lee. The complexities of health care, and simplified Republican version. Promoting and rationalizing lying for the Lord.
Sigh, let’s lighten the mood with a little exmo good news. 😀 Or even an interesting new critique of Mormonism:
The Mormon church (by which I mean The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) bars women from its hierarchy altogether. All bishops, stake presidents, mission presidents, general authorities, apostles and prophets are men, by definition. The only positions of responsibility open to women are those in auxiliaries that contain only women and/or childreni.e., the Relief Society (the womens auxiliary), the Young Womens program, and the Primary program (the childrens auxiliary)so women in these positions not only have no authority over men but are also not allowed to set policy or practice without getting permission from the male hierarchy. This isnt an accidentit is by design.
Its possible for a misogynistic movie to pass The Rule, just as its possible for a misogynistic religion to pass this new rule. But while its possible for a movie that fails The Rule to be feminist in other ways, I would argue that it is not possible for a religion that fails this new rule to not be patriarchal, oppressive and sexist.
Seems like a valid point.
For next week, I’ll be on vacation in Italy, and many of the rest of you will be at Sunstone. Can I count on you guys to write some posts about what all happens at the symposium? Then I’ll be back as usual the following week! 😀
I planted my fave links from this latest SiOB over at exmormon.reddit.com and look what sprouted (sorry for the silly harvest metaphor, I picked up a “Popcorn Popping on the Apricot Tree” earbug earlier this afternoon while reading this weighty MADB discussion):
ETA: R2D2 & BoM Jacob
Hey, two posts in one SIOB. That’s a first for me. Thanks.
And Chino, thanks for posting my Star Wars thing to reddit. Somebody added it to the Atheism page and I’ve gotten over 8,000 hits from it today!
Kuri — That’s excellent! It’s a fun piece, so it’s great that it got so many hits! 😀