Because I'm a Christian

I’m hearing this phrase over and over again, and can I just say that I’m pretty darn tired of folks using their religion as a shield to hide behind when they are flinging their hatred and stupidity around the way a monkey throws poo.

Let’s start with the good folks of Westboro Baptist Church, because things are gonna get pretty real later, but I think most of us can agree that the Westboro folks are kooks. The banner atop the homepage for WBC is GodHatesFags. That’s their masthead. God also apparently hates Jews, Catholics, the media and soldiers, by the way. Essentially, God hates everyone and everything except WBC’s congregation. They are the elect, and everyone else will be cast into hell. In fact, when I visited the site, I noticed a little counter that tells me exactly how many people have been cast into hell since I opened their page. How helpful.

Now, without agreeing in any way, shape or form with these people or their agendas, I kinda see their platform. There are plenty of verses (mostly in the Old Testament) that talk of God’s hatred for people. These people were cruel, unrighteous, and sinful, and God hated them and their actions. WBC folks extend that hatred to today, and they feel that they must vocalize God’s hatred of wickedness and the people who wallow in it daily.

But here’s the big BIG problem: Jesus.

Jesus brought the world a message of love and peace. Jesus asks us to do something that is completely counter-intuitive and alien to our survivalist nature: he challenges us to love others unconditionally.

“But I say to you...love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.” ~ Luke 6: 27-28

And for most of us, the love part is really easy when we’re loving other Christians. We like to love those who are like us, the people who get it. The people who are filled with the awe and wonder of a man sacrificing himself for our eternal benefit.

The love thing gets dicey when we have to love criminals, atheists, homosexuals, Jews, Muslims, poor people, or anybody we somehow deem to be “other” than us. Because apparently “other” means “less than” or “not worthy.”

But even though there are truly sinful folks in the world, and even if God really does hate particular people for their sins and intends to doom them to everlasting judgement, Jesus instructed us to treat them with love, respect, and humility. The absolute worst thing we’re supposed to do to people who willfully reject God is….leave them alone.

“And whoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when you depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.” ~ Matthew 10:14

“And if the blind lead the blind, they will both fall into the pit.”  ~ Matthew 15:14

Jesus, you see, was big about leaving the judgement up to God and leaving salvation always an option on the table for people to come to. But who the heck wants to come to salvation when those who claim to have it are always so darn mean?

We can’t turn people away from our businesses because we’re Christian. We can’t withhold money from government programs we don’t like because we’re Christian. We can’t refuse people the right to live the way they want because their lifestyle conflicts with our Christian views. But what we MUST do as Christians is be kind to all people, whether we agree with them or not, whether we like them or not. This is what Jesus explicitly told us to do.

And in case you forgot, he also explicitly told us not to judge others, because none of us is perfect.

Treat Your Man Like a Man

I hear women saying these things a lot about the men in their lives: 

            If I don't do it myself, it won't get done right. 

           He wouldn't know what to do with the kids if I didn't write it all down for him. 

           He doesn't know the first thing about __(fill in the blank)__

           I swear I have three children instead of two.

Those statements trouble me, because I thought women were better than this. At least, as a woman, I hope we're better than this. 

Competency vs. Control

Women have to fight every day to prove we are as competent as men. We can't drive because we're women. We can't be business leaders because we're women. We can't be political leaders because we're women. 

As much as we take offense to those stereotypes, you'd think we'd be a little less critical of men in general and especially of the men we love. While it's true women have dominated the home-front for eons, we can't denigrate our men for doing things their own way. Doing a task differently is not the same thing as doing it incorrectly. 

If I insisted on chores being done only my way, then I'm not respecting his ability and his competence to get tasks done. If every time he tries to help out, I make him feel like his efforts are unappreciated because it wasn't done "the right way," then why would he ever be motivated to help me? 

Respect in Public

And why, WHY would I ever try to paint a picture of him as being incompetent in public? 

I wonder if we think we make ourselves look stronger and more able if we make our men look small. Just so you know, it doesn't work that way. Marriage is a partnership, and you owe it to your partner not to expose his faults publicly, just as he owes it to you. 

I guess we've come to a point where we are suspicious of praise. If I say openly that my marriage is good and my husband is helpful and supportive, then I'm showing off. Or I'm lying. Maybe it makes people comfortable to hear complaints, because then they feel more secure about their own imperfect marriages. That must explain sitcoms and reality shows featuring miserable couples. We can only feel good by comparison. 

But what do you gain from that? Nothing. Does publicly criticizing someone make them want to improve themselves? No. It makes them pull further away emotionally. Do you WANT to work to satisfy someone who shows you so little respect? I sure wouldn't. 

You lie in the bed you make

In the long run, calling your guy out and complaining about his shortcomings makes him not even want to try any more. In fact, the more you whine about having to do EVERYTHING, the more of everything you probably have to do. That breeds more resentment and more anger for you and a vicious cycle overall. If that doesn't completely destroy your marriage, it certainly makes it not fun. 

On the other hand, you could show your gratitude when your man helps out, even if he didn't do it exactly the way you would. You could tell him how much you depend on him. Tell him you trust him to make the best decisions for your family. You could show him the respect you know you want him to show you, and you'll be amazed at how he'll rise to the good opinion you have of him. 

Of Course Media is Liberal

Even people who are moderate in their politics like to invoke the phrase "liberal media" when they come across an article that supports an idea contrary to their own. In our society, the phrase is most often used by members of conservative parties to criticize news organizations they feel are biased against their political platforms.  People even make a sour face when referring to our "liberal media," as if they've bitten into a lemon. 

But what I find ironic is that, in a country where our politics and most of our political debates center on the protection of our rights and our freedom, our biggest criticism of the press is that it's.......free? 

The word "liberal" is an Old French word born from the Latin liberalis or liber meaning "free man." Our media system is, first and foremost, free and uncensored. News outlets may report on anything that is important to viewers or readership. It may even report information that may be critical or embarrassing for people, corporations, or political parties if they feel the information is relevant and necessary for the public to know. 

The converse of this free and liberal press would be censorship, much like the government-controlled press in North Korea, Burma, Cuba, and several other countries. In North Korea, specifically, the Korean Central News Agency is the state controlled news source that promotes positive propaganda to the people. When a munitions train crashed in 2004, the press did not speak of the 150 people killed or the thousands injured. Instead, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists (cpj.org),  it praised the loyal citizens who rushed into their homes to rescue portraits of their “dear leader” Kim Jong Il before looking for family members. BBC News reported that North Korea’s internet is also a government-run operating system that only certain people called “elites” can use. Foreign correspondents to North Korea are accompanied by government “minders” who monitor their every move. I’m sure none of us want to live in a government like this or be subject to this sort of censorship no matter what our party affiliations.

So maybe it’s not the liberal (free) press that chafes so many butts, but rather a perceived liberal bias. We are bombarded with the constant claim that news agencies intentionally publish stories that cast conservative policies and politicians in a negative light. Well, let’s examine that. This is a portion of an infographic published by The 4th Estate, a group devoted to "statistical journalism."

This chart shows the percent of negative comments about Obama and Romney during the 2012 campaign, separated by news source. Overall, Obama had 57.4% negative press, while Romney had 42.6%. Of the eight news organizations listed, only two had a higher percentage of negative comments toward the Republican candidate. That's only 25% "liberal bias." What should we call the other 75%? Conservative bias? Good reporting? Objectivity? 

Complete and total objectivity in news is next to impossible. Why? Because first, media is run by people, and people naturally have their own biases. Also, media outlets market towards their viewers. Ratings. Sales. Circulation. Media is a business like any other, and those who run the media do give their patrons more of what they want. But again, they have the freedom to do it, and ultimately that is a good thing. 

I'm glad we have a liberal press. Our news organizations are free to report the news as they see fit, free to editorialize (in the proper place) and free to criticize openly. Anything other than a completely free and open press would be an Orwellian nightmare. As a consumer of information, I am also free to choose the news sources I want. But as a consumer who is free, I also have the profound responsibility to assess my information sources and choose them carefully. I have the responsibility to be circumspect about that information and not blindly swallow everything I see on TV, in papers, or on the internet. We all have that responsibility, because we all have that freedom. 

And freedom (liberalis) is precious.