“Fundamentalist Christians have claimed that a play to be performed later this year as part of the Glasgay arts festival is insulting to their beliefs,” Pink News reports.
The culprit here is the rabidly gay-detesting Christian Institute. The “crime”? Jesus is depicted as a transsexual and is Queen of Heaven.
What organisations such as the Christian Institute don’t see is that a belief doesn’t belong to anyone, so anyone can do as they please with it. Once one organisation claims some proprietorial right to it, other organisations that come under the same banner – in this case “Christian” – are automatically excluded, unless their beliefs concerning this belief system, their objectives, their mission statements, their conduct and observances are all exactly the same. And then there would be no need for the two separate subsystems.
I feel an unassailable argument taking form here!
Looked at another way, I believe in the existence of, let’s say, telepathy. Am I justified in getting all uppity because you make a film about telepathy (as has been done, numerous times), or write a fantasy novel about it, ridicule it, say it’s not possible?
No, of course not.
What if I believed in Nazism? Should I have the kind of protection for my belief that the Christian Institute says ought to exist for its belief in the Lord Jesus Christ?
No, of course not.
So shut up, you philistinic, interfering bunch of nutjobs!
__________
Related link:
Religion belongs to all of us
No comments:
Post a Comment
We welcome lively and challenging comments. However, please try to stay on topic, be polite and do not use abusive, racist or sexist language, and do not incite your readers to violence or other antisocial behaviour, or your comment will be deleted. This isn't censorship: it's a case of staying within the bounds of decency and having an eye to the law, although we realise the law will be different in different countries.
We do not bar anonymous comments at the moment, but we would prefer that those commenting play fair and use their name or at least a regular nom de plume. It does show a confidence in your convictions. We know, too, that it's easy to use a false name and be effectively anonymous, but, again, we appeal to your sense of good practice. Even a wacky nom de plume is better, since at least readers will come to know that contributor and maybe remember her or his previous comments.
Blatant commercial advertising will be removed.
Comments should not be construed as necessarily the policy or opinion of the Pink Triangle Trust.
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.