I was perusing The Onion and found a gloriously acidic article about Christianity and American politics. The article created a satirical representation of God at a press conference; this God went on the record to disagree with most Christian Right politicians on cases such as sexuality, capital punishment, and economy. The major push of the article was actually a comment made by Richard Mourdock, who made claims that pregnancies resulting from rape cases were God's will. In fact, they were a gift.
"'Many people hear my name in connection with the Christian Right and start to assume we are aligned in some capacity, and I’m here to say, for the record, that we are not,' God continued. 'So let me just be clear: I don’t want women to get raped—not ever. I don’t think their resulting pregnancies are my divine will. And if a woman is raped, then she has the right to get an abortion, period. I do not agree with Mourdock. I do not agree with the Christian Right. End of story.'"
The article brings to light an interesting tug-of-war: at what point do Christian politicians overstep the line by endorsing the brand of Christianity upon social issues? Do they have the authority to do this? How can individuals speak politically for an entire religion? And do their representations really describe the Christian church, or do they only further the careers of greedy politicians?
No comments:
Post a Comment