RANTLINGS: ONE

CHRISTIANITY

Like it or not the most overriding divisive issue in this country is Christianity. I say Christianity and not the umbrella term 'Religion' so many feel so safe with because if ever I can remember any aspect of my life in a socio-political sense being effected by a religious philosophy, it has been Christianity.

If you analyze in any serious way the main concerns of our country's collective unconscious you end up with a lengthy list of issues all deriving themselves in one way or another from a Christian point of view.

At the top of that list is the war in Iraq. There has been an endless stream of musings on the topic and many political analysts with undeniably louder bells than mine have weighed in on why we are there or what our strategy should be.

But more and more it seems that things have been broken down. The radical Christians in this country are being threatened by the radical Muslims abroad. Islam is being touted as an inherently violent religion and a danger to the American way of life simply as a result of its existence.

That may be true if we're to call a spade a spade. Perhaps violence and radicalism are ever bound to the Muslim faith and the two simply can not be separated. But if that argument is to be made, it must also be made in the name of Christianity. For no one who knows any history about Christianity or any other religion of the last thousand years can deny that one constant in the struggle for that belief to claim power is the elimination of its competition.

It is looking more and more lately like the war between the West and the Middle-East is the last new crusade. And just another battle between the forces of 'good' and 'good' that will leave the streets stained a shade of crimson.

However, if any of the issues currently facing our country is only abstractly related to Christianity, it is Iraq.

At the forefront of the battle between the Christ-faithful and the seculars are two main issues: The rights of homosexuals and abortion question.

It seems to me that the resistance of our civilization to the introduction of the homosexual as anything but a second class citizen is the last stand in the ever ongoing battle for a Human's individual rights.

No argument has been made with any moxy behind it for a downside to homosexuality as a part of the human condition that wasn't born out of a Christian belief that sexual relationships should only be between a man and a woman.

It seems still, at this point, that a majority of Americans don't want gays afforded the same rights as everyone else. People seem to be fine with voicing that opinion; and to voice it rather loudly with little regard for the positions of others around them.

That makes the homophobic philosophy seem a not-to-distant echo of the opinions voiced in the South during the civil rights movement about blacks, or the opinion's voiced during women's suffrage about the uppity 'second class.' And perhaps it is not too far a leap to think that maybe it is not so much the homosexual part of the equation that leads to the separation, but the fundamentalist Christian one. The Christian one that seems to need some other group to target and to separate and to destroy.

If any issue dividing us, though, is long over due to boil over, it is certainly abortion. And when it comes right down to it the abortion argument is all about trying to agree on what is alive and what is not.

The only criteria I have heard for life in the Christian mind-set is everything. From the moment the sperm meets the egg, it is life. But that begs the question, why do we not have funerals for miscarriages? Why do we not mourn the loss of the 500 million or so sperm in each ejaculation that never reach an egg? Why is a candle not lit for each egg flushed out of a woman's body during her period?

And while these questions may sound patronizing, they are ultimately an illustration of the issue. The real issue that divides us on all the above questions. And that is: What is your tolerable aesthetic moral level? And I do mean aesthetic. Because morals are almost as meaningless as obscenity, vulgarity, profanity and pornography.

They are aesthetic standards because there are no set criteria for them to be judged. And it is always, always pointless to argue an aesthetic moral issue because every one's tolerance level is different; whether you are like me and have a set of morals built on experience or you are a Christian and your morals are derived from the word of your God.

It might not be so bad for everyone to think about that once and a while. And when little things come up like the phrase "In God We Trust" on our money or the section "One Nation Under God" in our pledge, just remember that it is important to know just whose God that means or if it means one at all.

And remember the truly great thing about this country on paper. You know the paper I mean. The one that states that you have no right to impose your God on me, no matter what. It also says, if you look closely, that as long as it doesn't interfere with Government, or my life, I have no right to take your God away from you. Nor would I want to if I could.

There is a balance to be found. There is a path to coexistence. And while I am picking on the Christian's a little, I am also looking at the seculars. There needs to be a little give on both ends. You can't have coexistence without being able to admit you might be wrong. And while agreeing to disagree might not be possible, agreeing to not make any more bombs should be a more than fair middle ground.