A matter of what's valuable
DeepThought said:
Her refusal of a blood transfusion wasn't a calculated strategy to avoid the hassle and responsibility of raising her children - if it was you are quite right she was selfish and incredibly stupid.
It's not a matter of calculated strategy. It is the notion that her love was anywhere but her children.
At the heart of redemptive monotheism is the drive for salvation. The eternal soul is the most valuable currency these people have. And while some might chuckle if one of these believers refuses a really high-paying job on principle because s/he did not like what it required, at least we can understand the idea of not selling out.
But our children?
Neither is there enough evidence, I think, for believing she did it solely to 'please God and get into Heaven'.
This is redemptive monotheism. I would invite you to propose another reason for making such a decision on faith. One that, while coincidental with redemption, trumps it.
I'm trying to think of an analogy, perhaps something like this: someone tries to make you do something you consider wrong, for example, committing a homophobic attack on a gay person. You object and refuse to take part no matter how much they insist. The consequences for you are relatively slight... you walk away with your integrity intact and a gay person out there has been saved a beating.
Um ...
what?
Okay, it's enough to say the analogy fails.
The consequence for Emma Gough refusing to do something she believed was wrong was death.
Right. But
why was it wrong? Because
she believes God said so.
Would you pay that price to prevent a wrong being committed?
That seems rather an absurd proposition. The "wrong" Ms. Gough sought to prevent was her own condemnation. She died for herself. It's the reason your analogy fails. She didn't take a chance for anyone else. She did it for herself.
Does that make her a selfish, religious fanatic or a martyr?
It makes her selfish. And it might make her a victim. If she's any sort of martyr, she is a testament to the evil of redemptive monotheism and what it does to people.
• • •
A side note on the value of redemption. Now, obviously, not all Christians are this whacked, but things like this don't exactly help the infidels feel secure around their religious neighbors:
So at the 2003 conference, when the abstinence educator Pam Stenzel spoke, she knew she didn't have to justify her objection to sex education with prosaic arguments about health and public policy. She could be frank about the real reasons society must not condone premarital sex. "Because it is," as she shouted during one particularly impassioned moment, "Stinking filthy dirty rotten sin!" A pretty, zaftig brunette from Minnesota with a degree in psychology from Jerry Falwell's Liberty University, Stenzel makes a living telling kids not to have sex. Rather, she makes a living trying to scare kids out of having sex. As she says in her video, No Screwing Around, "If you have sex outside of marriage, to a partner who has only been with you, then you will pay." A big part of her mission is puncturing students' beliefs that condoms can protect them. She says she addresses half a million kids each year, and millions more have received her message via video. Thanks to George W. Bush, abstinence education has become a thriving industry, and Stenzel has been at its forefront. Bush appointed her to a twelve-person task force at the Department of Health and Human Services to help implement abstinence education guidelines. She's been a guest at the White House and a speaker at the United Nations. Her non-profit company, Enlightenment Communications, which puts on abstinence talks and seminars in public schools, typically grossed several hundred thousand dollars a year during the first Bush term.
At Reclaiming America for Christ, Stenzel told her audience about a conversation she'd had with a skeptical businessman on an airplane. The man had asked about abstinence education's success rate, a question she regarded as risible.
"What he's asking," she said, "is 'does it work?' You know what? Doesn't matter. 'Cause guess what? My job is not to keep teenagers from having sex. The public school's job should not be to keep teens from having sex."
Then her voice rose and turned angry as she shouted, "Our job should be to tell kids the truth!" And I should say that up 'til then, I agreed with her. But here's what she means by the truth:
"People of God," she cried, "can I beg you to commit yourself to truth? Not what works, to truth! I don't care if it works, because at the end of the day, I'm not answering to you. I'm answering to God.
"Let me tell you something, People of God, that is radical, and I can only say it here," she said. "AIDS is not the enemy. HPV and a hysterectomy at twenty is not the enemy. An unplanned pregnancy is not the enemy. My child believing that they can shake their fist in the face of a holy God and sin without consequence, and my child spending eternity separated from God, is the enemy! I will not teach my child that they can sin safely!"
(
Michelle Goldberg)
This is how valuable redemption is to some Christians. There is no greater currency than the eternal soul.
(For a larger excerpt of Ms. Goldberg's discussion, see
post #1586886. The citation link will lead to an audio recording.)
• • •
I should have made the poll public. (I'm accustomed to private ballots.) It would be interesting to know who won't go to hell for their children, whether they have children, and the rationale behind their decision.
