Tuesday, May 15, 2007

My prayers are with you?







I’ve gotta be honest…I’m a little torn. I live about an hour from both Liberty University, and Liberty Christian Academy. You may have heard of LU, but chances are that you haven’t heard of LCA. It’s a high school that has provided “serious” Christians the opportunity to be schooled from the age of 14 to 25 in Lynchburg, Virginia. All of these lessons have been taught by Jerry Falwell. The idea of someone being 25 years old without being exposed to ideas that fly in the face of that sect makes me more than a little nauseous. I believe the best way to determine your own beliefs is to test them in the face of others. Falwell, apparently, disagrees.

My initial reaction to his death was one of amazement. I really kind of thought that guy was never going to die. The fact that he lived to the age of 73 is, to me, anyway, some sort of terrifying support to the idea that there is a God, and that He (or She, you liberal bastards) agrees with this crazy son of a bitch. My next thought was a recollection of the VISAA volleyball tournament last year in which Mr. Falwell packed the gym of the high school that I work with his students. Buses were chartered and the entire student population came to root on the…well…whateverthefucktheyare. We lost, and I felt like I was on the other end of a crusade.

What shocks me, though, are the hit pieces put out, in the hours that the man’s body is still warm, by Salon and Slate.

Was he a hatemonger? Absolutely. Are those who advocate hate for him any better? I don’t think so. What’s always bothered me as a liberal is those liberals who will support those who want to have sex with animals (as long as it’s consensual, whateverthefuckthatmeans) but will openly criticize and, or, attack those who believe that premarital sex is a sin. If you are open to all opinions, be open to those that are closed to others. Don’t claim to be open, and then be closed to others. At least Falwell was straight up about it. He hated homosexuals. If you claim to hate him, simply because he hated homosexuals, I’m not sure where that self righteousness comes from.

I don’t know if the world is a better place without him. I personally think abortion and gay rights are good things, so, personally, there’s one fewer person alive that agrees with me. But in my barest opinion, whether or not the guy’s a real bastard, I’m not going to rejoice in his death. I really do think that death as a whole is a negative thing.

P.S. Go ahead…throw Hitler at me.

4 comments:

Andy D said...

In the interest of spurring another debate, and maybe even collecting a few bruises why I am at it, I thought I would chime in again. Here are my two cents (for what they are worth)..

There are very few deaths that I would rejoice at. I truly paid very little attention to Falwell. My thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends.

However, you stated something in your write up that I thought was interesting. You said, “If you are open to all opinions, be open to those that are closed to others.” To me, the problem with the ultra extreme liberal groups is that they tend to be open to any and all opinions that can’t be labeled as conservative or neo-conservative. Surely, there are opinions that simply are not worth becoming public policy. However, it would appear that most liberals don’t believe that. I agree the opinions must be open to debate and discussion. However, whenever we have laws allowing bestiality (provided it is consensual), surely we have gone down the wrong path.
Thoughts?

VirginiaDissentator said...

I may have been unclear, but I did not mean to imply that any idea should be made public policy. You're correct, some opinions should not be made into laws.

I do feel that to move from attacking policy to attacking those who promote policy is a mistake. For Jerry Falwell to blame 911 on abortion rights advocates in order to advance his anti-abortion political stance is, in my mind, reprehensible - but no more so than celebrating his death with champagne, as one Salon commenter described.

I think that you and I may differ though, on which policies indicate that we have gone down the wrong path. I think bestiality is wrong because I'm not certain how an animal can indicate consent to be penetrated, nor am I certain that simply because the animal does the penetrating it is necessarily implied consent. I think that's applying human reasoning to non-humans. I personally find the idea of establishing a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage (which was recently accomplished in the Commonwealth of Virginia) a sign that "surely we have gone down the wrong path."

CapeTownDissentator said...

I agree with both you guys that liberals and critics of Falwell can appear as closeminded as those they criticize. I hesitate, however, to say, as you did Andy, that this is indicative of "most liberals". I just think it's an inaccurate generalization.

I think what both our blogs are aiming for is to cease with the divisive rhetoric, figure out a way to have an open and engaged dialogue between conservatives and liberals and whoever else, so that we can sort through the nonsense and see that we actually agree on more things than we're meant to believe. I am just as annoyed with small minded liberals as I am with small minded conservatives who pigeonhole me (jury is still out as to wheather I'm a full fledged liberal. I got some moderate, liberatarian tendancies and also the damn liberal and conservative platforms keep changing on me).

losangelesdissentatorfan said...

you guys might find this interesting. a theory explaining what causes extreme liberalism and conservativism. apparently it's not our fault, it's physics' (phor poets) fault: http://buchanan.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/were-not-as-disagreeable-as-we-seem/

let me know if that link doesn't work and i'll try again. or just go to ny times. the "Our Lives As Atoms" blog by mark buchanan. the article title is "The Illusion of a Nation Divided". It's an illusion not a trick. A trick is something a prostitute does for money...or candy.