Wednesday, December 06, 2006

a few reasons I am not a regulation "Christian"

Have you ever noticed how many vehement, holier-than-thou, bustling proselytizers of born again Christianity seem to hate animals? Here's just a tidbit from "Unless The Lord..." magazine, written by the oh-too-aptly named David Crank:

"The CVA (Christian Vegetarian Association) believes that vegetarianism expresses the compassion and peace of Christ because the diet spares animals from suffering, alleviates world hunger, protects the environment and preserves human health."

With a statement like CVA’s above, we might question whether this organization is Christian in more than just name. The reasons given in support of a vegetarian diet sound so much like those given by non-Christian vegetarians who draw their values from eastern religions or animal rights activists.


Oh, yes, wanting to spare animals from suffering means you are not a true Christian, only a questionable one who sounds suspiciously like a godless animal rights activist. Crank is sadly not alone in his beliefs (I wish I had a dollar for every Christian who smugly informed me that I was wrong to be a vegetarian because God wants people to eat as many animals as possible. I would use those dollars to buy bottles of Blanc de Noirs to drink around Jesus's birthday). This sort of blend of conformity, suspiciousness, and meanness is what drove me out of organized religion, although I continue to believe in God, after I left the born again Christian home I was so severely raised in.

Years ago, when I was new at the mothering game, I sought support and knowledge at Breastfeeding.com. It turned out that the boards were overrun with hypercritical, hypocritical Christians. One detailed her husband's plan to stab raccoons with a kitchen knife. Their crime, which made them deserve this gory fate? They had gone into this family's yard. Evidently God had spoken to them and told them that they were allowed to brutally stab any living creature which dared cross their border.

Another one delighted in condemning everyone to hell: she stated that since she had personally informed us all that if we didn't accept Jesus the way we were supposed to, we were all going to be held accountable when we died because we had been informed of the truth, by her. Imagine the power that one chubby housewife wielded: one poorly written, mean-spirited post on a message board, and tens of thousands of lactating mothers were condemned to hell. I wonder about the ultimate fate of those who merely read the topic header but didn't click on it; did they save themselves an eternity of hell and brimstone?

The raccoons, the Christian Vegetarian Association folks, all those mommies who read the Breastfeeding.com boards years ago, and me: we're all bound for hell, I guess. See you there?

9 comments:

Freewheel said...

I've had this argument with a fundie. He quoted a line from Genesis that says something like "Man shall have dominion over the earth." So there you have it. Vegetarians are heathens for failing to exercise their dominion over animals.

Anonymous said...

Born Again's kill me. I just gently remind them that I was born perfectly fine the FIRST time! :-)

hughman said...

i'll save a seat for you in "hell". i'll be in a pink, two level igloo.

2amsomewhere said...

The use of the word regulation made me think for a moment. I wondered, "Why give such people the benefit of having presumed regulatory authority at all?" But maybe that's just the libertarian in me talking. :-)

DISCLAIMER: Biblical references follow. They are intended to make a point, not proselytize.

I did think about Peter's vision in the tenth chapter of the Book of Acts when reading this post, since it is a good example of how passages can be misinterpreted.

In his dream he sees an abundance of animals of all kinds, and a voice instructs him to get up, kill, and eat. Peter declines, saying that he hasn't and won't eat anything that is "unclean" under Jewish law. The voice tells him not to call that which God cleaned unclean.

Biblical literalists might stop there and argue that this gives Christians license to eat everything under the sun, so a choice to be vegetarian would run counter to God's will. But they would be wrong.

If you read further on down in the chapter, the meaning of the vision becomes clearer. He's being told by God to drop the idea of refusing to associate with Gentiles. The animals in the vision are a symbol of all people. Killing and eating is a symbol of willingness to interact.

But I'm sure that many of those same literalists who openly decry all sorts of actions in the name of divine command would have a tough time interacting respectfully with dissenters, let alone nonbelievers.

One final thought... If one is not a regulation Christian, does that mean he or she is an overtime Christian?

--
2amsomewhere

Anonymous said...

Channeling for Stephen Colbert...so I suppose you'll be breast feeding some zombie chickens!?

Aya said...

Oh no! Not hell! Please not hell! I shall singe my toesies!!1111

Stupid.

Susan said...

Well, in my opinion (as a Christian), the people who say things like that are as much true Christians as terrorist hijackers are true Islamics. There are kooks in every bunch.

hughman said...

yay! warches and pink clothes in "hell"!

stjarna67 said...

Never heard that argument before. I guess my response would be "Sorry, these animals need to be punished for their sins and seeing as sins are bitter to the soul; it looks like I'm gonna need lots of A1 Sauce."