The occasionally logical thoughts of an eccentric Episcopalian.
Fr. Dougal,This is horrible! How could God possibly be honoured by those who would kill in the name of the Holy One? Somehow I think the intention was magnanimity, but it doesn't come across that way.David
I was going to try to make some vaguely humorous Life of Brian reference to using stoning instead but I actually don't think humour is really appropriate here.There is something incredibly disturbing about fundamentalists - the inability to see past the endless mistranslations, the inability to see the difference between the endless (as far as I'm concerned, never having actually had to read to the end) petty rules of the Old Covenant and the simplicity of the New. The closed minds.I think that punishable crimes need to be linked to some concept of harm, rather than being used to enforce social norms.WV = "saternst" - is Google trying to tell us something?
David - I agree, but just read the Passion narratives. The human race has a long bad history of honouring God by killing his children.SE- yes, it was one occasion where my sense of satire stayed put. Martin Luther said "the devil that proud spirit cannot bear to be mocked", but sometimes all you can do is stare in disbelief. Why fundies cannot read the readily availble stuff that point out the inconsistencies is beyond me. And I get fed up with tolerating their illiteracy and inconsistency (the gay stuff is in the same section of Leviticus as the ban on eating shellfish - also called an abomination - death to prawn cocktail eaters anyone?)I suspect they would argue that homsexuality harms society so needs to be punished, but honestly I really don't want to be in communion with a Province and bishops who think like this. Their inability to see the face of God in the face of the outcast and marginalised seperates us too completely.
Hmm, I could be persuaded of the benefit of the selling of daughters, from time to time but, hey ho.There is more detail on the whole sordid saga on this blog: http://wthrockmorton.com/category/religion-and-sexuality/Section 14 of the Bill seems particularly abhorrent:"14. Failure to disclose the offence.A person in authority, who being aware of the commission of any offence under this Act, omits to report the offence to the relevant authorities within twenty-four hours of having first had that knowledge, commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding two hundred and fifty currency points or imprisonment not exceeding three years.""Authority" includes "a person who exercises religious ... authority". How does this fit with the Sacrament of Confession?
It doesn't - but there may be a more significant sub-text to this mess. Fairly recently the Ugandan judicary stood up for LGBT rights and there is an election coming up soon. El Presidente is not eligible to stand again but they are busy jigging the rules to subvert the system.and preparing mechanisms to squish dissent. Get this through on a soft target (gays) and you have the precedent for repressing ordinary democrats.Someone's been learning from the NSDAP in 1933 I think.