Opting Out

So the other day I open an email from someone that I like a lot ... let's call her Lola, just to keep her nice and anonymous (and because I don't know anybody named Lola, and because it's one of the best Kinks songs ever). Lola's the kind of girl whose convictions go very deep. She and I have an agreement not to discuss sports (she's a Sooner, I'm a Cowboy), politics (she's a Republican, I'm a Democrat), or religion (she's an evangelical fundamentalist, and I'm ... not). Our children play happily together -- indeed, we've known each other since before any of them were born -- and everything's good in the neighborhood.

OR IS IT??

Like all the rest of us who have email inboxes, Lola gets emails from time to time that she shares with other people. Sometimes she sends them to me, and that's where this story starts.

During the 2004 presidential election, Lola sent out a mass email that had a rather indignant tone; it seems that one candidate's wife had the temerity to say that the other candidate's wife hadn't ever held an RJ (that's Real Job for ye uninitiated). Lola took umbrage with this for a wide variety of reasons. However, there was more to it that I thought Lola must not have heard yet, and I wanted to draw her attention to it. In my job, I must tell several people the same thing at the same time, so I'm prone to click "reply all" and then go about the telling ... and that's what I did this time, too. Lola and I went back and forth for a little while, and then it seems that someone on Lola's mailing list decided they didn't need to be privy to our squabble. Lola then emailed me and told me to stop sending mail to everyone on "her" list, because they were getting irritated. I sent out a quick apology to the list in question, and ceased and desisted.

Flash forward a bit to spring 2006, and here's Lola sending out another mass email with yet another subject that I found narrowly construed. I composed an epic and once again clicked "reply all" ... equal time, right? Wrong! Lola sent another email, incredibly huffy in nature and tone, telling me that I was spamming her friends and that I should stop immediately. (I did ponder the thought that she'd spammed me first, but only briefly.) I mentioned that if her friends were that important to her, she'd either use the blind-copy feature for the outgoing email or leave me off the list.

Everything was hunky-dory for a while, and then last week, another mass email appears from Lola. Did she blind-copy everyone? No! Not wanting to engage in a war of words at a time when work and children and life in general have me quite busy, I sent back an email asking her to PLEASE either blind-copy everyone or just stop sending me emails of this nature! The email in question was a forward of some drivel that allegedly came out of Ben Stein on some Sunday morning talking-head show ... and it wasn't that said drivel is something that mutates and morphs from being mostly real to containing only shreds of truth, it was that I'd held up my end of the bargain by NOT hitting "reply all" but Lola couldn't hold up hers by not sending me this crap (or at least not sending me all her friends' email addresses in the bargain).

The email that started this round was a variation of the one you can find here: http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/benstein2.asp

Lola emailed back:

"fine - I'm not sure I understand what you're objecting to though. I am confused that you seem to think our Chrisitan views are different - all Christians believe the same thing I thought. You do still believe don't you? Just asking cause I love you."

ARGH. I couldn't take it any more. Here is my reply:

I hope I can put this in a way that won't come across as offensive, but I'll give it a try, with apologies in advance in case I fail miserably!

I object to the idea that the whole world is against Christianity. It isn't. What it's against is the persecution of any one faith or creed. Nobody likes to be bullied or shouted down or made to feel as though their beliefs aren't valid just because they're different from yours.

I object to the notion that pop culture has replaced basic morality for everyone who doesn't go to church and/or wear their faith on their sleeve. It hasn't. What it has done is given people a common point of experience, and I think the writer of the original email objects to "Nick and Jessica" (which in and of itself should tell you how bloody old it is) and secular humanism replacing sectarianism.

I object to an email that says that atheism is being shoved down our collective national throat because the Constitution says it should be so. It doesn't. It also doesn't say that Christians get to shove their religion down the throats of anyone who isn't possessed of their same system of beliefs.

I object to claims that aren't true (Dr. Spock had two sons, both of whom are still alive and kicking) but get passed all around anyhow because they're about God and someone might think we're awful if we *don't* send them along.

All Christians do have one basic similar belief, that being the belief that Jesus Christ was the son of God and the promised Messiah. Beyond that, all bets are pretty much off, aren't they? Baptism is done when you're a baby, unless you have to wait until you're old enough to confess with your own tongue, and it's done by sprinkling water on your forehead, unless you have to be dunked all the way under in a huge tub of water. Communion is an imitation of the Last Supper -- bread to represent the body of Christ (unless it's crackers or wafers) and red wine to represent the blood (unless it's grape juice). Women can be senior ministers (unless they can't), but they can't wear jewelry or make-up and they must wear skirts all the time and they can't cut their hair. Only men must lead the church, and they may not marry (unless they can). That's not even scratching the surface, either. Add in so many different "translations" of the Bible, and it's no wonder people get confused.

What I believe isn't at issue here, and it's truly none of your business anyhow. I don't lie, and I don't cheat, and I don't steal ... in short, I do my best to comply with the notes that Moses allegedly brought down from the mountain (although I must admit to being human and boffing up royally once in a while). Since you asked, though, I'll tell you. I don't go to church because I don't think God made me so stupid as to have to be told what to think. The last few times I've been in a church for a service other than a wedding, christening, or funeral, I was told to dig deep and vote for this one or that one and to shun the other ones because they want to destroy America. I don't believe that, and even if I were so gullible as to fall for it, I don't think it's the pulpit's duty to engage in that sort of coercion. (Yes, it is too coercion, because it implies that if I don't do as I'm told by that human being up there, I'm on the fast-track to hell no matter what else I do.) I take the Bible with a whole cup of salt (maybe it's Lot's wife?) because a bunch of men got together at the Council of Nicaea and decided that this bit of writing will go in, but not that one. (Ever notice there are exactly two books written by women in the Bible? What about the Gnostic Gospels and the Nag Hammadi scrolls? The Apocrypha? What are they, chopped liver?) I also take issue with it because it was mostly retold legend until somebody wrote it down, and it's been translated and "revised" umpteen zillion times until it's watered down and says exactly what some certain bit of "Christianity" wants it to say. And really, how about folks like Oral and Richard Roberts, Jim Bakker, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson? Creflo Dollar, Benny Hinn, Jimmy Swaggart, Jack van Impe? Oh, and my current favorite, Ted "I am not gay and I didn't have sex with a guy and he's lying except for the part where he says I bought meth from him and used it with him" Haggard. What in the world is all that about, anyhow? Send me all your money so I can promote the Lord's work (right after I buy a nice new Rolls Royce and a massive house and a new mink for my wife and pay off the city council and that cute little honey I hung out with at the convention a few years ago) ... yeah, super. What I believe doesn't matter; it's what I *don't* believe that matters.

I don't object to getting email from you, just like you don't object to getting email from me. I know, though, that if I send you something going on about how the conservatives are doing nothing but enriching themselves and their cronies while trashing the environment and killing our sons and daughters in an illegal and unjust war and lying and stealing and cheating and perverting the Constitution (and W *did* say it was a "goddamned piece of paper" ... so put that in your "he's such a wonderful God-fearing man" pipe and smoke it) to pursue and achieve their own selfish ends, you're going to throw a hissy fit of the first order.

It's about RESPECT, my friend, which you seem to only want to receive, although (in your own terms) it is more blessed to give.

Just learn to use the fucking BCC feature, would you? Pretty please? That's all I asked.

Hope you and the family are well ... love you muchly, see you soon!

Love,
Donna

So why am I posting this here? Because I don't think Lola cares enough to bother reading through my reply, that's why. It seems that the right-wing types only want to say their piece and aren't all that fussed about anyone else's views or feelings. If you're sick of people shoving their religion down your throat, perhaps you could use some of these arguments next time you get into it with someone who's determined to convert you. Good luck.