Being Amber Rhea

…why people believe in God.

Conceptually, I’ve always been able to understand why. Who was it who said that thing about how if God didn’t exist, humans would create Him? Something like that. Anyway, that’s always made sense to me. I think we all want to feel some sort of comfort that we’re not totally alone in the universe and that there is some kind of purpose (even if the truth is actually the opposite). Because if we’re all alone, reality can seem too scary to handle.

But during the last few weeks with my dad’s rapidly declining health and finally his death, I’ve come to understand on a much more real, personal, visceral level why people find comfort in what I’ll nebulously refer to as faith.

A caveat, too: “faith” is one of those words I generally dislike, because so often it’s used as a buzzword, devoid of any real meaning. Other words/phrases along those same lines are “values” and “tradition” and “way of life.”

Anyway, as I was saying…

Over the past few weeks, I have allowed myself to feel comforted by expressions of religious faith that seemed heartfelt and nonjudgmental. And why not? We all need to find some comfort wherever we can. I still do not consider myself a religious person, nor am I comfortable with the appellation “spiritual” (though I flirted with it when I was a teenager) - but I do know that during hard times, comfort and support is important, and there’s no need to split hairs over what form it takes.

I’m inspired by my mom’s friend P., who lost her son (who was just a month older than me) in 2006 when he was killed in a collision with a drunk driver. Prior to that he’d had a severe head injury at around age 11, and in his early 20s was diagnosed with leukemia (it had been in remission for several years at the time of his death). He had recently gotten married. I cannot even conceive of the suffering his mother has endured, and yet she remains so devoted to her faith and so warm, caring, and thoughtful of others. She spoke with my dad a few times when he was in the hospital and then when he came home for hospice, and according to my mom he was very moved by it; she thinks talking to P. really helped him. She has been a source of comfort to my mom, too; never preachy, never proselytizing, but always just there, with a kind word and a sympathetic ear (and not just a trite cliché, either).

I’m inspired by Lia of Star Light Ministries, who as far as I can tell seems to have the same approach to Christianity as P.: just being there, with love, without judgment. And based on what I know about Christianity (and I do know quite a bit, actually, having studied it in high school and college, and done plenty of reading and research on my own), it seems like this is the more authentic manifestation of Christianity, although unfortunately it’s quite rare.

I’m inspired by Denise, the American Legion chaplain who officiated my dad’s funeral service. She showed such compassion and sympathy, in a way that I really believed (rather than just going through the motions like a lot of people do), and she had only just met me! She just had a way about her that was comforting, respectful, and right.

I didn’t pray in the kitchen last Sunday with my mom, her friend M., and Denise, as they were going over what the service should include. I had been sitting at the table with them, but by that point I had gotten up and left the kitchen, and had just come back in to get something out of the fridge. They were about to say a prayer and Denise invited me to join, but I said “I’m not much of a praying person…” and just stood silently until they were finished. And it’s true, praying makes me uncomfortable and I don’t like to do it (and I certainly don’t like to “fake it”); but as for faith as a source of comfort, I get that.

My mom has never been a religious person either, but there she was, praying in the kitchen, and I could tell it was a help to her rather than her defenses going up as they usually would.

When Denise quoted Scripture at the funeral, I didn’t feel the annoyance that I typically do when people quote Scripture. Maybe that’s because most of the time it seems like people are doing it in an accusatory way, with an agenda. But the few passages she quoted were relevant and I could tell she had put some real thought into selecting appropriate ones.

And as I heard, many times, “He’s in a better place now,” or “He’s not in pain anymore,” I didn’t get annoyed. I was surprised because if you’d have asked me before all this started, I would’ve guessed those phrases would really irritated me. I guess I just didn’t have the energy to get worked up about it; I was taking comfort wherever I could get it.

I am still not a religious person, nor do I think there really is a God like the Judeo-Christian God, although there very well might be something; but I get why people are religious. I realize that in the past I have unfairly judged an entire religion by the bad apples who make themselves very visible in its name. I will try not to do that in the future.

And yeah, it might be cheesy, but there is a feeling of comfort to be had in that “Footsteps” poem. I think we all need that from time to time.

Scientists are leaving the States because of this BS. (Yes, that’s a feature from Glamour. I know, I was surprised, too!) I wish I could find a link to the article I read in Time a few weeks ago, about the plummeting numbers of scientists in the U.S., many of whom are discouraged by the increasing infiltration of politics into their research. Europe and China will have our heads.

Not sure which part to focus on; there’s so much. Doctors being compelled by law to provide medically inaccurate information? Kids being taught falsehoods that pose as sex ed, while at the same time being deprived of facts that could save their lives? “Christians” stalling the development of a vaccine that could prevent cancer? Wingnuts poking their sticky little fingers into all areas of American politics, spooking legislators in a manner reminiscent of Sunni Muslims?

Ah, how about the incessant crusade to control women’s sex lives through forced childbirth… (emphasis mine)

If it had been left up to the FDA’s Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee, American women would be able to walk into any drugstore and buy the emergency contraceptive Plan B over the counter (OTC). When the committee was convened in 2003 to review Plan B, a “morning-after” method of birth control that can reduce the odds of pregnancy by 95 percent if taken within 24 hours of unprotected sex, all 28 members agreed that the drug was safe and effective. The vast majority of them also voted to make it available OTC at any pharmacy.

In 2000 alone, the drug prevented approximately 51,000 abortions, according to a Guttmacher Institute estimate.

You guessed it - religious nutjobs put a stop to all that.

I simply do not comprehend this need to micro-manage the lives of strangers.

Let’s daydream for a minute and pretend EC is available OTC. Tell me how that affects your life. And don’t give me some hippy-dippy bullshit about how the moral decay it represents affects all our lives. I can smell a red herring a mile away, and I want a real answer. So consider the simple scenario. EC is available at your local Walgreen’s. You do not believe in taking EC to prevent pregnancy. Now… this affects your life, how?

Don’t buy it. Don’t take it. No one’s putting a goddamn gun to your head. They still sell Summer’s Eve by the gallon even though research has shown time and time again that douching disrupts the natural pH balance of the vagina and can make you more susceptible to infections. So, when I go to the pharmacy, I walk on by.

When are people going to start demanding that this shit be put to a stop, and accept nothing less than scientifically sound healthcare and education? Not to end on a downer, but I am honestly afraid that it might come to what the article mentions…

[M]any women can’t imagine how these lies could possibly have an impact on them, Trussell says. “The first time one of them walks into a pharmacy and can’t get her birth control pill prescription filled, that will have a wake-up effect. Most won’t feel the effects until these rights are gone — they can’t believe there would be a time when these things would be outlawed. I hope their belief is true, but I’m very worried.”

Ya know, it’d be a lot cooler if we were to make sure things don’t come to that.

h/t Bitch Ph.D.

Hey, look! It’s a Christian perspective on masturbation that stands in stark contrast to that of Every Young Man’s Battle.

God made our bodies, so if we think our bodies are dirty and shameful, we are shunning God’s divine creation. And if we masturbate with shame and feelings of sinfulness, we are besmirching God’s blessing. Instead, we should celebrate our bodies and our sexual nature, and rejoice in the pleasure and satisfaction that they can bring us through masturbation. [Full article]

Hmm, nothing in there about masturbation creating “distance from God” or causing your college girlfriend to have an abortion.

I wonder about some of the things on the Sex In Christ web site - why is it okay to have a threesome with two women, but not with two men? - but overall it’s a breath of fresh air when compared to the hellfire and damnation approach taken by many religious folks.

(Via Bitch | Lab)

See also my Every Young Man’s Battle book reviews.

Here it is, folks… the new blog I love to hate: Modestly Yours.

I’m kind of a masochist with it. It’s like a train wreck; I know I should look away, but I just can’t. As my 12th grade English teacher used to say: “fascination with the abomination.”

Then again, I do like to expose myself to, and try to understand, viewpoints that are radically different from my own (as I’ve mentioned before).

So what the dilly-o? There appears to be some kind of “modesty counter-culture” going on. (Every Young Woman’s Battle is just one of the many examples I’ve encountered.) On the one hand, it makes me chuckle and shake my head. On the other hand, I ask: what the fuck?

First of all: what is modesty? Could somebody please spell out a clear, concise definition? There’s all this talk about modesty, but I have yet to see a definition. I wonder how many of the people yammering about it have stopped and given any thought to what it really means.

Of course, modesty is only ever discussed in relation to girls and women (as far as I’ve seen, anyway). I guess that’s because, as we have learned, men are merely helpless vessels attached to willful, hyperactive cocks. But I digress.

As far as I can tell from my various readings, “modesty” means adhering to a very specific definition of womanhood - one that claims to promote individualism and female empowerment, but in reality draws rigid boundaries between acceptable and unacceptable forms of self-expression. If you spend your days volunteering at a homeless shelter and knitting, you’re a woman in charge of your own life, pursuing your dreams, and you are to be commended for it! If, on the other hand, you write erotic literature or enjoy non-monogamous sex, you are a misguided soul with no self-respect, who has clearly been corrupted by the mainstream media.

Even ModestyZone itself (of which Modestly Yours is a part) doesn’t include a definition of modesty. The only thing that approaches a definition can be found on their very short About page:

Whether you’re a virgin waiting until marriage, or just against casual sex more generally, you can find a safe harbor here to share your ideals, interests, and goals for the future.

Join forces with other young women who are tired of power struggles between the sexes. Believe in the possibility of real intimacy.

First of all, I have no idea what that last paragraph means. The first one is awfully presumptuous, since it assumes that everyone (excuse me, every woman) who is “a virgin waiting until marriage” shares the same views on sex, sexuality, gender dynamics, women in society, spirituality, and so on. And what of women who are “against casual sex more generally?” It’s always a red flag for me when I see people defining themselves in terms of what they’re not or what they’re against. It’s extremely common - I’ve been guilty of it plenty of times - but it’s an easy way out, because it means you don’t have to do any real introspection or give thought to difficult issues, and thereby find out what you are, what you’re for, and why.

As to Modestly Yours itself - where to start? I’ve had a lot of trouble narrowing it down. There’s just so much there. Do I start with the post about the proposed HPV vaccine, which is filled with misinformation and baseless assumptions? Or the one about why dating is not appropriate for the “marriage-minded” individual? How about the many that contain the usual boring doublespeak about how the freedom to decide for ourselves what is right for us sexually is actually a hindrance?

Nahl. I decided to go with the post about a Glamour magazine article that really rubbed me the wrong way when I saw it in the store - and apparently, this modest chick felt the same way. What’s interesting is that we both take issue with the article, but for entirely different reasons.*

Modest Chick says:

Besides the obvious indecency of constantly talking about sex, articles such as these give people the idea that since everyone is doing it (whatever “it” may be), you can and should do it too. Never mind how degrading, demeaning, or selfish the act is: as long as statistics can show that others are doing it, it is “normal.” And while I don’t doubt the accuracy of the statistics (actually, I do, since Glamour isn’t exactly Gallup), what bothers me is that they are telling women not to feel bad about what they have done even if the best thing in some cases may be to acknowledge that a mistake was made. This seems like part of our cultural tendency to “define deviancy down.”

So many problems with that paragraph!

First of all, it took some time to recover from laughing out loud (yes, literally LOLing) at the first clause. “The obvious indecency of constantly talking about sex”? Thank you Church Lady, may I have another!

Nevertheless - let’s pick that apart. I can only assume she’s being hyperbolic in her use of “constantly.” So I take that to stand in for “openly” or “often” or “without warning.” Such talk is indecent? Why? And it’s obvious? That’s a gaping hole of assumption if I ever saw one. The burden of proof is on her, and she provides nothing.

Her description of various nebulous sex acts as “degrading, demeaning, or selfish” is also questionable at best. First, we need to know what acts she’s talking about. Oral sex? Anal? Threesomes? BDSM? What, exactly, makes a particular sex act degrading, demeaning, or selfish? Are any of these sex acts (along with the myriad of others) inherently degrading, demeaning, or selfish? If so, why? What makes them so? And who decides? She’s operating on a lot of assumptions here.

Finally, I feel compelled to point out that acknowledging a mistake and feeling bad (sic) about something are not always synonymous. Or is Modest Chick just promoting a culture of guilt?

I would love to see some answers. Perhaps Modest Chick will see this post and explain herself. She’s made plenty of statements and proclamations; now I want to see her back them up with the whys and hows.

* Ed note: I’ll tell you my reasons later. I need to get some sleep now.

I was checking my referrers today, and found this one among them: The Girl Next Door. She has a link to me because we’re both on the BlogHer Blogroll.

So I’m glancing over her site with minimal interest, and then I see this post and am jolted to attention. You’ve gotta be fuckin’ kidding me. She’s reading Every Woman’s Battle.

Enthralled with this person who was happily swallowing such bullshit, I read on. And the coincidences got weirder and weirder. It’s like she’s the non-heathen version of me. She lives in Atlanta and says this in her bio: “My true passion is web development and design.”

They call this synchronicity, right?

I’m going to refrain from ripping into her too badly, though. Blog fighting is lame, and I’m really a nice person, ya know? (Just a heathen.) And she’ll probably end up here when she sees me in her referrer log, which she obviously checks compulsively, being a geek and all.

Merry Christmas… I’m a bitch.

(And If this provokes some kind of rabble in the comments, I’m just going to shake my head, sigh, chuckle, and NOT GET INVOLVED.)

A chapter toward the end of Every Young Woman’s Battle (which I finally finished the other night) contains the following excerpt from another book which is probably a real gem, The Mystery of Marriage by Mike Mason:

What moment in a man’s life can compare with that of the wedding night, when a beautiful woman takes off all her clothes and lies next to him in bed, and that woman is his wife? What can equal the surprise of finding out that the one thing above all others which makind has been most [creative] in dragging through the dirt turns out in fact to be the most innocent thing in the world? Is there any other activity at all which an adult man and woman may engage in together (apart from worship) that is actually more childlike, more clean and pure, more natural and wholesome and unequivocally right than is the act of making love? For if worship is the deepest available form of communion with God…then surely sex is the deepest communion that is possible between human beings.

Where do I start?

Yay for actually admitting that sex is natural; he gets a point for that. The adjectives “clean” and “pure” kind of raise my hackles - but more on that later. But childlke? That’s the one that really makes my skin crawl.

Sure, young kids engage in exploratory sexual play; that’s natural and normal. But are we really comparing 4-year-olds playing doctor to an adult married couple’s sex life? I sure as shit hope not.

As far as I can tell, the point the author was laboring to make has something to do with sex in a marriage relationship being part of God’s plan and therefore a good thing. He just goes around his ass to get to his elbow, and creeps us all out in the process.

Moving on to my hackle-raising issue with describing sex - excuse me, making love - as clean, pure, and wholesome. In our sex-negative culture, I would be the last to begrudge consenting adults any sexual activity in which they choose to engage, and I would vehemently disagree with any definition of “dirty” which casts sex itself in a negative light. However, dirty isn’t necessarily a bad thing. I think it comes down to what your definition of “dirty” is. And being dirty in the awesome sense of the word is one of my favorite pastimes.

Are handcuffs and blindfolds “clean and pure”? Dildos, buttplugs, strap-ons, BDSM, role-playing, porn of all varieties? Is it wrong for a married couple to incorporate these practices/paraphernalia into their sexual repertoire? If so, why? If not, would Mr. Mason still be comfortable using his chosen adjectives to encompass a wider array of sexual practices?

Maybe I should email the guy. Now that would make for an entertaining blog post.

I couldn’t not post a link to this excellent article, by Melinda Henneberger. An excerpt:

We as a nation - a proudly, increasingly loudly Christian nation - have somehow convinced ourselves that the selfish choice is usually the moral one, too.

…

Which is how “Christian” morality got to be all about other people’s sex lives - and incredibly easy lifting compared to what Jesus actually asks of us. Defending traditional marriage? A breeze. Living in one? Less so. Telling gay people what they can’t do? Piece o’ cake. But responding to the wretched? Loving the unlovable? Forgiving the ever-so-occasionally annoying people you actually know? Hard work, as our president would say, and rather more of a stretch.

Her observation in the first paragraph (about Ben Franklin coining a popular pseudo-Christian phrase) reinforces a point I’ve been making for awhile about ignorance - willful or otherwise. It goes alongside with other facts that people conveniently don’t know about, such as “under God” being added to the Pledge of Allegiance in the 1950s. (And join the discussion about that rigamarole here, won’t you? Blog pimping, yay!)

Anyway. Go read the full article. I know many of you will have disagreements to post (bring it!), but I also know a few Christians who will agree whole-heartedly.

I am annoyed and vaguely depressed. I’ve decided to blame the cold/allergy medicine I’ve been taking since yesterday. I started taking it because apparently I am allergic to Augusta. So yeah, I’m blaming my mood on that, even though I really feel like people are acting like j-holes today, and they shouldn’t get away with it, no they shouldn’t.

Forgot to mention, when Jen and I went down to the First Friday thing in Augusta, someone gave me a Chick Tract. Those things are great. This one was all about how this pastor and his wife who worked in Africa for 50 years building schools and hospitals, teaching people to read and helping them grow food, etc., are going to hell because they didn’t tell the Africans “how to get saved”; but this guy who just got out of prison (where he’d been serving a sentence for “killing a guy in a drunken brawl”) is going to heaven, because he converted his cellmate. Hmmm… you know, if that’s supposed to make me want to be a Christian, then it seriously backfired…

A couple of things (both of which were lifted from other blogs, but which I found too stellar not to post here — so, credit due to Dave and Patrick) for your web-surfing pleasure…

Date to Save — Missionary Dating
Favorite quote: "The Bible says ‘man looks at the outward appearance; God looks at the heart.’ We’re definitely not God, so just decide if your date is hot enough for you (after praying about it, of course)."
(The Jesus thong is also nice.)

God is a Hardass
Favorite quote: "Old Testament God ain’t letting Himself get nailed to any pussy crosses for your sinning ass"
…not to mention Pinkerton’s favorite God quote at the bottom of the page.