Sunday, December 11, 2011

Religion part 2

Following up on Morality. The benefit of most of the older religions (aka not Scientology) is that they offer citation to a source more powerful than anyone present. Whereas, in any other venue within the one-entity-one-vote neo-liberal republic, the voice of the individual has to be tested against other types of scripture over which the individual has little supreme claim (law, constitution, corporate-media reasonableness, etc.). In a church, though, there's still a little sense of "I have an undeniable, all-powerful connection to a binding spirituality," which, though it can be disregarded or punished by group consensus, can empower a single person to feel justified in saying, "This isn't right."

"This isn't right" is extremely powerful in a land of soulless politicking, murder and bullshit. Few people even bother discussing morality any longer in the great echo chamber:

"Should we pull out of Pakistan?"

"Does the president have the authority to order extrajudicial drone assassinations?"

"Is the War on Drugs proving effective?"

Vary and repeat as long as ye dare. While the American "left," with its Democratic Party, pursues a contemptuous, hyperscientific, inherently-hypocritical industrial exaltation, and the American "right," with its elephant party, pursues a troglodytic fantasy land of Norman Rockwell paintings, the idea of a "church" remains one of the last remaining socially acceptable venues of shared humanity that could bind those still living on either "side." This isn't right needs to be said and asked and accused and repeated. Asking what Jesus would do is more than (or completely separate from) asking what a historical or biblical "Jesus" might or might not actually "do" in any given situation. It is, instead, an appeal to a higher authority, unbound by memetic tendrils, that can allow the golden rule to shatter social blinders and question the things that aren't supposed to be questioned by pragmatic modern voters.

No comments:

Post a Comment