?

Log in

No account? Create an account
No bullshit

Moonbat of the day

The internet convinces me, on a regular and varied basis, that people are crazy. They're also usually pretty sure they're right.

Today's example is Mary O'Hayes, who boldly writes about why single people can't really be as happy as those who are married (no matter what they themselves may think). I think this particular entry is a steaming pile of poo, not because I don't value marriage very highly, but because I don't have clear evidence that God has somehow made it more sacred and fulfilling than single life. On all sides of the fence, on this side of Heaven, there will be longings and places where we feel incomplete. Only the marriage of Christ to His Bride will bring completion. Just as I believe we are created male and female to allow for the full expression of God's image within humanity, I believe we see God revealed in singleness and marriage alike (Jesus didn't come for the purpose of strengthening the family; no one would have crucified Him for this). She does a good job of identifying the (possible) longing, but prescribing marriage as the cure is short-sighted and gives the institution a responsibility it cannot bear alone.

Just at a glance, I see some clues as to why O'Hayes and I might disagree:
Mary was raised Catholic, grew away from the Church in college, and dabbled in other religions. She’s returned to Catholicism, and now appreciates its art and beauty, moral framework, and enduring values.
The fact that we hold to different flavors of the Christian faith isn't necessarily problematic in the least, but those aspects she appreciates about her faith are, at their very best, fringe benefits and/or side-effects. Christ is the center of the Church (and everything else), without peer. If I were to construct a worldview around my opinions, rather than allowing my opinions to be shaped and informed by the One at the center of my worldview, things would obviously look very different.

Also, I think this is why I prefer online journalling to "blogging," which often seems to carry the attendant expectation of broad political opinion and social commentary. Certainly, many of us have such opinions (I obviously do), but to create and sustain a sense of certainty about disputable matters (which we don't necessarily believe to be Truth) requires a degree of bluster I find both exhausting and counterproductive. Perhaps it's hypocritical, but I think the online journal format provides me with more freedom to write about anything and everything, without the pressure to stir a controversy or even have a point, and with an even more clear implication that everything I write here isn't necessarily about anyone or everyone else.

But hey, that's just me.

Comments

I hadn't even considered your point. How horrid.

In this case, the author clearly isn't allowing her faith to inform and shape her opinions. It'd be nice if she stated that up front, but it's not hard to see that she's jumped the track.