Glennalicious

« My type of South Beach diet | Main | Trouble with 'mos and 'tians »

June 30, 2006

Trouble with Zod

A very nice blogger whose opinion I appreciate vented that he finds bloggers mocking his faith by using Zod. As an occasional writer of Zod, I felt that I had to explain myself.

As a casual Zod-quoter, I never really thought it could be considered offensive. I like the ring of it, plus it reminds me of the improbable Kryptonian who wanted to be worshiped. Personally, I think a god should have a hot leather suit and sardonic facial hair, and battle it out with superheroes at the north pole.

I was raised Christian and am now agnostic (leaning towards atheist), yet I still respect the basic tenets, and I know them better than Congressman Westmoreland (one of the authors of a bill requiring the ten commandments to be on government buildings). I definitely don't take the Lord's name in vain, even though it is socially acceptable to do that (especially in the middle of an orgasm). Technically, most other cultures could find it offensive when someone in the Judeo-Christian faith asks their God to bless them after a sneeze. Usendroy, as a practicing Jew, finds it offensive that I use Zod. However, more conservative Jews would be offended that he writes down God, as there are specific Jewish laws about that.

Since I no longer believe in an organized god, I prefer to call mine Zod, because when I'm casting my questions into the heavens, I'm not talking to a Jewish/Christian god. If I still continued to use "God bless you" or "God bless," I would be taking the Lord's name in vain, as I no longer believe in the Lord.

For people who get bothered by anyone of a different faith/No faith being disrespectful to their specific deity, I would say that it is part of faith. Eric of We Like Sheep summarizes quite nicely about people sensitive about their faith:

....The fact that Christianity in the West is subject to criticism, skepticism, ridicule, and scorn is a very good thing. The varieties of Christianity that expose themselves to intense scrutiny and debate are, I believe, the strongest and most able to endure social, economic, scientific, and technological changes. In the short run, however, the anti-rational and literalist forms of Christianity are thriving, because they provide the kind of certainties that people want to hold onto in the midst of the chaos of their lives. But a faith based on such fragile foundations as the literal truth of the Bible can easily crumble. (Ask someone who believes that the Bible is the literal word of God who killed Goliath, or in what order God created humans and animals, or whether the Last Supper took place before or during Passover. Although Evangelical literalists always answer these things away by saying that they aren't important, to which I always ask, didn't you decide these are unimportant BECAUSE they are contradictions?)

Islam has been subjected to so little criticism that modern Muslims, even those who consider themselves to be liberal, are often shocked and offended by even the mildest anti-Muslim statements. I once had a Muslim acquaintance get visibly upset when I explained that Christianity teaches that Jesus is the Son of God. "The Koran clearly states that God has no son!" he snapped. This was a gay Muslim living in New York, but he was offended just by hearing one of the tenants of Christianity. I think that the violence prevalent in fundamentalist Islam is fueled by the fact that the core beliefs of Islam are seldom challenged or questioned in public. I don't think that Evangelical Christians are really too upset anymore when they see t-shirts like "Jesus is coming: look busy!", and mocking Christianity and the Church is pretty well accepted (although mean-spirited attacks on the figure of Jesus are pretty uncommon). Of course there are calls for boycotts and the like when something offends Evangelicals or the Roman Church, but death threats are relatively rare. Death threats from offended Muslims, however, have come to be expected when someone challenges Muslim orthodoxy (and this happens in Muslim countries; this is not just a matter of Islam's minority status in the West). The fact that the gay playwright Terrence McNally was threatened with death by Muslims for a play about Jesus shows that Muslim intolerance should be a concern for everyone who cares about living in an open society.

"Islam is perfect because the Koran says it is" is equivalent to "The Bible is the literal word of God because it says so in the Bible"...both of these concepts need to be challenged as often as possible. Laws in Europe to criminalize criticism of religion, proposed out of a misguided concern for sensitivity, are extremely dangerous, especially to those of us who might be threatened by the teachings of religion. All religions can be respected, but they should also be challenged.

The Very Reverend Alan Jones, Dean of Grace Cathedral in San Francisco (where I was baptized and confirmed), wrote "The opposite of faith is not doubt; the opposite of faith is certainty." We all need to challenge the certainty of the religious extremists, if we value living in a society where doubt is allowed. And the fervently religious should remember that even Thomas was eventually made a saint.

Posted by G at June 30, 2006 04:52 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.glennalicious.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/518

Comments

Posted by: Dagon at June 30, 2006 06:12 PM

Posted by: myke at June 30, 2006 07:11 PM

Posted by: homer at June 30, 2006 10:05 PM

Posted by: brian at July 1, 2006 03:03 AM

Posted by: Andy at July 1, 2006 10:32 AM

Posted by: Doug at July 1, 2006 02:28 PM

Posted by: moby at July 1, 2006 10:58 PM

Posted by: homer at July 2, 2006 01:07 AM

Posted by: Mr. HK at July 2, 2006 07:23 AM

Posted by: goblinbox at July 9, 2006 12:29 PM