For more information on the Sydney Atheists Visit our website here.
You can also check out our photos, newsletter, podcast and MeetUp site.
Share

Monday, March 16, 2009

Oh God, Oh God! OH GOD!!!



Hmmm, interesting. Who ever thought of bible based sex education? What an amazing thought!

Seriously, the bible has been used to repress people's sexuality basically since it was written, but there is so much perverse stuff in the bible, of which only a little is condemned by God. It seems like, as we've seen so many times before, people are reading into the bible what they want to find and are blind to all the other stuff that they don't agree with. This happens a lot amongst those who claim the bible as a source of knowledge.

Let's have a look-see at the video and see if we can't unpack it a little...

Jerry Lawson says:
Gods way of sex is very straightforward. In the scripture it's a husband and a wife, only within the confines of marriage.
Well, in Genesis alone there's a whole lotta strangiosity!

Just some of the exceptions to the wedded heterosexual model can be seen with descriptions of:
  • Incest Gen 19:33
  • Having sex with your wife's handmaiden Gen 16:2, 30:3
  • Trading vegetables for sex Gen 30:16
  • Sex with your stepmother Gen 35:22, 49:4
  • Sex with your sister in law is fine Gen 38:9 (just don't come on the ground)
  • Sex with your daughter in law Gen 38:16
Jerry Lawson Continues:
We're just bible people and we make no bones about it, we're just going to talk about what's in the bible
Well, I guess that means no decent sex education, just a whole lot of really strict laws with horrific consequences:

If a man has sex with his mother, sister or another man, kill them both (Lev 20:11, 12, 13)
If a man has a threesome with his wife and her mother, all three must be burned (Lev 20:14)
If a man or woman has sex with a beast, kill them both (Lev 20:15-16)
If a man has sex with his sister or a menstruating woman they are to be shunned (Lev 20:17, 18)

Geez, abstinence only education would be a lot more attractive if screw ups get you killed!

Oh, and while we're in the sex-ed section of the bible, don't forget that God is ABSOLUTELY OBSESSED with how dirty-filthy-filthy-yuck-yuck-eww the seed of man is. I guess he really should have put a bit more intelligence into his design of that squidgy little creation!

Then there's the argument from ignorance where he holds up a stack of emails and says that he only got 5 negative ones. I guess it just goes to show that people who are not interested in this aren't compelled to respond. Lawson's email is not an adequate census of the population's feelings about the billboard. This is obvious, but I'm just pointing out some tomfoolery when I see it.

Finally, Lawson says:
People are tired of a one sided debate and they'd really like to hear what God has to say about it
Now I think I have a good litmus test to apply to this scenario. Make a film depicting all of the sex in the bible, with the required response to each act and try to get ANYONE to publish it. I'm pretty sure that it would be less a sex education film and more of an extreme porn/snuff/ moral imposition film. It would be very unlikely that an honest representation would be permissable in any country unless it only cherry-picked the bits that would be considered respectable.

When it comes to sex education, the best source is well researched, scientifically based information presented gradually over a child's progression through school. The topics should be presented based on the child's ability to understand and think about the subjects that they are exposed to.

There is no rational basis to restrict the sexual activities of informed consenting adults acting in a way that does not impact on the rights of others.

Using the bible as a moral compass is almost definately going to complicate the issues.

and just for those who might be thinking 'that stuff is all old testament, it doesn't count'. Lawson is referring to the bible as a whole and at no point says that he is using specific books of the bible over others.

3 comments:

  1. All I see is strawmen (Old Testament quotes minus any context) and completely irrelevant statements (A film depicting biblical sex acts would be hardcore!) there, so I'm wondering: Do you have anything worthwhile to add to the discussion?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Trav,
    Could you please show where Alan created strawmen and tell us why his reading is wrong. (Couple of examples please)

    ReplyDelete
  3. No need to. It's obvious.

    But one example. Lawson claims that scripture teaches sex is to be monogamous, between a husband and wife. Genesis 38:9 is cited to show an "exception" to the model by suggesting that "sex with your sister in law is fine". No context was given, no explanation of the verse, no explanation of how the verse might fit into any understanding of scripture.

    No one believes that the bible teaches sex with a sister is fine, and in fact, the next verse says God punished him with his life for committing the act. So the verse shows that God completely DISAPPROVES, not that it is FINE.

    So perhaps I was wrong, I'm not even sure if you'd call it a strawman. A blatantly obvious misrepresentation would be a more apt description.

    ReplyDelete

Atheist Quotes

Loading...