The last couple of posts from ‘David’ Thiessen of Theology Archaeology have spun off into character assassinations of both myself, and Bruce Gerencser. I’ve ignored a couple of his more recent displays of hypocrisy, but his latest post is grounds for a few corrections.
We apologize for our article title yesterday. However, we did find the content on the funny side. Both BG and MM accuse us of the very things they want to do. They want to control the Christian faith so it is more like them and their beliefs instead of accepting it as it is.
They want the Christian to accept what is wrong to the believer while rejecting what they consider wrong in the Christian faith. Their attitudes are like the attitude behind secular academic freedom.
The unbeliever wants the freedom to explore different topics and do so on Christian college campuses while refusing to let Christians have the same freedom on secular college campuses. This is why we said in yesterday’s article that the unbeliever is not the light unto the Christian. They have nothing to offer and only seek to hide the truth.
What is the basis for these claims? I might wish for Christianity to be different (then again, I’ve encountered forms of Christianity different to David’s fundamentalist version, and these other versions have featured far kinder, friendlier souls than David (and other Evangelicals) have ever presented themselves to be. However, I also know that change usually needs to come from within, so my policy – and despite David’s dishonest misrepresentation, this has always been my policy – live and let live, so long as religion does not interfere in the rights and freedoms of others. David desires more interference, he wants his version of his religion to have every right to inject itself into every corner of our lives, regardless of whether we want it or not. His little remarks about colleges are a case in point.
What is his source for his claim? Do secular elements of society really push for involvement in religious schools? Meanwhile, taxpayers in the US are increasingly bearing more of a burden because of religious schools. Religious interference in people’s lives is increasing in the US, and elsewhere too. This is what David wants. This is what every fundamentalist wants. They will not accept living and letting live.
What follows are some demonstrations of David’s absurd ignorance:
Abortion is NOT healthcare. It is murder and if a woman wants independence, then she should not have sex. The statement in the first paragraph shows that the Episcopal Church has little understanding of how life works and the roles of men and women.
There are many medical reasons why someone might need an abortion. There are numerous risks to a woman’s long-term health and even to their life, that cannot be treated via any other means. For example, an ectopic pregnancy would be fatal for the child-bearer, and the fetus is unable to survive outside of the womb, even if the condition were not fatal to the woman.
David also betrays his attitude that women are property. Apparently they become property of the man if they have sex. Well, women are under enormous societal pressure to be sexually available, and marriage is spoken of as a sexual union within some Churches. Then we have matters of rape and sexual assault.
There more to David’s latest rant, and you can read it at his site. Suffice to say, he merely repeats notions that display his complete disregard for the welfare of children.