A CREEPING THEOCRACY

The Rev. Dana Prom Smith, S.T.D., Ph.D. (3/23.2012)



The Republican Party is doing what all the Roman Catholic bishops and Pope Paul VI failed to do, enforce an edict upon the faithful. Pope Paul’s encyclical Humanae Vitae was largely disobeyed by most Roman Catholic women, some 98% of them. They used contraception after it was condemned. In the encyclical the pope argued somewhat speciously that the sole purpose of sexual intercourse was procreation, ignoring that it often used for love-making, too. However, since he was not into love-making, he discounted that reason. The upshot of his logical fallacy was that he coldly condemned one of the richest rewards of marriage, safe sex.

So, lots of Roman Catholic women didn’t take the pope seriously, disobeying his edict. Into the breech rushed Republican legislators from all over the country and in Washington who wanted to ensure that all these disobedient women knuckled under in obedience to the pope and the bishops, all of whom claim to be celibate. So we have the Republicans slipping in a bit of theocracy as well as practicing medicine on the side without licenses.

I’m sure it would come as a surprise to all the Mormons and Evangelical Republicans that they are doing the Roman Catholic bishop’s bidding, but there it is, a fledging theocracy. As they try to suppress the rights of women, they’re putting themselves at the behest of the bishops. Of course, these same Republicans who say they’re opposed to government intervention into the lives of the citizens go poking around in the nation’s vaginas and sexual intimacies.

THE POPE'S FALLACY

The Rev. Dana Prom Smith, S.T.D., Ph.D. (3/12/2012)



Pope Paul VI argued in Humanae Vitae that the sole purpose of human sexuality is conception and claims that his assumption is “according to nature.” In a neat logical sleight of hand, he uses the phrase “according to nature” to claim that his assumption is beyond dispute.



However, as nearly everyone knows, human sexuality is often used for purposes other than conception, such as in making love. The encyclical was, in fact, an anti-romantic analysis of marriage by someone who had never known a soul-mate. He decreed from the asylum of ignorance. The Bible and the marriage service use the phrase “they two shall be one flesh.” Sexual intercourse is the physical act of becoming “one flesh.”

The assumption in the encyclical isn’t universal, and claiming that it is “according to nature” is merely an argumentative fallacy, nature being simply what he made it to be, a fiction. As my philosophy professor used to say: “You’ve always got to check those assumptions.”



The intriguing history behind the encyclical is that a commission had been formed by Pope John XXIII, a predecessor of Paul VI, to advise the pope on the issue of contraception. In a paper issued by that commission, entitled “Fostering the Nobility of Marriage,” the majority of the commission argued for “some form of birth control.” Pope Paul VI rejected the recommendation. Subsequently, a number of bishops and priests argued that the encyclical could be disobeyed as a matter of conscience. And it was, resulting in ecclesiastical authorities without authority.

BY THEIR FRUITS YE SHALL KNOW THEM

The Rev. Dana Prom Smith, S.T.D., Ph.D. (3/6/2012)



As a born-again Evangelical Protestant, I’m dismayed by the much of the Evangelical movement’s affiliation with the Republicans. In their affiliation they’ve replaced the ethic of charity and mercy with an ethic of anti-vice purity, the aim of which seems to exclude and condemn. To be sure, there are islands of the old-fashioned evangelicalism, such as Hope Cottage and Dorsey Manor, but their voices seem drowned out by so such harsh vituperation.



They’ve forgotten Reinhold Niebuhr’s point that the Gospel ethic of love translates into social justice. The signal morals of Christianity are grace and mercy, and grace and mercy mean health care for everyone.



“But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream (Amos 5:24).” Happily, many young Evangelicals are becoming socially conscious.



Of course, the Democrats are no bed of roses. Many of them ridicule faith and people of faith as though the faithful were dim-witted, an attitude particularly offensive.   They seem unaware of the rich resources in a life of faith. The fact is that I don’t see many secularists starting homes for the down-and-out. More often than not, it’s the people of faith, both Roman Catholic and Protestant, who are down in the trenches. We forget that the civil rights movement grew out of the churches. I know because I was there in Selma.



However their faults, the Democrats for all of their dim secularity believe in social justice, and that counts for a lot.  As Matthew said, “By their fruits ye shall know them (7:16).”

WIMPY REPUBLICANS

The Rev. Dana Prom Smith, S.T.D, Ph.D. (3/5/2012)



Everyone but the Republicans has known for a long time that Rush Limbaugh is a clown and a knave and a groundling. They claim he’s an entertainer while, in fact, he’s their rag-and-bone man. Apparently, he doesn’t know that it’s not wise to call a respectable young woman a “slut.” What is worse is that Republican politicians do not know that. They say it is “inappropriate,” “unacceptable,” or “words that I wouldn’t have used.” The fact is that it is foul. Limbaugh should have his mouth washed out with soap.



Impersonal commercial corporations know it’s bad even when Republican politicians don’t. Carbonite is sending out letters of apology, but not Republicans.



The fact is that they’re afraid of Limbaugh, an obese, thrice divorced, ignorant, loud-mouthed drugger. If they’re afraid of such a loathsome creature, would they have the courage to take out Osama Ben laden or to stand up to Iran? Perhaps, they’re best exemplified by Willard Romney, commonly called Mitt, who has taken every known political position, sometimes within an hour or so. If he sees any voter walking towards him, he will immediately turn around to walk the other way to keep in step with the voter.



It is hard to know whether they are wimps or just plain cowards. They're don't defend the dignity of a fine young woman who has been viciously slandered because she has the courage to speak her mind is common decency. Not only are they cowards and wimps, they’re not even decent.

THE REPUBLICAN PLATFORM

The Rev. Dana Prom Smith, S.T.D., Ph.D.



The long primary fights within the Republican Party have revealed the mind-set of the Republicans. It turns out that they are against both sex and education, unaware that sex is a very popular activity and that education is necessary for our well-being as a nation and important for individual success. Also, they do not like women, wanting to keep them in a subordinate relationship to men. They are proposing and passing legislation whose sole purpose is to humiliate women considering abortion by state sponsored rape, inserting a foreign object into their vaginas against their wills.



They support Roman Catholic bishops’ attempt to prevent birth control for women when 98% of Roman Catholic women already use contraception. Of course, the bishops have already proven themselves immoral in hiding the depravity of sexual abuse of children within their ranks.



Every now and then, I meet a Republican whose interests are not in establishing a theocracy pleasing to Roman Catholic bishops, but who favor grinding the heads “of the poor in the dust of the earth (Amos 2:7).” It’s called a flat tax which means that a billionaire would pay taxes at the same rate as the poor.



So it turns out that Republicans are against sex, women, education, and 99% of the population and are for a theocracy. What a platform!



If I were a Republican, I would be ashamed of myself.