Consent is a necessary prerequisite for any sexual ethic

TwoBoxes2

To put this all another way, for social conservatives, marriage is necessary and sufficient for ethical sexual activity. When they hear folks like Libby Anne (or me) emphasizing the essential importance of consent, they therefore assume that we are, in turn, arguing that consent is necessary and sufficient for ethical sexual activity. But that’s not what we’re saying. We’re saying consent is necessary. Period. [Read more...]

‘Erotic liberty’ — Al Mohler’s new slur is really a sad confession

AlMohler

The phrase “erotic liberty,” as Al Mohler is trying to use it, only makes sense if you accept Mohler’s premise — which is that “erotic” has, and can only have, negative connotations. For Mohler and his Mohlerettes, “erotic” means dirty. It means sex — and sex is a bad, naughty, nasty, filthy thing. For Mohler, in other words, “erotic” means “shameful.” [Read more...]

‘We must be careful about what we pretend to be’: How tribal cheerleading creates new tribal dogma and changes the tribe to conform to it

PandG

Over time, these kinds of tribal-cheerleading responses to pollsters and other catechists eventually become required responses. And thus, over time, the things that people pretend to believe as a “way of showing that they’re members in good standing” of their political faction become the things that members of that faction actually believe. The fluff becomes substance — becomes dogma. And the tribe is transformed to conform to this new dogma. [Read more...]

James Dobson cannot really believe what he says about legal abortion and the Holocaust

If you're living under the Third Reich, your first moral obligation might not be to make a fortune peddling books about how to spank your children.

James Dobson isn’t alone in making this claim. The legal-abortion-is-worse-than-the-Holocaust line is so frequently repeated by anti-abortion white evangelicals that Dobson’s remark is really just a bit of “pro-life” boilerplate. But repetition hasn’t made this claim any less outrageous or any more credible as something anyone could possibly say in good faith. If you try — really try — to imagine the implications of someone saying such a thing whole-heartedly and in good faith, you’ll be forced to conclude that can’t be what Dobson is doing. [Read more...]

ERLC-Watch-Watch: The Watchdog blog against watchdog blogs that might keep Southern Baptist leaders accountable

ERLCWatchdog

One way to avoid the kind of scandal that forced Richard Land out of the Southern Baptist ERLC would be for Southern Baptist leaders, going forward, to not spout racist garbage on the radio and not commit serial plagiarism. But Samuel James suggests another approach: suppressing all dissent and smothering public accountability under a fluffy pillow of sanctimonious blather. [Read more...]

A closed circle of squares: Hipster costumes can’t make exclusion cool

Skinny jeans, Red Wing shoes, and Brooklyn beards still wouldn't make these guys "cool."

The uncoolness of Q Ideas, I think, stems from its desire to attain insider status — its need for permission and approval and influence. Insider status always depends on a willingness to accept the rules of the insiders, which means a willingness to keep the outsiders outside. And excluding outsiders is the definition of uncool. Excluding outsiders precludes the possibility of coolness. [Read more...]

Inerrancy, white evangelicals, ‘and the sin of racism’

The Oracle at Delphi was inerrant. Fat lot of good that did anybody.

Emma Green’s “Southern Baptists and the Sin of Racism” provides us a sharp image of the SBC’s long, ugly struggle with what its leaders now at last admit is a sin. But I think it’s a mirror image — accurate, but backwards. I don’t think their doctrine of “inerrancy” and their individualistic spirituality contributed to the sin of racism, I think those things are a product of it. [Read more...]

What’s the deal with this ‘Sunday WTF’?

BIBLE

I’m sure that some people will perceive my focus on these passages as an “attack” on the Bible. But I’m not attacking it, I’m just quoting it — accurately. Those who wish to “defend” the Bible from being quoted accurately need to recognize that it cannot be the Bible itself that they’re defending. [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X