Volume 92, Issue 91
Friday, March 19, 1999
New views on old book
There are 287 days until the year 2000. Some think it sounds futuristic in the sense that the world will become more sophisticated, more educated and more tolerant. Too bad this couldn't be any further from the truth.
The spring issue of the Alumni Gazette, illustrated this with one letter to the editor.
An alumnus, an educated past member of the Western community, submitted a letter which used a religious verse to express her disapproval of not only gays and lesbians, but also the studies of their culture, their scholars and their lifestyle.
It's pathetic and saddening that in an aging world when we should keep moving forward with thought, we move backward. That someone would use the Bible to express hate against a particular lifestyle is absurd. God is supposed to love everyone despite sexual orientation.
Yet, there are those who insist God loves everybody except gays because "it says so in the Bible." The entire argument only gives people further reason to choose not to believe in God and instead, believe in nothing.
Furthermore, what educated mind takes what they read at par? As students, especially in university, we are taught to research, research, research then come up with our own theories, thoughts and beliefs.
These are mine. What kind of God is it we believe in who tells us to be conflicting in our views. That is, "Love thy neighbour, except if they're gay." If God didn't want us to appreciate the gay community, then why did he allow for their creation?
This simple argument furthers my belief that the Bible was written by a few guys who had a bit too much to drink then decided to throw some religious propaganda into a text they figured they could call holy. Little did they know their creation would cause a few big wars, be responsible for a few million deaths and create a wide range of ignorant people.
Everywhere we turn, it seems someone in a position of authority is saying something stupid. Only residents of London, for example, would re-elect a mayor who not only ran a ghost campaign, but also chooses to represent only the residents she "approves of" according to her beliefs.
This is exactly what London Mayor Dianne Haskett did when she denied a proclamation for a gay pride weekend in 1995. She claimed the proclamation was against her religious beliefs.
The mayor of any city should be dedicated not only to her work, but also to all the residents of the community of which she is a part. Period.
Despite any letter to the editor, any kind of education and any kind of authority, perhaps we should question why we put such emphasis on these things, when we let a collection of words written eons ago shape who we are and what we believe.
Copyright © The Gazette 1999