Of religion...

Recently I have been dealing with an extended relative of mine that has converted into a religious fanatic over the last few years. While I am generally accepting of everyone's views, I usually draw the line of an unparalleled zealotry that it starts to hinder and discriminate other persons. While I do call people out on this as I do with bigotry and a stifling political viewpoint that is full of proven fallacies, I tend to be less receiving of such as I grew up around such a centralized train of thought.


When I say religious zealot in reference to my relative, let me put into perspective that I try not to over-exaggerate on such descriptions. Prior to my most recent comments I made on her Facebook wall statuses, she was under the impression (and from what I gather, is still under the impression) that Barack Obama was Muslim and how it was destroying America since he did not have Christian brainwashing doctrine at heart and was promoting the Muslim agenda by converting the United States into an Islamic nation and practicing the religious duty of Jihad in our military.

She has commented on many other things that would lead me to believe that she would be the best or friends or worst of enemies with Fred Phelps. This comment with Obama made me recall that our government should be devoid of religious precedent, but those of us living in our nation should be free to practice any religion we so choose.

After going through the multiple points of why Obama's religious outlook is not pertinent to his overall ability to lead our nation, as well as the political implications and ramifications of such, as well as going through the other conspiracy theories that she most likely believed (still believes?) in.

Examples of these theories were when Obama was elected, him taking our guns, Obamacare forming death panels (though now with the Arizona laws being passed and John Kasich as well as Scott Walker, this has seemed to have debunked that urban legend quite thoroughly), and the whole official birth certificate debacle (our president is black-- get over it).

When I destroyed her Tea-Party reasoning with these facts, I understand that she was fuming weeks afterwards and she felt it was a personal affront to her beliefs. Granted, while I could agree that I was arguing against such beliefs and that I was a little biased towards my favor in the assessment, I left my comments open to interpretation and corrected any inaccuracies from either side in our rather heated debate.

Her most recent post was in regards to a 20-second ad for a golf tournament on NBC, where in the background the Pledge of Allegiance was being said by what sounded like a body of students. What I assumed was chalked up to time constraints of editing the audio, or simply an oversight from the person editing the audio, the phrase "Under God" was omitted. Even if was omitted deliberately, NBC took credit for it and apologized for the omission. However, that didn't stop the point of some of the more patriotic people on Facebook wanting to "flood" people's web statuses with the full pledge, with a strong emphasis on God. The full description is below:

Everybody, let's do this (and NBC, this one's for you!). We should flood Facebook with this."I pledge allegiance to the flag of ...the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands: one nation under G O D, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all". RE-POST IF YOU THINK GOD, OUR COUNTRY, OUR FLAG, AND OUR MILITARY DESERVE RESPECT!!!!. Let's just see how many AMERICANS will RE-POST!!

While I do believe the moral guide and belief of God did found our country, I do feel the way this was addressed was rather arrogant, even in the humble opinion the post was trying to present. While I do support our God, country, military, and flag, equating all of those to being American is a gross misrepresentation. We, as Americans, have varying levels of both respect and reverence to all the items listed above, and some hold their positions higher than others, and in a different hierarchy of respect and adulation. Some people believe God before country. Others believe that while God may ultimately save them, our soldiers will save them first.

Keeping this in mind as well as the burned bridge that I mentioned earlier regarding my family member, as well as her new-found religious views, I kept mentioning about how mundane a 20-second TV spot was in regards to this, and subtly giving scenarios and definitions that matched Matthew 5:38-42 and 7:1-12 as I thought it appropriate when pointing out the fact that not everyone worships the same God, let alone God himself (or herself/themselves, depending on what worldly stance you take on it).

After a response from her asking me to stop posting my opinion on her Wall (ergo, defeating the whole point of Facebook statuses), rather than let tensions escalate, I decided to end the conversation by detailing the previous points mentioned (making it rather obvious, stopping just short of actually listing the passages) and then stating that my response would be the last post. I felt that was a good point to end it.

She didn't get the references.

Nor did she want to give up the conversation, inviting me back to elaborate. While I was pretty succinct in the matter of not replying to honor her wishes, I am debating whether I should just send her a message, and how direct I should be in that message. My previous conversations with her up to this point have been fairly civil; not at all like some of the discussions I have with my other friends on Facebook. Yet, no matter how civil I am regarding this, when it starts interfering with her beliefs (which I should also mention that she found only a few years ago), there is no way to avoid pissing her off.

While I respect her recent values, moral standing and higher beliefs, I do feel there is no way of actually knocking some common sense into her that once defined her entire existence, giving herself completely over to her convictions and her faith in other people. That being stated, I face the moral dilemma that this world is a cold place for such people, and wonder if this fact should be given light by someone she can confide in --and possibly forgive-- or a total stranger that has no need for her compassion, nor will offer any, and will not ply any restraint.