Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
MOURDOCK’S DILEMMA
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/10/mourdocks-dilemma.htmlThere is no good mother who, having given her daughters permission to go to a dance, would not revoke that permission if she were assured that they would succumb to temptations and lose their virginity there.
Pierre Bayle, Historical and Critical Dictionary, 1697.
Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/10/mourdocks-dilemma.html#ixzz2AVVIV7bF
The latest Republican spin seems to be that when Richard Mourdock, the senatorial candidate for Indiana, said that if a child is conceived by an act of rape, it is something that God intended to happen, he was bumbling his way toward a less controversial propositionthat life is precious, regardless of the circumstances, as Rob Jesmer, the executive director of the Republican National Senatorial Committee, told the New York Times. Jesmer added that Mourdock didnt say it in a particularly articulate way. Mourdock may be both idiotic and vile, but I dont think he was especially inarticulate, and I dont think he was merely alleging that life is cherishable, whatever the conditions of its conception. He was more pointed: he said that life is a gift from God, and that even if life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen. Obviously, it all depends on the meaning of it. For an air-brusher like Rob Jesmer, it means life, and not rape. But the force of Mourdocks claim, the shock of its haplessly radical transparency, lies in the fact that by it he clearly meant both the rape and the life that might come from it. Since God intends life to happen, God also intends all the various ways, good and horrible, in which life comes about. That is the commonsensical reading of Mourdocks words.
This may be unpalatable, and for many non-believers it is a profound reason not to believe in the traditional God of monotheism, but there is nothing theologically peculiar about Mourdocks position. (He is an evangelical Christian.) First of all, he was doing nothing more than offering the familiar weak defense of God in relation to evil and pain, the silver-lining defense: out of the unavoidable abundance of great suffering and hardship that exists in the world, God produces redemptive teaching. New life is born, or we learn something important about ourselves, or we come anew to God or Christ, etc., etc. As Bart Ehrman pointed out in his book Gods Problem, the Bible is full of such stories. When Joseph confronts his murderous brothers in Egypt, he lectures them about how (in Ehrmans words) even though you intended to do harm to me, God intended it for good, in order to preserve a numerous people, as he is doing today. The Job story ends in the suffering faithful man restored to happiness and prosperity, as reward for his hardship. And, of course, the story of Jesuss sacrifice and resurrection is the ultimate version of the redemption idea: God suffers with us on the cross, dies, and is born to new life in heaven, a place where God wipes away all tears from our faces, and where there is no more death or sorrow. In her essay on affliction, the philosopher Simone Weil essentially argued that suffering is good for us; that we are like apprentices who must learn on the job, by making painful mistakes.
Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/10/mourdocks-dilemma.html#ixzz2AVVQBk9p
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 1152 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (6)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
MOURDOCK’S DILEMMA (Original Post)
xchrom
Oct 2012
OP
randr
(12,413 posts)1. Excellent article
jsr
(7,712 posts)2. Recommended
snagglepuss
(12,704 posts)3. to read later