Good Friday & Fundogelical Morality

At first glance, this may seem like an odd Good Friday post, but, since I alluded to Easter during the Christmas season, I might as well go the other direction today. This creative billboard – posted by a church in New Zealand – twisted some believers’ shorts in knots last Christmas:

New Zealand’s advertising authorities determined that the billboard was “controversial, but not obscene.” They also said that, “because there were no naked people or sexual acts depicted on the billboard, while children could see it, they likely wouldn’t understand it.” That’s probably true for very young children, but I suspect that most children in New Zealand are not as naive as the adults around them believe they are wish they were.

I’m glad the New Zealand authorities decided to allow the billboard to be displayed. For one thing, their position that controversy does not equal obscenity is correct. For another, I think the billboard is hilarious. It shows personality and humor that are sadly lacking from many of the atheist billboards and slogans that have been posted in recent years. Of course, co-believers have more leeway in publicly poking fun at their beliefs than nonbelievers do. When co-believers do it, they can be chastised by fellow believers as shallow, immature, mistaken, or something similar; when nonbelievers do it, we invariably are castigated as arrogant and mean. I think I would get along pretty well with the people who conceived and posted that billboard; they may be believers, but they’re obviously willing to think outside of the orthodox Christian box.

One believer, displaying what many atheist bloggers have come to perceive as a typical fundogelical command of the English language, complained that it was “inappropriate for a child’s perceptive of Christmas to be distorted in a perverse and sexual manner.” A child’s “perceptive” of Christmas? The word should be either “perception” or “perspective.” What it should not be, is “perceptive.” Good Friday Grief! Is it too much to ask that fundogelicals purchase a second book – a dictionary – with which to adorn their homes? Surely there’s room for another book next to their Bibles.

As I continued reading, I was not at all surprised, and I’m sure you won’t be either, when I learned that some New Zealand fundogelicals abide by the same moral code as their American counterparts who vandalize and steal atheist holiday displays:

The billboard was put up in December, was vandalized, stolen and then put up again before being stolen yet again. The two billboards were up for a total of less than 12 hours before they were both taken…. Another two versions of the ad were later put up and also vandalized before being stolen….

Apparently, theft and vandalism are acceptable ways to defend the honor of a less-than-honorable deity. After all, we’re talking about a deity who allegedly – what, raped? seduced? is it a distinction without a difference in this case? – a teenager. We’re talking about a deity who allegedly demanded and accepted the death of an innocent man rather exacting punishment from those who had actually offended him. If such behaviors are typical of the moral standards to which fundogelicals aspire (they are, after all, exhorted to be like their god in thought, word and deed), nonbelievers should not be surprised when such believers pillage and steal. When they do such things, they’re following the example set by a god who stole a young woman’s virginity, and, years later, her son’s life. Compared to those acts, believers’ vandalism and theft of billboards is laughably childish, incompetent and impotent. As billboard-Joseph learned, their god is a hard (and disgustingly immoral) act to follow. That’s a good thing for the rest of us.

– the chaplain

Advertisement