A little harsh in that last post, huh? Yeah, well. Let me take this opportunity to sympathize with those savaged. To argue the other side.
"Devil's Advocate" I believe is the correct term.
Ahem.
In this increasingly secular world in which we live, believers may feel a bit besieged by threatening specters they wot not of. Science, and reason, and the separation of church and state, and assorted such bogeymen.
Now, it's true that none of those things threaten or even conflict with belief or with the existence of God in any way! But that's no help to you if you don't have a real confident handle on the basis of your faith, and/or you're easily intimidated. Those specters can still pack spook. We feel as though we being are made to feel irrational, insecure, isolated, shunned. Marginalized.
And so, we beleaguered believers band together, trying to find ways to keep each other's spirits up in the face of the various perceived threats. An e-mail like this hits the in-box, and even though we say "MAN. That is PRETTY WEAK STUFF!" - we can't help but feel the strong urge to forward it on. Just as a show of sympathy and support. Just to huddle around even such meager heat as these feeble flames provide, to warm our spirit's chill.
Is it so wrong to want to bolster that sense of community, to want to send out a message of encouragement, even though the message is rather embarrassingly poorly written? Is it so wrong to forward it on anyway?
YES. It is. Please go back and read the previous post again. SHEESH.
2 comments:
Well...you just plain SUCK OUT LOUD as a "Devil's advocate"!! Dang.
Let me guess...you're a P.R. guy for the, ummm, recently defeated party?? :P
Heck! I thought I did a pretty persuasive job underlining the various mindsets and contributing factors that tend to lead people to forward that crap on. What did I miss?
And yes, I am an unofficial unauthorized unpaid P.R. guy for the recently defeated Prohibition Party. Gene Amondson, I barely knew ye!
Post a Comment