Mailvox: not that Derbyshire isn’t right

in2n writes:

Kind of like VDs comments, come to think of it, a guy who considers it no conflict of his Christian lifestyle to write F— You on public posts, advocates the indiscriminant killing of FBI agents, and thinks taking explosives to public schools works in society’s best interest.

There is no conflict between Christian faith and writing the word “fuck” or using it in conversation with friends inclined to a more vulgar persuasion. I find it tremendously ironic that many societally-conscious Christians are far more squeamish about using common words for sexual intercourse, defecation, urination and genitalia than they are about the only things they are commanded not to do, namely, taking the Lord’s name in vain and swearing oaths. I don’t recall where it is written that in order to be saved, one “must believe with his heart and confess with his tongue that Jesus Christ is Lord… and don’t you dare say fuck, either.”

True, Paul writes in Colossians 3:7-9: “You used to walk in these ways, in the life you once lived. But now you must rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips. Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices.”

In other words, using “filthy language” is right up there with getting mad and telling white lies. Is it better not to? Yes, of course, but I’ll consider taking people like in2n seriously when they get as righteously wroth with a little old lady saying “by Heaven” or a wife getting bent out of shape because her husband forgot to take out the trash as they do about someone cracking a vulgar Hitchhiker’s joke.

In general, I do tend to try avoiding the use of such language, not only in person but on this blog since there are many regular readers who find it distasteful. However, this is simply common courtesy, not an endorsement of the moral position of the religious language police.

For what is today condemned as verbal filth by nothing more than social mores will, over time, often eventually be embraced by them. Languages are dynamic, and I daresay that the word “fuck” is already far more acceptable in today’s society than “nigger” or even “faggot”. Would in2n assert that every self-professed Christian who ever used the racial epithet in the eighteenth and nineteenth century is now burning in Hell? It’s certainly possible, considering that no one actually knows precisely on what God’s judgment is based, but I don’t think that’s the reasonable interpretation based on God’s Word. It certainly doesn’t seem to have anything to do with the fruits on which we are told to pass our own judgment.

Moreover, I did not advocate the indiscriminant killing of anyone, I merely hoped for justice in the agents’ murder of an innocent young girl, justice which the corrupt police and courts have utterly denied. I still sincerely hope that God will provide that which Man has not. I have yet to see anyone attempt to prove that destroying the public schools would not be in society’s best interest; does in2n seriously believe that Jesus Christ would support the anti-christian secularist brainwashing that currently takes place there?

I also seem to recall that Jesus Christ’s only stated opinion on a public building was that it would be demolished. If one follows the omnniderigents’ practice of extrapolating general rules from solitary Biblical actions, one must conclude that the destruction of the public school buildings is not merely desirable, but a veritable Scriptural mandate.

UPDATE – Digital Cowboy happens to have made this timely post yesterday: For those that didn’t pick up on the title of this post, it’s a quote from Tombstone. For those that did pick it up, did you know that in the time that movie was set, it was an expletive? In the mid and late 1800’s, the word “kidding” was used the way “f***king” is used today. It makes sense if you think a bit about it.

I can’t help but relish the notion of in2n unleashing the full fury of the Pharasaical pulpit the next time someone says that they’re “just kidding” in shis presence.

UPDATE: I’ve always been curious about the notion of so-called profanity. If it is derived from the concept of a sacriligious use of that which is holy, then the logical assumption is that those offended by “profane” terms related to the excretionary function actually worship – or at least hold holy – the stank.