Making the Bible fit specific needs; Birds of a feather


OPINION AND COMMENTARY

Editorials and other Opinion content offer perspectives on issues important to our community and are independent from the work of our newsroom reporters.

Making the Bible fit specific needs

I enjoy how the Bible can be used to support any position one wants to argue. Using Psalm 139, local church people recently argued that the Bible is not compatible with being pro-choice and that God values ​​all life. A more recent letter points about that Psalm 139 is not about when life begins in the womb. Both ignore Psalm 137, in which some of God’s favorites lament their mistreatment by Babylonians and express in a revenge fantasy that, “Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.” The Bible contains multitudes of examples of God ordering the slaughter of men, women and children who belong to an outgroup. It is in no way “pro-life” except for certain people. My favorite example is Hosea 13, another revenge fantasy against people who worship the wrong way; “They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open.” This sounds like sanctioned religious murder of the unborn to me. For those that resent my cherry-picking to make a point, of course I am. That’s the best thing about the book; it can mean whatever you want. For those who say that Jesus changed the rules so that the OT doesn’t count, Matthew 5 disagrees; “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” And Psalm 139 is OT. Nonsense for all.

Michael Biek, State College

Birds of a feather

There was a really obnoxious guy at my college named Green, regularly referred to as “Gross Green.” One day a new student arrived, transferring from another school from which he was expelled for bad behavior, who was equally obnoxious. It didn’t take much time before they found each other and became best buds. They would basketball games together and make obscene attend gestures toward the other team’s players.

The US House now permits a designated member to announce how another member will vote. It is interesting to observe which members have been designated by other members for this purpose. Representative Gohmert is often designated by Representative Gosar (or vice versa). Representative Cawthorn for Representative Gaetz; Gaetz for Taylor-Green; Gosar for Boebert; Taylor-Green for Cawthorn; Boebert for Gohmert.

A real fellowship of the equally questionable.

Now an article in the June 14 edition of Center Daily Times tells us that Republican nominee Doug Mastriano has selected Jenna Ellis, out of the clown car of attorneys supporting Trump’s “Big Lie,” to be a major campaign advisor. What a pair! Here is another example of untruthful like-minded opportunists finding one another.

Election deniers of the world, unite! Throw off your truthfulness! You have nothing to lose but your integrity!

Richard London, State College

PA Republicans aren’t protecting ‘freedom’

The Republicans in our state legislature refuse to even consider limiting access to military-style rifles. In the name of “freedom,” these Republicans have decided to put their support behind mass murderers and domestic terrorists by making sure that it is easy to get hold of the mass murderers’ weapon of choice.

While hunting rifles and shotguns are designed for killing game, military-style rifles and handguns are designed for killing people. Military-style rifles like the AR-15 are designed for killing a lot of people. They have no other legitimate use (unless running around is sight pretending to be some kind of warrior is a legitimate use).

That is why mass murderers turn to these weapons when they want to go out and kill Black shoppers, Jewish worshipers, gay nightclub patrons or school children.

And the Republicans, who used to believe in law and order, refuse to do anything at all to limit access to AR-15s or any other assault-style rifle. They claim that they are upholding “freedoms,” but what about the freedoms of school children? The Republicans, and the gun promoters that they represent, have decided that all those kids’ lives are just the price we have to pay so that domestic terrorists and would-be mass murderers can have the firepower that they lust after.

We need sensible restrictions on assault-style rifles and handguns so that law-abiding citizens, including school children, can enjoy some measure of freedom from our American epidemic of gun violence.

John Hruschka, Bellefonte

.

Leave a Comment