Calling y Gods will calls x Gods will, because y depends on x. - Edit 4
Before modification by Joel at 26/10/2012 12:22:22 AM
Senate candidate Richard Mourdock (R-IN:) Declares pregnancy from rape "Gods will" and thus sacrosanct, as if all human acts (e.g. 911) are Gods will.
From Wikipedia:
Senator John Cornyn, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said "Richard and I, along with millions of Americans -- including even Joe Donnelly -- believe that life is a gift from God. To try and construe his words as anything other than a restatement of that belief is irresponsible and ridiculous."
Quite. It says a lot about the crazy atmosphere in American politics that so many Republicans are running to denounce Mourdock's comments and saying they "disagree" with them, instead of being sensible and taking a good look at what the man actually said.
Sure, God can and frequently does make lemonade out of our lemons, but calling the lemonade "Gods will" rather than God mitigating one of our many horrible acts is absurd. If the Marshall Plan was Gods will it was only in the sense of repairing damage MAN inflicted on wartime Europe. Further, it only took that form because MAN chose to participate; had we not, repairing the damage either 1) would have happened without/despite us or 2) was not Gods will.
Yet Mourdock cannot use even that weak rationale unless he believes bearing a rapists child somehow makes the rape better. If he does, I would love to hear him say it if only because the fallout would be fun to watch.
Cornyn, like Romney, is trying to cover the partys ass after one of its many asinine Senate candidates made yet another indefensible and logically hopeless comment. Were I not so familiar with his views since his days as TX Atty. General (and my moms ultimate boss) I would pity the SOB: He is running the GOP Senate campaign and, despite defending half as many seats as Dems, will probably net a LOSS. Scott Brown looks headed for defeat in no small part because Elizabeth Warren keeps saying, "sure, Brown is moderate enough, but do you really want a Todd Akin running the US Senate?" That question is increasingly relevant.
Cornyn is scrambling to prevent Mourdock and Akin doing to GOP hopes for a Senate majority what Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell did two years ago. It could not happen to a more deserving guy, but that is all his comments reflect.
If you believe that God is involved in the conception of a very much wanted child in a loving family, I don't see how you can claim he is not involved in the conception of an unwanted child conceived through rape - a fetus is a fetus. "As if all human acts are God's will", you say - how exactly is conception a "human act"? The rape is a human act, and obviously most believers don't think that God intends for such horrible things to happen - but then Mourdock never said so. He was talking about the conception.
God is, or at least was, involved to the extent He made conception possible through sex, but He accomplished that long ago. The determing factor in pregnancy from rape NOW is rape, a wholly human act never Gods will. God is not the author of sin, and I doubt claiming He is would help Mourdocks campaign much either.
Do I have a huge problem with Mourdock's stances on reproductive rights and abortion - you bet I do. But I do not see how his statement is offensive, and I find the hysteria about it rather bizarre - and sad.
His statement is offensive because of its determinism and Dominionism: By making every outcome (even negative ones) of every human act "Gods will" he simultaneously makes God responsible for every negative human act and absolves us of all responsibility for them. The same thing is wrong with that was wrong with James Watts declaration "Gods willed" America take Mideast oil by force, on the grounds He 1) put the oil there and 2) gave us the means to take it. It is the same thing that was wrong with Manifest Destiny: The POWER to do anything (however horrible) manifestly demonstrates the divine RIGHT, even DUTY, to do it.
God gave us free will, because only free beings could choose to love and serve Him; either choice is impossible if there is no choice at all. That does not mean every choice we make, from the Fall to the present, is Gods will. Claiming it does impugns God, diminishes man and excuses, even JUSTIFIES, any and all atrocities on the grounds they could not have happened unless "Gods will." THAT is what makes Mourdocks attitude not just offensive, but perilous in a US Senator.