I looked at comments and emails for today, after coming home, and discovered a comment from a very angry person. The post that got the person so angry was written in July, and I almost deleted the comment without looking at it, assuming it was spam. But....lo and behold.....my opinion that Christian churches are too liberal with their trust of good conformists and other con artists, even those of the criminal element, expressed almost eight months ago, garnered an angry reaction today. The commenter was not terribly specific about the anger and enragement point, other than offering general criticism of my perspective on Christianity. The post deals with a Christian church employee with a criminal record, whose criminal record was not checked upon hire, and who took the opportunity to murder another church employee while both were in the building alone. I decried the lack of background checks across the Christian board, wishing that Christians would stop making all kinds of crime opportune within their ranks. I also hinted at the type of soul who might be attracted by such lenient practices. I also think that I am well in the right to question such things, and to protect my family. Here's the comment: "Juli you have some kind of abhorrent, twisted view of Christianity. Your blog is absolute trash. Unfortunately, I stumbled upon it and I am appalled. You are abusing free speech. This could have happened anywhere and you know it. How intolerant you are of Christianity. Hypocrite."
If you find my view of Christianity abhorrent, so be it. I will not be the one to get murdered or raped because I was inside of a church by myself with a Christian. Writing about these people, making others aware of certain things.....such as profiles on national sex offender registries.......and guilty pleas in court to crimes that put others on sex offender registries, just not Catholic Bishops, (see Bishop Robert Finn) is not an abuse of free speech. If it was, sex offender registries would not exist.
You are also incorrect about the notion that this could have happened anywhere. This could only happen in an environment where a person's past is unimportant, or where background checks are not done on employees. The notion that "Jesus saves", and that a criminal no longer has criminal tendencies is in error, especially in cases of sex offenders. There is no "initiation process" involved in becoming a Protestant Christian, and as a result, Goddess only knows who and what is running amuck within their churches. You're darned tootin' I'm "intolerant" of Christian churches; everyone should be!
Here's another reason I think Christians are rather stupid about persons with criminal pasts: last year, a local church was asked to help a friend of mine who is homeless. She is a woman, and has no criminal record. For whatever reason, this particular local Baptist church turned her away. But then, they actually helped a violent sex offender pay his legal fines! They expose their children to him, and by enabling him, they give him the chance to re-offend and maintain the level of danger he poses to the rest of his community. It would be nice if they would use common sense about who they decide to help and who they turn away, but they don't. Both of these people were from other areas; the church simply chooses to help better conformists who are good at saying the stuff they want to hear. Between driving down property values to exposing unsuspecting victims to serious danger, I do not think I can find a reason to respect many Christian churches today. I know that does not describe all Christian churches, but it describes too many.
If you find my view of Christianity abhorrent, so be it. I will not be the one to get murdered or raped because I was inside of a church by myself with a Christian. Writing about these people, making others aware of certain things.....such as profiles on national sex offender registries.......and guilty pleas in court to crimes that put others on sex offender registries, just not Catholic Bishops, (see Bishop Robert Finn) is not an abuse of free speech. If it was, sex offender registries would not exist.
You are also incorrect about the notion that this could have happened anywhere. This could only happen in an environment where a person's past is unimportant, or where background checks are not done on employees. The notion that "Jesus saves", and that a criminal no longer has criminal tendencies is in error, especially in cases of sex offenders. There is no "initiation process" involved in becoming a Protestant Christian, and as a result, Goddess only knows who and what is running amuck within their churches. You're darned tootin' I'm "intolerant" of Christian churches; everyone should be!
Here's another reason I think Christians are rather stupid about persons with criminal pasts: last year, a local church was asked to help a friend of mine who is homeless. She is a woman, and has no criminal record. For whatever reason, this particular local Baptist church turned her away. But then, they actually helped a violent sex offender pay his legal fines! They expose their children to him, and by enabling him, they give him the chance to re-offend and maintain the level of danger he poses to the rest of his community. It would be nice if they would use common sense about who they decide to help and who they turn away, but they don't. Both of these people were from other areas; the church simply chooses to help better conformists who are good at saying the stuff they want to hear. Between driving down property values to exposing unsuspecting victims to serious danger, I do not think I can find a reason to respect many Christian churches today. I know that does not describe all Christian churches, but it describes too many.
No comments:
Post a Comment