A Criticism of an Idiot Vampire Writer

Vampire genre author, Anne Rice is officially counting herself amongst the heathen again....

"Anne Rice has had a religious conversion: She's no longer a Christian.

The 68-year-old author wrote Wednesday on her Facebook page that she refuses to be "anti-gay ... anti-feminist," and "anti-artificial birth birth control."

She adds that "In the name of ... Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen."

Her publisher, Alfred A. Knopf, confirmed Thursday that the posting was by Rice.

Rice is best known for "Interview With a Vampire" and other gothic novels. Raised as a Catholic, she had rejected the church early in her life, but renewed her faith in recent years and in 2008 released the memoir "Called Out of Darkness: A Spiritual Confession."

I would imagine that her spiritual journey isn't terribly unlike those of some of the online skeptics out there that comment on this forum from time to time. Perhaps raised in a nominally Christian environment, some questions were raised at a later point in life that were not adequately addressed by the practicioners of their religion to their personal satisfaction leading to a quest to find answers from other sources. They might be questionable sources with questionable answers to their inquiries, and for all they know they sound good on the surface anyway and perhaps there is an initial feeling of "freedom" or otherwise hard-to-pin-down emotion with rejecting the belief system of their youth. The only problem is that there actually are legitimate answers out there and oftentimes that person spends the rest of their life trying to justify the decision they made as a young adult, never really seeking the "best possible answers" out there from people that are very learned on the subject they had doubts on. Ms. Rice cites three different topics that seem to bother her about Christianity so let's examine them, shall we?


#1. Christianity is "anti-gay"

This is true. According to THE foundational document of Judeo-Christian belief, homosexuality is a sin. One writer summed it up thusly. "There are loads of evidence that it is not sexual repression, but the absence of sexual repression that is dangerous. Abstinence never killed anyone, but AIDS certainly has. Male homosexuals are the least sexually repressed humans on the planet; they also happen to enjoy the shortest life expectancy."[1] I think that it is important here to differentiate between homosexual acts and the people who practice them. This link has more evidence than you could possibly ever dream of concerning the adverse affects of homosexual sex upon the human body. Don't even get me started on the psychological consequences of such a lifestyle. Lest anyone try to bring up the subject of the non-existant gay gene, even gay gene researcher Dr. Dean Hamer when asked if homosexuality was grounded purely in biological causation replied, "Absolutely not. From twin studies, we already know that half or more of the variability in sexual orientation is not inherited. Our studies try to pinpoint the genetic factors...not negate the psychosocial factors".

I wonder if Ms. Rice thinks that just not being 100% accepting of such a lifestyle choice constitutes simply being "anti-gay". We don't have the particulars so we are left to speculate. If anyone is interested, I came across an excellent defense of traditional marraige this week should anyone like to read up on it. Next up...

Christianity is "anti-feminist"

I can only shake my head and recall the words of Illinois College Professor of Sociology (retired) Alvin J. Schmidt who once said...

"In what countries have women lacked freedom?".... Where Christianity is not present, especially in the Middle East. Were it not for Christianity, Gloria Steinem would still be walking about in a veil." He continued, "Christ was never quoted as saying anything demeaning or derogatory to women. Women in Greek days could hardly leave their homes. When her husband had guests over, she was not even allowed to sit in the same room. Their status was extremely low among the Romans, where the father of the family had the power of life and death, even over his wife. "In [the Gospel of] John, Chapter Four, Jesus was asked what he was doing talking to a woman in public, as you only talked with prostitutes in public. When he taught Mary and Martha in Luke 10, that was a behavior you did not do with women. "Christianity also nullified polygamy, as Jesus made it clear a man has one wife. If a Greek man was walking about outside with a woman, that was his mistress, not his wife. Christianity also made it clear widows were to be taken care of."

Continuing along that same theme, Professor John Carlisle Kilgo of Duke University once wrote...

"The earliest Christian communities met in people's houses; they didn't have churches yet for quite some time, and throughout the New Testament, particularly Paul's letters in the Book of Acts, we find out that women owned the houses in which the early Christians met. This I think is significant because I don't think the women who owned the houses were simply providing coffee and cookies, in effect, for the Christian community. I think that this probably gave them some avenue to power... in the church."

I'm certain that we're not going to hear anything about that anytime soon from Ms. Rice. why confront FACTS when wallowing in your own bias is so completely comfortable? And lastly...

Christianity is "anti-artificial birth control"

Christians consider sex to be something that's best between a married man and woman. It's a bit more serious of a matter in that one should be careful with whom you have it. It's not something to be done whenever and wherever one wants to. The Rhythm Method is 99% effective and it doesnt cost a dime and doesnt come with bad side effects. Or as this writer puts it...

"I chose to revisit this topic after presenting an NFP (Natural Family Planning) class to a new couple last Thursday. When the wife mentioned that her doctor had warned her NFP was the Rhythm Method and a bad idea for women with irregular cycles, I couldn't roll my eyes enough. For the LOVE, how long will doctors keep saying this?? In a day & age where knowledge is pretty much accessible to everyone, how can some of the most educated people still be the most ignorant? I'm walking proof that NFP was made for irregular cycles.

It's time to ask all the right questions:
Why is the most scientifically proven method on the planet still labeled as the Rhythm Method?

Why aren't people being told about something that's 99% effective, 100% natural, and 0% damaging to their bodies & the environment?

Why aren't "green" advocates adding this to their list of favorite things?

What's behind this bizarre widespread ignorance?

Money. If anyone denies that money is the driving force behind everything in this country, sexual ignorance is the least of your problems. And NFP doesn't equal money. (There's your understatement of the year.) Imagine every woman choosing the healthy, free, simple method of NFP. She'd never have to fill another monthly pill or IUD prescription for the rest of her life. (Not to mention avoiding an increased risk for blood clots, stroke, weight gain, depression, and impaired fertility. But that's another blog altogether.) Losing millions of women to NFP would mean the serious crash and burn of pharmaceutical companies everywhere."

And let's not forget that employing the Rhythm Method requires that the participants actually know one another and thus monogamy is encouraged and it discourages anonymous, one night stands. And of course,we can't have that in this day and age now, can we?

[1]Day, Vox; The Irrational Atheist, pgs 173-174