This is The Nooner, a (very short) daily newsletter slash podcast that has its very own section within Dispatches from Inner Space. To see the first post, which doubles as an explainer, click here. Also a quick reminder that you can listen to the podcast version of each post wherever you listen to podcasts.
Funny how a thing like hell can be done away with.
I won't pretend to be an expert on various sectarian Christian theology, but it's for damn sure (pun intended) plenty of Christians still believe in hell, regardless of what the official creeds might be.
The only organizations that don't have power and dominance structures are the ones that don't last.
And while there are certainly plenty of complicated emotions competing in the arena that dictates parental action, love is always a major player. I don't think it's helpful to forgo the assumption that parents love their children by default. Sure, there are exceptions, but the rule remains, regardless of how awful their actions and attitudes may be.
You're referring to functional structures, whereas I was alluding to the power religions exercise when they create tiers of worth, with men being the top tier, and everyone else being less, lower, and the dominated, especially women and children.
A parent merely loving a child doesn't mean their words and actions stem from love. Threatening a child with going to hell, for example, is self evidently abusive and manipulative, rather than loving parenting.
Only Catholics had hell, and even they did away with it, I'd thought?
Funny how a thing like hell can be done away with.
I won't pretend to be an expert on various sectarian Christian theology, but it's for damn sure (pun intended) plenty of Christians still believe in hell, regardless of what the official creeds might be.
Given the power and dominance structures of all religions, you're being generous in ascribing parental motives to love.
The only organizations that don't have power and dominance structures are the ones that don't last.
And while there are certainly plenty of complicated emotions competing in the arena that dictates parental action, love is always a major player. I don't think it's helpful to forgo the assumption that parents love their children by default. Sure, there are exceptions, but the rule remains, regardless of how awful their actions and attitudes may be.
You're referring to functional structures, whereas I was alluding to the power religions exercise when they create tiers of worth, with men being the top tier, and everyone else being less, lower, and the dominated, especially women and children.
A parent merely loving a child doesn't mean their words and actions stem from love. Threatening a child with going to hell, for example, is self evidently abusive and manipulative, rather than loving parenting.