The Iditarod started over the weekend, and I learned that this year, they’ll be testing participants along the route for drugs. Now, I’m not in favor of using drugs, but I do wonder what benefit drugs could give mushers? It seems like testing pool players for drugs, you know? This is obviously borne out of my ignorance of both drugs and dog sled racing.
But it also reminded me of a funny conversation we had with my MIL a month or so ago. Actually, I could start a whole series of bizarre MIL conversations, but I’m not entirely sure that my inlaws aren’t reading my blog, so I think I’ll refrain, lol.
But anyway. We were talking about Mark MacGwire, shortly after his admission to taking drugs and semi-owning up to it. She didn’t see it as a huge deal. So he used steriods, so what, she said. It didn’t put him at an advantage over anyone else, because everyone else had the same opportunity to use drugs as he did. Yes. Because everyone else could have chosen to ruin their health and do something illegal, but they chose not to, what he did was OK. She went so far as to say that, not only should he not be punished, but that his decisions were morally ok.
That really shocked me.
I asked her, so if my oldest niece got caught cheating on a test, then would she be OK with that, since everyone else in her school had the same opportunity to cheat? She didn’t think it was the same at all.
But, honestly, I’m not sure why that shocked me that much. I’m finding that I’m surrounded by more and more moral relativism, particularly among Christians, and particularly among mainline Christians. (Mainline = Presby, Methodist, Episcopal, Church of Christ, Lutheran, mainline Baptist.) I happened across this article a little while back. Scroll down halfway, to where it says:
Beliefs of mainline Christian clergy:
A survey of mostly mainline Protestant clergy by a prominent American sociologist showed that many doubt Jesus’ physical resurrection. 8 Percentage of doubters were found to be:
|American Lutherans: 13%|
|American Baptist: 33%|
51% – over half, and that was in 1998 – of Methodist ministers (people who had been through Seminary) did not believe that Christ was resurrected.
What, then, would be the point? I’m not being a smartmouth here, I’m seriously asking. What would be the point? If you don’t believe in the resurrection, why bother being a Christian minister? Or a Christian at all? And how could churches allow ministers who do not believe in the resurrection to preach to their congregations? Does it not come up during the interview process?? (yes, nonCatholic churches interview their ministers and are allowed to vote up or down, they’re not just simply assigned.)
But, given this, is it any wonder that we hear moral relativism preached in these churches? That these churches seem to be lacking in the Holy Spirit? That I feel like I need to shower when I get home (hence why I avoid going to church with my IL’s whenever possible)?