Related articles and links |  1 of 5

Last week, ChristianityToday.com Weblog asked readers to best chronicle everything offensive about Neil Steinberg's Chicago Sun-Times column, "What's with Sex and Religion?"

Though Weblog received many responses, most respondents found the contest itself more reprehensible than Steinberg's column. Faced with so many delightful entries (OK, I admit it: it's a shameless attempt to lure our offended readers back to the site), ChristianityToday.com Weblog is awarding multiple accolades, both to those disagreeing with Steinberg and to those disagreeing with Weblog. Steinberg, by the way, published on Sunday a follow-up column, titled " Premarital Sex Myth Lures Clerics Off Beach."

And, for those of you offended that ChristianityToday.com Weblog is devoting all this space to Steinberg's column, don't worry. We'll get back to linking to other sites' news stories and commentaries tomorrow.

From The Persaud Family

If Steinberg is so smart, how come he misspelled "genealogy?"

From Matthew Prins

Oh dear. It is unwise to take on a task this austere: tearing apart a column about sex and religion by a man who seems to have no experience with one and … well, perhaps I shouldn't hypothesize on the other. Still, I am in awe with how utterly wrong one person can be in fewer than 600 words--so wrong that it took me more than 900 words to respond. Oh bother.

1: Any possible reading of the disagreement between Ms. Stoffer and BYU cannot "[throw] a stark light" on why "fundamentalist Christians are so obsessed with sex," because of a teeny little problem: Mormons are not fundamentalist Christians. Some Christians believe Mormonism is a subset of Christianity; some disagree. None, I hope, would call Mormonism a subset of fundamentalist Christianity. Mr. Steinberg is not making an analogy between these two groups; he's calling the two groups one and the same, so any inferences he makes between the two groups are utterly baseless. If [Surviror's] Dirk gets thrown out of a fundamentalist university because he leered too much at Colleen, then we might be able to have this conversation.

2: Perhaps part of Mr. Steinberg's problem is he just doesn't grasp the literary concept of the analogy. Surely he wouldn't have written something as silly as, "What if … Stoffer … coveted her neighbor's ox," unless he didn't understand that God wasn't just talking about oxen. That or, uh, he was trying to make Christianity out to be a religion with no relevance to current society. But we should probably give Mr. Steinberg the benefit of the doubt and assume literary ignorance. After all, he did mistakenly end that question with a period.

3. On that same paragraph: I'm no Mormon, but I've known a few in my day, and based on what they've told me, I have a suspicion that BYU would be quite unhappy if Ms. Stoffer blatantly ignored the Sabbath or had too much interest in others' material goods. Sex is just the focal point because, as [Steinberg] correctly states later, that's the story the media is looking for.

4: Logical fallacy approaching: Mr. Steinberg says religious leaders should be focusing on God. Mr. Steinberg says the Bible – the word of God—talks about sex. Mr. Steinberg says religious leaders should not be talking about sex. Huh?

5: Mr. Steinberg writes, "I want to be clear—I'm genuinely curious. I'm not broaching this touchy subject as a sideways slap on the religious, particularly with all those Southern Baptists in town, saving souls. I like religious people. I admire their ability to focus on ritual and order in a chaotic world. At least they care about something." Mr. Steinberg must be unaware just how condescending that statement is. (Alternate theory: Mr. Steinberg is quite aware of how condescending that statement is; ergo, the statement is included in his column.) If he is confused why the statement is so offensive, perhaps a change of venue is required. "I want to be clear—I'm genuinely curious. I'm not broaching the touchy subject of race as a sideways slap on blacks and Hispanics, particularly with those NAACP members parading today on Michigan Avenue. I like blacks. I admire their ability to play basketball and football in a world where so many children are unathletic and obese. At least they care about something."

next page... |  1 of 5

July (Web-only) 2000, Vol. 44