Play Gods

Michelangelo's Creation of AdamWho are we to play God?!

I didn’t know if I was being asked the proverbial rhetorical question, or if I’d just received a definitive declaration. But that’s what a friend of mine wrote, to my amusement, in response to one of my recent posts.

It really didn’t matter to me whether it was a question, a declaration, or both. My response would have been the same… because it centered on another senseless argument that we argue senselessly about: Race; Our Religious Preferences and Political Leanings; Our Sexual Preference & Orientation; Whether we’re Pro-Life or Pro-Choice; Who’s right and who’s wrong? Take your pick or add your own. But, for reasons unknown, my friend decided to remove the comment before I could respond to it. Which leads me to believe my point was missed.

Well, I’m responding now.

Who are we to play God? The definitive answer is in the question. We would be play God’s. And I’m too old to play pretend!

I guess this means I agree with you!  🙂

Advertisements

About xmatman

... just a 50 something year old, married but happy father of five trying to keep a low tech profile in a high tech world.

Posted on June 26, 2011, in Church, Ethics, Opinion, Politics, Religion and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 6 Comments.

  1. Politically, “who are we to play God?” is an answer to a lot of the trash that the Republicans are try to throw around. Ironically, the traditional Conservative position had been exactly that: Government has no place in our private lives, no right to dictate morals, no business in our homes or personal lives.

    • Greetings Stephen,

      Thanks for stopping by and sharing your thoughts! 😀

      Ironically, I’ve never associated the right to privacy, religious freedom, etc., with Conservatism. They could never fit in such a small box. 😉

      BJ -aka- xmatman

  2. Hi Bobby,

    I’m not sure how my comment got lost on your post, but I’ll post it here again. (And, no, you didn’t step on my toes!) 🙂 It saddens me that many people in this world are so ignorant, and I agree with you that this question centers on other senseless arguments such as you’ve listed.

    Who are we to play God? In respose to NY’s recent legislative rule, if two people love each other and want to marry… let them. Same sex, opposite sex, who cares…good job NY.

    Best greetings,
    Laura

    • Hi Laura,

      My apologies to you, also, for not responding sooner.

      Actually, it was I who wondered if the post was removed because you thought you had stepped on my toes! LOL! Glad that’s not the case.

      I might add that short of stepping on my toes, it’s pretty hard to step on my toes!

      My post (ROFL RT @BorowitzReport: It might be a little early to ask this, but where does New York stand on gay divorce?) was meant to garner the same chuckle it had elicited from me. After all, with the victory comes, too, the spoils!

      I ceased being saddened by ignorance (the world’s and my own) when I realized it is a choice!

      Best in turn,
      Bobby

  3. Hi BJ,

    In my experience, that phrase is usually wielded as a declaration that you’ve stepped on some toes! I don’t know which comment the responder was responding to, but I suspect that it had to do with something that he or she perceives as being beyond the grasp of “Man” to question. That’s usually a non-starter for me because I think that everything should be questioned.

    Ray

    • Hi Ray,

      Wish I’d been able to reply to your comment sooner. 😦

      As usual, there are few (if any) holes in your argument. True; in my experience, this phrase is usually an indication that a toe has been stepped on; a sensibility offended; an ego bruised. In others, it’s just an easy way to take the emergency exit when someone (or group) realizes the debate isn’t going their way.

      In this case, I think it would be more fitting to attribute the response to the perception that some things are beyond the right (as opposed to grasp) of “Man” to question; e.g., who deserves a particular civil liberty and who does not. For me, the answer to that question is easy: Everyone or no one! But then, I speak as one who’s been on the “does not” side of that question.

      Suffice it say I, too, hold fast to the belief that it is Man’s (or at least my) quintessential nature to question everything. I do so believing the answer(s) will allow me to grasp an understanding of a thing, person, place, principle, idea, etc. Of course there are those who have the ability to answer without questioning and provide solutions without identifying the problems. That’s usually a non-starter for me! 😉

      One of the most memorable stanzas I’ve ever read is this one:

      In modern thought (if not in fact)
      Nothing is that doesn’t act.
      So that is reckoned wisdom which,
      Describes the scratch but not the itch.

      Always a pleasure chatting with you, my friend, because you force me to question what so far has been my greatest challenge: me! 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: