Amazon.com Widgets

« Links With Your Coffee 2007-03-26 | Main | Happy Birthday Richard »

Purity Ball

Bill Maher has some fun with Christian Purity Balls. I must agree, they're pretty damn creepy.




Quicktime Video 3.6 MB : 00:02:39
Quicktime 7 required
This file is available for download here.
Ctrl-Click and 'Download Linked File' (Mac)
or Rt-Click and 'Save Target As' (PC) the link above.

Real Time w/Bill Maher
More Bill Maher video here


 

Comments

Creepy indeed. I cant help, I KNOW Maher is an asshole, but I find him hilarious.

the really ironic thing is that Jesus, himself, would be disgusted by this. Jesus spoke out against the purity system of his day. Back then, women were a step below tax collectors and considered un-pure, etc. This B.S. just further propagates the very system their savior sought to denounce. Ugh...

Bill's right: this is a losing battle and I find it both admirable and stupifying that religious people are still trying these virginity pledges.

Don't something like one in twenty of us actually follow through on the virgin pledge? Even then, these girls are more likely to use the two loopholes not privy to the pussy. (Has a nice ring to it) There was even a New Rule about it...

Funnier than hell, and yeah -- insanely creepy. If you spend that much time and effort, obsessing over other people's sex life -- you're a creep...

What about boys, shouldn't they too be saved from the depravity of premarital sex.

Virgin boy on wedding night: "Why are you sucking dear? Isn't it called a blow job?"

Am I the only person that thought Christian Purity Balls were a knockoff of Ben Wa balls from reading the clip description?

I thought the same thing asdf. Exactly! LMAO!

While its no doubt that the people who do these purity balls considerthemselves christians, it is very unlikely that they are literate in christian theology or understand Christs message in any real way. These are ignorant people. I dont believe in god, but I know these people are not truely christian, at least not the way Jesus would have intended it.

Jesus led a purely virgin life so I actually don't see a contradiction when a Christian wants to emulate such lifestyle. I may find it completely ridiculous, but theologically sound. Why do you think Catholic priests are coerced by the Church to lead celebate lifestyles?

beowulfkg:

What about boys, shouldn't they too be saved

Oh, they've got their own, except they're called "Integrity Balls." Jill wrote about them awhile ago:

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2007/01/18/purity-or-integrity/

WOW. Just wow. Interesting article Susan. And here I thought that all boys had were just balls. This obsession with sexuality to the point of sheer madness is one of the very problems I have with religious dogma.

It shouldn't really suprise us to see women getting the shorter end of the stick when it comes to the views of these monotheistic, patriarchal religions:

"The social and legal position of an Israelite wife was inferior to the position a wife occupied in the great countries round about... all the texts show that Israelites wanted mainly sons to perpetuate the family line and fortune, and to preserve the ancestral inheritance... A husband could divorce his wife; women on the other hand could not ask for divorce... the wife called her husband Ba'al or master; she also called him adon or lord; she addressed him, in fact, as a slave addressed his master or subject, his king. The Decalogue includes a man's wife among his possessions... all her life she remains a minor. The wife does not inherit from her husband, nor daughters from their father, except when there is no male heir. A vow made by a girl or married woman needs, to be valid, the consent of the father or husband and if this consent is withheld, the vow is null and void. A man had a right to sell his daughter. Women were excluded from the succession."

-Roland de Vaux, archaeologist and priest

At one point in history, women had the higher ground. The archeological record not only shows women as the primary sex depicted for much of the first polytheistic religions (or even first known statuettes for that matter), but were also Temple Priestesses who served as Temple Prostitutes. Only later, with the arrival of dominator/patriarchal/monothestic religions did the views of fertility, love, union, rejuvination, motherhood, etc. become symbols of offensiveness and impurity. Women used to openly use contraceptive devices and herbal abortants. Women owned property, governed, and determined marriages. They lost their status as soon as they fell pray to beliefs of these dominator religions.

I must admit that personally I find the whole concept of Purity Balls a bit goofy. It's strange that in so many societies women are either A: pure, fragile beings that must be protected; or B: randy, seductive temptresses. A woman is either a whore or an angel.

That said - I was surprised by Maher's reaction to the idea of a father passing a daughter on to a husband. Maher seemed shocked by this, and yet it common in our society. Look at our wedding ceremonies where a father walks the daughter down the aisle to give her away to her future husband.

Yes it's archaic, but it's not shocking. Nor is it creepy.

Note: this is a bit of a tengent, but interesting none the less...

Jesus led a purely virgin life...

Actually this idea isn't as ironclad as you might think. There are actually many apocryphal texts that suggest Jesus was married. The "DaVinci Code" references a couple of these texts to accelerate the story's fictional plot.

Naturally, there is much debate in the interpretation of these texts. Which is understandable... interpreting ancient texts is a bit tricky.

For example: Probably the one that gets people the most excited is where Mary Magdalene and Jesus are spoken of as companions & he 'kissed' her. This seems pretty straight forward, but there are a couple holes:

  1. In the original document. the word "kissed" is missing. The paper was destroyed, and liguistic experts read through the document and figured out which word would physically fit into the gap (and of course fit the context). The word they came up with was "kissed". It sounds a bit crunked up, but from what I have read, this method of filling in the gaps is pretty common among ancient literature.

  2. It was common back in the day for teachers/guru to kiss. It was a form of respect/affection... like kissing your Aunt Murtle.

So the point is a lot of debate behind so many religious "facts". Jesus as a virgin is a good example of this. I wonder why more religious individuals don't research these topics. It would probably lead to much less finatical arguing and much more discussion.

Eileen, thanks for your input!

Yes, I think what you are referring to (and correct me if I'm wrong) are the New Testament era apocryphal texts that were retrieved after the discovery of the Nag Hammadi library in 1945 in Egypt.

The jar where the texts (Gnostic Gospels) had been preserved included numerous papyrus codices such as: Gospel of Judas, Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Mary, and the Gospel of Truth. One that sparked much attention in the summer of last year was the Gospel of Judas (reconstructed '06). The Gospel of Mary is sometimes considered to be the Gospel of Mary Magdalene though the text itself simply refers to her as Mary and so is a matter of controversy as well.

The reason I don't go PC on the issue of what Jesus did or didn't do is that many of these texts contradict each other on many levels. So it is accurate to say, for instance, that Jesus was both hung on a tree (Acts 5:30) and crucified (Luke 23:33)—and this is within the accepted texts that made it to the New Testament!

Much of the other texts I've mentioned were discarded as being ‘heresy’ (see Against the Heresies by Irenaeus of Lyon). Christians, and more broadly Christianity, reject for the most part these "heresy" texts and do not follow the teachings found in them. When we critique Christian protocol, it is done by mapping their actions in accordance to the texts they follow. The texts of the New Testament were approved by the Council of Trent (Tridentine Council) in 1546. They actually voted what books would and wouldn't make it to the Bible!

So if you want to include these texts then you would be technically on firm ground to say that many Christians are rejecting much of the teachings of their belief system. However, because of the nature in how religions evolve, these texts did not make to the Bible and so their religion does not mingle with such ideas found in the Gnostic Gospels.

M.Eileen, to add on to your point, the word for "virgin" and "young" is very similar, used interchangeably and even mistranslated in ancient texts.

I pointed out to Christians a few times that if Jesus was the messiah, he has to be born with the blood of David, not God's. That rules out any divine bloodline or the immaculate conception for that matter.

And I find it odd that he did not marry.

It is expected of him to have children to extend the family line and to preserve ancestral ties.

And I seriously do not expect God to want Jesus to stay virgin, so that the line of David ends with Jesus.

That's why I find it odd why Christians is so hung up on the words virgin or abstinence.

I see no tangible benefits from this other than as a personal choice.

It's not worth crowing about and certainly not worth preaching about.

again, even if jesus did lead a virgin life, to emulate that part of his life is completely missing the freaking point. For a great reference, check out Marcus Borg's "Meeting Jesus again for the first time." Great book. Much more sensible look at the life of jesus..

It's not missing the point, it's actually the point. The problem at hand is much more shallow than you make it out to be. Most of these fundamentalist believers follow the examples as they appear in scripture. The atrocious outcomes we see aren't because evil people do evil things and just happen to give religion a bad name, but actually guillible--otherwise seemingly well-intentioned people--doing horrible things.

pass the tissue, this girl will have a daddy issue

Navigation

Support this site

Google Ads


Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson

Contact


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives