Humor Me J-F 2002

We, the Genders ...

"Dad, can you test me on the Declaration of Independence? We have to memorize part of it," said my youngest son, Brad.

"Sure," I replied, delighted that his class was becoming grounded in our founding documents.

"First, I'm going to read it out loud, then I'll try it from memory," he said.

"Go for it," I replied.

"We hold these Truths to be self evident, that all people are created equal . . ."

"Try again," I interrupted. "You made a little mistake."

Brad stared at the paper in his hands, shrugged, and took another stab at it.

"We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all people are created equal . . ."

"Brad, focus on the words," I chided. "It says 'All Men are created equal.'"

"No it doesn't" he retorted, handing me the paper that the teacher had passed out.

I stared dumbfounded at the cursive script. Thomas Jefferson's immortal words had been edited to make them gender neutral.

I felt my blood pressure rising.

"Brad, why don't you go outside and play while dad pops a few heart pills and calls an ambulance?"

Later, I explained to Brad that the Declaration says what it says, despite who it may offend. Ditto the Lord's Prayer, which some liberal churches have dared to alter so that it reads "Our Creator, which art in heaven." Some of the wackier groups will no doubt go a step further and edit the passage to read, "Our Oppressive Male Deity, whom we don't believe in anyway."

There is something very scary about altering historical documents in order to make them conform to a modern day ideologies.

If my son's teacher had wanted to explain that there have been many changes since the days of the founding fathers, she could have easily done so. In fact, it would have been a great opportunity to explain that our Constitution contains a mechanism by which it can be amended, and to point out how that process was utilized to grant women the right to vote.

But misinforming students in order to make history "inclusive" is a sheer outrage. It makes a mockery of the very word "educate." It is likewise outrageous to tinker with the Bible.

Frankly, there are lots of things in the scriptures that jar my sensibilities - such as divine judgments that wiped out thousands of men, women and children. I have a very hard time understanding some of the stuff I read. But I don't feel the freedom to pull out the scissors and leave the offending passages on the cutting room floor. And I certainly can't imagine substituting, "And then the Lord thundered in his wrath, 'You guys knock that off or there will be NO ice cream after the golden calf ribbon-cutting and orgy."

Let's go back to the example of the Lord's prayer for a minute. It may not seem like a big deal to change one Biblical term, "Father," for another biblical term, "Creator," but the implications are huge. While the Bible refers to God as the Creator, Sustainer, Savior, Lord - and all kinds of other titles, these are not equal terms that you can just pluck out as though you are using a thesaurus. Those terms have different meanings in order to emphasize a specific attribute of God.

If Jesus had wanted us to pray, "Our Creator," or "Our Redeemer" or "Our Gender Non-Specific Almighty Individual in Heaven" He could have and would have said so. But He deliberately selected the word "Father."

None of us has the right to change the record of what He said. History is history. And while none of us will ever stand before Thomas Jefferson to give an account for messing with his words, we will stand before a God who has emphatically stated that His word will "endure forever." So let's not get cheeky with God.

Besides, whether you like it or not, the English language does not contain a gender-neutral term to refer to an individual. Some college texts have resorted to the jarring construct "s/he" to cram both genders into a single word, but just try that one out on a group of kindergarteners at story time.

Face it, we are stuck with gender-specific language unless you want to see "Take Your Chances" signs printed on the public restroom doors at the mall.

I really hope I never see they day when stores sell Hallmark greeting cards that read, "Congratulations on your bouncing baby human!"

Dave Meurer is a congressional staff member and published humorist. "We, The Genders ..." is an article adapted from his book Out on a Whim, published by Bethany House.




Click here for more information on the author.

We, the Genders ... "Dad, can you test me on the Declaration of Independence? We have to memorize part of it," said my youngest son, Brad. "Sure," I replied, delighted that his class was becoming grounded in our founding documents. "First, I'm going to read it out loud, then I'll try it from memory," he said. "Go for it," I replied. "We hold these Truths to be self evident, that all people are created equal . . ." "Try again," I interrupted. "You made a little mistake." Brad stared at the paper in his hands, shrugged, and took another stab at it. "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all people are created equal . . ." "Brad, focus on the words," I chided. "It says 'All Men are created equal.'" "No it doesn't" he retorted, handing me the paper that the teacher had passed out. I stared dumbfounded at the cursive script. Thomas Jefferson's immortal words had been edited to make them gender neutral. I felt my blood pressure rising. "Brad, why don't you go outside and play while dad pops a few heart pills and calls an ambulance?" Later, I explained to Brad that the Declaration says what it says, despite who it may offend. Ditto the Lord's Prayer, which some liberal churches have dared to alter so that it reads "Our Creator, which art in heaven." Some of the wackier groups will no doubt go a step further and edit the passage to read, "Our Oppressive Male Deity, whom we don't believe in anyway." There is something very scary about altering historical documents in order to make them conform to a modern day ideologies. If my son's teacher had wanted to explain that there have been many changes since the days of the founding fathers, she could have easily done so. In fact, it would have been a great opportunity to explain that our Constitution contains a mechanism by which it can be amended, and to point out how that process was utilized to grant women the right to vote. But misinforming students in order to make history "inclusive" is a sheer outrage. It makes a mockery of the very word "educate." It is likewise outrageous to tinker with the Bible. Frankly, there are lots of things in the scriptures that jar my sensibilities - such as divine judgments that wiped out thousands of men, women and children. I have a very hard time understanding some of the stuff I read. But I don't feel the freedom to pull out the scissors and leave the offending passages on the cutting room floor. And I certainly can't imagine substituting, "And then the Lord thundered in his wrath, 'You guys knock that off or there will be NO ice cream after the golden calf ribbon-cutting and orgy." Let's go back to the example of the Lord's prayer for a minute. It may not seem like a big deal to change one Biblical term, "Father," for another biblical term, "Creator," but the implications are huge. While the Bible refers to God as the Creator, Sustainer, Savior, Lord - and all kinds of other titles, these are not equal terms that you can just pluck out as though you are using a thesaurus. Those terms have different meanings in order to emphasize a specific attribute of God. If Jesus had wanted us to pray, "Our Creator," or "Our Redeemer" or "Our Gender Non-Specific Almighty Individual in Heaven" He could have and would have said so. But He deliberately selected the word "Father." None of us has the right to change the record of what He said. History is history. And while none of us will ever stand before Thomas Jefferson to give an account for messing with his words, we will stand before a God who has emphatically stated that His word will "endure forever." So let's not get cheeky with God. Besides, whether you like it or not, the English language does not contain a gender-neutral term to refer to an individual. Some college texts have resorted to the jarring construct "s/he" to cram both genders into a single word, but just try that one out on a group of kindergarteners at story time. Face it, we are stuck with gender-specific language unless you want to see "Take Your Chances" signs printed on the public restroom doors at the mall. I really hope I never see they day when stores sell Hallmark greeting cards that read, "Congratulations on your bouncing baby human!" Dave Meurer is a congressional staff member and published humorist. "We, The Genders ..." is an article adapted from his book Out on a Whim, published by Bethany House.