Shades of Gray

I find it kind of funny that today in English we talked about "shades of gray", and I had on an all-gray outfit. :P And no, we weren't literally talking about colors (hence the quotation marks!). But this whole subject got me to thinking about some other things, so this blog might seem kind of... sporadic? I think that's the word for it.
It all started with a small debate about TSL. The Puritan society Hawthorne wrote about is very small-minded. A sin is a sin to them, no matter what the situation. Adultery is adultery, whether or not they loved each other; regardless of the fact that the adulteress's husband was MIA for a long time.
One girl in the class compared the two lovers' adultery to murder. "If you kill someone because you hate them, that doesn't make it right." No, it doesn't. But things aren't always black and white. Very rarely will you find things in life that way. There's always different degrees of sin; some sins are worse than others, and the degrees depend on the situation. Argue all you want about a sin being a sin, but even Dante believed there were different levels of sin. Why else would he have made all those different levels of Hell in The Inferno?
This whole "right is right, wrong is wrong" argument? Definitely not true. Hypothetical situation: I stole money from someone's wallet that was just lying around. Is this wrong? Ethically, yes, it is. But what if I told you I was poor? That I didn't have a dime to my name? What if I told you that I had two children to feed, with no food to give them? Would it be considered just as wrong as it would if I were to steal just out of greediness? No, it wouldn't. Committing a sin for selfish reasons is worse than doing so for logical reasons.
Yes, I know in adultery is selfish. But I think it should make some sort of difference in the degree of wrongness to know that they were in love, and her husband was dead for all anyone knew. That's not the point I'm trying to bring out though. What I'm trying to show you is that even though her sin is still a sin, that doesn't mean everything is like that.
Some of my classmates were trying to prove that no matter what unlawful act you commit, it's equally bad no matter what the situation is. What was said before, about killing someone because you hate them? That is a completely unparallel comparison. You can't try to show the similarities between two situations that are nowhere near being on the same level. Yes, they are both sins. But adultery is wrong no matter what the reason is. Of course, if the two were in love, you will have more sympathy for them. Humans are sensitive and understanding, as able to relate more easily with a situation such as that, than we are able to connect with murder.
And murder is a sin on many different levels and degrees. What if you killed someone because of self defense? Or because of a car accident? That is definitely not equally as bad as killing someone out of hate.
Alright, I've rambled off subject a little... Where was I heading with this? Oh, yeah. This belief of everything being laid out in black and white makes me think of why I don't go to church anymore. I'm not trying to criticize anyone's religion here, but I quit going to church because everyone was so judgmental. I'm not going to say which church I went to, because I don't want to offend anyone on a personal level. It's just that, they say they're open-minded and that they welcome everyone with open arms. But that's not true. They criticize others for sinning and look down upon those who have sinned and don't come to God for forgiveness. They think they are better than others because they go to church and follow the Bible.
Whatever. That's the one thing that bothers me right there. The Bible. Who wrote it? They say it's truth, but how do they know it is? When the Catholic Church in Europe first began, the Pope and other church leaders decided what to share and what not to share through the Bible. They told the people what God wanted them to do, because most of the people were not educated enough to read. How do we know that what is written in The Bible is the truth? How do we know that the Catholic Church didn't change and rewrite parts of The Bible to fit their beliefs? Exactly- we don't.
Sure, The Bible has a lot of interesting stories in it. Sure, there's a lot of inspiring messages. But what about what's preached between the lines? What about the fact that they say you can only have one of two fates: (a) you accept Jesus Christ into your heart, and repent your sins, and worship God until you die, which leads you to Heaven. Or (b) you don't do all of part a, and you go to Hell. No. That can't be true. Things can't be written black and white that way. There has to be gray areas in between all of that. If God is as great and forgiving as they say, then why would he send so many people to Hell because of that? What about all those who believe in other religions? What about those who lived an atheist or agnostic life, but were wonderful people? Would God just send them to Hell? I don't think He would. If He really exists, if Christianity really is the "right" religion, He would not be so cruel.
And who's to say Christianity is the "right" religion? What makes it so right? It might be the religion followed by the majority of the U.S., but it doesn't have the most world-wide believers. Why do we have to just have one "right" religion? Aghh, all this spiritual thinking is giving me a headache. Plus, I've still got English homework to do. I'll save that rant for another day.
So, what was my major reason for this rambling today? Things can't be just right or wrong. There is always room for argument and judgment between the two. If there wasn't, most of our court laws would not exist. Shades of gray can be found easily; you never have to look hard for it. End of discussion.