HuffPo: Isn't it time for the Pope to declare that God is bisexual?

No, silly, not bisexual in orientation, merely bisexual in gender identity. Androgynous, in other words, like an early 1970s David Bowie except a lot older and even more charismatic. And maybe hermaphroditic? It’s all a bit vague.

Thus does freaky deaky sex ‘n religion day at Hot Air end with a bang:

The Church’s opposition to birth control and to abortion even early in pregnancy is largely an outgrowth of its all-male composition and those males’ attempts to degrade women’s physical powers by asserting that women and the intercourse into which they putatively tempt men are necessary evils (“It is well for a man not to touch a woman,” Paul instructed the Christians of Corinth), the only purpose of which is procreation. The condemnation of homosexuals is based entirely on Old Testament rules established by men who feared anything that placed in question their insistence on the polarity of the sexes.

The idea that God is solely male is the work of the Church Fathers who chose which gospel accounts to include in the official New Testament and excluded all the Gnostic Gospels that contain references to an androgynous God, and of the bishops who met at Constantinople in 381 and modified the Creed to say that the Holy Spirit is male. The idea that a Creator could be of only one sex is absurd on its face. Yet this nonsensical belief, which actually diminishes God, has been one of the main bases for the subordination of women and values associated with them — precisely the values taught by Jesus — throughout the history of the Church…

During the second week of his papacy in 1978, John Paul I sensibly declared that God “is a Mother as well as a Father.” Eighteen days later John Paul I was dead, only 33 days after his election. Despite that unfortunate example and his own stance against desperately needed reform, Benedict XVI owes it to Catholics to take the bold steps needed to break the hold on the Church of earlier flings with relativism and to bring the institution he heads into line both with the needs of the modern world and with the teachings of Jesus.

Forgive the atheist for quibbling about theology but doesn’t Church dogma about Christ’s parentage make this a hard argument to pull off? Not an impossible argument — by definition, nothing is impossible if God is omnipotent — but it does raise the question of why He/She chose to be father to Jesus instead of taking on some more nuanced role. Also, Christ himself specifically refers to God as “Father” numerous times, doesn’t he? That would seem like … a clue. I’ve got no dog in this hunt, though. Catholics, want to take it from here?