Why can't people see the value of the Indiana law?


carlimac
 Share

Recommended Posts

Here's an interesting way out of the logger-jam.  This liberal, pro-same sex marriage liberal argues that secularists and religionists should simply agree not to impose their morality on one another.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/03/29/indiana-religious-freedom-prothero/70632870/

Edited by prisonchaplain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By coincidence, I am reading this thread in a lunchroom surrounded by lawyers discussing "the Indiana situation". And in this city, that automatically means I am surrounded by liberals.

I feel I don't dare pipe up and even ask for clarification on why they believe this law targets the LGBT community (and apparently only that community because that's the only one talked about) as that will automatically be interpreted as support, which of course must mean I am a bigot and a homophobe.

It's become glaringly obvious that conservative or religious values are not welcome in this country.

Just prior to this, I was reading a Facebook post regarding supporting the Amish in Wisconsin who are being evicted from their homes. The responses to the post sickened me. Religious bigotry is now an accepted value in this country. It disgusts me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an interesting way out of the logger-jam.  This liberal, pro-same sex marriage liberal argues that secularists and religionists should simply agree not to impose their morality on one another.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/03/29/indiana-religious-freedom-prothero/70632870/

It could be that simple if people possessed common decency and respect. There is an interesting discussion in the comments section after this article. The thing i don't understand that keeps getting said is that non-believers don't want Christianity shoved down their throats. OK so how is politely declining to photograph a same sex wedding cramming religion down anyone's throat? And on the flip side, how is forcing said photographer to take pictures at said wedding NOT cramming a belief system down someone's throat? Hypocrisy at it's finest.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another relatively liberal columnist who believes discrimination is always wrong, yet faults the LBGT folk for shifting away from "liberation" into compulsion.  He argues that RFRA is the moderate ground.  It allows government to bring the hammer down on actual discrimination, while compelling it to do so with measure and with justification. 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/31/opinion/david-brooks-religious-liberty-and-equality.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ultimately the motive for all the hollering has nothing to do with equality or rights.  It's about validation.  It's a cultural war with the prize being the moral highground.  In the past, Christians had it, the LGBT community wants it now.  

 

I once debated a gay man on similar issues and I told him that frankly I don't care who he spends his nights with, that it wasn't my business.  He insisted that wasn't good enough.  He insisted that I ought to be congratulatory and supportive of his decision to "come out" and that he deserved it from me in the same way the LGBT community deserved it from Christians in general.

 

Failure to extend those kudos meant I was a homophobe.

 

And so we see it here.  That's why Islamic businesses aren't getting much attention even though they react the same way we do.  It's because Christianity is the target.

 

We shouldn't be at all surprised.  The Scriptures warned us this would happen.  Repeatedly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This edit is in consequence of my being an idiot.
 

 

Is this evidence of hate speak and discrimination against those who use the edit function? Surely we all have an equal right to use the edit function without running the risk of being unfairly slandered?  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the government caves each and every time for some cause.

 

Progressive socialists in both political parties like anything that leads towards dependance on government.  Sexual deviation and fornication lead one towards a dependant slave like mind set and lifestyle with also a host of other ills in my judgment.

 

Also the lazy idleness of some give some in government authority satisfaction.  Those who have able minds and bodies who choose to depend on others for the necessities of life rather than work for their bread and lay up in store like the prophets encourage us.

 

Just remember there are some in government who want you to think it is too hard and give up.  They want you to rely on them for what you need because it gives them the power.  Anything that moves one toward slavery and powerlessness is what some in authority want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does this term "homophobe" mean?  It means you are afraid of homosexuality.

No, what it means is that this is a way to shame anyone into accepting the agenda that sin is not sin and should be "encouraged, taught to the children in school, embraced, supported" and all that nonsense.

So, are we "afraid" of homosexuality?  No.  We don't approved of it.

dc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By today's standard, that's "homophobia."

 

Basically it's just another label they slap you with to intimidate you into shutting up.  Nobody wants to be called homophobic, because the vast majority of people who morally oppose it don't have any hate in their heart, it's just not something they can support... but out comes the label anyway because, as I said earlier, they want validation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call it irony, or call it hypocrisy, but I just read an opinion column about a Christian chaplain that is facing possible "discharge with cause" from the Navy.  He served 19+ years, and did four years as a SEAL.  His actionable offense?  He, in his role as an Evangelical Christian chaplain, responded to requests for pastoral counsel, by telling sailors what the Bible says about homosexual activity and premarital sex.  The pregnant-out-of-wedlock sailor, and the gay sailors took copious notes, and then filed discrimination charges against him.

 

The opinion article was defending the Navy's choice to get rid of "chaplain hater."  He called him Fundamentalist, Dominionists, Gay-hating, 'Christian right,' and about a half dozen other childish labels.  He labeled the Liberty Institute, the Family Research Counsel, and my denomination (the chaplain's endorser) with similarly scathing labels.

 

The bottom line for this writer was that the chaplain had a right to his foolish bigotry, but when he acted on his beliefs (by speaking them during sought-for spiritual counseling), he crossed the line. 

 

Soulsearcher has explained this before--it's payback.  Our side has done similarly in the past.  I get it.

 

At this point, our answer ought to be to keep doing what we do.  Stop whining, speak truth, and let our careers end where they may.  We believe in God. He sees, and knows.  I won't look for trouble, but neither will I cower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call it irony, or call it hypocrisy, but I just read an opinion column about a Christian chaplain that is facing possible "discharge with cause" from the Navy.  He served 19+ years, and did four years as a SEAL.  His actionable offense?  He, in his role as an Evangelical Christian chaplain, responded to requests for pastoral counsel, by telling sailors what the Bible says about homosexual activity and premarital sex.  The pregnant-out-of-wedlock sailor, and the gay sailors took copious notes, and then filed discrimination charges against him.

 

The opinion article was defending the Navy's choice to get rid of "chaplain hater."  He called him Fundamentalist, Dominionists, Gay-hating, 'Christian right,' and about a half dozen other childish labels.  He labeled the Liberty Institute, the Family Research Counsel, and my denomination (the chaplain's endorser) with similarly scathing labels.

 

The bottom line for this writer was that the chaplain had a right to his foolish bigotry, but when he acted on his beliefs (by speaking them during sought-for spiritual counseling), he crossed the line. 

 

Soulsearcher has explained this before--it's payback.  Our side has done similarly in the past.  I get it.

 

At this point, our answer ought to be to keep doing what we do.  Stop whining, speak truth, and let our careers end where they may.  We believe in God. He sees, and knows.  I won't look for trouble, but neither will I cower.

I do find in sad we are starting to see another version of don't ask don't tell, this time aimed more at those with religious convictions.    Not everyone is going to like what others say and do, but there does need to be a bit thicker skin all around.

 

Now as i pointed out earlier with people who take issue with the term homophobe ( i'm not a huge fan of it myself)  we are starting to see the terms Christianaphobe and starting to see the term persecution when applied to Christianity in North America more and more.  So if it's just silly to use the term homophobe, isn't it just as silly to use the term applying to Christianity?  Are Christians really being persecuted in America or are they having some growing pains rubbing up against another way of life that could very easily even out given time if both sides stop trying to win it all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christians are not persecuted to the extent they are in the Middle East.  There, some would use the term genocide.  However, when jobs are lost, careers ruined, etc. for "thought crimes," then persecution might not be hyperbole.  Also, I'm fairly certain that "Christianphobe" was an intentional throwback at the term homophobe.  In reality, some LBGT have pretty decided that, "it's not that I'm afraid of Christians--I just think they are hopelessly wrong and hateful."  That sounds familiar too, doesn't it?

 

I forget which columnist said that the only thing worse than a sore loser are sore winners. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christians are not persecuted to the extent they are in the Middle East.  There, some would use the term genocide.  However, when jobs are lost, careers ruined, etc. for "thought crimes," then persecution might not be hyperbole.  Also, I'm fairly certain that "Christianphobe" was an intentional throwback at the term homophobe.  In reality, some LBGT have pretty decided that, "it's not that I'm afraid of Christians--I just think they are hopelessly wrong and hateful."  That sounds familiar too, doesn't it?

 

I forget which columnist said that the only thing worse than a sore loser are sore winners. 

I personally wonder why neither side can learn from the past?

 

So if we go with what you consider the level of persecution in America we can agree both sides have been persecuted and it still goes on.  If it's wrong to have it on one side then it must be wrong for the other side to do the same kind of behavior, or at least in my mind if it's wrong for one it's wrong for the other.  We see tit for tat across the board.  Too many times the other side see's the worst possible outcome of the other sides actions and reacts according to the worst possible out come. Gays get denied as say in their partners lives and deaths so gays want marriage, Christians worry they will be forced to participate so they bring in RFA bills, Gays worry the extent these bills can go to ( doctors ok to refuse treatment, grocery stores refusing to sell food ect), Gays rally and push back and make the Christians more scared so Christians push for more extreme bills ( two new ones i read about include one that would make it impossible to have your marriage recognized and another that will not let a state issue marriage licenses to gay couples even if it is the law of the land.)it's a never ending circle that keeps constricting and forcing worse reactions out of each side and it worries me cause both sides will soon be backed into corners that will only lead to something horrible if neither side blinks and realizes that we are to a point just being spiteful against each other rather than seeing how it's taking a human toll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Religion in America is an ocean wide and an inch deep."  I'm not sure who said it, but the idea is relevant to this conversation.  Why is it that in a country that is still 70% Christian--that still shows a belief in higher power amongst well over 80% of the population, and yet, which has an LBGT population somewhere in the mid-single digits, that the culture is currently so skewed against religious liberty (when pitted against sexual identity/gender rights)?  One answer is the whole "inch deep" thing.  And, of course, some religious groups have turned in favor of LBGT perspectives.

 

BUT, is the current favor for LBGT, and opposition to religious freedom claims also an inch deep?  Visceral but shallow? 

 

Soulsearcher, I agree that we should all be more humane towards one another.  I just gave a religious tolerance lecture.  I argued that to be confident and competent in one's own perspective allows us to be kind and open towards others.  To help one of another faith is to show the ultimate confidence in my own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it that in a country that is still 70% Christian--that still shows a belief in higher power amongst well over 80% of the population, and yet, which has an LBGT population somewhere in the mid-single digits, that the culture is currently so skewed against religious liberty (when pitted against sexual identity/gender rights)?

Because it is currently a running ball in the American sport of political baseball. Very powerful people's careers are on the line with this thing. It is very easy to establish that homosexuals are victims of religious persecution. Homosexuality is a classic liberal position against the classic conservative religious morality. Splash a few extreme snippets on the news 24/7 and you can pretty much get Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie to tweet about it without having to fork over a cent. Slap a one-word label on people who try to stop the train and get a few memes on facebook and the world turns against its axis. The narrative is set - Homosexuals are victimized in the same degree as black slaves by the evil Christians (you can't use evil Muslims - who actually do push homosexuals off very tall buildings - because that would compromise another set narrative) and all the young people who has not much experience in the inner workings of political agendas start hating on Christians. Which is exactly the objective - Christians are conservatives... off with their heads. Easy peasy.

Think about it... what is statistically the highest concern of voting Americans today. No no no... not the economy (Republican strength) where it has now gotten to the point where there are more people collecting government money than there are giving government money, not foreign policy (also Republican strength) where we have madmen on a killing rampage toppling governments in the middle east... no, no no.... in the voting American's priority list is Homosexuality and Climate Change both Democrat leaning.

Edited by anatess
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share