April 2015 – Religious Freedom Laws
The firestorm over the recent religious freedom laws passed in Indiana and Arkansas has erupted into a full scale political fight. But what is this fight really about? There are essential principles of liberty that guarantee the freedom of all. In other words your liberty guarantees mine and my liberty guarantees yours. Take the freedom of speech principle for example. Is the first amendment given to protect popular speech? The answer is clearly no. There is no need to protect what is popular since there is no threat to any power structure by speaking things in agreement with the power structure. The entire principle of free speech hinges on the right to speak what is not popular. A dissenting voice is protected because in order for there to be liberty there must be tolerance for opposing views.
The biggest motivator for the founding of this nation was the idea of right to conscience. Right to worship according you your religious position and of course the right to not worship. The bedrock of freedom is individual conscience respected. There is no doubt the homosexual political agenda seeks to destroy the right to opposition against it and freedom of religion. The agenda is totalitarian. It’s a “you accept and endorse or else” mind set. I remember being on a radio show in the late 1980’s and debating against the homosexual agenda. The man I was debating said this; “What is the problem with gay people, all they want is the right to be in relationships of their choosing and to be left alone.” My response to that statement was this; “That is not what they want, they desire to force everyone to accept it and make people participate in endorsing it.” He went on to explain just how wrong I was. Well fast forward to 2015 and what do you see? I was unfortunately right. The idea that a Christian caterer must cater a “gay wedding” is preposterous under the principles of liberty. The idea that anyone believes a person should be forced against their deeply held religious convictions to participate in this is ridiculous and a gross violation of the principle of liberty.
To further exacerbate the insanity of this when I ask pro homosexual activists and supporters the following questions they deflect and refuse to answer;
- Should a caterer who is homosexual be forced to cater an even that is titled “anti-gay rally”?
- Should an African American baker be forced to make a cake that says “lynch the negro” for a KKK meeting?
- Should a Jewish funeral home be forced to allow Christian funeral services?
It should be clear to any intellectually honest person should answer “no. no one should be forced to go against their conscience. The next this that liberals ask me is “why that does not apply to refusing to serve someone based on their race? The answer to that is obvious. A person’s race is a physical manifestation of their genetic makeup. It has nothing to do with behavior, or predisposition to any political, or moral position. Homosexuality is completely different because it is a matter of behavior. It is an immoral behavior according to both Jewish and Christian teaching for thousands of years. The comparison of homosexuality to a race is absurd. It is a stretch to say the least. Let’s talk about what a race or ethnic group is. A race or ethnic group is made up of a large group of people who have married over a long period of time. Through procreation certain genetic traits develop. This is due to dominant genes. As a group of people they live together in a society, the society develops an ethos that is specific to that group. Without reproduction you have neither a race, ethnic group. It is quite literally impossible to compare homosexuals to a race since by definition homosexuals do not reproduce. If we for discussion’s sake took 1000 heterosexual men and women from various places and put them on an island with no outside contact, and came back 500 years later, they would be an ethnic group with certain physical genetic characteristics. If however we took 1000 homosexuals and placed them on an island with no outside contact, and came back 500 years later, not only would there not be an ethnic group, there would be no one alive since again they by definition do not reproduce. The idea that this is a civil rights issue based of homosexuals being some sort of minority group akin to a race defies logic. Reproduction is necessary for there to be a race.
The idea that can force a person to go against their deeply held religious beliefs that have been held for thousands of years is an affront to liberty for all including those who practice homosexuality. No one should be forced to support what they do not believe in their conscience.
I am absolutely sure that the homosexual agenda is coming after the Church as well. You will see a push to force churches to let homosexuals rent churches for “weddings” and force pastors to perform “weddings”. Intimidation and threats will be used against any pastor who openly preaches against homosexuality. The left does not believe in individual rights or the principles of liberty. They believe in government power to force their agenda. They believe in a collectivist mindset that does not allow freedom of conscience or speech unless it agrees with the liberal leftist agenda.
Am I saying that discrimination is ok? Let’s examine that question. Is there any discrimination that our society allows and that the left has no problem with? I will answer by asking these questions:
- Should the NAACP be forced to have a white man lead it from time to time or is it ok that only African American’s can lead the NAACP?
- The National Organization of Women is a liberal woman’s organization. Should it be forced to have a man lead it?
- Should the Asian student’s organizations be run by non-Asians?
In all these questions the obvious answer is that in these cases no one has a problem with discrimination. Make no mistake about it, it is discrimination based on race and sex. Should a religious group be allowed to discriminate against those who are not part of its religion in who it hires for positions in its religious institution? Of course they have the right to discriminate. Just as many private groups that advocate for many different things have the right to only hire those who agree with their position. It’s not discrimination in the sense of hating anyone, but rather it is obvious that a black organization would be led by a black person, and a Hispanic organization would be led by a Hispanic etc. It’s a no brainer! It is also a no brainer that in a free country with freedom of conscience that a person who believed gay marriage is immoral and against their religion, should not be forced to cater or give any other services to promote or help with something they religiously disagree with.
Why must the leftist liberals force people to obey? Because they have a totalitarian world view that refuses opposition, and punished anyone who would dare to resist them. Instead of a mindset that says you have a right to your conscience, opinion, and a religion practice. What we are really dealing with is a organized effort to destroy all of our Christian heritage and culture. Unless we resist this government imposition of liberal leftist garbage, we will cease to be a nation of freedom of thought and speech.