“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…’’
The battle against traditional Christian Biblical beliefs has continued to escalate since the Indiana RFRA debacle. Gay and progressive activists have been so encouraged by the one-sided media coverage against ‘freedom of religion’ lately that now they have, I believe, begun to ‘jump the shark’ with some key people calling for Christians to be forced to change Church teaching and be made to accept the gay and LGBT lifestyle.
Now from the New York Times, which is considered by many to be America’s leading newspaper, comes an article by Frank Bruni which I believe calls for radical action against conservative Christians:
And homosexuality and Christianity don’t have to be in conflict in any church anywhere.
That many Christians regard them as incompatible is understandable, an example not so much of hatred’s pull as of tradition’s sway. Beliefs ossified over centuries aren’t easily shaken.
But in the end, the continued view of gays, lesbians and bisexuals as sinners is a decision. It’s a choice. It prioritizes scattered passages of ancient texts over all that has been learned since — as if time had stood still, as if the advances of science and knowledge meant nothing.
It disregards the degree to which all writings reflect the biases and blind spots of their authors, cultures and eras.
It ignores the extent to which interpretation is subjective, debatable.
And it elevates unthinking obeisance above intelligent observance, above the evidence in front of you, …
…church leaders must be made “to take homosexuality off the sin list.”
<Read the whole article>
Response: So according to this NYT writer it is not a matter of ‘freedom of religion’ but ignorance and choice. His reasoning seems to be, that religious beliefs which are nothing more than uneducated ignorance (according to Bruni) should never be allowed to be a legal excuse for discrimination in spite of the fact that ‘freedom of religion’ is suppose to be protected by the First Amendment.
Since some mainline liberal Protestant denominations have been ‘enlightened’ and have accepted homosexuality and same-sex marriage than Frank Bruni of the preeminent NY Times concludes that the traditional Biblical teachings are merely ignorant subjective interpretations that need to be debated and changed. He catalogs all of the books and articles supporting the acceptance of homosexuality within the church but conveniently fails to mention any of the many books extant that continue to support the Bible.
Since “Conservative Christian religion is the last bulwark against full acceptance of L.G.B.T. people,” the thinking among Christians must be changed? That is what this writer is suggesting. Conservative Christian churches must become more like their liberal mainline brothers and turn their backs upon traditional Biblical teaching: …church leaders must be made “to take homosexuality off the sin list.”
In essence this writer and many progressives like him today are suggesting that the First Amendment and ‘freedom of religion’ needs to be reevaluated, redefined, limited, and trumped by LGBT rights. How will this be played out in the future?
The future is already here with conservative Christians being persecuted and discriminated against. Christian businesses being fined and shut down, Christian chaplains and firemen losing their jobs and a CEO and college professor that supported traditional marriage pressured to resign. The culling has already begun. Soon every church and ministry in America will be forced to choose between the Bible and an ever increasing secular American culture where religious liberty is now understood to be limited to ‘freedom of worship’ within the four walls of ones own home or official place of worship.
One interesting side to all of this controversy. Notice that no one has suggested that Muslims need to give up their traditional Islamic teaching against homosexuality which is found in the Quran. After all, any writer making that sort of suggestion or observation would be guilty of ‘Islamophobia’ –another progressive sacred cow. So in a few years, if the strategy for ‘forced change’ suggested by this NYT writer and other progressives is successful, then the First Amendment will continue to fully apply to Muslims but for conservative Bible believing Christians -not so much? *Top