Nuclear Bomb, or Train Wreck? – Western Voices World News

The bomb (actually) went off 25 years ago when the US Supreme Court stripped Bob Jones University of its tax exemption for banning interracial dating. Now we’re dealing with the fallout. And, since evangelicals have been cheering on the liberals while they demonized race realists, they can hardly complain.by James EdwardsReality is slowly starting to sink in for the James Dobson crowd. They’ve spent decades demonizing normal white people as “racists” and “bigots” for believing what every Christian believed about race and interracial marriage up until about 40 years ago. They’ve sat by and done nothing, or worse, applauded, as good men and women have been hounded, disgraced, and ruined for upholding the traditional Christian view of marriage as between one man and one woman of the same race, or the belief that the races are different. Now, they’re under attack for their own “bigoted” and “hateful” views about gender and marriage, and it’s finally sinking in – liberals are going to do to gender realists what they’ve been doing to race realists for decades. And, since evangelicals have been cheering on the liberals while they demonized race realists, they can hardly complain.But complain they do. The Family Research Council <a href=”http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=28483&ref=BPNews-RSSFeed0716″>just held a big conference to discuss the matter</a>:<blockquote>Same-sex unions and religious liberty are destined to collide in this country in ways that could prove costly for the free exercise of religion, legal experts said in a Washington panel discussion.The event, convened by the Washington-based Family Research Council, brought together law professors and legal advocates to discuss the impact on religious expression of the California Supreme Court’s May decision in support of “gay marriage.” Benjamin Bull, chief counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, said the conflict is inevitable, although the extent of the damage is yet to be determined.“I do think … there is one thing that we can agree on, and that is that this whole attempted institution of same-sex marriage is on a collision course with traditional Christian views and values in virtually every institution that one can think of,” Bull said at the close of the 90-minute discussion. “And I can’t tell you whether or not it’s going to be a nuclear bomb-type collision or just a train wreck, but it’s coming.”</blockquote>Well, I can tell you, Mr. Bull. That’s an easy one. It’s going to be a nuclear bomb. Actually, that “going to be” isn’t quite accurate. The bomb went off 25 years ago when the US Supreme Court stripped Bob Jones University of its tax exemption for banning interracial dating. Now we’re dealing with the fallout. In fact, BJU published a pamphlet in the aftermath of the decision, prophetically entitled The Bomb And Its Fallout.<img alt=”The Bomb And Its Fallout” src=”http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3036/2614089273_5af13951e4_m.jpg" />(If you want to read the pamphlet, <a href=”http://bju.typepad.com/bjuexposed/files/img002.pdf”>click here for the pdf</a>.)Of course, nobody paid any attention to BJU; they were just a bunch of “racists”, so why give any heed to their warnings? You know how those “racists” are with their overheated rhetoric and conspiracy theories. So evangelicals ignored the BJU decision, because it only applied to “racists”, and by God, they’re not “racists” like their parents and grandparents, so why should they care if the government tramples on the religious freedoms of some backwater “racists” in South Carolina? What was that to them?Well, they should’ve paid attention, because the decision said that BJU didn’t deserve tax exemption because they “violated public policy.” Well, public policy is a funny thing. It tends to change over time. And now the “homophobes” are the new “racists”, and guess who’s violating public policy now? And because evangelicals didn’t speak up for the religious liberties of “racists” 25 years ago, there’s not a whole lot they can do now that “homophobes” are being stripped of their religious freedoms:<blockquote>Kevin Hasson, president of Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, told the overflow audience his organization convened a diverse group of legal scholars for a discussion on the subject, a discussion that produced a soon-to-be-released book. “[The alarming thing is that all these scholars across the board said, ‘This will be very expensive in terms of religious liberty,’” Hasson said.A 1990 opinion by the U.S. Supreme Court suggests the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion will not safeguard the rights of Christians and others who oppose same-sex unions, said Teresa Collett, a professor at the University of St. Thomas (Minn.) School of Law.In Smith v. Oregon, the high court “said that when there are generally applicable, neutral laws that free exercise does not require an exemption,” Collett explained. “As long as those who are engaged in demanding recognition of same-sex unions do not exempt anyone, free-exercise claims will not be exempted either…. t doesn’t appear that the free-exercise clause will protect us.”The loss of tax exemptions could be one of the ways religious organizations are impacted by the legalization of “same-sex marriage,” said Nathan Diament, director of the Institute for Public Affairs of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America. “It is quite possible that it is only a matter of time ’til every institution that chooses under its First Amendment beliefs to act in ways that manifest its objections to same-sex relationships … could have their tax-exempt status removed,” he said.</blockquote>You can just drop the “It is quite possible” part, Nathan. It’s a certainty.<blockquote>Diament and other panelists cited a number of scenarios in which Americans’ religious rights might be infringed on when they clash with legal recognition of “homosexual marriage.” They questioned if accommodations or exemptions would be permitted for religious adherents or institutions in the following situations, among others:– County clerks who oppose issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.– Employees who disapprove of diversity training programs that endorse “gay marriage.”– Insurance company workers who do not want to sell policies or process claims for homosexual couples’ partner benefits.– Owners of small hotels and bed-and-breakfast inns who refuse to serve same-sex couples.– Lawyers who decline to provide estate planning for homosexual couples.– Psychologists and psychiatrists who refuse to counsel same-sex couples.– Doctors who will not provide some services, such as in vitro fertilization (IVF), for gay couples.– Religious colleges that will not open married student housing to same-sex couples.– Religious institutions that refuse requests from homosexual couples to hold wedding receptions in their buildings.– Christian bookstores and other parachurch organizations that decline spousal benefits for “gay marriage” partners.</blockquote>Funny, if you go through that list, and substitute “interracial” for “gay”, five years ago many, many Christians in America would have said that those actions are “bigotry” and don’t deserve religious liberties protection. Well, what goes around comes around. But there’s some good news. You’ll still be allowed to believe that homosexual relationships are immoral, just as “racists” are still free to believe that interracial relationships are immoral. You just won’t be able to act on those beliefs, without facing fines, lawsuits, or even jail:<blockquote>One of the problems, Bull said, is “what radical, homosexual activists will do with the new institution of same-sex marriage in using it as a battering ram across America to blast open new areas that ultimately will diminish, that will shrink the rights of Christians to express their faith in their lives and how they live, their free exercise of their religion. In the end, the logical extension is that our faith will only be a personalized, individualized faith that you can think about but you can’t even talk about.”</blockquote>A couple panelists said there’s a tiny bit of hope of retaining some freedoms: <blockquote>Diament and Chai Feldblum, a Georgetown University Law Center professor and a leading advocate for “gay rights,” both said it might be possible for “same-sex marriage” and religious freedom to coexist. “From my perspective, they can coexist if one or another is not, you know, taking the ‘my way or the highway’ kind of approach,” Diament said.</blockquote>Yeah, that’s a real nice theory. But does that sound like the ACLU you know? Or any radical gay rights group you’ve ever heard of? Yeah, I didn’t think so. So good luck with that:<blockquote>Lawyers for the ACLU and Lambda Legal, a leading advocate for “gay rights,” argued recently before the California Supreme Court a doctor who refused IVF treatment to a lesbian should have “no opt-out for a religious exemption,” Bull said. “The choice is: Stop practicing medicine or violate your religious beliefs. And that’s the only option presented to the physicians by the other side.”</blockquote>Yes, they did. And can you guess what they argued was one of the top reasons for not granting an exemption for religious beliefs? I bet you can! That’s right; they argued that any “racist” doctor who refused to give fertility treatments to an interracial couple wouldn’t get a religious exemption; he’d lose his license, no ifs, ands, or buts.I’m not saying it will happen overnight. But the religious freedom to act on beliefs that homosexuality is immoral will eventually be taken away in this country, and it’s going to happen a lot sooner than most people think.Oh, and guess what? That proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in California? <a href=”http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN1747320720080718″>It’s now trailing by about 10 points in the latest poll.</a><a href=”http://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/jamesedwards/2008/07/19/nuclear-bomb-or-train-wreck/" target=”_blank”>Source<del datetime=”2008-07-20T00:46:27+00:00″ /></a>

2008-07-20