Dun worry, the title is more succinct than when I began: “Homosexual Super-Rights, the Thought-Police, and the All-Encompassing yet Overly-Vague ‘Hate Speech’ Idear.”
See what I mean? *Innocent grin*
I was first informed of the hate speech bill by a customer Friday morning, and I, like the Aldaran system, was completely blown away. The very moment I had access to a computer I did a quick search and sure enough, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that would make hate speech illegal. What is hate speech exactly? That’s the thing, the bill isn’t overly clear in defining its terminology but does seem to assume it has an inherent meaning. What I can say is that hate speech laws that have passed in Europe or Canada are being applied primarily to stop freedom of speech against any verbal opposition towards homosexual marriage or homosexuality in general.
What sort of ramifications have there been in places like England or Canada? Up to this point, pastors have been fined and spent time in jail for preaching against homosexuality – get this – in their own churches, for quoting the Bible. And there it is. These are outrageous attacks against the freedom of religion and freedom of speech. None of these pastors supports the killing of gays and lesbians. None of these men support violence against the homosexual community. But their words were considered “hate speech” and therefore illegal.
I honestly never thought I would see the day when this kind of legislation would draw such support here in our nation. How wrong I was. Maybe a bit naive. There are people who want nothing more than to silence those who condemn homosexuality as wrong or … sinful.
Never in my life have I been so concerned about a particular new legislation as this bill. It still has to receive the Senate’s approval, and finally, President Obama’s – it shall likely receive both.
While spending time with close Christian friends and family over the weekend, many excellent conversations were had about this bill, which allowed me to further develop my thoughts about this subject. I was anxious for Sunday when I could talk with a friend of mine who has helped shape my political viewpoints: Rich Pierce. The first chance I had I asked Rich his opinion on the whole issue. His response changed my entire thinking on the bill and I am excited to tell you what he told me. In a nut shell, Rich explained that he hopes the bill passes the Senate and is signed into law by the President. It isn’t that he wants Christians to lose the freedom of speech or religious practice, but in so doing, the Democratic Party would be shown to discriminate against opposing viewpoints, and that they would in effect be denying their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.
Rich added that the government would be sued, likely by Jay Seculo, and kept in the courts for 10 years before it made it to the Supreme Court, only to be shot down as unconstitutional by the high court. It has the potential to be a great victory for personal liberties, the Constitution, and for the freedom of expression – especially of religion.
From that vantage point, I cannot help but agree with Rich.
There are those conversations that change your mind or your thinking on an important issue in a few moments. This was one of those conversations for me. Thanks Rich.
What is startling to me is that the Democratic Party is filled with men and women who desire to discriminate justice. Same-sex marriage advocates argue that conservatives want to discriminate against gays by not allowing them to marry. I defend the rights of homosexuals, and argue that they have the same rights as heterosexuals: to marry a member of the opposite sex. What homosexuals want is to redefine marriage to mean something it has never meant in our society, or in Western Society. What homosexuals want are super-rights. They want to define words however they want, and society does not function in this way. They make an absurd argument.
“See! See! This is the kind of hate speech I’m talking about!” cries the homosexual community. Why is the expression of an opposing viewpoint assumed to be hateful? I say all of this without hating homosexuals; rather, I love homosexuals. I try to be friendly towards homosexuals, just as I try to be friendly towards heterosexuals. From my perspective, both groups are sinful, but only one of these lifestyles is declared unacceptable by God. It seems to be asking too much of the political Left to recognize that disagreement of opinion doesn’t equate hatefulness.
But even if I was being hateful … even if I did hate gays … should the government try to play the thought-police by monitoring my opinions? Does the government have a right to tell me what I can and cannot say? Think about the slippery slope this is. What if the government outlawed pro-homosexual speech? Would the Left be okay with that? You can be your bottom dollar liberals would not endorse such a thing. On the other side of the political isle, no mainstream conservative is arguing for the silencing of pro-homosexual speech. And it is in this that we see the double standard.
Is it too much to ask for consistency?
Psalm 12:1 reads, “Help, LORD, for the godly man ceases to be, For the faithful disappear from among the sons of men.” (NASB).
May we, like the Psalmist, seek the Lord’s help in this fascinating time where the ungodly reign supreme. They strut about just like those later described in this psalm. What can the righteous do? We can watch and pray, boldly proclaiming the gospel of peace to our friends, family and coworkers. God’s plan is unfolding and we can rest assured that He will continuously be glorified in His Church throughout all generations (Ephesians 3:21). Our Lord has also promised that everything that happens, the good and bad, are meant for the good of His people. Therefore, how can we not express our thanksgiving to God, knowing that even wicked legislation is ultimately due to God’s ordained will?
Thanks for reading,
Rusty
No comments:
Post a Comment