Comments Which Conservatives Block From Their Blogs For July 30, 2014

July 23

To Jennifer Marshall and her blogpost telling us to speak up for the religious liberty to oppose homosexuality. This appeared in the Gospel Coalition website.


The above seems to signal the start of the persecution complex industry for Conservative Christians. Noting the "backlash" we are suffering, it would helpful to note where the pendulum was prior to its change in direction. We criminalized homosexuality, we insisted that gays in some occupations, such as teaching, could be fired for their sexual orientation, we tried to deny them the right to marry, and now some of us are favoring Jim Crow-like laws. And in the end, all we can see is the coming "backlash."

We should note that Obama's directive has everything to do with those who have federal contracts-- it is the government's job to protect the rights of everybody including those who disagree with us. As for the other stuff, we should put it in context with where the pendulum was when we controlled culture.

We will suffer some kind of backlash, but that is only because we associated preaching against sin with having a privileged position in society which would allow us to dictate who was acceptable and who was a societal leper. But, as with foreign policies, we only take note of the wrongs done to us while erasing from the discussion the wrongs we done to others. And that is how privilege works except when one's group loses its privileged position.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

July 29

To R. Scott Clark's blogpost video posting of a young Christian speaker stating that natural law determines that marriage is only between one man and one woman. He stated that in answer the objections of a young gay man. This appeared on the Heidelblog.


In society, it isn't about definition, it is about privilege and antiquity. Who gets to determine what is recognized as something being by nature? Well, Christians are citing the Scriptures to say what is natural, and to extent they are right. But we are not necessarily right when we enforce religious definitions, including our religious definition of natural law, on those who don't share our religious convictions.

For those who would point to the over 1,000 species in which homosexuality is not only practiced but brings a benefit, natural law to them includes homosexuality. And what if the nature vs nurture question gains significant evidence for the nature side, natural law to them includes homosexualtiy.

When we try to use natural law as a basis for not allowing homosexuality in society, are we really relying on natural law or antiquity? For what has been recognized as natural law is because of Christianity's past privileged status in society. So in essence, what the speaker was really challenging the person posing the question on is, What right do you have to change what has been practiced in the past? Because note how the speaker assumes to identify the principle being used by the person posing the question?

Unless we understand that the same-sex marriage question is about privilege trumping equality, we will never see the gun we are using to shoot ourselves with. And we should add that the legal status of same-sex marriage makes into a transformationist the most ardent of 2kers.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Elise Hilton and her blogpost on Pope Francis' view on poverty. This appeared on the acton blog


It seems that what is missing here is how the Pope describes the current economic system. According Pope Francis, the current system works on an idolatry of the dollar and an exclusion of others. The problem with our economy, according to Pope Francis, is that it does not exist to serve people but rather people are made into objects for the accumulation of wealth by a few.

In other words, yes the Pope does not tell us how to fix a problem; But rather, he has vividly described what is wrong with today's status quo. Unfortunately, those who need to listen the most are moved the least to listen to what he and others have to say