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

Comments Which Conservatives Block From Their Blogs For Jan 15, 2014

This is a new category of posts. It is dedicated to those conservative blogs that have blocked my comments for various reasons. The blogpost of blocked comments will appear every Wednesday when the blog is not taking a break


Jan 9

to Jennifer Marshall on her blogpost in gospel coalition blogpost on helping the poor

Certainly, some of what is written in this article is important in helping the poor. Family and church as well as business and government participation is important. Programs to connect people who are successful with those in prison or poverty are important.

But it is also important to be specific as to where we have seen failures. And while Conservative Christians who write about poverty have had no problems associating poverty with families headed by single parents, we do have problems highlighting the roles that business and government play in producing poor people. For example, businesses that pay poverty wages should listen to what Martin Luther King Jr. said when speaking to the strikers in Memphis, Tennessee:

"it is criminal to have people working on a full-time basis and a full-time job getting part-time income." (click here for source). 

Or perhaps we can talk about poverty from the cost of living side. Today's food speculation, which unnecessarily increases the cost of food and thus the cost of living and predatory loans from the past which along with the fraud involved with the housing bubble caused many families to lose their homes contribute to poverty. 

Or perhaps we can talk about businesses that outsource their jobs to other countries because those countries allow these companies to abuse and underpay their employees. Paying poverty wages and the outsourcing of jobs to other countries are significant factors that play a role in poverty on the personal income side of the problem. 

And we have to remember government's role in letting businesses treat people this way. 

All of this leads to something else Martin Luther King Jr. said about showing compassion to the poor, 

"True compassion is more than just flipping a coin to a beggar; it is not haphazard and superficial. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring." (click here for source).

So while businesses defend their part in creating and maintaining poverty by saying that they must cut pay, in one way or another, to stay competitive or to be responsible to their stockholders, we need to ask if such a system is unjust. The same goes for those businesses that benefit from causing unnecessary increases in the cost of living. Because if it is, we must demand that the system repents and change so that a few don't grow rich at the expense of the many. And those in the middle class must use additional criteria to how the wealthiest among us are doing to determine if we have a  successful and prosperous economy.

So far, the Conservative Church has offered suggestions on how to alleviate poverty while keeping the current system as it is. Thus the necessary challenges that those in business and government need to hear of often muted, and this is especially true for those in business. And though what was suggested above is good, especially that which entail personal involvement with those who are poor, these suggestions will only be responding to rather than also eliminating what causes poverty. And as important and well thought out as these suggestions are, they will only tell us how to put better bandaids on a person than how to also remove a person from harm's way.

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

Jan 11


To Robert Royal's blogpost on Western Civilization on the Imaginative Conservative blog


What is the purpose for all of this rambling about Western Civilization? Is it to have a measuring contest between our contributions vs the death and destruction we've wrought? And who is going to determine the winner of this measuring contest? Should it be those who are on the Western Civilization team or should outsiders be asked whether the good we've done outweighs the bad? And if Westerners are the ones determining the tradeoffs, how honest can us be about ourselves? Does what we say about our own civilization and history reflect more on who we are today or who we have been over time? And what would be the purpose of such a contest? Would it be to decide whether Western Civilization should cease or how it should continue its journey? 

My struggle with this reflecting on Western Civilization is that it somewhat separates us from other civilizations and what we can learn from them. It lessens the connections we could have with those outside of our own group. And if we have any degree of loyalty for and pride in belonging to Western Civilization, it makes us defensive and less honest about the winner of the previously mentioned measuring contest.

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