Showing posts with label Freedom of Religion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Freedom of Religion. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

“I was at – forgive the expression – a Christmas party,”

Wow. How weird is that?


Totenberg’s bashfulness came as she explained how the failure of Congress to pass an annual budget has left federal workers in limbo:
Well, these agencies, including the Defense Department, don't know how much money they've got and for what. And I was at – forgive the expression – a Christmas party at the Department of Justice and people actually were really worried about this.

Read more: hat NewsBusters

Friday, December 10, 2010

'Hate crimes' law challenged for cracking down on biblical beliefs

From WND a very important case...


Officials with the Thomas More Law Center say they have appealed their lawsuit over the "hate crimes" law to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, raising pointed questions including why will the law attack Bible-following Christians who follow its instructions....


...In fact, during congressional debate on the issue, supporters admitted that a homosexual attacking a Christian pastor would be protected from the law's enhanced penalties that would apply should a Christian pastor attack a homosexual.
"Under the guise of enforcing 'niceness' and promoting 'tolerance,' homosexual advocacy groups have mobilized their financial power to purchase political clout which they now use to shut down any criticism of their deviant lifestyle. The truth is they are one of the most intolerant groups in our society and viciously attack anyone who opposes their point of view," said Richard Thompson, chief of the law center.
"The sole purpose of this law is to use the threat of federal prosecutions and long jail sentences to silence Christians from expressing their Biblically based religious belief that homosexual conduct is an abomination and a sin."
The center confirmed that statistics from homosexual advocacy groups reveal that the greatest threat of violence to homosexuals comes not from Christians but from other homosexuals. More

Thursday, November 25, 2010

Proclamation Establishing Thanksgiving Day

Proclamation Establishing Thanksgiving Day
October 3, 1863


The year that is drawing towards its close, has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies.  To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God.  In the midst of a civil war of unequalled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign States to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict; while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union.  Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defence, have not arrested the plough, the shuttle, or the ship; the axe had enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore.  Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege and the battle-field; and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years, with large increase of freedom.
No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things.  They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy.
It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and voice by the whole American people.  I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens.   And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to his tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquillity and Union.
In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the city of Washington, this third day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the independence of the United States the eighty-eighth.

A. Lincoln

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

George Washington Thanksgiving Proclamation

WHEREAS it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favour; and Whereas both Houfes of Congress have, by their joint committee, requefted me "to recommend to the people of the United States a DAY OF PUBLICK THANSGIVING and PRAYER, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to eftablifh a form of government for their safety and happiness:"

NOW THEREFORE, I do recommend and affign THURSDAY, the TWENTY-SIXTH DAY of NOVEMBER next, to be devoted by the people of thefe States to the fervice of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our fincere and humble thanksfor His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the fignal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpofitions of His providence in the courfe and conclufion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have fince enjoyed;-- for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to eftablish Conftitutions of government for our fafety and happinefs, and particularly the national one now lately instituted;-- for the civil and religious liberty with which we are bleffed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffufing useful knowledge;-- and, in general, for all the great and various favours which He has been pleafed to confer upon us.

And also, that we may then unite in moft humbly offering our prayers and fupplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and befeech Him to pardon our national and other tranfgreffions;-- to enable us all, whether in publick or private ftations, to perform our feveral and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a bleffing to all the people by conftantly being a Government of wife, juft, and conftitutional laws, difcreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all fovereigns and nations (especially fuch as have shewn kindnefs unto us); and to blefs them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increafe of fcience among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind fuch a degree of temporal profperity as he alone knows to be beft.
GIVEN under my hand, at the city of New-York, the third day of October, in the year of our Lord, one thousand feven hundred and eighty-nine.
(signed) G. Washington

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Sharia Law in America

Under Sharia law non-Muslims are not allowed to proclaim their beliefs to Muslims. Nice to see they have the Dearborn police to help them enforce this.

If this is what it looks like, replete with cops confiscating video cameras to keep what happened off the record, it’s one of the most ridiculous First Amendment violations you’ll ever see. H/T  and more over at HotAir

This is an ongoing issue and you can read more details at WND and a link to last years video which is even more disturbing.

Some color for the story over at Touchstone:

"...There are no Muslims who do not need the Gospel, and no Christians, Arab or otherwise, who can live without it. Why should we be silent? The Gospel can be shared always, but not always welcomed. Jesus wasn't in the end; why should we be?" More

Saturday, January 9, 2010

American Exceptionalism and American Religion

Contemporary secular liberalism, and the social decomposition it is incapable of addressing, are the almost irresistible outworking of the problematic of modernity: All the beliefs, norms, and prejudices formed by the mediating institutions of civil society, and therefore those institutions themselves, successively come under question as obstacles to the unfettered freedom of the autonomous individual. All that’s left, or would be left, is what happens to remain largely unquestioned: the consumer society, which is about choice, and the nanny state, which forbids and penalizes bad choices.

Neither the consumer society nor the nanny state do anything to form, sustain, or improve the moral character of the citizenry. In the long run, this proves as destructive philosophically as it is socially. Liberalism is based on certain ideas, such as that of human dignity, that are actually predicated on Christianity and biblical religion. Human dignity, at least in the relevant sense, didn’t exist for the Greeks; and as we analyze the waves of modernity, it becomes evident that every attempt to anchor human dignity in something other than biblical religion has failed.

Monday, November 23, 2009

Sign The Manhattan Declaration!

H/T Touchstone.
Attention! From the signers of Manhattan Declaration, :


We invite you to join with other Christians across the nation who support the sanctity of life, traditional marriage and religious liberty by endorsing the Manhattan Declaration.


Throughout the centuries, God has graciously provided His people with teachers and prophetic voices who apply His word to the critical issues of the day and who lead their hearers to embrace His life-giving authority and counsel in the midst of cultural madness. The Manhattan Declaration extends and honors that tradition, and we urge you to join us in affirming it. The Manhattan Declaration addresses with urgent eloquence the devaluation of human life, the corruption of marriage, and the erosion of religious liberty. With careful instruction, it brings light and clarity to all who read it. We trust that millions of believers will sign it, that countless others will be drawn or driven to give it fair consideration, and that our society will be changed by its strong yet sweetly reasonable message.

The Manhattan Declaration will be released this Friday, November 20, 2009, at a press conference in Washington D.C. It bears the signatures of many religious leaders, but this is just the beginning. The list of supports will grow dramatically in a short time and those who most need to hear this word will not be able to escape or downplay it. So please endorse this document by your signature and spread the word to others who might endorse it as well. Thank you.

Click here to view the Manhattan Declaration and lend your name to those who have already signed: http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/



Who Signed?

Friday, May 1, 2009

To Demonize and Criminalize Thought

Fair warning from Townhall:

...Lovers of free speech and free exercise of religion should awaken to the relentless effort of radical homosexual activists to validate their lifestyle by demonizing, criminalizing and silencing those who disagree with them. ...


... the House Judiciary Committee has already approved Barney Frank's bill, H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. The full House is expected to vote on the bill April 29, and various liberal groups, from gay activists to liberal religious organizations, are engaged in a full-court press to get this bill passed. ...

...I think the main purpose of this bill is to demonize and criminalize thought, especially the politically incorrect belief that homosexual behavior is either abnormal or sinful. It is to make an emphatic societal statement that this belief constitutes "hate" and possibly to lay the groundwork for outlawing speech expressing this belief, including from the pulpit.

I hardly think I'm being hysterical here. The practice of criminalizing peaceful expression of this belief has already occurred in other nations -- including Sweden, Canada and Great Britain -- and even in our own Philadelphia.

New York City authorities ordered the removal of billboards -- citing an anti-harassment ordinance -- that displayed various biblical versions of Leviticus 18:22, such as the New International Version's rendering, "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." Staten Island Borough President Guy Molinari reportedly publicly condemned the language in the displayed verse as "mean-spirited" and "hate speech."

Irrespective of your opinion on homosexual behavior, it is a distortion of the English language to say that it is hateful to believe it is somehow abnormal or even sinful. One can disapprove of behavior without hating those engaging in it; indeed, the Bible exhorts Christians to love, not hate. One can oppose hate crime legislation or same-sex marriage without being a homophobe -- another distortion of the language to paint the opposition as irrationally and immorally fearful of homosexuals. ... (more)

Christian teacher suspended after complaint about training time to promote homosexuality as normative

Let the indoctrination camps begin.

From Secular Heretic:

Kwabena Peat, 54, was one of several teachers that walked out of his school's compulsory training day in January, at which Sue Sanders, a prominent UK homosexualist activist, suggested that those who do not accept homosexuality as normal have 'issues' that need to be addressed.During the presentation Sanders started promoting homosexual lifestyles and suggested that those who had objections should sort out their prejudices.Mr. Peat wrote to the three staff members who organized the session at Park View Academy complaining about Sanders' "aggressive" presentation. Peat was suspended with pay pending outcome of disciplinary investigations after the staff members complained that, although they were senior to him, they felt "harassed and intimidated" by his complaint. (more)

Contact your representative now re H.R. 1913

H/T Bioethike
From Dr. Robert Gagnon:

Dear friends who live in the United States,
(Please feel free to circulate this correspondence widely and rapidly)
This is a matter of great urgency. Please take a moment to contact your representative in the U.S. House of Representatives and express your opposition to the homosexual “hate crimes” bill (H.R. 1913) that will likely be voted on sometime tomorrow (Wednesday). Call 202-225-3121 or 202-224-3121 or contact your representatives through http://www.congress.org/.

Support for a “hate” bill that enshrines “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” into federal law (note that it is not yet so enshrined) does not mean merely that you oppose hateful, violent acts against persons who self-identify as homosexuals, transsexuals, and cross-dressers. Laws are already in place protecting persons who identify as homosexual or transgendered. They are the same laws that protect all of us from violent physical or verbal attacks.

Support for such a bill means, in effect, that you are in favor of the federal government taking an official, legal stance that opposition to homosexual practice and transgenderism of any sort is hatred and bigotry akin to virulent racism and liable to state prosecution. Any statement against such homosexual practice or transgenderism could be prosecuted as an “incitement” or “inducement” of others to violence, no matter how loving and rationale that expression of opposition may be.

A “sexual orientation hate” crime bill does virtually all its damage in establishing “sexual orientation” as a category of being that is worth the federal government’s vigorous special protection. A person who has a problem with the behavior arising from homosexual “orientation” will be legally established as a “bigot,” even if he or she does not commit a violent crime. That status becomes codified in law. Your opposition to homosexual practice, no matter how loving and rationale, puts you in the category of a virulent racist who regards African Americans as morally inferior beings.

In establishing an official “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” protection category, “sexual orientation” hate laws make inevitable, so-called “employment nondiscrimination acts” for “sexual orientation” that turn out to be “employment discrimination acts” against people in the workplace who do not want to support a homosexualist agenda. Together they make inevitable the passage of legislation that mandates acceptance of “gay marriage.” It is not possible to be for a “sexual orientation thought-crime” bill and not also be for the enforcement of “gay marriage” because the former leads inevitably to the latter. That is how the courts in Massachusetts and, recently Iowa, operated. They moved from “sexual orientation” laws in “hate crime” and “employment” to treating as intrinsically discriminatory any opposition to “gay marriage.”

Look at how far things have already gone in Canada. Among those recently fined thousands of dollars are: Father Alphonse de Valk and Catholic Insight Magazine for speaking against homosexual behavior; Bill Whatcott, a Catholic activist, for producing pamphlets that called homosexual practice immoral (Whatcott was also “banned for life” from criticizing homosexuality); Stephen Boisson, a pastor, for a letter to a newspaper denouncing homosexual practice as immoral (also ordered to desist from expressing his views on homosexual practice in any public forum).

Can’t happen in the United States? Even though some high court justices have already made appeals to precedents in foreign law to support the homosexualist agenda here? Tell that to the freelance female photographer who on the grounds that it violated her Christian belief declined to photograph a lesbian wedding and, as a result, was ordered by the New Mexico Human Rights Commission to pay over $6000 to the lesbian couple.

This past year an African-American woman Crystal Dixon was removed from her position as associate vice president for human resources at the University of Toledo simply because she wrote an editorial in a newspaper saying that homosexual behavior should not be compared to being black.

Rolf Szabo, Richard Peterson, Kenneth Gee, Annie Coffey-Montes, and Albert Buonanno were all fired from their corporate or government jobs in the United States for not wanting to “celebrate” at their work station “sexual orientation” diversity.

A Christian ministry in New Jersey has been subject to state investigation for refusing to allow a lesbian civil union ceremony to be conducted on its property.

In California affirmation of homosexual practice is now mandatory for public schools from the earliest grades on up; teachers who refuse to go along are subject to termination.

Need more examples of this juggernaut of intolerance? Go to my online postings at http://www.robgagnon.net/AlleghenyCountyHomosexualBill.htm or http://www.robgagnon.net/ObamaWarOnChristians.htm.

I commend to you also an analysis by law professor Shawn Akers posted at http://americansfortruth.com/news/analysis-of-2009-hate-crimes-bill-hr-1913.html.

As Akers notes,
“This bill will certainly be construed in light of existing federal law including specifically United States Code Title 18, Section 2, that says that : “Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.” (emphasis added). This is the feared immediate nexus between the speech of a pastor or radio commentator and the actions of a deranged parishioner or listener. Proponents of the bill argue that it clearly, under its own language, applies only to acts of violence. This argument is misleading and naïve in that it implies that criminal liability would be available only for the person physically committing the violent act, while ignoring completely the likelihood that courts, especially ideologically driven, activist courts, will impose criminal liability on those deemed complicit in the violent act whether or not they physically contributed to the act….

“In other words, because penalties already exist for those who commit criminal acts, HR 1913 serves only to punish individuals for the beliefs, opinions, or convictions held at the time an act is committed. As such, HR 1913 does not punish criminal intent, but criminalizes thought….

“Tellingly, in the April 23, 2009 Judiciary Committee hearings on HR 1913, Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX) said unequivocally that “We need to protect victims against hateful words, hateful acts and even violent acts.”

Please contact your representative in Congress now.
Thank you,
Robert A. J. Gagnon, Ph.D.Author of : The Bible and Homosexual Practice : Texts and Hermeneutics (Abingdon Press).

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Time to Stand Up

Excellent post over at Bedlam and Parnassus:

If same-sex "marriage" takes hold of Rhode Island, it will be because of the "abysmal apathy" of Catholics who did not stand up for true marriage, says Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence.

Each Christian must stand up each time he sees an instance of that which is a lie or a proclamation of evil. For this reason, I note the following lies and evil statements from an article on soon-to-be-compulsory sodomite education in England. Fortunately, for the moment, Christian schools and families will have the choice to opt out of such teaching.

Terry Sanderson, head of the National Secular Society, called it "unfortunate" that the government is not forcing faith schools to teach the normalisation of homosexuality.

Unfortunate that the government is not forcing its citizens to do something? How heavy-handed would Mr. Sanderson like his government? (more)

Friday, April 24, 2009

Miss California's Warning for All of Us

I haven't been much interested in the Miss USA pageant since I quit salivating over the lingerie adds in the newspaper back in Jr High. But unless you've been under a rock the last few days you have no doubt been hearing of the brouhaha over Miss California's response to the question on same sex "marriage."

A nice summary can be found over at Pearl Diver:

So Miss California got baited and reeled in at the Miss USA Pageant. And, of course, now she’s being fried by the oh-so-neutral mainstream media we’ve all come to know and love. I am so proud to be a Californian right now! First, We the People speak our minds and establish that in California, marriage is between one man and one woman. Then, our “little Miss,” responds to a loaded question posed by gay blogger, Perez Hilton, with a very diplomatic, but firm response, “I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised.” (more)

Pearl goes on to discuss an interesting phenomenon with the searches on the subject focusing on the possibility that Miss C might be a Mormon. It's an interesting read as is the rest the blog over at Pearl's place.

But something caught my eye while reading the comments section. Avery interesting comment from Opine Editorials that said this:

"Miss Prejean is currently a student at San Diego Christian College, which is associated with Shadow Mountain Community Church at whose International Ministry Center Miss Prejean has volunteered. While virtually any faith would be proud to count Miss Prejean a member, it appears she is currently affiliated Southern Baptist.Here's the wrinkle: Miss Prejean's educational background would have been part of her application for the Miss USA pageant, to which all judges would have been given access. Mr. Hilton likely knew Miss Prejean's Christian faith when he targeted his highly divisive question at her. Donald Trump, the pageant owner, attributes the question to her "bad luck." I'm not so sure."

And I think he is on to something here. I think Miss California was targeted specifically for her views on this subject and I think it bodes ill for all of us.

STR says this:

The fact is, decent Americans are the ones being bullied here, citizens who are people of conscience, overflowing with tolerance in the classic sense, but are being pushed around and oppressed because they disagree with the extreme views of the minority. Instead of making the case for traditional marriage, maybe we should also point out what's really going on behind the rhetoric that appeals to fairness and equality.

Let me tell you what’s really going on here.
Good people with honest differences with the Homosexual agenda are being bullied.


First, Americans are incredibly tolerant of homosexuality, especially considering the moral concerns lots of folks have with it. Same-sex couples have been getting married for years in private ceremonies. No one interferes, and no one should.

Americans are happy to give equal rights, and that is done virtually everywhere. However, they do not want their arms twisted into approving something they do not think is good for America or for families. That’s the real issue. (more)

The expansion of hate law legislation ( a dubious idea to begin with) only adds to the concern for the loss of religious freedom and free speech.
Hate Crimes Legislation Draws Criticism from Christian Groups

And in order to pass the legislation proponents often (surprise) play fast and loose with the facts.

From OneNewsNow
Andrea Lafferty, executive director of the Traditional Values Coalition, notes that Democrats were forced to eliminate a key portion of the bill -- the findings section. "We exposed the fact that they claimed, they have fraudulent claims that there was an epidemic of hate against homosexuals and drag queens, transgenders -- and that claim was the foundation of the bill," she notes. "They claimed that homosexuals are fleeing across state lines to avoid persecution, and that perpetrators are crossing state lines to commit crimes against these gays, lesbians, and transgenders, and that they have trouble purchasing goods and services or finding employment. We nailed them on the fact that that's a lie." Lafferty says during yesterday's markup hearing, Democrats neglected to mention that in America -- a country of 300 million people -- there have been only 1,521 cases of hate against homosexual, bisexual, and transgender people. (more)

Lifesite shows us what may be at stake:

...In a motion almost completely ignored by the mainstream media, the Judiciary Committee voted 15-12 to allow the hotly contested H.R. 1913, known as the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Act of 2009, to go forward.

The measure would grant the federal government a new authority to prosecute any violent crime anywhere in the country that is perceived to be "motivated by prejudice" against a number of protected characteristics, including "sexual orientation" and "gender identity."
Christian leaders are particularly concerned that attempts to secure the right to speak against the homosexual lifestyle and its normalization have failed. Among many rejected proposals for the bill was one offered by Rep. Louis Gohmert, R-Texas, which would have included a clause ensuring ministers could not be prosecuted for abetting a "hate crime" because they preached the Christian perspective on homosexuality.


Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the Congressman who introduced the bill, claimed the bill posed no danger to Christian free speech, saying that it "only applies to bias-motivated violent crimes and does not impinge public speech or writing in any way." Section 10 of H.R. 1913 states: "Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by, or any activities protected by the free speech or free exercise clauses of, the First Amendment to the Constitution."

Yet free speech advocates have pointed out that under current U.S. law, any action that "abets, counsels, commands, [or] induces" a perceived "hate crime" shares in the guilt of that crime, and is therefore punishable.

The danger posed by the "hate crime" legislation to Christian ministers was confirmed when Congress considered practically identical legislation in 2007. Then, Rep. Artur Davis, D-Ala., admitted during a hearing on the measure that it could be used to prosecute pastors for preaching the biblical perspective on homosexuality, given the perception that it may have "induced" a later hate crime.
...(more)

Thursday, April 23, 2009

NOM CONGRATULATES THE PEOPLE OF CONNECTICUT

Press Release from the National Organization for Marriage (NOM)

Princeton, NJ) - The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) applauds the Connecticut legislature which, in a surprise move today, adopted substantive religious liberty protections as part of what was expected to be a routine bill implementing the Connecticut court decision ordering same-sex marriage. “We are just grateful that the Connecticut legislators acknowledged and addressed the serious potential implications of same-sex marriage for traditional faith communities,” said Maggie Gallagher, president of NOM. “We hope this decision represents a change of heart among gay marriage advocates and a new willingness to accept broad conscience protections.”NOM launched its “Gathering Storm” ad campaign in Connecticut and neighboring states last week to help alert the people to the threat on religious liberty brought on by same sex marriage legislation. Robocall technology was also used to generate citizen outreach to elected officials regarding SB 899, a bill that followed a state Supreme Court decision granting same-sex marriages. “Thousands of ordinary Connecticut voters called up legislators. We are pleased that our Gathering Storm ad campaign could help put this issue on the map even in a blue state like Connecticut,” said Brian Brown, executive director of NOM.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Intrinsically Disordered

A legal complaint has been filed against a Spanish bioethics professor who had the nerve to speak the truth.

LifeSite has the story but Secular Heretic has a number of good links including one speaking of the dangers of homosexuality to one's health and others outlining the dangers to the freedom of thought and religion that the homosexual activists pose to the rest of the world. Like this one:

David Booker an employee of the "English Churches Housing Group" has been suspended for answering questions about his faith to a colleague at work

Go over to Secular Heretic and have a look.

Sunday, April 12, 2009

The Loss of Religious Freedom and Freedom of Speech

As a follow up to a previous post, also by the Washington Post, on what the redefining of marriage will cost. World wide, the freedom of speech, long a cherished bullwark of western civilization, is under assault and any many cases has been killed.

For years, the Western world has listened aghast to stories out of Iran, Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern nations of citizens being imprisoned or executed for questioning or offending Islam. Even the most seemingly minor infractions elicit draconian punishments. ...

...Among the new blasphemers is legendary French actress Brigitte Bardot, who was convicted last June of "inciting religious hatred" for a letter she wrote in 2006 to then-Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, saying that Muslims were ruining France. It was her fourth criminal citation for expressing intolerant views of Muslims and homosexuals. Other Western countries, including Canada and Britain, are also cracking down on religious critics.

Emblematic of the assault is the effort to pass an international ban on religious defamation supported by United Nations General Assembly President Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann. Brockmann is a suspended Roman Catholic priest who served as Nicaragua's foreign minister in the 1980s under the Sandinista regime, the socialist government that had a penchant for crushing civil liberties before it was tossed out of power in 1990.... (more)

Beetle has some examples of actual healthcare professionals who have been pressured to violate ethical standards.

And over at Get Religion they're also talking about the WaPo article and have pulled in a number of different viewpoints on the matter like this one from GayPatriot:

Ms. Salmon cites a number of examples where individuals, organizations and entrepreneurs were fired for, fimed for or barred from refusing service to or inclusion of gay people. Now, I personally think these groups are wrong to so exclude gays, but they’re not requiring me to buy their product or participate in their activities.

At the same time, if a gay group wanted to exclude Christians from its membership, it should be free to do so. Their right to do that would come from the First Amendment’s clause on “the right of the people peaceably to assemble” and also possibly the Ninth Amendment.

But, these constitutional protections don’t seem to be a barrier to gay groups in their zeal to reduce the freedom of private individuals and organizations. They are prevailing in courts according to Ms. Salmon “because an individual’s religious views about homosexuality cannot be used to violate gays’ right to equal treatment under the law.”

Say what? That’s not equal treatment under the law. That’s using the law to limit individuals’ freedom, just as it would be if Christians used the law to mandate that gay organizations include ex-gays or gay business serve the Christian Coalition
. (more)