There are any number of reasons to denounce the religious right, from its willfully blind resistance to empirical evidence on evolution to its cartoonish depictions of the homosexual “agenda,“ whatever that is (whatever it is, if it even exists, it isn’t what conservative Christians say it is).

But the religious right too often gets a bum rap from people who don’t bother to inform themselves about the object of their denunciation. In particular, one often hears that religious opponents of abortion care about children only up to the moment of birth, not afterward: “If they love kids so much, why don’t they promote adoption? Hunh?“

Well, actually, they do. Those tuning in to American Family Radio in the past few days heard quite a bit about it.

Pat Robertson’s buffoonish comments make headlines, and deservedly so. But the good work of well-intentioned believers rarely does, and that’s a pity. Knee-jerk critics of the religious right would do themselves—and civic discourse—a favor if they actually tuned in and listened to what the religious right is saying. They might be surprised at how much of it is inward-looking (i.e., how can we become better persons?) rather than outward-looking.

They might even take away a lesson from that.

You bet. State your case to your heart’s content. Just don’t expect special rights and privileges for your “case,“ such as denying others a seat at the table. Equal treatment under the law is not “special treatment.“

How are gays being denied a “seat at the table”?

How are they being denied at all?

From what I can see they want special treatment and consideration. At the expense of people who find their lifestyles objectionable.

Tell you what, that seat at the table argument is fine. As long as I’m allowed to state my case and objections without censure.

Still want me at the table?

Most progressives would not…

Tom, do you or do you not find the rule I suggested fair?

Interesting that the consensus seems to be that anyone NOT implicitly endorsing with homosexual unions (and all that it implies) MUST be knuckle-dragging, rude, insensitive homophobes.

Nice to know that we can have a civil (OOPS, there’s that word again) discussion about different views of aberrant behavior.

And please enlighten me where it is WRONG to criticize anything in this great country of ours. It seems you’re all quite comfortable criticizing MY point of view.

Some would find homosexuality morally objectionable. Do they not have that right?

Some of us actually do see avid Christian followers/activists as good people—even when not agreeing with 100% of their stances.

First of all, I realize that the ‘controversial’ agendas attributed to the Christian Right are not their province solely. For example, you can have a group of Churchgoers condeming homosexuals or whatever…but this attitude can also be found in a red-neck pool hall or a black barber shop. I.e., its not just the practicing Christians.

Views on issues or no views on issues: I’d much rather have a practicing Christian for a neighbor than I would have a boisterous, trashy moron living next door.

Tom, what in the world gives you the right to rudely treat others as you would not want to be treated, and then have the gall to label your behavior a “moral absolute”?

There is a very simple rule that we all can agree to follow. Everyone gets a seat at the table, and no one gets to claim that their own seat requires someone else being denied theirs. If that makes you feel marginalized, that’s just too bad. Learn to coexist.

Speaking of moral absolutes, I’m pretty certain that it’s wrong to criticize anyone for trying to lead a happy life in a manner that is most comfortable to them.

Criticize gays all you want, but don’t expect that everyone will agree that you’re motivated by morality.

Even more symptomatic of the marginalizing of Christians is the utter disdain the left has for their opinions regarding homosexuality.

Or as Bill Maher frequently quips, “they just hate to see 2 men kissing”, as he lampoons knuckle dragging conservatives for issues ranging from the Iraq War to minimum wage.

Why is it perfectly acceptable, expected even for gays to flaunt their lifestyle in closed interpersonal situations (schools, places of employment, the military), but implicitly NOT OK for straights to in any way criticize or respond to what they consider a deviant lifestyle?

Has our PC society successfully banned the right to make ANY moral judgments whatsoever?

IMO the progressive agenda which advocates the dismissal of moral absolutes is irresponsible, even suicidal in this day and age.

Post Your Comments: