Veteran pop star and homosexual Elton John wants to ban religion completely because he says it promotes hatred of gays (see story below). People of faith are outraged, but do they understand that the homosexual lobby seeks to accomplish part of Elton s dream i.e.
, banning the outworking of traditional religion that results in speech and actions opposed to homosexuality?
There is an inherent incompatibility between rights based on homosexuality ( sexual orientation ) and traditional First Amendment and religious freedoms. For a good book on this, I recommend my friend Janet Folger s , available on her .
I. Step One in banning religion (critical of homosexuality): push Christian and religious speech defending Biblical sexual morality to the fringes; punish it, harass it or outlaw it altogether, all the while celebrating the former taboo of homosexuaity
In John s England, a Christian pro-family advocate, Minorities Support Unit simply for passing out a Biblical flier opposed to homosexuality outside a gay Mardi Gras event. The charges were dropped, but free speech and religious liberty are in jeopardy in this once-Christian land, with UK police hot on the trail of homophobic speech.
Consider the case of 67-year-old Christian street preacher , a sufferer of Asperger s Syndrome who in 2001 was holding a sign in the town square of Bournemouth that read, Stop Immorality, Stop Homosexuality, Stop Lesbianism. After Hammond was physically harassed by youth, police arrested him (not the thugs) after receiving complaints from homosexuals about his placard.
A magistrate found the preacher guilty of using abusive, threatening or insulting speech that could lead to harm coming to someone nearby (even though it was Hammond who was harmed!
). Hammond s sign was ordered destroyed as if it were a dangerous weapon (which is actually how radical queer activists regard Biblical truth). Click for a good article about Hammond s case.
In 1996, in Madison, Wisconsin, Ralph Ovadal, then with Wisconsin Christians United, was . Despite the hateful motivation of the assailant (he detested one of Ovadal s group s signs, Homosexuality Is Sin ), and the existence of a strong hate crimes law in Madison, the attacker was never charged with a hate crime. Indeed, he received just a slap on the wrist despite the severe injuries caused to Ovadal.
How differently would the case have been handled had it been Ovadal who viciously attacked a homosexual protester?
II. Step Two in banning religion (critical of homosexuality): create a definition of the family that is unacceptable to Bible believers and traditional religions, then mandate that all social agencies, corporations and ministries adhere to that state definition.
Earlier this year in Boston, Catholic Charities of Boston announced that it was , because the Church could not countenance placing adoptive children in homosexual households, which the Vatican regards as gravely immoral. Placing children in homosexual-led homes is required under the state s pro- gay nondiscrimination law.
In California, a requires that large companies doing business with the government provide DP coverage for their employees.
The state law followed a (copied by New York and other major cities) that forced local businesses doing business with the city to carry DP benefits for homosexual couples if they offer benefits for married couples.
If moral-minded businessmen, landlords and even Christian schools and ministry leaders are forced to recognize and reward sinful homosexual couples, then the practice of their religion has been banned in this key area of their life.
III.
Step Three in banning religion (critical of homosexuality): Add homosexuality ( sexual orientation ) and gender confusion ( gender identity ) to the list of criteria for civil rights laws and diversity policies in corporations. Then enforce these laws and policies against Christians, all in the name of tolerance. Chip away at the concept of religious exemptions to these laws.
Colleges like Arizona State University, citing their school s sexual orientation nondiscrimination codes, are asserting that homosexual students despite their refusal to sign a Christian Statement of Faith.
Last year in the northern suburbs of Chicago, Matt Barber (now AFT s Corporate Outreach Director) was Allstate later settled with Barber.
In Minneapolis, the Police Department from its list of approved contractors for screening police candidates following protests by liberal diversity advocates who learned that Campion once was a board member of the , a state affiliate of Focus on the Family.
Nobody came forth to file a discrimination complaint against Campion, yet he was not put back on the contractors list.
Outside Detroit, Michigan, in defiance of clear Church teachings. Jeff Montgomery, Michigan s top homosexual activist, complained to the Detroit Free Press that such firings are allowed in Michigan since the state has no sexual orientation law.
Thus Montgomery would deny the freedom of a Catholic school to make hiring and firing decisions based on its own religious beliefs, so as to provide wholesome role models for its students?
In Canada, a Toronto printer and Christian, Scott Brockie, was fined $5,000 by the Ontario Human Rights Commission for . Brockie incurred huge legal bills defending his name.
In an interim report, the Human Rights Commission said that Brockie s rights as a Christian were subordinate to those of homosexuals not to be discriminated against, and that he must restrict the practice of Christianity to his home and church, and not take it with him into the public marketplace. (See Step One above.)
Consider also the , which in 2000 came within one vote on the U.
S. Supreme Court of being forced to hire homosexual and atheist Scoutmasters, despite the Scouts credo to believe in God and to be morally straight.
It s easy to laugh off Elton John s comments as just another nonsensical rant by a liberal celebrity.
But he is spot on, as the Brits say, about the real target of the gay/transgender agenda: the faithful practice of true religion, with its pesky demands for moral purity without reference to fads. The gay lobby is now fully engaged in demonizing Christians and traditionalists as haters and discriminators. From there they will try to use America s growing network of hate crimes and sexual orientation laws to criminalize anti-gay actions.
We ve seen the future of gay rights in Canada and Europe and it is not a happy one for Christian dissenters. Banning religion? Well, not exactly.
How about just homophobic religion?
The following is excerpted from , by John-Henry Westen, published Nov 13, 2006, by LifeSite News:
Homosexual activism has led singer Elton John to call for the banning of all religion. In a discussion last August with Jake Shears of Scissors Sisters and published yesterday by The Observer Music Monthly, Elton John said:
I think religion has always tried to turn hatred towards gay people.
Religion promotes the hatred and spite against gays. But there are so many Christian people I know who are gay and love their religion . .
. From my point of view I would ban religion completely, even though there are some wonderful things about it. I love the idea of the teachings of Jesus Christ and the beautiful stories about it, which I loved in Sunday school and I collected all the little stickers and put them in my book.
But the reality is that organised religion doesn t seem to work. It turns people into hateful lemmings and it s not really compassionate.
The UK (GALHA) jumped on the opportunity to bash Christianity.
GALHA s secretary George Broadhead said: It should be quite clear to anyone that these days most hostility to gay relationships and gay rights comes from religious sources, notably Evangelical Anglicans, Christian pressure groups like the Christian Institute, the Vatican, and Islamic organisations.
Hardly a day passes without some anti-gay proclamations, fatwa or edict being issued by one religious leader or another, he said.
Sir Elton John speaks for many when he pinpoints religion as a primary generator of homophobia, Mr.
Broadhead concluded.
News RSS