Mark's Views, Perhaps — from behind my eyeballs
I’d been thinking that the opposite of “gay” pride is “straight” humility.
But I just wondered a bit ago if matching up double opposites would have the same effect as a double negative in English.
Thus the opposite of gay pride might be straight pride or gay humility.
Because straight humility might be doubly opposite of gay pride and thus Read it all
I know this is from the United Kingdom, but still….
In a landmark judgment, which will have a serious impact on the future of fostering and adoption in the UK, the High Court has suggested that Christians with traditional views on sexual ethics are unsuitable as foster carers, and that homosexual ‘rights’ trump freedom of conscience in the UK. The Judges stated that Christian beliefs on sexual ethics may be ‘inimical’ to children, and they implicitly upheld an Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) submission that children risk being ‘infected’ by Christian moral beliefs.
Today’s ruling relates to the dispute between married couple Eunice and Owen Johns and Derby City Council. The Johns applied to the Council in 2007 to foster a child but the Council blocked their application because they objected that the Johns were not willing to promote the practise of homosexuality to a young child. In November 2010 both parties jointly asked the Court to rule on whether the Johns were able to foster children, or whether they could be excluded from doing so under equality law because of their Christian beliefs.
Today (28th February) that judgment has been released. The judges declined to make the statement that the Johns, wanting to re-establish their fostering application, had sought. Instead, the judgment strongly affirms homosexual rights over freedom of conscience and leaves the Johns currently unable to foster a child as desired, despite their proven track record as foster parents. There now appears to be nothing to stop the increasing bar on Christians who wish to adopt or foster children but who are not willing to compromise their beliefs by promoting the practise of homosexuality to small children.
And here’s a March 4 update: Johns Fostering Case: Effects of the Ruling and Further Analysis
Frankly, I was astounded to read this earlier this morning.
Furthermore, it happened Saturday night. I didn’t learn about it till this morning. Lemme see — Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday — six days later. And I don’t exactly stay isolated from the news.
Has this story been buried?
President Obama delivered an unprecedented message to the Human Rights Campaign Saturday night. Sounding more like a homosexual activist than a sitting president, Obama went well beyond his expected message of “I’m here with you” on the homosexual agenda.
“My expectation is that when you look back on these years, you will see a time in which we put a stop to discrimination against gays and lesbians — whether in the office or on the battlefield,” Obama told an estimated audience of 3,000. “You will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognize relationships between two men or two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman.”
Even Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese was stunned at the breadth of Obama’s statement, calling it “something quite remarkable.”
“This was a historic night when we felt the full embrace and commitment of the President of the United States,” Solmonese said in a post-speech statement. “It’s simply unprecedented.”
Sounds like the folks at Human Rights Campaign got far more hope and change than they dared expect.
Oh, America!
“Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.
“Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil;
“If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land:
“But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it” (Isaiah 1:10,16,19,20).
Here’s my source: Obama: Homosexual Relationships ‘Just as Real and Admirable’ as Heterosexual Marriage
Congress acts to extend hate crimes to cover gays
The House voted Thursday to make it a federal crime to assault people because of their sexual orientation, significantly expanding the hate crimes law enacted in the days after Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination in 1968.
With expected passage by the Senate, federal prosecutors will for the first time be able to intervene in cases of violence perpetrated against gays.
Civil rights groups and their Democratic allies have been trying for more than a decade to broaden the reach of hate crimes law. This time it appears they will succeed. The measure is attached to a must-pass $680 billion defense policy bill and President Barack Obama – unlike President George W. Bush – is a strong supporter. The House passed the defense bill 281-146, with 15 Democrats and 131 Republicans in opposition.
[…]
Many Republicans, normally stalwart supporters of defense bills, voted against it because of the addition of what they referred to as “thought crimes” legislation.
“This is radical social policy that is being put on the defense authorization bill, on the backs of our soldiers, because they probably can’t pass it on its own,” House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio said.
GOP opponents were not assuaged by late changes in the bill to strengthen protections for religious speech and association – critics argued that pastors expressing beliefs about homosexuality could be prosecuted if their sermons were connected to later acts of violence against gays.
[…]
Some 45 states have hate crimes statutes, and the bill would not change the current situation where investigations and prosecutions are carried out by state and local officials.
[…]
Tom McClusky, vice president of the conservative Family Research Council’s legislative arm said the next step likely would be contesting the legislation in court. “The religious protections are pretty flimsy,” he said. He contended that Democrats were trying to move their “homosexual agenda” this year because it would prove unpopular with voters next year.
Two stories via Persecuted Church:
Hutterite colony loses battle over photo ID
Yesterday (July 24, 2009) the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that all driver’s licences in Alberta must require photo ID regardless of one’s religious beliefs. After hearing the appeal by members of the Wilson Hutterite Colony more than nine months ago, the Supreme Court of Canada delivered a close 4-3 judgment to uphold Alberta rules requiring a digital photo for all new licences. Some Hutterite sects, however, believe the second commandment forbidding idolatry prohibits them from willingly having their photograph taken.
Saskatchewan marriage commissioner loses appeal
Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Janet McMurty has upheld the ruling of the human rights tribunal that marriage commissioner, Orville Nichols did not have the right to refuse to marry a same-sex couple in April 2004 on basis of his personal Christian beliefs. The tribunal had also ordered Nichols to pay the complainant (a man identified only as M.J.) $2,500 in compensation.
Nichols had appealed the May 23, 2009 ruling, arguing that his religious beliefs should be protected under Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms. McMurty dismissed his argument, however, in her 39-page ruling today, concluding that the human rights tribunal was “correct in its finding that the commission had established discrimination and that accommodation of Mr. Nichols’ religious beliefs was not required.”
The Hutterite story is of particular interest to me since their historical roots are Anabaptist, just like mine.
How shall we then not fear…
Is that how we overcome homophobia as well? (I need a barfing emoticon for that term! Term, OK? Not people.)
Here’s the headline that precipitates such thoughts: Gays, lesbians in worldwide call for end to homophobia
How do I know I suffer from homophobia?
How do I overcome it?
Here’s another headline this morning: Obama urges “fair-minded” abortion debate
Fair-minded — what’s that?
What does it sound like?
What are some fair-minded words?
And now…to connect the first headline to the second:
Mr. President, world citizens, ladies and laddies: I call for an end to life-o-phobia.
Thank you.