Half-Baked Politics
Published 6-Oct-10 in The Times
Recently, a downtown Indianapolis bakery, “Just Cookies”, has found itself in the middle of a debacle. A gay college group wanted them to bake some special cookies for an event. The owners declined based upon their moral beliefs and the example they are to set for their children. The activist group has now incited the City of Indianapolis and the City Market Board who leases out the storefront to investigate the store owners. When the city adopted an ordinance regarding “sexual orientation” 5 years ago, they were warned of such inevitable conflict. Now, a business is in jeopardy and tax payers will have to fund an investigation and potential legal process.
What’s ironic is that it’s been turned into an issue of the store owners’ “discrimination” and “intolerance” of gays, when in fact; there is discrimination and intolerance against the owners and their morality. These and other code words like “diversity” and “inclusion” have been cunningly redefined and systematically used to further the homosexual agenda. Also interesting is the methodical transition from sexual “preference” to “orientation”, which gets one’s mind away from the idea of a moral choice that seems to square up with the fact that people do switch in and out of that lifestyle.
Another objective of proponents of this agenda is to portray such lifestyles as “human rights” while attempting to usurp a “protected class” status in order to leverage lawsuits to force their acceptance on society. And granting such status is proving to be a legal liability. When, in truth, legitimate protected classes based on race, true genetic gender, national origin, age and disability do not have direct moral connotations or implications as does the homosexual lifestyle. There is paramount difference between unchangeable characteristics and a reversible moral choice. Apparently, the city and many others have succumbed to this redefined morality.
What’s troubling is that the freedoms of select religious expression and right of conscience are being sacrificed on the altar of the new state-sponsored religion of secular humanism. Such societal conflicts exist because there are opposing moral standards rooted in religious beliefs. Regardless if those beliefs are based upon the authority of God or man, they are held with equal fervor and devotion. And to some degree, both types discriminate in the true sense. When it’s on a personal level, at least you have a chance of finding someone else who’s sympathetic just as this gay group found another bakery. When it’s the government, you have a hard time escaping the oppressive clutches of tyranny.
This is precisely why any governing body should remain neutral by not promoting radical agendas that carry moral baggage such as the “hate crimes” legislation that passed last year and has similar or worse implications. And this is why the city of Indianapolis should take a more educated look at its ordinances.
What’s ironic is that it’s been turned into an issue of the store owners’ “discrimination” and “intolerance” of gays, when in fact; there is discrimination and intolerance against the owners and their morality. These and other code words like “diversity” and “inclusion” have been cunningly redefined and systematically used to further the homosexual agenda. Also interesting is the methodical transition from sexual “preference” to “orientation”, which gets one’s mind away from the idea of a moral choice that seems to square up with the fact that people do switch in and out of that lifestyle.
Another objective of proponents of this agenda is to portray such lifestyles as “human rights” while attempting to usurp a “protected class” status in order to leverage lawsuits to force their acceptance on society. And granting such status is proving to be a legal liability. When, in truth, legitimate protected classes based on race, true genetic gender, national origin, age and disability do not have direct moral connotations or implications as does the homosexual lifestyle. There is paramount difference between unchangeable characteristics and a reversible moral choice. Apparently, the city and many others have succumbed to this redefined morality.
What’s troubling is that the freedoms of select religious expression and right of conscience are being sacrificed on the altar of the new state-sponsored religion of secular humanism. Such societal conflicts exist because there are opposing moral standards rooted in religious beliefs. Regardless if those beliefs are based upon the authority of God or man, they are held with equal fervor and devotion. And to some degree, both types discriminate in the true sense. When it’s on a personal level, at least you have a chance of finding someone else who’s sympathetic just as this gay group found another bakery. When it’s the government, you have a hard time escaping the oppressive clutches of tyranny.
This is precisely why any governing body should remain neutral by not promoting radical agendas that carry moral baggage such as the “hate crimes” legislation that passed last year and has similar or worse implications. And this is why the city of Indianapolis should take a more educated look at its ordinances.
Related Pages
|