Google
 
Web rhymeswithright.mu.nu

November 11, 2008

Intolerant Gays Attacking Religion

Iíve long been on record condemning Fred Phelps and his malignant klan for their disgusting activities. Their protests of funerals of homosexuals and servicemembers are a disgrace, though I am thankful that our nationís laws and constitution protect the right of the folks from Westboro Baptist Church to spew their warped religious faith.

That said, there have been three assaults on the religious beliefs of some Americans by homosexual activists over the last week or so that are equally deserving of condemnation.

Letís consider the first Ė the assaults endured by the Mormon faith in the wake of the Proposition 8 victory. Not content to accept the voice of the people on the issue, gay rights groups have targeted the LDS Church for attack and special punishment Ė with one writer for Huffington Post going so far as to demand that the Mormons be stripped of their recognition as a religious group despite the fact that they have remained fully within the (arguably unconstitutional) restrictions imposed upon political activities by religious organizations. Indeed, one prominent celebrity opined in a television interview that Mormons are not good Americans because they had acted to write their values into law Ė not noting the implicitly hypocritical nature of his argument that only those who agreed with him should be permitted to have their values so established. I guess they feel that appealing to religious bigotry in an effort to promote their own cause (not to mention racial bigotry, like that of Roseanne Barr) is a small price to pay for overturning the will of the people as has now been expressed by religiously and racially diverse voters in 30 of the 50 states.

But that is not all we have seen in recent weeks. Not content to allow religious believers to freely practice their religion unmolested, a church in Dallas was picketed this past weekend because the pastorís sermon was to deal with the negative treatment of homosexuality in the Scriptures.

About 100 people stood in front of First Baptist Church of Dallas on Sunday morning to protest Dr. Robert Jeffress' sermon, "Why Gay Is Not O.K."

When one boils down the argument of the protesters, it is essentially that not only may Christians not seek to have their moral values on the issue written into law, but they also may not preach them from the pulpit, teach them in a Sunday School class, or in any way disseminate them. Iíd have to argue that theirs is a pretty crabbed view of religious tolerance, given that they were doing nothing less than protesting a religious service. Iím curious Ė how did their picketing in any way, shape, or form differ from the sort of thing done by Fred Phelps and his followers? Where, pray tell, is the condemnation of this event?

But that is not the worst of it Ė in Michigan a church was invaded by homosexual activists who disrupted their service.

A gay anarchist group infiltrated the Mt. Hope Church in Eaton County Sunday morning, disrupting a service by pulling a fire alarm, dropping leaflets and yelling at parishioners, a pastor said.

The group, Bash Back, was simultaneously picketing outside the church, beating on buckets and using a megaphone to shout ďJesus was a homoĒ and other slogans as confused churchgoers continued to enter the building.

Members of Bash Back issued a press release Tuesday saying that it targeted Mt. Hope, a church that claims a flock of around 5,000, because it is, "complicit in the repression of queers in Michigan and beyond."

Now imagine, if you will, that Phelpsí followers were to invade a meeting being conducted by a gay rights group Ė or the services of a congregation of the Metropolitan Community Church. Wouldnít there have been arrests? Charges filed regarding hate crimes and civil rights violations? National media coverage of the outrageous evil they had committed? Interestingly enough, not one major media outlet in the Lansing area even bothered to report the matter. So much for objective journalism.

And yet when Christians and other believers argue that the efforts of the gay rights movement are a threat to their religious freedom, they are told that they have nothing to worry about. Who are we to believe Ė the liberal gay rights activists or our own eyes?





|| Greg, 07:47 PM || Permalink || Comments (21) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Trackback Information for Intolerant Gays Attacking Religion

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blog2.mu.nu/cgi/trackback.cgi/255312
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Intolerant Gays Attacking Religion'.

Comments on Intolerant Gays Attacking Religion

Do Christians have to go through an "Irony-ectomey"? Intolerant gays?? OK so it's both tolerant and a "right" for Christians to call gays abominations, and worse, because of their 2,000 year book's god said so? It's both tolerant and a right for Christians to use the political system to force their bigoted views on all of us? Just because the majority of California's voters are bigoted makes it all OK? The despicable Phelps celebrates the death of good Americans, calls for the death of "fags" and spews hatred all over everyone. Of course he's not a "True Christian TM". In any event, he is allowed to carry on with his evil protests. When the majority is morally wrong, then is shouldn't be "majority rules". And it is morally wrong to deny basic humans rights of a class of people, any class of people. Except for those that went into the church, all the rest of these protesters had every right to point out such Christian hypocrisy.

|| Posted by Red Mann, November 13, 2008 01:38 PM ||

In other words, you don't really believe in democracy, religious freedom, or freedom of speech.

Thank you for clarifying.

By the way -- there is no human right to gay marriage, or to prevent the free exercise of religion in the name of political protest. You have no place talking about human rights until such time as you begin respecting the rights of Christians.

|| Posted by Rhymes With Right, November 13, 2008 07:28 PM ||

Now whether someone is gay, lesbian, christian, islam, straight, athiest, it is morally wrong to deny basic humans rights of a class of people which is true, but it is also forgotten that everyone I mean every individual person has a right to choose, and to except, what they want and the battle here is christianity Vs. homosexuality. now the gay rights activist(people)want everyone here in the U.S.A to EXEPT not TOLERATE their views, belief there way of life and their choice, which is fine and dandy exept for the fact that they want to take away other people(christians) views, belief, there way of life and choice, they don't want EXEPT or TOLERATE them.
People are People and as was stated before it is morally wrong to deny basic humans rights of a class of people which also means we have a right to fight for what we want for, believe what we want to believe to say and to be as hyprocritcal as we choose, as for this "Except for those that went into the church, all the rest of these protesters had every right to point out such Christian hypocrisy", No they did not they're just as bad because they show their own hypocrisy and intolerance towards christians(people)and their beliefs views and rights,If and when christians do the same thing to homosexuals(people)show their hypocrisy and intolerance towards homosexuals(people). Just as homosexuals (people)have the right to fight for what they believe so do the christians(people)have the right to fight what they believe.
Everyone wants christians(people)to stop putting their views and beliefs on everybody right,why?. Why should they stop,everybody else is putting their views where ever they want sounds like hypocrisy to me.You can't talk about morality here saying "nd it is morally wrong to deny basic humans rights of a class of people any class of people" and beforehand say When the majority is morally wrong, then is shouldn't be "majority rules". that is contradiction and hypocrisy at its best.Here in the U.S.A we fight for what we belive until there is no fighting left there is the majority not immoral people it cant be that way ,But as long as there is controversy this pushing ,and shoving,and hurting each other crap is not going to work you force people to believe and exept and fight for what you believe in, But you do have a right speak and explain what you believe in,fight for what you believe in,but remeber there will always be someone to accept or oppose for what your fighting for and it is their right.I am christian (person) and I love all Homosexuals(people)gay,lesbian,bi,tran, as does GOD and if you so choose not to believe in god thats your choice, God is still gonna love you regardless we never said we were perfect we are not some of us know and understand the word of god and some thtget the word of god distorted the.christians that hate homosexuals ,white ,black,and brown people, are misguided the word of god does not say to hate anyone,It says to love your neighbor as yourself.
people we love you ,sincerily,but please stop forgetting that we are people too,just because 1 or 2 or 3 christians or groups treated you badly gives you the right to turn around and treat ALL christians badly,we are people we are al not the same we all understand differently from each other violence on either side wont work.And meant accepted not exepted.

|| Posted by mike, November 13, 2008 08:45 PM ||

ďIn other words, you don't really believe in democracy, religious freedom, or freedom of speech.Ē
Nice strawman. Who said I donít believe in democracy? Democracy is not mob rule, thatís why we have a federalist system. The majority claimed blacks didnít have the same rights as whites Ė Jim Crow, whites only here, whites only there, lynchings Ė all in my lifetime. The majority (men) didnít think women should vote and on and on. BTW most of those who supported this bigotry used the bible as their authority. Yes, I believe people have a right to practice their religion as they see fit, they just donít have any right to extend their beliefs to anyone else. Apparently you donít think gays should have freedom of speech just because they donít like Christians calling them abominations and telling them theyíll burn in hell.
Freedom of religious expression does not mean that your beliefs and your statements are exempt from criticism. Just because you say it as a Christian doesnít make it true, or right. History is replete with cruel and vicious behavior of those proclaiming they are following the wishes of their god. Donít even bother with the Hitler, Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot references; they have all been debunked over and over. I personally believe all religion is based on delusional thinking, but thatís my opinion and Iím as entitled to it as you are to yours. But if preachers stood in their pulpits and called any other class of people abominations, all hell would break lose; except for atheists, of course. Condemning and denigrating atheists is perfectly OK, right?
There is no human right to any kind of marriage, itís a cultural convention which Christians in this country have misappropriated as belong to them and them alone. The only real argument I have ever seen against gays is purely religious. Gay marriage will not destroy hetero marriage; thatís pure foolishness. Gays do not want to steal your children. Gays want to be just like everyone else, to be with the one they love and have all the legal rights that append thereto.

|| Posted by Red Mann, November 13, 2008 09:32 PM ||

Why so much anger towards christians you mention "all religion is based on delusional thinking" and yes you are entitled to it yet you focus so much on christianity why do you hate christians so much because of our beliefs?
You say that "Yes, I believe people have a right to practice their religion as they see fit, they just donít have any right to extend their beliefs to anyone else."Why not you're doing the samething in stating that we don't have the right to extend our beliefs to anyone else of course we do just as you have the right to EXPRESS yours not FORCE yours in the same way."Gays want to be just like everyone else",Gays are like every one else but just like eveyone else they are expected to stand up for what they believe in and THAT IS THEIR RIGHT as is OURS.You can be as ANGRY as you want but it is not going to help you in what you' re standing up for.Christians are not the only ones against Gay marraige.And you know that.

|| Posted by mike, November 13, 2008 10:36 PM ||

Yes, infiltration and disruption of a religious service is vile and anti-American. Vandalism is a crime and should be punished to the full extent of the law, and then some.

But people peacefully protesting outside a church as in the Dallas case? That's legal, constructive, and perfectly reasonable. Mr. Jeffress has as much right to preach that "Gay is not OK" as he would (hypothetically) "Jews are inhuman scum" -- that's his inalienable First Amendment right. But just as a white supremacist will endure public criticism for sharing his hateful views, so too can (and should) a religious group be peacefully protested for verbally attacking sexual minorities.

|| Posted by Shih Tzu, November 14, 2008 01:46 PM ||

Once again I hear, ďwhy do you hate Christians so much?Ē Why not other religions too? Thatís really a tu quoque fallacy, but the reason is because I live in the US and Christians are the ones I most encounter. If I say I donít believe in your beliefsí, I am not trying to force my beliefs on you, Iím just saying I donít believe yours. Using the government, as in Prop 8, IS forcing one groupís beliefs on others. Once again, the only support for discriminating against gays is religious. Yes, many (most?) other religions are bigoted against gays; some, like Islam, much more violently. That does not make Christian bigotry any less of a problem (see tu quoque fallacy).
One of the reasons I may sound a tad angry is because Christians in this country assume that they have the special right to say whatever they want and do whatever they want, because this is a ďChristian NationĒ. Sorry, you donít have any special exemption from criticism and the US is not, and never was, a ďChristian NationĒ. Religious freedom requires that I respect your right to believe in your religion, it does not mean that I must respect your beliefs (and I do not). All religions require believers to accept their guiding precepts without any evidence at all, and Iím talking about actual, empirical evidence. This is why I say they require delusional thinking. There is as much evidence for the Invisible Pink Unicorn or the Flying Spaghetti Monster as for any religionís god(s). This is the real reason why your set of beliefs does not trump any others. What Iím standing up for is human right for all humans and freedom from religion.

|| Posted by Red Mann, November 15, 2008 08:20 AM ||

Your argument about the illegitimacy of Prop 8 based upon the argument that it imposes someone's beliefs/values upon you. After all, every law does that -- whether it is a zoning regulation, an ordinance banning smoking in restaurants, or a statute forbidding discrimination based upon race, sex, and religion. The beliefs and values of some majority, transient or long-enduring, override those of the minority. In the absence of some Constitutional prohibition upon such legislation, such an imposition is legitimate.

Interestingly enough, your argument is the very twin of the one you claim to be illegitimate. Your position is that YOUR values must be written into law, and that even a majority that disagrees with you has no right to overturn such laws. There is no place in our system of government for such arrogance, which is antithetical to the republican/democratic values of our Constitution. Indeed, what you propose is that religious believers -- a majority -- do not have the right to see their values and beliefs respected by or written into law.

By the way, the notion that there is a human right to "freedom from religion" is absurd. For that to be carried off, religious believers would need to be deprived of their right to speak, write, or worship publicly, as well as the right to participate in the governance of the nation. In other words, their most essential human rights would have to be negated. Hell, you might even need to set up special camps where they could be concentrated, away from the rest of civilization -- until, of course, you could find some Final Solution to the Religious Problem.

|| Posted by Rhymes With Right, November 17, 2008 07:03 PM ||

Hey Red Mann,
Nothing makes me more disgusted than when gay activists compare their 'struggle' with the civil rights movement.

The last time I checked, there were no 'gay' and 'straight' seperate restrooms or drinking fountains, no resturants a homosexual can't walk into, no neighborhoods they can't reside in or buy property, no restrictions on where they may work or their right to vote.

You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

Even the California State Supreme court admitted when they legalized same sex marriage that due to California's domestic partnership laws, there were virtually no rights that a heterosexual couple had that a homosexual couple did not.

What you want is to legitimize your choice of lifestyle and to create a new victim class, with all the attendant federal programs and a cushy lifestyle for a select group of 'activists'.

And of course, to bully into submission anyone who doesn't agree with you.

ff

|| Posted by Freedom Fighter, November 19, 2008 01:16 PM ||

buy tadacip online purim revia levitra cialis

|| Posted by asmrfg3k04, July 7, 2016 07:40 PM ||

wh0cd798686 floxin buy cefadroxil clindamycin 300mg canadian cialis online wellbutrin buy allopurinol online dipyridamole arimidex for men

|| Posted by KennethPek, January 28, 2017 02:14 AM ||

wh0cd976366 cialis 20 mg generic benicar Metaxalone Suprax

|| Posted by BennyJiz, February 5, 2017 10:26 AM ||

wh0cd916878 generic seroquel buy elocon buy motilium buy toradol online get the facts ampicillin

|| Posted by Tracyrhype, February 6, 2017 07:16 PM ||

wh0cd701998 Viagra Online Cheap Omnicef robaxin otc cafergot viagra buy medrol WELLBUTRIN alesse nexium buy online ACYCLOVIR

|| Posted by BennyJiz, February 7, 2017 09:50 PM ||

wh0cd446622 nexium 40 mg revia zoloft sildenafil 100mg tablets

|| Posted by Alfredbiz, February 8, 2017 11:33 PM ||

wh0cd138350 tadalafil

|| Posted by BennyJiz, February 11, 2017 09:58 AM ||

wh0cd247438 viagra

|| Posted by Tracyrhype, February 11, 2017 12:58 PM ||

wh0cd826782 TADALAFIL SALE

|| Posted by BennyJiz, February 12, 2017 08:42 AM ||

wh0cd247438 Zoloft ORDER VIAGRA Tadalafil

|| Posted by Tracyrhype, February 13, 2017 08:54 AM ||

wh0cd216046 viagra viagra atenolol 75 mg

|| Posted by Eugeneagict, February 26, 2017 02:08 AM ||

wh0cd863982 cleocin suppository

|| Posted by Michaelvog, February 26, 2017 07:32 PM ||
Post a comment

Remember personal info?


 

 





AnotherMunublogSmall.jpg





Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards
Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2013 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2012 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2011 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2010 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2009 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Posts by Category

Abortion (posts: 2)
Announcements (posts: 13)
Blogging (posts: 187)
Border Issues & Immigration (posts: 421)
deferred (posts: 4)
Education (posts: 685)
Entertainment & Sports (posts: 483)
Guns & Gun Control (posts: 65)
History (posts: 329)
Humor (posts: 88)
Israel/Middle East (posts: 44)
Medical News (posts: 54)
Military (posts: 273)
News (posts: 1571)
Paid Advertising (posts: 234)
Personal (posts: 109)
Politics (posts: 5271)
Race & Racism (posts: 281)
Religion (posts: 819)
Terrorism (posts: 884)
Texas GOP Platform Reform Project (posts: 4)
The Courts (posts: 310)
Watcher's Council (posts: 482)
World Affairs (posts: 345)

Archives

January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
December 0000



MuNuviana



Licensing

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Powered By

Powered by
Movable Type 2.64
AnotherMunublogSmall.jpg

Administrative Stuff

Email Me
Syndicate this site (XML)

Advertising Disclosure

adpolicy.gif

About Me

NAME: Greg
AGE: 50-ish
SEX: Male
MARITAL STATUS: Married
OCCUPATION: Social Studies Teacher
LOCATION: Seabrook, TX
DISCLAIMER: All posts reflect my views alone, and not the view of my wife, my dogs, my employer, or anyone else. All comments reflect the view of the commenter, and permitting a comment to remain on this site in no way indicates my support for the ideas expressed in the comment.

Search This Site


Support This Site



Recent Entries

On Fake News
Who Cares About The Emoluments Clause?
If It Doesn't Bother You, It Should
Bromance Turns America Into Russian Satellite State
Because Many Americans Would Findf The Biblical Plagues To Be Preferable
Because When A Minority Wins An Election, The Majority Must Shut Up
Hope For The Future
My Resignation As Precinct Chair
Resolution Packet For GOP Precinct Conventions
Why #NeverTrump Is The Only Moral Position

Blogroll


Watchers Council
  • Ask Marion
  • Bookworm Room
  • The Colossus of Rhodey
  • The Glittering Eye
  • GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD
  • The Independent Sentinel
  • JoshuaPundit
  • Liberty's Spirit
  • New Zeal
  • Nice Deb
  • The Noisy Room
  • The Razor
  • Rhymes With Right
  • The Right Planet
  • Simply Jews
  • Virginia Right!
  • Watcher Of Weasels

  • Political & Religious Blogs