May 20, 2015 6:09 AM

"Religious freedom" isn't freedom to discriminate against those you hate

Likely Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush said that Christian business owners should not have to provide services for gay weddings if it goes against their religious beliefs…. “Yes, absolutely, if it’s based on a religious belief,” he said when asked by the Christian Broadcasting Network in an interview Saturday if businesses should be able to decline services to same-sex weddings…. “A big country, a tolerant country, ought to be able to figure out the difference between discriminating someone because of their sexual orientation and not forcing someone to participate in a wedding that they find goes against their moral beliefs,” he said. “This should not be that complicated. Gosh, it is right now.”

As the GOP clown car continues to take on moral and intellectual midgets who for whatever reason believe themselves qualified to be President, it’s been interesting to monitor the speed with which they fall in line with the American Taliban. If you listen to the current motley collection of announced candidates, you’d think that God was an angry, vindictive, mean-spirited son of a bitch who hates gays, Liberals, gun control advocates, most Vagina-Americans, and anyone not White (or Christian). It may have been awhile since my Sunday School days, and I no longer believe in God (Why would I given the hateful, angry Supreme Being of the GOP?), but I do remember being taught that His son preached love, tolerance, and acceptance. The herd of cafeteria Christians lusting for the Oval Office have shown themselves willing to do and say whatever it takes to earn the vote of the Far Right zealots who make up GOP primary voters.

What fascinates- and greatly disturbs- me is the American Taliban’s conviction that “religious freedom” means the right to discriminate against others because of their sexual identity. Never mind that there’s no justification for this belief to be found in Scripture, and Jesus Christ certainly never taught that one should deny goods and services to those whose sexuality and/or lifestyle you find to be “icky.” Jeb Bush’s endorsement of the “right” to discriminate against others based on the principle of “religious freedom” looks like, at least from where I sit, like just so much pandering to those who dominate emotions are self-righteousness and hatred. Bush’s statement is not supporting religious faith, it’s an endorsement of hatred, homophobia, and cafeteria Christianity.

A big country, a tolerant country” would recognize that hatred has no place in the practice of one’s religious beliefs, that people are people, with the inalienable right to live as they deem appropriate. “A big country, a tolerant country” would understand that no individual has the right to judge or discriminate against another whose sexuality or lifestyle (or any other personal characteristic) they disapprove of.

Bush’s call for a “spiritual awakening” to fix the “crumbling of our moral foundation is a cheap, callow attempt at pandering. His only concern for a “spiritual awakening” is the primary votes it will get him from those who believe his words actually hold meaning and truth, when in fact they’re merely words devoid of meaning or conviction.

Despite Bush’s sad argument, there is no right to discriminate…and denying the “right” to discriminate is not in fact discrimination of the worst sort. To argue that Jesus would agree with refusing to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding (or, as I like to call it, a “wedding”) simply flies in the face of the truth. That sort of bigotry simply wasn’t what He preached, despite what so-called “Christians” would have us believe. It has nothing to do with “religious freedom;” that’s merely camouflage for hatred, prejudice, and homophobia.

Not surprisingly, there are those who would argue that Jesus would admit He was wrong on same-sex marriage, that he wouldn’t bake a cake for such a “sinful” union. If that isn’t the height of arrogance and self-righteous delusion, I don’t know what would be. Then you have the hate-addled sorts who believe that turnabout is fair play, and that bakers should be required to bake cakes saying “Same-sex marriage is wrong” or something similar upon request…except that it’s not an equivalent argument. Not by a long shot. Same-sex couples generally aren’t looking to make a political statement; they’re looking to get married.

If you don’t support same-sex marriage, there’s a very simple solution available to you: don’t marry someone of the same gender. Beyond that, in “a big country, a tolerant country,” you don’t get to determine how others get to express their love for and commitment to another person. You do your thing; they do theirs. You don’t have the right to decide who gets to marry or deny other rights to those who sexuality and/or lifestyle you despise…especially when those folks are paying taxes just as you do. I suspect you’d never agree with allowing them to have a lower tax burden to compensate for their second-class status, so how can you reasonably expect them to be OK with paying full price for fewer legal rights? in “a big country, a tolerant country,” acceptance and inclusion are expectations to be assumed, not rights to be granted (or not) at the whim of the majority.

Then again, reason and the Rabid Religious Right have very often enjoyed an adversarial relationship, and in no sense do the American Taliban envision “a big country, a tolerant country.”

blog comments powered by Disqus

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Jack Cluth published on May 20, 2015 6:09 AM.

For those times when you need to feel in control was the previous entry in this blog.

Dostoevsky's words of wisdom is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Contact Me

Powered by Movable Type 6.0.8