“Homosexual-led persecution of church”

A joke, right? We all know the attitude of many Christian churches is too close to persecution of homosexuals; see here and here, for example.  How could such malign actions possibly be going in the other direction? 

And plenty of religious groups opposed even secular “gay acceptance” activities, thus trying to prevent efforts to diminish the cruel and sometimes lethal persecution gays do suffer.

But, no, some people apparently actually maintain that homosexuals are persecuting churches. And the nature of the persecution is quite ironic. Most persecution is at least ostensibly to get rid of something. But homosexuals are persecuting churches in order to join them and to get them to stop their discriminatory behavior.  As NPR, quoted by the blog linked to immediately above, put it:

In recent years, some states have passed laws giving residents the right to same-sex unions in various forms. Gay couples may marry in Massachusetts and California. There are civil unions and domestic partnerships in Vermont, New Jersey, Connecticut, New Hampshire and Oregon. Other states give more limited rights.

Armed with those legal protections, same-sex couples are beginning to challenge policies of religious organizations that exclude them, claiming that a religious group’s view that homosexual marriage is a sin cannot be used to violate their right to equal treatment. Now parochial schools, “parachurch” organizations such as Catholic Charities and businesses that refuse to serve gay couples are being sued — and so far, the religious groups are losing.

When suing for your civil rights is presented as persecuting, watch out! You may well be in the Orwellian land of the far right.

5 thoughts on ““Homosexual-led persecution of church”

  1. I don’t know what the situation is in the US, but in Canada, the Catholic Church ( and others ) pay no taxes. As far as I’m concerned, that amounts to a huge financial public subsidy, as good as a tax refund. The difference is notional only. They are as good as taking “our” money. So they ought to be held to the same standards as registered public charities in terms of their extension of human rights. OR, they could give up their tax exempt status. Even then, they might lose in the Courts, which would sure be fine by me. As a non-religious person, I sometimes have trouble understanding why anyone would want to fight to be a member of a sexist, homophobic institution. But then I remember that most disputes about human rights are about people’s rights to be full members of civic institutions and civic society. If churches get tax exempt status, that makes them some funny mix between a civic and a religious institution. Religious bodies benefit from that double-think both coming and going: they feel free to persecute on the basis of freedom of religion and they scream persecution if someone tries to hold them responsible. Nice.

  2. I’m from Massachusetts. Yes, churches are being persecuted. Pastors have received death threats. Persecution against the church is very real here in Massachusetts. I guess it’s part of what is talked about in the bible about the end times. I don’t know. It’s made me open my bible and read it to find out.

  3. D. Martino, we are very keen here on evidence. That usually involves credible and fairly impartial resources. It would be great if you could cite such sources for your remarks.

    It would also be interesting to know if there are any instances of homosexuals actually harming churches or church officials. Given that some officials of the church maintain that homosexuals will burn in hell for all eternity, one might easily imagine someone’s writing something that express a comparably hostile hope for the officials. It’s an entirely different thing to find any deeds to match the words.

Comments are closed.