Homosexuality is Not a Civil Right by Peter Sprigg

Early in 2004, San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom began giving out marriage licenses—illegally—to same-sex couples. One of the homosexuals who traveled to San Francisco in search of a marriage license explained his rationale succinctly: “I am tired of sitting at the back of the bus.”1

The allusion, of course, was to the famous story of Rosa Parks. Parks is the African-American woman who, one day in 1955, boarded a racially segregated city bus in Montgomery, Alabama, sat down near the front, and refused the driver’s order to “move to the back of the bus.” Parks’ act of civil disobedience violated one of the “Jim Crow” laws that enforced racial segregation in various public services and accommodations in some states.

Parks’ arrest for her courageous defiance sparked the Montgomery bus boycott, led by a young minister named Martin Luther King, Jr., which is generally viewed as the beginning of the great civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. It culminated legislatively in the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, banning racial discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations.

The stories of Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr. have become an inspiring part of American history. It’s not surprising that homosexual activists have tried to hitch their caboose to the “civil rights” train. They do this in the context of efforts to change the definition of marriage in order to allow same sex “marriages” (by comparing same-sex “marriage” to interracial marriage) and efforts to pass “hate crime” laws (which stigmatize opposition to homosexual behavior as a form of “hate” comparable to racism). The arguments in this essay are relevant to those debates, but focus particularly on laws that would ban employment “discrimination” on the basis of “sexual orientation” (such as the federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which is regularly introduced each Congress).

This essay is not a legal treatise, but an exploration of the philosophical justification for including various characteristics as categories of protection under historic civil rights laws—and why “sexual orientation” simply does not compare with them.

Defining Terms: What Are “Civil Rights,” Anyway? …

Read the rest of the article here:
“Homosexuality is Not a Civil Right” by Peter Sprigg, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at the Family Research Council

Advertisements

The Day After the Elections – A Biblical Perspective

The cultural shift toward Darwinian humanism was displayed in its fullest form yet in the elections of 2008 in the US. Here is one theologian’s perspective that I HOPE will be the normal reaction from professing Christians to this year’s presidential election.

Since you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ, in God. Colossians 3:1-3

Discerning Ideologies in Political Positions – Reagan and “Spreading the Wealth”

How do you tell the difference between Democratic and Republican principles and those of the socialist and communist caste? What’s the difference between a private organization giving grants to individuals or other organizations and the government doing it? What is the role of government in people’s lives? Who are the government servants suppose to serve – themselves or the people?

This video is a brief but outstanding examination of the current competing ideologies at war for the right of entrance into the White House. Take some time to educate yourself on them. Compare them to your Constitution… how do they measure up?

“MAN IS NOT FREE UNLESS GOVERNMENT IS LIMITED.” Ronald Reagan in his farewell address to the nation.

Oh, No, Yoko! Your Lawsuit Has Been “Expelled”…

EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed film NEWS

News Watch
“Imagine” She’s Ticked: Yoko Ono Loses NY Lawsuit

New York Lawyer
June, 2008

NEW YORK (AP) – Yoko Ono has lost her Manhattan legal battle to block the use of John Lennon’s song “Imagine” in a film challenging the theory of evolution.

Lennon’s widow had sued the makers of “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” saying they used parts of the song without her permission.

In a decision Monday, federal Judge Sidney Stein says the filmmakers are protected under the “fair use” doctrine. That permits small parts of a copyrighted work to be used without an author’s permission under certain circumstances.

The movie opened on U.S. screens in April; it’s set for release in Canada on Friday and on DVD in October.

It presents a sympathetic view of intelligent design, the theory that the universe is too complex to be explained by evolution alone.

Ono’s attorney did not immediately return a call for comment.

More Arrogance From The “Scientific” Establishment

Here’s an interesting quote.

“It’s (EXPELLED) going to appeal strongly to the religious, the paranoid, the conspiracy theorists, and the ignorant –– which means they’re going to draw in about 90% of the American market.”
-Atheist blogger and fabulist PZ Myers, on a film he (had) not yet seen.

So, P.Z. Myers, one of the country’s alleged leaders in science, thinks that 90% of you are “religious” (like it’s supposed to be an insult to be religious…), paranoid, a conspiracy theorist, or ignorant.

P.Z. Meyers thinks 90% of us are stupid, and he thinks he is smarter than 90% of you.

How very tolerant of him. Certainly the epitome of religious neutrality.

This only illustrates how arrogant the people who have been deciding what is in your child’s science curriculum can be. And he’s not the only one who feels this way. You only have to go to the main page of the NCSE (National Center for Science Education) to see the fervor with which the NCSE not only try to defend their stance on Darwinian evolutionary theory, but how they fairly froth at the mouth to discredit any other position to the point of excluding any debate on the subject. Period. One would think they had actually proven that life had come from nothing and that there was, in fact, no God. This they have not proven – not even close.

Whether they like it or not, the monopoly on scientific commentary is now being opened up to some pretty serious competition (although they would beg to differ), which in my opinion only causes quality to go up. It will perhaps open up areas of research that have been cut off due to the prejudicial scientific funding process and rules, and it will force scientists who manipulate data to fit their philosophical (humanistic) worldview to be more honest in their assessments and perhaps make their headlines less propagandistic in nature.

The “scientific bigwigs” must learn that just because they keep repeating the same thing over and over again, it doesn’t make it true.

The Great and Powerful Evolutionists – Expelled, The Movie.

By The Reformed Faith Weblog Administrator

While many detractors believe this movie is an attempt to prove Intelligent Design, in reality it is mainly about academic freedom and the monopoly that humanist/evolutionist philosophers have had for so many years and will do anything to maintain. I mean, if you were getting (all the billions of dollars in) scientific grant money given out every year to research facilities and that money was gotten with the assumption you must continue maintaining that Darwinian Evolution is the only way life could have “evolved” on earth (or else look like a theorist – GASP! The Horror!), wouldn’t you defend your job, even if it meant lying or trying to “scientifically discredit” a film that threatened your monopoly before the film was ever even released into the theater?

Unless you’ve been hiding under a rock for the last few years… (how long has it been since they’ve “proven beyond a shadow of a doubt” that Richard Dawkins uncle was actually a monkey?)… the state of our culture is reflective of the humanistic belief that morals are an invention of man, and not instituted by a sovereign and almighty God… and so everyone does what is right in their own eyes.

Ben Stein obviously is a firm believer that our schools system should be teaching children HOW to think instead of WHAT to think. In Expelled, Ben simply pulls back the curtain to show the world that the wizard is simply a desperate old codger who stands to lose the satisfaction of having a fearful and trembling public stand in awe of him – the public that he has been duping for so many years as he shouts imperiously, “I AM THE GREAT AND POWERFUL OZ!”

I submit that the “first cause” of the demise of the evolutionary monopoly is… this great and powerful film. Way to go, Ben!

Related articles and links of interest:

Expelled The Movie Comes Out Friday, April 18th, 2008!

Expelled, The Playground – View Trailers and other fascinating phenomena.

R.C. Sproul Interviews Ben Stein

‘Expelled’ Producers Deny Deceiving Scientists to Appear in Film