Skip to main content

Idaho conservatives mix up "traditional faith" and "traditional bigotry"

Republican Idaho Representative Lynn Luker, with the support of his conservative Christian allies, is attempting to make it illegal for licensed professionals to lose their license for refusing to serve or employ anyone whom they feel violates their religious beliefs. Such professionals would include all of the following: Doctors, nurses, pharmacists, police officers, firefighters, real estate agents, insurance providers, attorneys, and social workers. Representative Luker and his "Christian" allies mainly want this proposal to be passed due to the ever-increasing rights of the LGBT community.

One of these "Christian" allies is the Cornerstone Family Council, who said the government shouldn't "block people from 'living out their faith'."

Another such ally is Focus on the Family. Julie Lynde - executive director of the group - said this with regard to the proposal: "The free expression of religious freedom is no longer understood for what it was intended. There's a double standard against people of traditional religious faiths."

Is it just me, or in these contexts, doesn't it sound like we could realistically substitute the word "faith(s)" with "bigotry"? If so, the quotes would read as follows:

"[The government shouldn't] "block people from 'living out their bigotry'."

"The free expression of religious freedom is no longer understood for what it was intended. There's a double standard against people of traditional bigotry."

Yeah, I thought that word substitution would work quite nicely. The reason why I placed the word Christian in quotes is the fact that the man these people claim to worship - Jesus - wouldn't believe this proposal was actually Christian. For, in the book of Matthew, chapter 25, verses 31-46, the following is written:

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

In other words, according to the Bible, by refusing service to the LGBT community, Idaho Representative Lynn Luker, members of the Cornerstone Family Council, Julie Lynde and other members of Focus on the Family, and other like-minded individuals, will be eternally punished in the fiery pits known as hell by the man they claim to worship and represent.

Like I noted earlier, those two before-mentioned quotes sound much more honest when substituting the word "faith(s)" with "bigotry":

"[The government shouldn't] "block people from 'living out their bigotry'."

"The free expression of religious freedom is no longer understood for what it was intended. There's a double standard against people of traditional bigotry."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/12/idaho-bill-would-allow-doctors-or-cops-to-refuse-service-to-lgbt-people-on-religious-grounds/

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2025:31-46

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"