Phyllis Schlafly is convinced that the goal of gay marriage is to destroy Christianity.
Long-time conservative activist, nationally syndicated columnist, and best-selling author Phyllis Schlafly said that gay marriage advocates are targeting Christian businesses, such as bakeries and wedding planners, and not targeting similar Muslim businesses because the ultimate goal of homosexual marriage is to “wipe out the Christian religion.”
On the May 11 talk-radio program, Talkback with Chuck Wilder, the host asked Phyllis Schlafly, “Have you noticed that only Christian small-business people have been harassed and sued for refusing to participate in same-sex marriages, even though our fast-growing immigrant populations — you know of Muslims, Hindus and other faiths — are also opposed to that concept?”
He continued, “The use of same-sex marriage to attack Christian businesses but not businesses run by members of other religions demonstrates what is really driving the demand for the new constitutional right to same-sex marriage. And Phyllis, give them the bottom line. What is that bottom line?”
Schlafly, president of the pro-family group Eagle Forum, said, “Well, that is right. They want to wipe out the Christian religion.”
I try to be fair and I can see her point about the double standard. Gay marriage advocates should be theologically blind where it comes to these things, yet they do seem to target only holders of (supposedly) Christian anti-gay views, and not those of others, such as Muslims.
Double standard aside, I have a problem with her logic. Let us assume that the goal of gay marriage advocates is to destroy Christianity. How, precisely, does gay marriage do that? True, there are a number of instances now of business owners refusing to supply services to gay weddings — and being smeared on the Internet and elsewhere in retaliation. But even if we suppose that all of these religious-dissenting businesses (such as photographers who won’t take pictures, caterers who won’t cook food, florists who won’t sell flowers, pizzerias who won’t make pizzas) are ruined, is that really the destruction of Christianity? I mean, if the goal is to destroy a religion — unless we assume that refusing service to gay weddings is absolutely central to Christian doctrine — how is harassing a few small businesses really going to accomplish that?
While I have long had mixed feelings about gay couples inviting the state into their bedrooms, I honestly don’t understand how the destruction of Christianity follows from that.
Might Ms. Schlafly’s concern be that Christianity is losing followers, as polls seem to indicate?
Or is that because of gay marriage too?
MORE: As commenter Chocolatier pointed out that Jesus was silent on the question of homosexuality, I think it’s worth asking what it is that some Christians find gay marriage so uniquely destructive of Christianity. After all, is not Christianity a spin-off of Judaism? And are not many of the biblical anti-gay arguments grounded in ancient Jewish texts like Leviticus?
So why aren’t Jewish merchants claiming that baking gay wedding cakes or photographing gay weddings would violate their religion? And why isn’t it being argued that gay marriage is destroying Judaism?
Comments
23 responses to “Is gay marriage destroying Christianity?”
From a theological Christian viewpoint, Satan is out to destroy Christians and overthrow Christ. Anything outside the will of God, which includes sex outside the union between one man and one women, is sin and therefore becomes a wedge between humanity and God. Satan uses all sin to build this wedge, not just “The Gays”. To target one action over any other just pisses people off and does not lend weight to the argument that any and all sin hurts God and man.
All that being said, Gay Marriage will not and cannot destroy Christianity. When Christians, me being one, stand around picking and choosing one sin over another and one sinner over another, we fail to show Christ’s love and acceptance of all sinners. God says that the sin (whatever it is) is the problem.
One a second note, Christianity based on Biblical standards will not be swayed by polls. If you’re faith is poll based, good luck standing for anything let alone something controversial. That’s true of atheists as well as evangelicals.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unreasonablefaith/2009/03/12-bad-effects-of-prohibition-you-should-know/
2. Prohibition eroded respect for religion.
Evangelicals were the main force behind Prohibition. They saw alcohol as the “devil’s drink,” hating it so much they explained away their holy book’s favorable references to it (and still do today).
They preached God demanded total abstinence from alcohol. Much like today with homosexuality, conservatives thought drinking was responsible for many of society’s ills. If it could be made illegal, then God would bless America.
But instead of ushering in paradise, Prohibition increased alcohol consumption and immorality, created organized crime and caused massive political corruption. As they so often are, evangelicals were wrong. They made false promises and did far more harm than good. This jaded many people towards religion.
=================
Drug Prohibition is having a similar effect.
If God is Love then what is jail? Jail for smoking the wrong plants?
Schlafly’s oldest son was outed by a gay magazine over 20 years ago. She was mad at the magazine for outing him.
Jesus had a lot to say about sin. It is possible that Jesus thought homosexuality was sinful, but if he did, he kept it to himself. He never spoke about the subject.
Not to derail the conversation from Gay Marriage into Prohibition. I lump myself with the modern evangelical but don’t have enough historical understanding to say if I would a hundred years ago.
I have many thoughts on prohibition of cannabis. This is not the topic for that and I may comment in some later post.
In the context of this post, I’ll address the Gay Marriage topic only.
I think the position our government is in now concerning marriage sucks. I’d like to see it support and nurture the best atmosphere for the rearing of children. That’s a stable two parent, male and female couple. However, since everyone from the right and the left and everyone out on the extreme EXTREME fringes can’t agree on anything, I think it’s time for the Government to begin simply not being involved in the contract between “one man and one women”, or two men, or three men and 1 women or 6 men and a goat or whatever “Marriage” means to whoever. This will have a HUGE impact on individuals, estates, taxes, property law, on and on. Much like trying to throw out the current law concerning corporations, the ties to marriage throughout laws governing society are far reaching.
At this point, trying to define “Marriage” at all I think is outside the ability of our democracy.
>So why aren’t Jewish merchants claiming that baking gay wedding cakes or photographing gay weddings would violate their religion?Evangelicals were the main force behind Prohibition<
the proggtarded were the main force behind amendments 16- 19 fool
ask an orthodox baker.
Not my dog in this fight, but my understanding is that mainstream theology is that the prohibition is against getting drunk, not against enjoying the fruits of creation. As long as you don’t get so drunk your clothes fall off, anyway. (cf Noah and Ham)
Plenty of positive references to wine in the major versions, from 5 glasses of wine at Passover to the wedding at Cana. (I asked Pastor Corbin just what Jesus changed the water into, he says “IT WAS GRAPE JUICE!!!!) Can’t beat pastor C for screeching that gospel…)
I still don’t understand how gay marriage
became such a hot button issue to the left. It will be practiced by a vanishingly small minority of a minority.
(Roughly 2% of the population is homosexual; out of that 2% how many really wish to be married? As opposed to “gay marriage” as yet another celebrity scandal for the kind of boobs who follow that kind of brain rot)
What we do have is the Grampscian left attempting to tear down any existing institution outside of state authority. “All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.” – some famous leftist.
What’s interesting to me is how different the policies implemented by the American left are so different from, for example, the Soviet Union. Try having a gay marriage, or even just being gay in Russia, then and now. I know, and have worked with a number of Russian and Ukrainian engineers. All of them have superb educations. Very good grasp of math,first principals and so on. So, what kind of education policy do we get here from the Marxist left? Useless dog shit, mostly.
As my friend Alex put it “In Russia we had 5 days to learn the Pythagorean theorem, memorize it, understand it, whatever, but you had 5 days. In my daughter’s class here the assignment is to write an essay about how you feel about the Pythagorean theorem”.
Jerry Pournelle likes to quote Glen Seaborg claiming that if the American education systems were imposed by an outside power it would be considered enemy action. I’m wondering if it effectively was.
Try another one: The left has been advocating for a low fat, low protein, high carbohydrate diet since the mid 70s.
Low fat and protein and high carbs is a brainwashing diet, it makes people dull and listless and easily manipulated. Coincidence? I think not.
I think Guy deBord and the Situationist International were almost on to something with the concept of The Spectacle. The continuous flood of advertising, pop culture, the swirl of images and consumer culture that dominates the media. They saw the spectacle as a tool of the capitalist oppressor class. Capitalists just want to sell you anything you wish to buy. The media spectacle is overwhelming leftist.
Worry about the Karcrashhians, Kanye, reality TV, whatever, I don’t watch this shit. Sleep. Don’t notice the fnords.
Don’t worry about the entire world going up in smoke, 98 million American out of work, the economy, education and so on. Good job, leftoids.
You are looking for logic in the mind of Phyllis S? You are looking in the seriously wrong place.
She hasn’t made sense she ran around defeating the Equal Rights Amendment. Because having equality before the for men and women would just be wrong.
As for gay couples “inviting the state into the bedroom.” It is about all the tax-breaks and other issues that you get. Yes. Tax breaks. (Look up the rules on spousal inheritance tax for starters. Then go to “survivors” benefits under social security. Work your way out from there.)
Then there is stuff like being able to make funeral arrangements. (Not married = no standing.) Insurance coordination. Etc.
Depending on who counts the “perks” of straight marriage, there are between 1100 and 1500.
You want to get the state to take away all those issues from straights? Good luck with that. Being married is short-hand for all kinds of things that don’t have a bit to do with what does or doesn’t happen in the bedroom. But does have everything to do with who makes the decisions in your life and what it costs to make those decisions.
I would be perfectly happy if “marriage” was only an issue of religion, and the state stayed out of it. But it doesn’t work that way.
And before you sign off on all of your hypotheticals, imagine what would happen if you were traveling in Europe with your spouse and one of you was injured or became sick. Gay couples have more problems than that traveling in US states that hate teh gays.
newrouter May 19th, 2015 (#):
the proggtarded were the main force behind amendments 16- 19 fool
Well no. It was an alliance of Progressives and Evangelicals.
And the last supporters of Prohibition in 1932? The Evangelical Republicans. And the last States to legalize? States dominated by Evangelicals.
We are seeing the same dynamic re: the current Prohibition.
So there it is, gay marriage is all about who can inherit social security “benefits”.
I’m opposed to the entire concept of social(ist) security as a Ponzi scheme of monumental proportions foisted on the American people by criminal politicians.
Imagine a violin just incrementally longer than Planck length with me playing it to see how much I care about your little issue.
But, if that’s really all it is, ss bennies, insurance payouts, funeral arrangements,$$$ etc, it would only take a few changes to the relevant laws to make you gay partner, cat, pet rock or whatever your beneficiary, no marriage needed.
Try being gay just about anywhere else in the world. Start with Iran. Or Iraq, or anywhere fine jihads are sold. Or walk the streets of Eurostan holding hands with your lover and see what happens.
And I still don’t get why it’s such a big deal when it’s such a tiny minority, so of so little consequence. Really, don’t you people have anything more important to worry about. Like, maybe, oh, just spit balling here, getting blown up by Islamowhackos? Out of control federal debt and deficit? Legions of ignorant chuckle heads churned out by the civilized world’s worst education system? Anything?
MMM,
How about the state of the police. Or as us crazies prefer “The Police State”.
http://classicalvalues.com/2015/05/police-in-the-us-now-rival-criminals/
duh…whut he said
We should all hope so ;but I doubt it.
zonetard: it’s not just about drugs.it’s the erosion of civil liberties, the feds wiping their collective ass with the constitution, the no-knock raids that kill innocent people, the civil asset forfeitures and the rest. Or don’t you care about liberty?
Doesn’t Jeebus say in one place he’s the new dispensation, and elsewhere that he intended to enforce the full old testament law. Pro gay? Anti gay? Too confused to tell? A big pile of nonsensical superstition courtesy of some ignorant desert nomads living in tents? Who can tell…
You don’t get to choose which parts of Leviticus to obey, and which to ignore. If they want biblical strictures against gays they must also oppose shrimp, mixed-fiber clothes and beard trimming. It’s all there, in plain language.
Christinanity is committing suicide. What relavance does a religion based on a book of tribal mythology compiled by some desert nomads 3000 years ago and embellished with some fairy tales about about water into wine and raising from the dead.
And, universal flood my ass!!!
The Christers have never learned to accommodate Darwin, not to mention Kepler and Galileo. If you want to live a “moral” life you don’t need the threat of eternal Hellfire to accomplish it.
http://www.satori3.com/justdrew/wonko.html
MMM: Really, don’t you people have anything more important to worry about.
Let me tell you why it matters that one of the traditionally most socially conservative countries in the world, Ireland, just voted by almost 2/3 to approve same sex marriage – why it matters that a tiny minority should be treated equal before the law. It’s because it is an affirmation of the human virtue of fidelity. It is a tiny positive development in a world where innocents are getting blown up by Islamowhackos, a world of out of control federal debt and deficits, a world where
legions of ignorant chuckle heads are churned out by the civilized world’s worst education system.
It matters because it’s a celebration of something good in humanity.
To start with, Ireland is a pimple on the ass of the world stage, so I really don’t give a shit what they did. After a few hundred Irish gays get married you will never hear about it again.
So, your point is the Irish did something nice while the rest of the world is going to hell in a handbasket. Trivial-minded idiots like you are a major contributor to the situation.
And, at least the Irish VOTED for it, instead of having it stuffed up their ass by judicial fiat.
I still don’t see why and how gay marriage became such an overwhelmingly important issue. As a political “movement” it seems more like astroturf than genuine grass roots. With maybe some truly sincere dupes to front the operation. Astroturf means organized, as in, cui bono? (not Sonny Bono or Bono from U2, just plain old Cui Bono.
Trivial-minded idiots like you are a major contributor to the situation.
You want to get personal, asshole?
OK.
You don’t know shit about me nor what I consider really important. I’m old enough to remember how this country sent 50,000 mostly draftees, or “volunteers” who joined at the point of a gun, to their deaths in Vietnam, with another 200,000 plus wounded. And then just walked away leaving hundreds of thousands or our allies behind to suffer in reeducation camps or die in boats trying to flee, all so the butchers of Hanoi can be at the receiving end of our outsourcing and factory building largess today.
Despite knowing the duplicity of our fucking government, after 9/11 my gay lover (husband, after the California Supreme Court stuffed it up your ass by judicial fiat as you eloquently stated)- the two of us backed the Iraq War, and became pariahs among our liberal friends. Dinners became shouting matches until we were no longer invited. And why did we do this? Stupid patriotism I guess. You know what else we did? As owners of a unique printing business that makes embossed seals among other specialty items, my graphic artist lover/partner/husband designed a 3″ foil seal heavily embossed with an eagle clutching a banner with the words, September 11, 2001 – United We Stand. We printed 20,000 of them at our own expense and donated them to the VFW. The MOC used them to raise over $100,000 for supplemental care, the “extras”, at VA hospitals.
http://www.lotcs.org/history.html
And what did you do, MMM, besides bitch?
“With the respect to the question of relationships, my general view is freedom means freedom for everyone.
Dick Cheney
“The big thing is to make this country, along with every other country in the world with a few exceptions, quit discriminating against people just because they’re gay. You don’t have to agree with it, but they have a constitutional right to be gay.
“I think every good Christian ought to kick Falwell right in the ass.”
Barry Goldwater
Maybe MMM can give us a a quote from one of his Russian friends, or that paradigm
or tolerance, Vlad Putin, who fancies himself the protector of Western Conservative/Christian values.