Minister responds to readers’ feedback
I appreciate the openness of the newspaper to share responses from all across the spectrum when it comes to Springfield’s debate over acceptance of a special rights ordinance for those choosing the LGBT lifestyle. However, I would like to respond to several misinterpretations by some readers regarding our recent roundtable discussion, as shared in the Ideas & Voices section on Friday, Jan. 27.
• One hate-based letter to the editor (“Some want people to stay in closet”) evidences the creation of reverse discrimination against Christians whom the letter writer feels are “prideful” and “intolerant,” individuals who are guilty of “drawing on ... ignorance.” To the contrary, I would agree that people of different sexual orientations are “good” people. And the last thing I want to do is act superior to anyone who is different from me.
The reality is, we are all sinners according to the Bible. Yes, pride is a sin whose effect is the same as choosing to live a homosexual lifestyle. But I am not asking for a legislation on pride to make it acceptable practice or force others to alter their hiring, management or housing practices to elevate it to an elite status of rights. You may legislate discrimination; you cannot, in the name of religious intolerance, legislate healthy discernment.
I refuse to lower myself to hate-based speech, but I willingly defend my right toward faith-based speech. I believe the greatness of our country lies in the character of our people, as expressed in their faith, honorable relationships, personal responsibilities, and valueled public policy and government.
• Another letter writer (“Arguments full of contradictions”) brandishes a skewed understanding of God’s original model of marriage and the family in Genesis by suggesting that I believe and approve of Abraham or Jacob’s polygamy. My reference to Genesis was to focus on God’s original desire and design of marriage to be between His creation of one man-one woman.
The polygamy of the patriarchs to which the letter writer refers are examples of what sin can do in distorting God’s original design. Outside of God’s design, polygamy always led to frustration, fighting and divisions among its practitioners. God never “cleaned up” the accounts of people in the Bible to make them pristine examples of righteousness. (It’s one reason why the Bible doesn’t read like a lie.) After the Garden of Eden, we see sinfulness tainting God’s design at every relational level.
• Finally, as to my reference to our nation’s founding documents, which emphasize our moral, religious and constitutional foundations: My references were not from the Constitution, but from our Declaration of Independence that states, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
My belief is that any claim on life, liberty or happiness are founded on the Creator’s constructs, as outlined in the Bible. You cannot truly enjoy or understand life, liberty or happiness apart from God’s loving and protective boundaries. The apparent contradiction, certain readers picked up on, was that much of our discussion was focused on whether or not this was a constitutional issue. Apart from the First Amendment, I am aware that God is not mentioned by name in the Constitution, but we would be misguided to forget the faith of the authors behind the Constitution.
Religious liberty is being discriminated against in this discussion and by the approval of a special status and rights ordinance for those choosing the LGBT lifestyle. Look at the recent case in the 6th District Court of Appeals dealing with a case at Eastern Michigan University, where a young lady named Julea Ward was expelled because she was unwilling to vocally support samesex sexual conduct in counseling sessions. Had this action not been opposed, another step would have been taken to regulate our personal thoughts and beliefs.
Just because an individual Christian or church is unwilling to express support for things they do not believe in should not earn legal action or protection by the courts. I do not condone discrimination, but I do support godly discernment guided by the absolutes of Scripture and God. I also refuse to change my beliefs to affirm homosexuality or lend vocal support to behaviors which God clearly declares immoral.
I will continue to encourage Springfield’s commissioners to make decisions that are consistent with God’s “eternal character and truth.”