Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Bryan Preston

Bio

June 10, 2014 - 7:44 am

Hippies, Commies and other assorted lefties used to chant “Smash the state! Smash the church!” Now they don’t use that chant so much, probably because it’s too honest, and because they have figured out that they can use the one as a weapon to smash the other, which they hate more.

They’re making progress. Serious progress. Remember the baker who refused to participate in a gay wedding in Colorado because of his Christian faith? Such weddings remain illegal in that state, as they were at the time he made his decision. Yet he is being forced to undergo sensitivity training, and to report to the state on his business practices — for two years. Because a judge says so.

[Jack] Phillips appealed the verdict to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which stood by Spencer’s decision and ordered May 30 that Phillips be required to bake wedding cakes for same-sex couples in conflict with his moral Christian convictions. Additionally, Phillips and his staff will have to submit to a regimen of state-sanctioned sensitivity training to make sure they are in line with Colorado’s non-discrimination statute.

Over the next two years Phillips will also be required to submit quarterly reports to Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission concerning his business practices, informing the commission whether he has turned any business away, most importantly homosexual customers. “So if his shop is closed or he’s out of flour, he needs to report to the commission,” explained Nicolle Martin of Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the conservative Christian legal advocacy group that represented Phillips in the case, to Fox News on June 5.

He will also be forced to train his staff to comply with the left’s whim, including his 87-year-old Christian mother.

So in the name of tolerance, the state is stepping into this man’s business and even straight into his family relations.

On the other side of the country, a national symbol of the Christian faith is declaring its allegiance.

The most visible Episcopal church in the U.S. is hosting its first openly transgender priest this month.

The Rev. Cameron Partridge is set to give the June 22 sermon at the Washington National Cathedral in Northwest.

Dean of the cathedral, the Rev. Gary Hall, said in a statement that he hopes Mr. Partridge’s presence sends a message of support for the transgender community.

“We at Washington National Cathedral are striving to send a message of love and affirmation, especially to LGBT youth who suffer daily because of their gender identity or sexual orientation,” he said. “We want to proclaim to them as proudly and unequivocally as we can: Your gender identity is good and your sexual orientation is good because that’s the way that God made you.”

Mr. Hall also announced that the Right Rev. Gene Robinson, the first openly gay Episcopal priest, would be presiding the same service with Mr. Partridge. He retired from his post as a bishop in New Hampshire and now works at the Center for American Progress.

Apparently it’s too much to ask the Cathedral to offer a message of love and affirmation for traditional Christian beliefs.

Pretty soon there won’t be any room left in our Christian churches for Christian beliefs about marriage and family.

A friend of mine proposed a solution yesterday, one that I’ve heard before and you probably have too. It would have the state “get out of the marriage business” by declaring that henceforth, all unions are merely civil in nature, and the church alone has the right to use and define the word “marriage.” That proposal is equally naive and radical. Naive, because marriage is not really the end game for the radicals behind today’s dispute. Redefining marriage is a means to an end — observe the National Cathedral and Jack Phillips’ plight to see a glimpse of the end they have in mind. There will be no room for any sort of objection. You will be forced to care, and you will be forced to approve. It’s also naive because the most liberal churches have already redefined marriage, while the traditional ones have not. That creates space for disagreement, and in our litigious society, that’s an invitation for lawsuits. Through lawsuits, judges will end up imposing their own definition on the rest of the churches anyway.

The proposal is radical, because 1) we’ve been told that gay marriage is fine “because it doesn’t effect my marriage,” and 2) because it would give the government an angle to attack family law at its foundation. Obviously if we sweep away the state’s current definition of marriage and push that word off into a purely religious context, we’re changing everyone’s marriage whether they like it or not. Without a vote, without even having had a serious debate about it. As for the second, when we open up the family to a redefinition, we’re giving the government a window to re-examine millions of relationships and billions if not trillions of dollars of private property. Who in their right mind believes that our deeply in debt  government will not take that opportunity to go on a confiscation spree? That’s to say nothing on how it might choose to start re-defining the parent-child relationship. Cue Melissa Harris-Perry, the leftist professor and MSNBC host who wants us all to give up the idea that our children belong to us. To whom do they belong? Why, the state, of course.

Bryan Preston has been a leading conservative blogger and opinionator since founding his first blog in 2001. Bryan is a military veteran, worked for NASA, was a founding blogger and producer at Hot Air, was producer of the Laura Ingraham Show and, most recently before joining PJM, was Communications Director of the Republican Party of Texas.

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (8)
All Comments   (8)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Don't worry. When Obama's Mullah proteges send nukes to burst in low orbit and the EMP pulse reduces the US to the steam age, we'll laugh at all this.
27 weeks ago
27 weeks ago Link To Comment
“We want to proclaim to them as proudly and unequivocally as we can: Your gender identity is good and your sexual orientation is good because that’s the way that God made you.” Oh, for the Love of Life Orchestra. How about your ACTUAL BIOLOGICAL SEX being the way that G-d made you?
27 weeks ago
27 weeks ago Link To Comment
How is any of this even remotely constitutional?
27 weeks ago
27 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Getting the State out of Marriage" is to marriage, a cause championed by faux Libertarians more than anyone else, is a stalking horse for the official abolition of marriage and the family. Neither Progressive of faux Libertarians have any use for an institution that sustains civil society. What legal status would a so-called privatized marriage have? That is a rhetorical question since it would have no legal standing. Cass Sunstein is right up front when he writes about reason for abolishing state sponsored marriage. It abolishes an entire legal structure that protects family privacy from the reach of the government. Faux Libertarians see marriage and other elements of civil society as an infringement on personal autonomy. They would rather live under socialism with unconstrained personal autonomy than in free society where values are set by private social institutions. It is time for real conservatives to expel faux Libertarians and force them into alignment with their true allies the Progressive elite.
27 weeks ago
27 weeks ago Link To Comment
States recognize marriages without church involvement now. The role of the officiant is to recognize the marriage for state registration purposes. Many officiants are also clergy and recognize the marriage within the doctrines of the churches they represent.
The marriage license was and is a state document, as is the certificate.
There are, I am sure, some people who are angling to destroy families. It's a terrible goal for them to have. Families existed before written law. Lower-class families often existed outside of written law.
Using the law to regularize relationships among people who wish to have state recognition does no harm to others who are also recognized by the state. Taking the church out of the legal equation is a lot like taking the church out of the divorce equation, really.
All I want for people who are gay is for them to also be happy. I want the same thing for people who are straight. I don't see any inherent conflict, nor any inherent threat to traditional families.
27 weeks ago
27 weeks ago Link To Comment
Marriage is an institution of societal approval. Why do gays need my approval to be happy? Why isn't my tolerance enough?
27 weeks ago
27 weeks ago Link To Comment
When do churches start offering "Hostess wafers" at Communion?
27 weeks ago
27 weeks ago Link To Comment
I think Harris-Perry was smoking something when she read Gibran's "Children."
27 weeks ago
27 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All