Chuck Colson writes:
As more states—like
Iowa—approve same-sex “marriage,” conservatives are claiming that freedom of
religion is in peril. Same-sex “marriage” supporters accuse them of engaging in
hysterical gay-bating. Who’s telling the truth?
Let me share some stories with you from an excellent news broadcast produced by National Public Radio. Then you decide.
Two women decided to hold their civil union ceremony at a New Jersey pavilion owned by the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association. This Methodist group told the women they could not “marry” in any building used for religious purposes. The Rev. Scott Hoffman said a theological principle—that marriage can only exist between one man and one woman—was at stake.
The women filed a discrimination complaint with the New Jersey Division of Civil Rights. The Methodists said the First Amendment protected their right to practice their faith without being
punished by the government. But punish the Methodists is exactly what New Jersey did. It revoked their tax exemption—a move that cost them $20,000.
Then there’s the case of the Christian physicians who refused to provide in vitro fertilization treatment to a woman in a lesbian relationship. The doctors referred her to their partners, who were willing to provide the treatment. But that wasn’t good enough. The woman sued. The California Supreme Court agreed with the woman, saying that the doctors’ religious beliefs didn’t give them the right to refuse the controversial treatment.
In Massachusetts, Catholic Charities was told they had to accept homosexual couples in their adoption service, or get out of the adoption business. They chose correctly—get out of the business.
In Mississippi, a mental health counselor was sued for refusing to provide therapy to a woman looking to improve her lesbian relationship. The counselor’s employers fired her—a move that was backed up by the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
In New York, the Albert Einstein College of Medicine at Yeshiva University refused to allow same-sex couples to live in married student housing, in keeping with the school’s orthodox Jewish teachings. But in 2001, the New York State Supreme Court forced them to do so anyway—even though New York has no same-sex “marriage” law.
In Albuquerque, a same-sex couple asked a Christian wedding photographer to film their commitment ceremony—and sued the photographer when she declined. An online adoption service was forced to stop doing business in California when a same-sex couple sued the service for refusing, on religious grounds, to assist them.
Convinced? Clearly, homosexual “marriage” and religious liberty cannot co-exist—because gay activists will not allow them to. As marriage expert Maggie Gallagher puts it, same-sex “marriage” advocates claim that religious faith “itself is a form of bigotry.”
Tune in tomorrow, for I want you to learn how you can help protect both our religious rights and marriage itself. I know this may sound alarmist, but it’s true. If we don’t work to stop this juggernaut, we may soon find ourselves hunted down at work, at school, and even at church—as others have been—by those determined to force us to accept as a moral good what God calls evil.
| Today's BreakPoint Offer |
Please help the prison ministry of Prison Fellowship and the worldview ministry of BreakPoint with a generous tax-deductible gift today to help us continue strong this year.
| For Further Reading and Information |
“Gay Rights, Religious Liberties: A Three-Act Story,” NPR, 18 June 2008.
“Docs Can’t Claim Religious Right Not to Artificially Inseminate Lesbians, Calif. Court Says,” CNS News, 18 August 2008.
“California Supreme Court Assaults Religious Freedom: Forces Christian Physicians To Treat Homosexuals,” Traditional Values Coalition, 20 August 2008.
Al Dobras, “The Great Myth: A Biblical Case Against Gay 'Marriage',” BreakPoint Commentary, 7 January 2009.
“Chilling Free Speech: Mapping Political Persecution,” BreakPoint Commentary, 24 February 2009.
“The Coming Persecution: How Same-Sex 'Marriage' Will Harm Christians,” BreakPoint Commentary, 1 July 2008.
***
Colson followed up the column above with one today: "Demanding to Be Served"
Gay Activists and Religious Freedom
eHarmony is a popular online dating service designed by Neil Clark Warren, an evangelical Christian psychologist. The site claims that, on average, 236 eHarmony members marry every day. That’s good news.
The bad news is that, in 2005, a man claimed the company violated his rights by not offering a matchmaking service to homosexuals. He lodged a complaint with the New Jersey attorney general, who found probable cause that eHarmony had violated state anti-discrimination laws. eHarmony vigorously disagreed.
Nevertheless, last year, eHarmony agreed to develop a matchmaking service for same-sex couples—and pay $55,000 in fines.
As I said yesterday on BreakPoint, we’ve seen this scenario over and over again. Christians or Orthodox Jews open up a business, ministry, or school, and sooner or later, a same-sex couple shows up demanding services that conflict with the sincerely held religious convictions of those they confront. When the same-sex couple is turned down, they promptly sue—even if others offer to accommodate them for the same services. And too often, they are winning their cases.
It’s as if the First Amendment no longer exists. I can’t help but suspect that radical gays deliberately target outfits run by religious believers in order to force them to accommodate their political agenda—or go out of business.
So what can we do about this? How can we protect our First Amendment rights—and marriage itself?
First, if you are victimized by a gay activist group or same-sex couple demanding that you throw out your religious beliefs, contact the Alliance Defense Fund. They have spent many years defending the First Amendment right of religious believers—rights now under brutal attack.
Second, we’ve all got to work together to protect the integrity of marriage. Learn how by contacting the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy. You’ll also learn why we need to pass a federal marriage amendment. I know you’re getting fatigued, but it’s time to stiffen our spines.
College students who want to learn how to defend traditional marriage should go to the Ruth Institute website and sign up for a summer conference. The Ruth Institute also offers a list of people who will speak to your group about marriage. Or, you can purchase a same-sex “marriage” home party kit, which includes DVDs, bumper stickers, and wrist bands. Have your friends over, and use the kit to teach them how same-sex “marriage” will harm everybody.
The issue is critical. We all must learn how to answer the charge of “bigotry,” and winsomely explain why marriage cannot exist between same-sex couples; and how same-sex “marriage” will not broaden marriage, but radically and dangerously change its nature.
We must learn, as the apostle Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 10:5, to “demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God.”
If we don’t make the case for natural marriage—or fight attempts to shut us up or shut us down—sooner or later, we will all find our most sacred liberties sacrificed on the altar of the gay agenda.
| For Further Reading and Information |
Learn more about the Alliance Defense Fund.
Learn more about the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy.
Learn more about the Ruth Institute.