Newly Elected Southern Baptist Convention President Fred Luter
I
can almost hear Paula Abdul singing “two steps forward, one step back” as I
read the news coming out of the Southern Baptist Convention in New Orleans
today. A denomination which was founded
around being pro-slavery prior to the Civil War has finally, in 2012, elected
their first African-American President.
No doubt this is the kind of step forward that must have their slave
holding founders spinning in their graves.
Kudos for the Southern Baptist Convention!
Wait… What’s that other little tidbit? Was this a ruse to detract from yet another
bigoted stance by the Southern Baptists?
It seems the Southern Baptist have decided to step outside the bounds of
their personal religious beliefs and once again speak out in favor of denying
human equality.
A
day after electing their first African-American President, the Southern Baptist
Convention passed a resolution opposing the stance that “same-sex” marriage is
a civil rights issue. Civil rights
issues of course are a matter of public policy and not an issue to be decided
upon by religious institutions; particularly religious institutions that, from
their very founding, have consistently been on the wrong on human rights
issues.
The
resolution declares that marriage is “the exclusive union of one man and one
woman” and that “all sexual behavior outside of marriage is sinful.” Though I wholeheartedly disagree with them, I
will steadfastly support the Southern Baptists right to believe these
statements. After all, that is what
freedom of religion, speech, and ideas is all about.
It
is important for Southern Baptists to realize that the same freedom of religion
and the separation of church and state that allow them to believe and preach
such doctrine are also the same freedoms that ensure I don’t have to be
subjected to those doctrines. So far as
I am concerned, this story would not be an issue if the Southern Baptist
Convention would have stopped at simply stating their beliefs.
When
a church formalizes a stance that “same-sex” marriage is not a civil rights
issue, they have stepped out of the realm of faith and into the realm of public
policy. It goes without saying that most
of us progressives don’t believe faith and public policy should mix. The folks on the religious right clearly don’t
believe this is so which I find amusing.
I find it amusing because these are some of the same people who have
been pushing for state laws forbidding courts from considering Sharia law in
their decisions; some actually believe liberals are trying to force Sharia into
our laws.
If they would just open
their ears and listen to us despicable liberals for once, they would learn that
we do not want any religion, even our own, in public policy. This protects their right to believe slavery
is OK, that the LBGT community is bad, and that interracial marriage should be
forbidden. It also protects them from Sharia
law which, ironically, is religious law that they fear. In the meantime, any two people who fall in
love and wish to dedicate their lives to each other regardless of race,
religion, or gender, should also be free to do so without fear of
discrimination from self righteous bigots.
Is it really so hard for all of us to respect each other’s dignity and
cherish the principle of universal and equal freedom?

As a despicable liberal myself, I want to point out that it's my religious beliefs that make me want to support things like food assistance, public charity, and even same sex marriage in public policy. In a way, if you think about it, the food stamp program is a way of forcing my Christian belief in taking care of the poor on unsuspecting .... I don't know ...people who want to live outside the social contract? You don't want them to mix, so should I yield to my Social Darwinian neighbors in the Republican part on this one?
ReplyDeleteI kinda stopped reading at, "Southern Baptist".
ReplyDelete