Pick one. Seriously.
This is the choice the intolerant left is forcing on us. Liberals pretended right up to the day before Obergefell v. Hodges was decided that all they wanted was tolerance. Privacy. To keep government out of people’s intimate lives. And that sounds good to us. I’ve never met a single person — and I move in some pretty right-wing circles — who wanted to imprison or fine anyone for private sexual conduct. Most of the Christian opponents of the LGBT agenda just want themselves and their institutions left alone. We want freedom of contract and association, with certain justified Civil Rights exceptions. Those old-fashioned American ideals.
President Trump really believes that this is what he’s fighting for, when he commits the U.S. to decriminalizing sodomy in foreign countries. But he’s mistaken.
The Left Never Wanted Tolerance
Because the liberals were lying. They want to take the old American status quo circa 1965, which was often egregiously cruel to homosexual Americans, and impose the same upon faithful Christians. This isn’t reform, it’s payback. It’s revenge, served not quite cold.
It’s happening in increments, in dribs and drabs. A Christian baker here, a florist there. But sometimes the chef turns up the heat, and the frogs in the pot start to notice. The Equality Act now before Congress would place homosexuals and “transgender” people on the same legal footing as ethnic minorities under the Civil Rights Act. That would declare Christian (and Jewish and Muslim) teachings on sexual morality the legal equivalent of racial hate speech.
I want to speed up the film on the boiling frogs. In the hope that they’ll jump from the pot.
Make Your Choice
Constitutional amendments don’t work this way, but try this as a thought experiment anyway. Imagine one came before Congress. Like an old-fashioned Chinese menu, it offered a choice between column A and column B. We’d revise the Constitution in one of two ways:
- Affirming the constitutionality of the old anti-sodomy laws, which in theory punished even private conduct. In practice, they were rarely enforced. They mostly provided the legal basis for restricting gay bars, keeping gays out of the military and allowing private citizens to shun people and things that promoted gay sexual activity. These laws protected organizations like the Boy Scouts and Christian businessmen who didn’t want to rent hotel rooms or apartments to flamboyant same-sex couples.
Continue reading here.
[Editor’s Note: This article was written by John Zmirak and originally published at The Stream. Title changed by P&P.]