The "tolerant left" claims another scalp

Intolerance and bigotry masquerading as "equality for all" is still just intolerance and bigotry. The left-wing guardians of "diversity" practice hypocrisy of the most rancid variety.

 

TODAY’S MOST OMINOUS NEWS STORY…is the resignation of Brendan Eich as CEO of Mozilla, the company that makes the Firefox browser. Eich is a superstar in the world of technology; among other things, he invented Javascript and was one of the founders of Mozilla.

But in 2008 he contributed $1,000 to support Proposition 8, the California ballot proposition that defended traditional marriage. For that, he was pilloried by left-wing activists. He lasted barely more than a week before being forced to resign from the company he helped to create. So the liberals claim another scalp.

This is something new in our history, as far as I know. Until now, private citizens could hold whatever political beliefs they wanted, and support political causes as they chose. I don’t recall an instance where a corporate officer has been driven out of a company because he holds unpopular political views. Not until now.

And, of course, there is nothing unusual, or even unpopular, about Eich’s belief that traditional marriage represents good public policy. While the tide obviously has swung in favor of gay marriage in recent years, it is still only a 50/50 proposition. The last poll I saw on the subject, at Rasmussen Reports, found 43% favoring gay marriage and 43% opposed. It is odd, to say the least, that a business executive can be deemed unfit to lead a company because he holds an opinion that is shared by half of his countrymen.

What we see here is, I think, a harbinger of things to come. The Left is mobilized and on the march, and has no intention of taking any prisoners. Anyone who thinks some kind of accommodation or compromise can be reached with these people is mistaken. They are vicious bullies, and must be dealt with accordingly.

This sort of totalitarianism is not unique to the gay marriage issue. Global warming hysterics are now arguing that those who disagree with them should be imprisoned. Seriously; even though it is the realists, not the alarmists, who win all the arguments. When you can’t win the argument, what do you do? Throw your opponent in jail, or get him fired. Liberals have no intention of living in a pluralistic society. They want to wipe you out, or at a minimum force you underground. And if you don’t fight back, they will succeed, just as they did with Brendan Eich.

Time to look for a new browser.

So what, exactly, did World Vision do wrong?

Like most any business or organization, Christian relief agencies have employment standards which are reviewed and revised as a routine matter. Rarely does a change in policy spark the kind of uproar which accompanied World Vision's recent decision to allow the hiring of "Christians" in same sex "marriages." The backlash from the evangelical world was so swift and so virulent that the agency quickly reversed itself and reinstated its former standards.

The initial change in policy, while indefensible, would not have been so controversial if Richard Stearns, World Vision's president, had been more discreet. If he had implemented the change in employment standards quietly and without fanfare, it is likely no one would have known and no one would have cared. Instead, he chose to announce the change with trumpets, heralding it as some kind of boon for "church unity." Such pious pomposity, moreso than the moral repugnance of the decision itself, is what so many evangelicals found offensive.

Stearns did what the hypocrites do, and he got called on it. He has repented and asked for forgiveness. We cannot be anything but gracious toward him, recognizing that his real sin was one which can so easily trip up any one of us.

"Tolerance" and "diversity" bullies get a dose of their own medicine

YES! It's about time something like this happened.

AUSTIN, TEXAS--The case of fired former-Fox Sports broadcaster Craig James is now under investigation by the State of Texas.

The Texas Workforce Commission is launching an investigation into whether James suffered from religious discrimination when he was fired shortly after he said in a televised debate he supports traditional marriage.

The state agency, which which has authority over such employment matters in the Lone Star State, issued a “charge” document announcing its inquiry Thursday.

Previously, Fox Sports President Eric Shanks admitted in a court deposition that a senior vice president at the network anonymously told the media that James was fired for his religious views, although Shanks denied that was actually the reason.

Additionally, emails obtained by Breitbart News show James' remarks about traditional marriage were a topic of significant conversation in the 48 hours immediately before he was fired.

“The Texas Workforce Commission issuing a charge of discrimination against Fox Sports Southwest and conducting an investigation is a serious step toward holding Fox Sports accountable for violating the law and religious liberty on Craig James,” said Hiram Sasser, the Liberty Institute's Managing Director for Strategic Litigation.

Breitbart News was the first media outlet to report when James filed a legal complaint against Fox Sports. As explained in detail in that report, when James was a candidate for U.S. Senate in 2012, he had been asked during a televised debate about his views on marriage, to which he responded that he believes marriage exclusively to be one man with one woman. That view is dictated by his Christian faith, and is a provision in the Texas Constitution.

Fox Sports fired James from his job as an on-air sports analyst days after this was brought to the network’s attention in 2013.

The arrogance, hypocrisy, and sheer hubris of Canterbury and York

Bishop David Anderson of the American Anglican Council well describes the recent communique on homosexuality from the Archbishops of Canterbury and York to the Provinces of Kenya, Uganda, and Nigeria as "spiritual bullying." The two top clerics of the Mother Church have literally scaled new heights (or, perhaps better stated, sunk to new depths) of arrogance, hypocrisy, and sheer hubris in presuming to lecture the three largest provinces of the Anglican Communion on the subject of human sexuality while, within their own house, they have failed miserably and scandalously to uphold the biblical teaching concerning the same.

Bishop Anderson pulls no punches, also pointing out other failures of the Mother Church's ostensible leadership.

The English Archbishops of York and Canterbury have fired the equivalent of a broadside into the respective Anglican Provinces of Kenya, Uganda and Nigeria, and naturally it has to do with the Western hot button issue of homosexuality. While this subject seems to be causing the implosion of Anglican Provinces in America, Canada, England, Wales, and Scotland, the English Archbishops, rather than stand their Biblical ground against unnatural acts between individuals, choose rather to lecture and caution the three largest Anglican Provinces on the laws their civil governments are enacting.

When the head, nominal though he be, of the Anglican Communion lectures and cautions any Province, the implications and threat cannot be missed. It is odd that this lecture and caution would be directed toward the orthodox Anglicans of the Communion and not against the heterodox Anglicans both in North America and indeed within the Church of England itself. It seems that the Pilling Report may define the path that the Church of England will actually take. The Anglican Communion will soon have to face the prospect of a Mother Church which is spiritually unable to lead the worldwide flock of Anglicans. Interestingly, both the Archbishop of Kenya and now Uganda have responded to this English broadside and, commendably, they understand exactly the kind of spiritual bullying that is being directed toward them.

Archbishop Stanley Ntagali of Uganda, reminds the English Archbishops that, “….as they lead their own church through the “facilitated conversations” recommended by the Pilling Report, that the teaching of the Anglican Communion from the 1998 Lambeth Conference, from Resolution 1.10, still stands. It states that “homosexual practice is incompatible with Scripture,” and the conference “cannot advise the legitimising or blessing of same sex unions nor ordaining those involved in same gender unions.” And then, in a direct and clear statement Ntagali says, “We sincerely hope the Archbishops and governing bodies of the Church of England will step back from the path they have set themselves on so the Church of Uganda will be able to maintain communion with our own Mother Church.”

I would not be surprised if the Church of Nigeria, Anglican Communion, doesn’t respond as well. These three Anglican Provinces are the largest in the Anglican Communion, with a combined total of some 40 million, and these are people they can actually find on Sunday. I think it is fair to note that no longer should the mice dictate to the elephants on matters ecclesial.

There you have it. The primus inter pares, the Archbishop of Canterbury can no longer convene a full Primates Meeting, or a successful Lambeth Conference, and the orthodox Anglican Primates of GAFCON can convene two Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans conferences, in 2008 and 2013, and see a huge turnout and success. As additional responses to Canterbury surface we will post them.

One final thought. To be clear, the American Anglican Council does not support any law that unjustly targets people based only on sexual orientation. We agree with the 2008 resolution of the Ugandan House of Bishops to the effect that the church should offer “counseling, healing and prayer for people with homosexual disorientation” and that the church should be a safe place for anyone seeking help and healing.

Many westerners tend to use public pressure and media outlets to influence governments, churches and other groups. Those tactics don’t always work. If we have differences with our brothers and sisters in Christ, private, respectful but direct conversations are called for more often than not.

Also notable is the response from Archbishop Wabukala, who is not only Primate of Kenya but also chairman of GAFCON.

The good advice of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York would carry much more weight if they were able to affirm that they hold, personally, as well as in virtue of their office, to the collegial mind of the Anglican Communion. At the moment I fear that we cannot be sure.

Regrettably, their intervention has served to encourage those who want to normalize homosexual lifestyles in Africa and has fuelled prejudice against African Anglicans. We are committed to biblical sexual morality and to biblical pastoral care, so we wholeheartedly stand by the assurance given in the 1998 Lambeth Conference resolution that those who experience same sex attraction are ‘loved by God and that all baptised, believing and faithful persons, regardless of sexual orientation, are full members of the Body of Christ.’

We anxiously await Nigeria's response.

Another reason to bypass Charles for William and Kate

You have to give a lot of credit to our cousins across the pond. "More than half" of them want the throne to pass directly from Elizabeth to newlyweds William and Kate, bypassing the longsuffering Prince of Wales, affectionately known as "Charles of Infidelity," or, perhaps more appropriately (as this video illustrates), "Charles of Hypocrisy."

Coexist? Pharisaism masquerading as tolerance

H/T to just about everybody in the Anglican blogosphere!

I am always amused, never impressed, by the holier than thou attitude behind the gibberish on display on many a car bumper. It is Pharisaism masquerading as tolerance and holding in disdain anyone who would dare call out such obvious hypocrisy.