with Brian Tubbs
Persecution of Christians
Crystal Dixon and the Continued Decline of Religious Freedom in America
032 days
Crystal Dixon is the latest casualty in what can safely be described as an ongoing campaign against religious freedom in America. Dixon was fired from her job at the University of Ohio in Toledo for writing a letter to the editor, under her own name (without mentioning her employment or staff position with the university), that expressed disagreement with homosexuality. The university president specifically cited Dixon’s letter when he fired her. There is no mistaking the fact that Dixon was fired for publicly expressing her biblical views concerning homosexuality. And the university as well as at least one judge in Ohio feel this is perfectly justified in light of the university’s desire for “diversity.”
Obviously, this “diversity” doesn’t include women or men with a biblical worldview. On the contrary, it is the view of those who fired Dixon that the rights of gays and lesbians to be fully accepted, validated, and made to feel comfortable trump the First Amendment rights of free speech and religion. Dixon isn’t alone. Ask Jennifer Keeton. Ask Frank Turek. Dixon is one of many, and I fear that number will continue to grow.
For the record, I believe that gays and lesbians should be treated with courtesy and respect just as anyone should be treated with courtesy and respect. I deplore gay bashing and hatred of any kind, but I am deeply troubled that we’re fast becoming a society where those who speak out for traditional marriage are automatically branded as bigots and homophobes and can have their jobs taken away and their careers ruined accordingly. If you care about religious freedom in America, you should be deeply troubled as well.
Dissing Tim Tebow: Why the Denver Broncos are (at this point) Not a Team Worth Cheering For
360 days
Peyton Manning is in and Tim Tebow is (apparently) out. That’s the news coming out of Denver, as the Broncos front office, led by former NFL quarterback John Elway, has lured the legendary quarterback Peyton Manning into their lineup. They will now send the promising Tim Tebow either to the bench or to another team. Supporters of this decision point to the greatness of Peyton Manning as well as Tebow’s less-than-stellar passing accuracy. Opponents of the decision (like me) point to the fact that Manning is coming off a major injury and several operations — something that kept him on the sidelines all last season. This makes the decision to bring in Manning a gamble at best. We likewise point to the fact that Tebow is a proven winner. Say what you will about his passing accuracy, the man can win football games. He took over as quarterback when the Broncos were 1-4 and led them into the playoffs.
There’s an old saying: “Stick with the one that brung ya.” Tebow is the workhorse that turned the Broncos around in the 2011 season and took them to the playoffs. He is a consummate student of the game and a relentless workaholic. He is a strong leader with solid character and a dedicated fan base that any NFL team should appreciate. An amazing athlete, Tebow has a bright future. He will get better in the areas he’s lacking. Barring some unforeseen tragedy, injury, or psychological setback (like a team he’s loyal to not being loyal to him), Tebow has all the makings of becoming a Hall of Fame quarterback himself one day. The Broncos had every reason to build their team around Tebow for the next few years and ride the “Tebow wave” back into the playoffs again and again. But rather than think long-term and invest a player that’s worth cheering for, they’ve chosen to chase the dream of instant gratification with Peyton Manning.
I understand that football is a business, and I understand that it’s tough to pass up on an opportunity to bring someone like Peyton Manning into your organization. What I object to is the way this is all being handled. One gets the impression that John Elway and Co. were never comfortable with Tim Tebow. They never really liked him. Is it his Christian faith? his high moral character? his solid work ethic? or the fact that legions of fans adore him, hungry for a sports role model they can believe in? Which of those things made Elway wince when Tebow would score a touchdown and do his “Tebow” thing to thunderous crowd approval?
Why is it that NFL teams are quick to support players with criminal records, off-the-field antics, brazen showmanship, and horrible morals, yet (at least in this case) are uncomfortable with a player that any kid in America should strive to emulate?
I understand the desire on the part of NFL front offices to put a winning team on the field. I get that. But, speaking as a fan, I feel we’ve lost something with the NFL. We’ve lost the “why.” Are we just supposed to root for teams that win? Is winning in-and-of-itself the end-all, be-all of which team to which we give our support? Do we want fans bouncing from team to team chasing the “winner” just as players now bounce from team to team chasing the money? If that’s what the NFL is now all about, count me out. I want to root for a team that’s worth rooting for — a team that supports its community and that has players who serve as true role models for the people in that community, especially its youngest citizens. I want a team with heart and a team with character, a team that’s proud (in a healthy way) to celebrate an honorable man like Tim Tebow.
We’re talking about a guy who invests his free time into charity work and helping those who need a helping hand. He’s raised money for numerous worthy causes, including pediatric cancer treatment, a children’s hospital in the Philippines, playrooms in children’s hospitals around the world, and sending disadvantaged kids on a Disney vacation. While some athletes spend their time gambling, boozing, doing drugs, sleeping around, partying at drunken orgies, committing felonies, or more, Tebow spends his with disabled children and veterans, prisoners who need a second change, and poor kids who need hope and encouragement. Please tell me why I shouldn’t believe in an athlete like that!? We’re talking about a guy who takes his status as a role model seriously and who cultivates that opportunity to serve and help as many people as he can. This is a guy worth believing in, and any team who is loyal to him is likewise a team worth believing in and cheering for.
Tim, keep your head high. You may not have the respect of greedy men like John Elway, but you have won the hearts of many football fans like me, who understand there’s more to life than getting a football across the goal line or cashing in on ticket sales. Hang in there. I’m praying for you, and I know God will bless you!
Kirk Cameron Learning There’s a High Price to Pay for Opposing Homosexual Marriage
074 days
It’s okay to be a Christian in the United States of America, so long as you believe only the parts of the Bible that meet with society’s approval or at least keep your mouth shut regarding those parts that don’t. That’s the lesson Kirk Cameron is learning after honestly expressing his Bible-based views on homosexuality and marriage.
The former “Growing Pains” star ignited a firestorm when he told Piers Morgan that homosexuality was “unnatural” and “detrimental” and that no one should try to redefine marriage, an institution that is “as old as dirt.” Celebrities are stepping over one another to put the former child star in his place, and a petition drive to tell Kirk Cameron to “grow up” is already garnering thousands of signatures. Suffice it to say that Kirk Cameron won’t be starring in any more Hollywood productions!
All of this goes to prove that the gay rights community has taken command of society’s megaphone. If you speak out against homosexuality, there will be consequences…serious consequences. You may lose job contracts (as Christian speaker and author Frank Turek has suffered). You may get disciplined by your university (see Jennifer Keeton). You might even get suspended from your job (see Jerry Buell). Even if you’re a Christian organization on a college campus, you’re not safe. You can have religious views, so long as they don’t contradict homosexuality, as numerous Christian groups are learning at secular colleges. In fact, even Christian colleges are coming under fire for not openly embracing homosexual students or groups.
It would be nice to think that the Christian community was united on this, but that’s simply not the case. Many professing Christians are distancing themselves from the Bible, preferring instead the applause of society.
The pieces are falling into place for seismic changes in our society over the next several years. If you think I’m exaggerating, pay close attention to the rhetoric coming out of the gay, lesbian, and transgender community regarding those who oppose their lifestyle and agenda. They don’t hesitate to throw the words “hate” and “intolerance” around, nor do they hesitate to advocate the consigning of such views and such people to the fringes of society. Christians today can look to the persecutions of the early church for guidance as to where things are headed. Note that the Christians of the apostles’ day weren’t persecuted for their private beliefs. They were persecuted when their beliefs spilled over into the rest of society, and when those beliefs impacted social culture, local economics, or political stability. Likewise today, Christians who keep their politically incorrect views to themselves have little to fear (at least for now). It’s those Christians like Kirk Cameron that need to be concerned. Sadly, not enough Christians are standing with him.
Where Does the Redefinition of Marriage End?
082 days
One of my favorite biblical illustrations is the contrast between the builders who erected their house on the sand and those who built theirs upon a rock. When you build something — be it a family, a church, a country, or a culture — it better be on a firm foundation. I had hoped that, with the United States anyway, the family would remain on a solid foundation.
For most of American history, that was certainly the case. The family was always understood to be two or more persons joined together by birth, marriage, or adoption. And marriage, being at the center of the family, was widely understood to refer to one man and one woman who had made a loving, legal, and lifelong commitment to one another. Sure, there were people living together outside of marriage and sure, there was divorce. But these things were seen as something distinct from the ideal. The definition and understanding of marriage itself, even if only in the ideal, was secure. For most of its history, the United States respected this understanding of marriage, something that was reflected in the church, in city hall, in Congress, in literature, in movies, television, music, etc. The foundation of the family, i.e., marriage, was clear and solid.
But then, things began to change. In the last few decades, the consensus has been breaking down. The definition of marriage has been challenged and our culture’s understanding of the family is now unraveling. As a result, this redefining of marriage, coupled with all the problems our society has with marriage (abuse, divorce, infidelity, etc.), is turning our foundation from rock to sand.
The state of Maryland is now the latest to jump on the redefinition of marriage bandwagon. On March 1, 2012, the governor of Maryland will put his signature to the Civil Marriage Protection Act, which redefines marriage to include couples of the same gender. The state of Maryland now joins seven other states and the District of Columbia in allowing same-sex marriage. It is yet another victory for the gay rights community and, in the words of The Washington Post, one more step in “expanding nationwide momentum for gay rights.” And this momentum will likely carry the redefinition of marriage to even more states, and probably fairly soon, the entire United States.
For a growing number of Americans, including a great many who profess to be Christians, the redefinition of marriage raises no alarm. To them, the fact that God is the One who created and defined marriage (see the book of Genesis) is not worthy of serious, if any, consideration. I expect non-Christians to disregard God and the Bible, but when Christians do it, it’s something else entirely. But I’ll set that issue aside for the moment, and simply ask this…
Since gender is no longer a relevant consideration when defining marriage, what’s to stop society from saying that a NUMBER (as in the number “two”) is likewise no longer relevant?
For the record, I agree that the government shouldn’t stop consenting adults from living together. Back in the 1990s, gay rights activists won a major victory when the U.S. Supreme Court in Lawrence vs. Texas struck down all laws barring sodomy and homosexuality. Even though I believe the Bible is clear on homosexuality being a sin (and thus I believe churches should teach the truth on the issue of homosexuality, regardless of what the government says), I nevertheless fully understand gays and lesbians seeing Lawrence vs. Texas as a civil rights issue. The redefinition of marriage is, however, a different story altogether. By using the strong arm of government to force a redefinition of marriage onto society overall, they are no longer advocating simply for their rights.
Supporters of same-sex marriage often point to concerns over wills, estate settlements, hospital visitation, etc. Nevertheless, these considerations can be addressed through a number of means, including power-of-attorney agreements and civil unions. Many states have, in fact, set up civil partnerships to confirm that gay and lesbian couples have the same exact rights as married heterosexual couples. And on this point, I agree that states have every right to oversee and define contracts (including civil unions). Yet civil unions aren’t good enough for the gay rights community today. They want a redefinition of marriage to include them. And they are getting their way.
If trends continue, it won’t be long before the United States of America redefines marriage, probably by edict of the Supreme Court. Gays and lesbians are actively pushing for this by trying to get the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) overturned in Court or repealed by Congress. Once that happens, the U.S. Supreme Court will likely rule that all fifty states must accept gay marriage, given the “full faith and credit clause” of the Constitution. All that is coming. It’s only a matter of time, unless there’s a major shift in public opinion. Not only that, but this redefinition of marriage in society and culture will permeate even more into our schools, television, movies, music, and the church. Those who remain opposed to same-sex marriage will be increasingly ostracized and marginalized. So, given the likelihood of gay marriage being legalized across the nation and thus marriage being fundamentally redefined, I return to my question…
What’s to stop society from saying that three people can marry (instead of two)?
Obviously, the government should do everything it can to prevent the type of scary, polygamous cults that crop on the news now and then. These cults usually involve one man with a harem of women, some of whom are underage. That type of twisted exploitation should be opposed by government, and I fully expect it will continue to be opposed by government. However, what about three or four consenting adults? What if you have three consenting adults (three men, two women and a man, two men and a woman, whatever) who say they love each other and want to be together and they want to be married? What do we say to that? If we say “no,” on what objective grounds do we deny them marriage?
Please don’t respond to this with a red herring accusation that I’m equating homosexuality with polygamy. I am not doing that. I’m simply saying that some of the same arguments being used in favor of gay marriage can also be used to favor polygamy. If we should allow two consenting adults of the same sex to marry because they love each other, then shouldn’t we also allow three people or four people (regardless of the gender mix) to marry one another? Once you redefine marriage to no longer take gender into consideration, then you are on a slippery slope.
And that slippery slope brings me back to my favorite Bible illustration. If we, as a society, can no longer agree on the definition of marriage, then what does that say about the kind of foundation we’re building families on? In this case, not only do we disagree fundamentally over the definition of marriage, but no one has really any idea where the redefinition will end. Our foundation is fast becoming slippery sand, and everyone knows what happens to a house built on sand.
Jennifer Keeton and the Decline of Religious Freedom
1151 days
Jennifer Keeton, a graduate student with Augusta State University, is yet another casualty in an ongoing war against Christianity and religious freedom. While pursuing a degree in counseling at Augusta State, Keeton was forced to undergo a “remediation plan,” due to her biblical worldview. Keeton, you see, is a Christian. So long as Christians set the Bible aside or water down their views or keep them private, there’s no problem. Not yet anyway. But when a Christian actually takes the Bible seriously, particularly on an issue like homosexuality, and then dares to express her biblically based views, well, quite a few people do have a problem with that….as Ms. Keeton is learning.
When Keeton was assigned this remediation plan (which reportedly included a requirement that she attend a gay pride parade), she filed suit. A U.S. judge ruled against Keeton, saying that the remediation plan was “academically legitimate.” With support from the Alliance Defense Fund, Keeton appealed. Now, a three-judge panel has upheld that ruling, dealing Keeton another setback. Her attorneys have now filed for an appeal with the Circuit Court.
Keeton probably believed that, because of the Bill of Rights, she had the freedom, even as a graduate student, to believe the Bible and express her religious views. Unfortunately, Keeton is learning that when those views come in conflict with an agenda that modern society has declared politically correct, then religious freedom takes a back seat in an increasing number of places in American society today, including Augusta State University.
I have no problem with a university teaching its students to be sensitive and compassionate in how they express their views. If Keeton were abrasive or hateful in her comments, then I can certainly appreciate the need for Augusta State University to deal with that accordingly. But, according to what I’ve read, this was not the case. Keeton simply said she believed homosexuality was “morally wrong,” a position that is certainly in line with Scripture. This case has wide ramifications. For example, now that gays and lesbians are serving openly in the armed forces, will chaplains (including evangelical, Bible-believing chaplains) be required to counsel gays and lesbians in ways that conflict with their biblically held beliefs? There are already indications that the answer to this is yes.
Must Bible-believing Christians operating in academic, military, and government settings be required to jettison their beliefs or openly work against them in order to pursue successful careers and make a living for themselves and their families? If the answer is yes, then religious freedom is perhaps seeing its last days in the United States of America.
Is Tim Tebow a Victim of Christophobia?
0200 days
Is society becoming Christophobic? One writer thinks so, and believes Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow is the latest victim!
Without trying to be melodramatic, there are signs that North America is becoming less friendly to evangelical Christianity. Not only do we have statistics to show that fewer Americans associate themselves with Christianity today than Americans did in decades past, but there are a growing number of accounts of men and women of Christian faith being ostracized, fired, or ridiculed for their beliefs.
Of course, we in America need to be careful not to raise the “Persecution” banner too high, when we consider what’s happening to our brothers and sisters in Christ in places like North Korea, China, Sudan, Cuba, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and many other places in the world. The United States of America, comparatively-speaking, is still a land of religious freedom with a history and culture that’s largely friendly to Christianity. Comparatively speaking, that is.
Even so, NFL quarterback Tim Tebow seems to be among the latest examples of Christians being publicly ridiculed for their faith. And one writer says that the hatred of Tebow is yet another example of “Christophobia” rising in America.
“Hating Tim Tebow” by Marcia Segelstein
Perhaps Ms. Segelstein is overstating it. Perhaps Christophobia isn’t anywhere near the level of alarm that some are claiming. Then again, maybe Segelstein and others aren’t far enough. Remember Frank Turek. Whatever the case, make no mistake. The USA is not as friendly to Christianity as it was 20 years ago. Times are definitely changing, and one wonders where things will be 20 years from now.
Modern Day Persecution of Christians in America: What a Florida School Teacher’s Suspension Tells us About the Future
4271 days
When a public school teacher is suspended for expressing his Bible-based opinions on Facebook, you know that religious freedom in the United States of America is beginning to falter. And the greatest threat to that freedom today stems from the national “culture war” over marriage. Make no mistake. It is the goal of homosexual activists to make opposition to the homosexual agenda unacceptable in every way. If homosexual activists get their way, Christians who speak out against same-sex marriage will face social, economic, and legal consequences. Momentum is clearly on their side. If things continue as they are now, Christians will be living in a far different America a decade or two from now. Think I’m exaggerating?
Pressured by homosexual activists, the federal government, local school districts, and private businesses alike are taking steps to curb any opposition to same-sex marriage. At the federal level, Congress has thrown its support behind legislation that essentially defines opposition to homosexuality as “hate.” The Obama administration, with encouragement from liberal activist judges, has cleared the way for gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military. When conscientious Christians serving as chaplains in the Armed Forces raised concerns that they might be pressured to support or provide services to homosexual couples (which would be against their biblical convictions), they were told basically to change their beliefs or get out of the military! Recently, a business consultant saw his contract cancelled by Cisco, even though his performance ratings were high. His offense was that, on his own time and completely outside of his relationship with Cisco, he wrote a book in favor of traditional marriage! And now a Florida public school teacher, one who was named “Teacher of the Year” recently, was suspended. Why? Because he took a position on Facebook that he was for traditional marriage! If you think these are isolated situations and that this doesn’t reflect an alarming trend, you are naive.
Remember that persecution of Christians in history has almost always been driven by cultural, political, or economic considerations. While Jesus’ crucifixion was of course divinely ordained, the human motive behind his execution was a threat to the power of Caiaphus and his followers and the desire for Roman governor Pontius Pilate to maintain order. The apostles were often persecuted in Acts, because their preaching the Gospel brought them into conflict with the economic interests of pagan cultures or the political goals of governing authorities. In the Roman Empire, the worship of their gods was a measure of patriotic unity and often commitment to the emperor in power. Whether we’re talking the Roman Empire or the Middle Ages or the modern era, Christians are persecuted when their actions (not so much their beliefs) bring them into conflict with society’s prevailing cultural, economic, or political agenda. Right now, the growing consensus for America is postmodern relativism and social (and sexual) libertarianism. And Bible-believing Christians (at least those who act on their biblical beliefs) are a direct threat to that consensus. It’s the recipe for persecution.
For the record, I completely support the moral and legal right of school districts, companies, the federal government, etc. to remove people that engage in genuine hate speech. I abhor gay bashing. It has no place in society and certainly not in the church. Someone who calls for violence against homosexuals deserves to lose their job and should be liable for appropriate legal remedies. But to say that someone is guilty of hate speech simply because they say that homosexuality is a sin (as the Bible does) or that marriage should be restricted to a man and woman is something else entirely. If I disagree with someone, it doesn’t follow that I hate the person. To equate disagreement with hate is a very troubling development in our society.
I understand that the history teacher in question, Jerry Buell, expressed his views rather strongly and did so in a public forum. I understand that it’s not entirely fair for Mr. Buell to categorize his Facebook posts as “private.” When you post something on the Internet, we’ve moved beyond the private sphere. But does the First Amendment only apply to private speech? Isn’t the whole point of the First Amendment’s free speech guarantee to make sure that citizens can speak out freely on even the most controversial issues without facing government penalty? If Mr. Buell had specifically targeted gay students with his comments or had called for some type of violence against gays and lesbians, I would completely support the school district’s action. And even in this case, I can understand the Florida school district asking Mr. Buell to issue some kind of public clarification of his comments that assures students that his views on gay marriage will have no bearing on his treatment of students (whether they be gay or straight) in his classroom. But to suspend him or possibly fire him for expressing an opinion on a public issue is something else entirely.
What if he opposes polygamy? I’m sure he does, by the way, since his views on marriage are derived from Scripture. Does it follow that a person who opposes polygamy hates polygamists? What if the debate were over polygamy instead of gay marriage? (It’s really not that far of a stretch, you know. If we’re not going to define marriage by gender, why should we define it by a number?) Would pro-polygamy activists have the moral right to equate Christians who oppose them with “hate groups”? Would a public school district have the right to suspend a teacher for saying on Facebook that polygamy was morally revolting? Where does this end?
I’ll tell you where it ends. It “ends” with those in power deciding what speech is permitted and what is not. It “ends” with those in power deciding what behaviors, lifestyles, and agendas are off limits for civic discussion or political debate? When that happens, free speech and free religion will, for all intents and purposes, no longer exist. And Christians in America will be staring at a bleak future.
Christians need to wake up and stand up if they want to avoid seeing themselves and their children face some of the same persecution that many of our brothers and sisters in Christ face in different parts of the world today or that the apostles faced in the first century Roman Empire. There’s still time, but there won’t be for long.
Why Was Frank Turek Fired From Cisco? And What Does it Say About Persecution of Christians in America?
7289 days
Bible-believing Christians in America need to sit up and take notice. Frank Turek, a Christian author and speaker, was fired from his contract with Cisco as a result of beliefs he publicly expressed outside of work. That a Christian would lose his or her job because of political or religious views expressed outside of work is deeply troubling to say the least. It’s certainly understandable that an employer would prohibit, limit, or regulate religious or political speech or activism within the workplace. It’s not only understandable, but perfectly reasonable. However, when an employer terminates an employee’s position or vendor’s contract over political speech or activism that takes place outside of work hours and off campus, that is something else entirely. And that is precisely what happened with Frank Turek.
Turek is a widely known Christian author, speaker, and ministry leader. Until recently, he was also a corporate consultant and trainer, using his expertise in leadership and management to supplement his family’s income. Turek was careful not to mix the two spheres, keeping his political and religious views out of his corporate work. That was not good enough, however, for a self-described gay manager at Cisco. In spite of the fact that Turek received high marks for his training and performance, this particular manager was appalled at Turek’s writings and public advocacy for traditional marriage. He complained. And Turek was fired.
What’s the big deal, you say? Simply this…if it happened to Frank Turek, it can happen to you. In fact, this kind of thing has long been happening in academia, especially on liberal college campuses. Now, it’s happening in corporate America. The bottom line precedent that’s being set right now is this…Christians can be fired from their secular jobs if they publicly write or say things outside of work that are deemed offensive by co-workers.
Professing Christians who pick and choose which parts of the Bible they’re comfortable with and/or who avoid taking any kind of stand on moral issues need not fear. Those types of “Christians” will be the last to face persecution, since they are not much of a threat to anyone. (Though even these Christians may find themselves passed over for promotion or undermined in subtle ways if they are associated with churches or pastors that DO take a stand).
For this blog post, I’m writing mainly to true followers of Jesus Christ. True followers of Christ will always be considered a threat to the Enemy as well as to a morally perverse culture, because they stand for the principles and precepts of God’s Word. Fortunately, for most of American history, Bible-believing Christians have enjoyed a wide amount of latitude in the free exercise of religion and in their free speech rights. Note the past tense of that statement, however. For if the story of Frank Turek is indicative of what’s on the horizon, the days of enjoying a high level of religious freedom in the United States may be numbered.
