So 145 "Christian" leaders have signed their self named "Manhattan Declaration" a call to actively participate in civil disobedience, as a means to work agents not only same sex marriage but all same sex civil rights (including ENDA). My plan is to pick out portions (mostly that impact the GLBT community) of their declaration and then pick that apart. While at the same time summarizing their arguments, so that they can be countered. I am going to apologize for the length to start with, I felt it was important to give an in depth summery and commentary.
SO it starts off with the first line of its preamble reads
"Christians are heirs of 2,000-years of tradition of proclaiming God's word, seeking Justice in our societies, resisting tyranny, and reaching out with compassion to the poor, oppressed and suffering."
Let's start with the hypocrisy of starting off a call to actively impose injustice, oppression, suffering and the tyranny of rule of the majority.
(without protection for the minority) Their goal is to actively work agents the forces of justice that are in action in this country (or to remove any level of justice in others) to remove equal protections and rights under the law for a group of people is not to seek justice. To work to keep a group/push a group back into a situation where they are second class citizens in their own country, to have the laws be used to do that is not reach out with compassion to the oppressed, it is to show disgust for them. To actively work at subjecting people to the tyranny of the majority rule without protection is obviously not resisting tyranny. To do all of this is not reaching out with compassion to those that are suffering , it is to insure the most suffering for those people that they can.
They then go on to give historical examples of how the faith has stood up and practiced those values. However they also whitewash over and outright ignore the fact that at many of the same periods of time the faith was also used to work against the christen changes they proudly clam.
Link to the full document
Their first section deals with "life" as they have titled it, and their stance against a women's reproductive rights for any reason. They speak of a resolve to help women and their children so that they do not need abortion yet that is merely not enough for them. Their ultimate goal is to take the choice away from to women about what is right for her and her body. Instead they believe that they know what is best for every women, that their views of scripture are what's best for every woman and there for must be imposed on them. I will say that personally I believe that abortion should not be the first choice, that in an ideal world, there would be a system a safety and support net in place for the mother so that she did not ever feel the need for an abortion. yet I also recognize that it is not my rightful place to make a decision about any ones reproductive issues for them, and that they should have every possible choice made available to them. Those a women should not be denied the right to chose the option that is best for her whether that be adoption or abortion.
They also go along to deal with their opposition of assisted suicide/right to die laws, they try to compare them to the ground work for a holocaust like genocide. While ignoring that the laws are written to protect life and the patient, that they are written in a way that a terminal ill patient who is found to be in a physiologically sound (Non depressed mind) with less them a set period of time to live (In WA its 6months) can request of their health care provider a dosage of drugs that will kill them. So that they can die with dignity instead of slowly and painfully wasting away in to an increasingly invaded state until they finally die. Religious institutions and medical providers already have the right to contentiously object and refuse to provide said services (the local hospital, run by the Catholics dose) however ultimately the right to simply object is not enough they want the right to change the law to take away the choice from the patient and replace it with their own interpretation of the scripture. They don't want the government to intervene in their doctrine which it does not but they also want to insert their doctrine into law. So in their view government is only good if it's to impose their beliefs on others.
their next section is "marriage" in this section they spend 5 paragraphs both explain the creation of marriage, why its "important" using many of the same old reproduction and protecting the children examples, and they mix in a little talk about the problem with divorce in straight marriage and children born our of wedlock (along with living together before marriage) then in the next 6 much larger paragraphs they go on to tackle Same-Sex marriage, where they carefully make a concerted effort to mention it always in the same breath on the page with polygamy. They try to paint same sex marriage as a condition of "the erosion of the understanding of marriage" , and that it can't be allowed or the understanding of marriage cannot be fixed. They say that to allow same sex marriage would,
"It would lock into place the false and destructive belief that marriage is all about romance and other adult satisfactions, and not , in any intrinsic way, about procreation and the unique character and value of acts and relationships whose meaning is shaped by their aptness for the generation, promotion and protection of life"
So their fist/main point in the argument against same sex marriage is that it would wrongly lock in the idea that it is about love for ones partner rather then that it is about having babies and rearing kids. Their stance is that the problem with marriage currently is that people base it on love and their romantic connection to their partner, instead of purely on their and their partners ability to have and raise children. (because we all know how good it is for children to be raised in a dysfunctional family where the parents resent each other)
For the next two paragraphs, with the old and worn out love the sinner hate the sin by taking away the civil rights of that person. and then trying to dismiss any gay person of faith, who like me, don't see things the same way they do, as being basically delusional and not understanding of the faith. they then again go on to make allusions to having children and ironically the joining of man and women (its parity easy to read between the lines and gather in sex) is the only union that is biologically physically and spiritually fulfilling.
They then go along to use the straw man slippery slop argument about why those that don't care about the issue or don't see a problem with same sex marriage because it does not impact their marriage as being wrong. they then go on to state "No one has a civil right to have a non-marital relationship treated as marriage" which in its self is an non-fact, circular argument presented as a fact, which makes it fail right off the bat after all you can't argue its X way because of X and there is no way for the other side to achieve X.
They then go on "marriage is an objective reality-a covenantal union of husband and wife-that it is the duty of the law to recognize and support for the sake of justice" again they ignore the fact that government is separate from the church that just because it is church doctrine does not mean it is legal as law. They also handily glaze over the fact that relegating GLB people to second-class citizenship within their own country when it comes to Civil (non religious) rights is not an act of justice but injustice, so there for doing so is not support for the sake of justice.
They then go on to close their argument stating that they don't seek to do this out of "animus" and "prejudice" but "out of love and prudent concern for the common good". Apparently the common good dose not include equality for all, let alone liberty. They may wish to say they are not doing this out of animus and prejudice but that is exactly what they are doing it out of, it's clear from the undertone of their writing, as well as their insistence on using the prejudice against polygamy against same sex marriage when they pair the two up every time they mention it.
Their final section is on Religious Liberty, where they of course try to claim their rights to worship to preach and peacefully publicly express their religious views are being removed from them. They complain about requirements that they cannot turn away those in need of treatment from their public medical hospitals, and that if they refuse to perform a procedure that they need to in some jurisdiction refer the patent to a place/physician that will.
They then go on to use the erroneous example of churches being punished by using the same NJ church (the same one Nom used in their adds) that lost the tax exempt statues on its hall, which was available to any no profits that opened their facility's (or land to the public for public use) they lost the tax exemption because open to the public means all the public not those they chose. (it was never a guaranteed tax exemption and the "church" violated the terms of it thus forfeiting the exemption)
They then go on to vaguely point at being punished in Europe and Canada for preaching without giving examples or names. they then go on to try to say that the new hate crimes will do the same to them as the laws in Europe that are supposedly throwing preachers in jail for preaching against homosexuality(etc). All the while ignoring the fact that in the new bill that passed religion, religious view and perceived religious view where all protect and one being attacked for them where grounds for a hate crime.
This declaration should make it abundantly clear that not only are those who have signed it, who are also those that continue to push not only against the continued fight to achieve full equality for LGBT citizens of this (and other countries around the world) but also fight to repeal equalities that have already been achieved, are truly moral corrupt and hypocritical on an appalling scale.
The only thing that can make this scarier is the fact that many of these people are increasingly focusing their energies and money to fight their "culture" war in the developing nations of Africa and Asia where they are trying to push the LGBT citizens of those country off the bottom rungs of equality. There they actively work to have homosexuality made criminal with death their ultimate goal for punishment. This decoration should make it clear that those of faith who their views (a vast and silent majority) must rise up and show itself, that it must provide a counter point for those of faith in the rest of the world to see, to actively work to undo the damage to Women, and the LGBT that these Religious Conservatives have inflicted and continue to inflict, as that is the true calling of Christ, that we are all called to fallow.
SO it starts off with the first line of its preamble reads
"Christians are heirs of 2,000-years of tradition of proclaiming God's word, seeking Justice in our societies, resisting tyranny, and reaching out with compassion to the poor, oppressed and suffering."
Let's start with the hypocrisy of starting off a call to actively impose injustice, oppression, suffering and the tyranny of rule of the majority.
(without protection for the minority) Their goal is to actively work agents the forces of justice that are in action in this country (or to remove any level of justice in others) to remove equal protections and rights under the law for a group of people is not to seek justice. To work to keep a group/push a group back into a situation where they are second class citizens in their own country, to have the laws be used to do that is not reach out with compassion to the oppressed, it is to show disgust for them. To actively work at subjecting people to the tyranny of the majority rule without protection is obviously not resisting tyranny. To do all of this is not reaching out with compassion to those that are suffering , it is to insure the most suffering for those people that they can.
They then go on to give historical examples of how the faith has stood up and practiced those values. However they also whitewash over and outright ignore the fact that at many of the same periods of time the faith was also used to work against the christen changes they proudly clam.
Link to the full document
Their first section deals with "life" as they have titled it, and their stance against a women's reproductive rights for any reason. They speak of a resolve to help women and their children so that they do not need abortion yet that is merely not enough for them. Their ultimate goal is to take the choice away from to women about what is right for her and her body. Instead they believe that they know what is best for every women, that their views of scripture are what's best for every woman and there for must be imposed on them. I will say that personally I believe that abortion should not be the first choice, that in an ideal world, there would be a system a safety and support net in place for the mother so that she did not ever feel the need for an abortion. yet I also recognize that it is not my rightful place to make a decision about any ones reproductive issues for them, and that they should have every possible choice made available to them. Those a women should not be denied the right to chose the option that is best for her whether that be adoption or abortion.
They also go along to deal with their opposition of assisted suicide/right to die laws, they try to compare them to the ground work for a holocaust like genocide. While ignoring that the laws are written to protect life and the patient, that they are written in a way that a terminal ill patient who is found to be in a physiologically sound (Non depressed mind) with less them a set period of time to live (In WA its 6months) can request of their health care provider a dosage of drugs that will kill them. So that they can die with dignity instead of slowly and painfully wasting away in to an increasingly invaded state until they finally die. Religious institutions and medical providers already have the right to contentiously object and refuse to provide said services (the local hospital, run by the Catholics dose) however ultimately the right to simply object is not enough they want the right to change the law to take away the choice from the patient and replace it with their own interpretation of the scripture. They don't want the government to intervene in their doctrine which it does not but they also want to insert their doctrine into law. So in their view government is only good if it's to impose their beliefs on others.
their next section is "marriage" in this section they spend 5 paragraphs both explain the creation of marriage, why its "important" using many of the same old reproduction and protecting the children examples, and they mix in a little talk about the problem with divorce in straight marriage and children born our of wedlock (along with living together before marriage) then in the next 6 much larger paragraphs they go on to tackle Same-Sex marriage, where they carefully make a concerted effort to mention it always in the same breath on the page with polygamy. They try to paint same sex marriage as a condition of "the erosion of the understanding of marriage" , and that it can't be allowed or the understanding of marriage cannot be fixed. They say that to allow same sex marriage would,
"It would lock into place the false and destructive belief that marriage is all about romance and other adult satisfactions, and not , in any intrinsic way, about procreation and the unique character and value of acts and relationships whose meaning is shaped by their aptness for the generation, promotion and protection of life"
So their fist/main point in the argument against same sex marriage is that it would wrongly lock in the idea that it is about love for ones partner rather then that it is about having babies and rearing kids. Their stance is that the problem with marriage currently is that people base it on love and their romantic connection to their partner, instead of purely on their and their partners ability to have and raise children. (because we all know how good it is for children to be raised in a dysfunctional family where the parents resent each other)
For the next two paragraphs, with the old and worn out love the sinner hate the sin by taking away the civil rights of that person. and then trying to dismiss any gay person of faith, who like me, don't see things the same way they do, as being basically delusional and not understanding of the faith. they then again go on to make allusions to having children and ironically the joining of man and women (its parity easy to read between the lines and gather in sex) is the only union that is biologically physically and spiritually fulfilling.
They then go along to use the straw man slippery slop argument about why those that don't care about the issue or don't see a problem with same sex marriage because it does not impact their marriage as being wrong. they then go on to state "No one has a civil right to have a non-marital relationship treated as marriage" which in its self is an non-fact, circular argument presented as a fact, which makes it fail right off the bat after all you can't argue its X way because of X and there is no way for the other side to achieve X.
They then go on "marriage is an objective reality-a covenantal union of husband and wife-that it is the duty of the law to recognize and support for the sake of justice" again they ignore the fact that government is separate from the church that just because it is church doctrine does not mean it is legal as law. They also handily glaze over the fact that relegating GLB people to second-class citizenship within their own country when it comes to Civil (non religious) rights is not an act of justice but injustice, so there for doing so is not support for the sake of justice.
They then go on to close their argument stating that they don't seek to do this out of "animus" and "prejudice" but "out of love and prudent concern for the common good". Apparently the common good dose not include equality for all, let alone liberty. They may wish to say they are not doing this out of animus and prejudice but that is exactly what they are doing it out of, it's clear from the undertone of their writing, as well as their insistence on using the prejudice against polygamy against same sex marriage when they pair the two up every time they mention it.
Their final section is on Religious Liberty, where they of course try to claim their rights to worship to preach and peacefully publicly express their religious views are being removed from them. They complain about requirements that they cannot turn away those in need of treatment from their public medical hospitals, and that if they refuse to perform a procedure that they need to in some jurisdiction refer the patent to a place/physician that will.
They then go on to use the erroneous example of churches being punished by using the same NJ church (the same one Nom used in their adds) that lost the tax exempt statues on its hall, which was available to any no profits that opened their facility's (or land to the public for public use) they lost the tax exemption because open to the public means all the public not those they chose. (it was never a guaranteed tax exemption and the "church" violated the terms of it thus forfeiting the exemption)
They then go on to vaguely point at being punished in Europe and Canada for preaching without giving examples or names. they then go on to try to say that the new hate crimes will do the same to them as the laws in Europe that are supposedly throwing preachers in jail for preaching against homosexuality(etc). All the while ignoring the fact that in the new bill that passed religion, religious view and perceived religious view where all protect and one being attacked for them where grounds for a hate crime.
This declaration should make it abundantly clear that not only are those who have signed it, who are also those that continue to push not only against the continued fight to achieve full equality for LGBT citizens of this (and other countries around the world) but also fight to repeal equalities that have already been achieved, are truly moral corrupt and hypocritical on an appalling scale.
The only thing that can make this scarier is the fact that many of these people are increasingly focusing their energies and money to fight their "culture" war in the developing nations of Africa and Asia where they are trying to push the LGBT citizens of those country off the bottom rungs of equality. There they actively work to have homosexuality made criminal with death their ultimate goal for punishment. This decoration should make it clear that those of faith who their views (a vast and silent majority) must rise up and show itself, that it must provide a counter point for those of faith in the rest of the world to see, to actively work to undo the damage to Women, and the LGBT that these Religious Conservatives have inflicted and continue to inflict, as that is the true calling of Christ, that we are all called to fallow.
Comments
Post a Comment