Conscientious Abstention From Same-Sex Marriage Is Not The Same As Racism

October 13, 2017 — 3 Comments

Here’s an important Heritage foundation panel discussion held in the United States a couple of days ago. The panel contributors include Ryan Bomberger who I have a growing admiration for, because his work through the Radiance Foundation.

The group discusses how anti-discrimination laws are being used as a sword, rather than a shield to impose an ideology and punish those who stand opposed to it.

The panel also addresses the false equivalency that is made between the abhorrent Jim Crow laws, and someone declining to serve/make/create based on a conscientious objection to gay marriage.

I’m in agreement with them.

I especially liked the reasons for a defence of traditional marriage, and the response to government involvement given by Heritage Foundation’s William E. Simon senior research fellow, Ryan T. Anderson, at the close of the discussion [see 46:25 – 47:18].

“Man-made law should recognise the natural law, which looks to human nature and what marriage is. That marriage is based on three secular truths.
First, anthropological truth, that man and woman are distinct and complimentary. Second, the biological fact that reproduction requires a man and a woman; and finally a social reality that children deserve a mum and a dad.
You put those three pieces together and you going to have a basic understanding of what marriage is and our man-made laws should reflect that.
Apart from that it’s not clear to me why the government is consenting ratification of romance business. Once we get away from the man-woman, husband and wife, mother/father understanding of what marriage is, I don’t see what role the state has in regulating consenting adults sexual or romantic relationships.”

In September, I contributed four articles to the Same-sex marriage debate in Australia. All graciously republished by the up and coming conservative/libertarian platform for free speech, edgy, online news magazine XYZ.net.au

1. Nein: Why I will be voting “No” To Same-Sex Marriage 

2. Still Nein: A Response To Janet Albrecthsen’s Libertarian Conservative “Yes” To SSM

3. Biology Is Not a Social Construct: Why “p” Cannot Equal “q” Without Perpetual Revolution

4. A “No” To SSM, is a “Yes” to Freedom, Not a Denial of it

It’s okay to vote “no”.

Trackbacks and Pingbacks:

  1. Even If a “No” Vote Wins, Our Lament Today Should Be About The Decline of Truth & The Freedom To Speak It « Gratia Veritas Lumen - November 15, 2017

    […] Conscientious Abstention From Same-Sex Marriage Is Not The Same As Racism […]

    Like

  2. To Everything There Is a Season: Deifying Our Neighbour Isn’t One of Them « Gratia Veritas Lumen - November 16, 2017

    […] I have hopefully made clear in the written contributions I’ve made to this national debate, I see the issues as a matter of social justice. This has […]

    Like

  3. Voting “No” To Same-Sex Marriage Was Never About Imposing “Christian Law” « Gratia Veritas Lumen - November 19, 2017

    […] Conscientious Abstention From Same-Sex Marriage Is Not The Same As Racism […]

    Like

Comments:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s