Thinking to Believe

Former supermodel, Kathy Ireland, is a pro-life Christian.  She was recently interviewed by Fox News and gives a great defense of the pro-life position.

Matt Barber has a good article on the hate crimes legislation bill pending in the House, exposing what is wrong with hate crimes legislation in general, and demonstrating why homosexuals should not be added to the existing list of people protected by these laws. 

The House is set to vote on this bill tomorrow.

Liberals talk about tolerance, but can never seem to practice it.  Whenever someone disagrees with their liberal positions, they are vilified.  Such is the case with the recent Miss USA competition.  Miss California, Carrie Prejean, was asked by pageant judge Perez Hilton (an openly gay man) whether she thought “gay marriage” should be legalized throughout the U.S.  Prejean responded: “Well, I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage.  And you know what, in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman.  No offence to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised and that’s how I think it should be – between a man and a woman. Thank you very much.”

Granted, I think this was a horrible defense of her position, but I’m not here to critique her answer.  I’m here to critique the way liberals have responded to her for stating her support for traditional marriage.  Perez Hilton responded by calling her a “dumb b**ch” on his blog, and describing her as having “half a brain.”  According to Hilton, her answer cost her the competition.  Did you hear that?  She was discriminated against because she gave an answer Hilton didn’t like.  Why ask an open-ended question that you will only accept one answer for?

E! News anchor Giuliana Rancic twittered, “I know i’m a journalist, and i should be objective … but she is an ignorant disgrace and she makes me sick to my stomach.”

Even the director of the Miss California pageant, Shanna Moakler, quickly distanced herself from Ms. Prejean.  She twittered, “This is why we have judges at Miss USA, so we find the girl to rep us ALL,” and “I don’t know how you can call a gay man or woman your friend and not want them 2 have the same joys as yourself. In my family we believe in equal rights for all, I am sad and hurt, I agree with Perez 100 [percent]. It’s one thing to have an opinion I am very opinionated n have dealt with backlash from it, it’s another to alienate people who cared about u.”  After the pageant, she even refused to meet her backstage and congratulate her for being runner-up.  It sounds to me that it is Prejean’s “friends” who are choosing to alienate, not Prejean.

Do these people not recognize that the majority of Americans still oppose same-sex marriage?  Miss California’s answer reflects the thinking of mainstream America, but by the liberal reaction one would think her views represent a tiny minority, as if she denies the Holocaust or believes the Earth is flat.

How has Prejean responded?  Has she villified all those who have called her names and turned their backs on her for holding to a different point of view?  No.  Regarding Hilton she said, “I can only say to him that I will be praying for him.  I feel sorry for him, I really do. I think he’s angry, I think he’s hurt. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion. He asked me specifically what my opinion was on that subject, and I gave him an honest answer.”  That is true tolerance.  And I don’t think it is any coincidence that a person who holds to Christian values is the one expressing it.

“Denying the humanity of a 20-week foetus is as unscientific and irrational as denying the beef on your plate is a cow because you can’t hear it moo.”[1]

“‘Narrow-mindedness’ is not a proper criticism of what you believe, but of how you believe it.”[2]

---

[1]Ed West, “Why Don’t Atheists Oppose Abortion?”; available from http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/edwest/blog/2009/04/14/why_dont_atheists_oppose_abortion; Internet; accessed 15 April 2009.
[2]Greg Koukl, “My niece was accused of being ‘close-minded.’  What I told her may help you”; available from http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=8555; Internet; accessed 10 April 2009

According to a recent Barna survey, American Christians have some very non-biblical points of view:

• 59% think Satan is not a real being, but only a symbol of evil
• 39% think Jesus sinned
• 58% think the Holy Spirit is a symbol of God’s power/presence, but not a living entity
• 41% think the Bible, the Quran, and the Book of Mormon are just different expressions of the same spiritual truths.

While the figures weren’t so bad when isolated specifically to born-again believers, I think this goes to show that just because someone claims to be a Christian, it does not mean they hold to a Christian, Biblical worldview.

Many also hold conflicting points of view.  For example, only 28% reject the idea that evil spirit beings exist and can influence human behavior, and yet 59% reject the existence of Satan.  But Satan is an evil being who can influence human behavior, so why do 31% more people accept the existence of evil spirits than the existence of Satan?  No idea.

Vermont is first again!  They were the first to enact civil unions in 2000.  Now they are the first state to democratically enact same-sex marriage (rather than having the courts impose it on the people).  The Vermont legislature voted today to legalize same-sex marriage, barely overriding the governor’s veto with a 2/3 majority in both houses.  From the polls I have seen, this reflects the will of the people.  While I am staunchly against legalizing same-sex marriage, at least Vermont went about doing it the right way: democratically.

In 2005 the Iowa state law defining marriage as between a man and woman only was challenged.  A county judge struck the law down in 2007.  On Friday 4/3/09 the Iowa Supreme Court upheld that ruling, making Iowa the third state to sanction same-sex marriage (via the courts).