Conservatives screw up constantly: the least accurate descriptor that you could call progressives and liberals, if there still any separation between the two, is inefficient. Efficiency in messaging, organizing, and implementation of policy is perhaps what most separates the right and the left besides ideology, which is odd, because for conservatives, the message has been essentially the same for thousands of years, while liberals must come up with new arguments for their ideas.
The latest example of this phenomenon is that Christian school faculty, the faculty of Grace Christian School, men and women who are supposed to be leaders, dedicated to helping the needy, and bringing God into others’ lives and providing resources for this mission, collectively decided to uphold their rule forbidding gay, transgender, and others in deviant sexual behavior to attend.
The news report from NBC quoted the email noting the policy from the administrator:
“‘We believe that God created mankind in His image: male (man) and female (woman), sexually different but with equal dignity,’ the email said.
“‘Therefore, one's biological sex must be affirmed and no attempts should be made to physically change, alter, or disagree with one's biological gender — including, but not limited to, elective sex reassignment, transvestite, transgender, or non-binary gender fluid acts of conduct (Genesis 1:26-28). Students in school will be referred to by the gender on their birth certificate and be referenced in name in the same fashion.’
“It continued: ‘We believe that any form of homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexuality, transgender identity/lifestyle, self-identification, bestiality, incest, fornication, adultery and pornography are sinful in the sight of God and the church (Genesis 2:24; Leviticus 18:1-30; Romans 1:26-29; I Corinthians 5:1; I Corinthians 6:9; I Thessalonians 4:2-7).’
“‘Students who are found participating in these lifestyles will be asked to leave the school immediately,’ the email said.”
Let me first note two things: number one, the first two lines are completely correct in both description and prescription and number two, the differences between the behaviors that would cause a student to be expelled.
Of course God created women and man in His image. Although some might not know God, everyone knows the sexual binary in the natural world, which is the reason why the adjective “transgender” exists in front of “transgender male” or “transgender female.” It is one of the most simple concepts in the world. It is impossible to say that this does not exist: you could not exist without it, to put it in clean terms. It is also reasonable to call girls “girls” and boys “boys”. If one could not say this because they were barred from doing so, it would be more than a violation of religious freedom: it would be a direct untruth, or a lie. Because saying the opposite of a truth, especially when it could ruin another’s entire perception of reality and life, it is compassionate to tell the truth, such as the case of a “transgender” female being told that he is really a male. And, yes, it is reasonable to expel a student for talking about their sexual encounters and such because that is disgusting and there should be no place for that in a Christian school.
But, there is a great divide between the behaviors listed as egregious enough to force a student to be removed from this school.
First of all, does anyone seriously believe that homosexuality, lesbianism, and bisexuality are the same thing as incest or bestiality? It is not nearly outside the moral order as committing one of the latter would be, and dare I say disgusting, all though they are all disgusting. Keep in mind, I am saying these terms, homosexuality and the others, in the sense of either thinking about an act in accordance with the attraction and acting on in either through thought or acting on it physically; while there is something wrong with being gay, in that it is outside of the natural order and can seriously damage a person considering they cannot start a family, pleasurably at least, and might feel as if they are left out on life’s greatest joys, it is not a sin to plainly have the attraction, although it would be a sin to act on the attraction with one’s will in their mind or through their body. Might I cite a few Bible passages in support of my argument, considering that the people who not just support the liberty for an institution to do this but the rule itself are relying more on the Bible than Natural Law Theory itself:
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9–10).
Women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error (Rom. 1:26–27).
The law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, immoral persons, sodomites, kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine (1 Tim. 1:9–10).
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9–10).
Now, on face value, it might seem that these verses actually go against my argument, and if you jumped to this conclusion you would be wrong. Notice how in St. Paul’s letters, he rebukes not the attraction of homosexuality, but rather a group of people labeled “sodomites”. What do sodomites do? The very fact that this question has to be phrased proves that he is rebuking the action, because of the word “do” and not “feel”. In addition, sodomites are lumped in with sexual perverts, presumably, but this does not necessarily mean that they are on the same level of other sorts of people who do very weird and unnatural things, and this can be assumed because of the hierarchy Natural Law Theory puts in place. Paul uses the word "acts" and "relations" and "committing".
Second of all, does this school seriously think it is possible not just to ban gays, but to get rid of porn-watchers and mainly adolescent young girls who are self-conscious and influenced by friends: what in the hell will this accomplish? Sure, there are some baseline behaviors that are so perverted that surely, surely you should not be allowed into the schools because it requires a great amount of premeditated evil to commit these certain perverted actions in accordance with the behavior, like incest and bestiality. But why is there is a need to kick out gay, transgender, and let’s be honest, rather than porn-watchers, majority porn-addicted minors? All of these behaviors are so common, so encouraged by society and not just society and culture, but parents too, that it actively is the norm.
How will they view this? And it is not just a question of the perspectives’ of those excluded by the policy, but how is this a smart, and forget smart, loving policy? How does this help anybody? The answer is, of course, it helps no one whatsoever but harms. I thought as Christians you are supposed to help the kids that are experiencing these feelings. I thought we were supposed to comfort those who we acknowledge are in a tough spot and not harming others. I thought we supposed to get the porn addict off of porn, convince the girl who thinks she is a boy that she is really a girl, and that the gay kid can still live a happy, chaste, single life like plenty of straight people. Apparently not.
I am all for religious liberty; heck, I usually lean on the authoritarian rather than the libertarian. I do not want to take away religious liberty. But here’s what I think: although the Bostock vs. Clayton County decision was abhorrent in that it restricted religious freedom and was an abject, direct, and intended misinterpretation of the Civil Rights Act in that it was a jump from the discrimination based on “sex” to be outlawed to discrimination based on “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to be outlawed, I see no reason why local and state governments could draft laws enshrining discrimination based on sexual behavior and gender identity, and even though it would be a pretty crappy thing to make a person open the exit door and walk away without a job just for watching porn or for acting on certain desires that while unnatural and evil in the sense of that they are deprived of good, not doing anything way out there, I hope that society would be wise enough to no longer use that business for a service or good. I would not send my kids to Grace Christian School and I hope others would not either.
After all, if a guy thinks that he is a girl, would you really trust him to even do spreadsheets if he cannot understand the simplest facts of the natural world? I would not. But it truly is unfair that a gay guy or an addict, yes, an addict, even if the gay guy is a good man and prevents himself to doing the things that the world teaches him is alright, even virtuous in the most perverted sense to do, or the addict, who faces shame and must grapple with his problem constantly, is forbidden from working at a certain establishment, not to mention a confused gay kid or a kid who was not protected by his parents being banned from receiving a Christian education. It is ridiculous, and dare I say, anti-Christian.
Comments