Month: July 2014
Believe in Traditional Marriage – Go to Reeducation Camp!
Posted on July 8, 2014 in Religious Freedom, Sexuality by Nathan Cherry
Do you think only women get pregnant?
Believe marriage is the union of a man and woman?
Hold the position that there are inherent differences between men and women?
You old-fashioned, homophobic, bigoted, discriminatory, sexist person. How dare you believe such things.
How dare you believe that only women can get pregnant. Never-mind the biology, it is absolutely sexist and gender-biased of you to think that only women can get pregnant.
And to think that marriage is the union of only a man and woman. I can’t believe any sane, rational, fair-minded person in this day and age would believe such nonsense.
And don’t get me started on gender distinctions. Anyone believing that the genders are inherently different is a product of their discriminatory environment, not an enlightened culture.
How the Transgender Will Redefine Gender, Marriage, Parents, and Family
Posted on July 7, 2014 in Family, Marriage, Religious Freedom, Sexuality by Nathan Cherry
This is the second part of a two-part post. Read part 1 here.
A recent article by TIME magazine gleefully advocates for transgender people and their “struggle” to be accepted. Sharing the story of Cassidy, the first openly transgender Homecoming Queen in the U.S., the TIME article (and video) eagerly exposes people to another world full of confusion.
At one point Cassidy says she “came out” to her parents as a gay man in high school, but now lives as transgender. Yet Cassidy said it was in 5th grade that “she” first acknowledged and knew “she” was transgender. The amount of sexual confusion here is astounding to me. This is a young man that has been confused for a long time and rather than seeking any kind of help he is being encouraged in his confusion by others.
Speaking of confusion, an article at The Federalist details the extreme confusion of a female named Tracey transitioning to male:
Commentary: What the Hobby Lobby Case is Really About and the False Claims of the Left
Posted on July 5, 2014 in Life by Derick Dickens
This decision really blocks women from being able to make their own health care decisions? Really? Are there religions that really do oppose health care (strawman argument)? Where are all those business owners who oppose all health care? Why aren’t they suing the government?
Wasserman Schultz also expressed concerns for later implications of the law, pointing out that women use birth control to treat illnesses, such as endometriosis and serious menstrual cramping, and saying “the life function day to day for women is dramatically impacted by this decision.”
The decision was limited to four pills. For some reason Wasserman Schultz thinks every pill, pills that help endometriosis and menstrual cramping were banned. Building a strawman, she uses irresponsible language when she says, “the life function day to day for women is dramatically impacted by this decision.”
Hobby Lobby Roundup: Statements Regarding the Momentous Supreme Court Decision
Posted on July 4, 2014 in Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
This is a collection of articles for numerous sources commenting on the landmark decision by the Supreme Court in the Hobby Lobby case against the Obama administration HHS mandate.
My Twitter Conversation About Transgender Rights Being More Important than Christian Rights.
Posted on July 3, 2014 in Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
I had a friendly conversation with a LGBT rights group on Twitter that said the religious convictions of Christian should be protected. As you can imagine, I was a little shocked. Seldom have I encountered any LGBT activist that believes religious convictions are important, much less that they should be protected.
The person I was communicating with said as long as people have sincerely held religious convictions and not just personal opinions, those convictions should be protected. I had a little trouble understanding the difference, but, okay, we were basically on the same page.
Or so I thought.
Wanting to dig a little deeper I asked a very simple question: “You would then condemn the court’s decision against the photographer in New Mexico who refused to render services to a homosexual couple for the fact that it would violate her religious convictions, right?”
That’s where things went south.
Two European Cases Hold Critical Implications for American Christians and Churches
Posted on July 2, 2014 in Marriage, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
Let me ask a question: how many times have homosexual advocates promised to respect religious liberty and religious freedom as they simultaneously demand “equality” and “rights”?
Activists and lawmakers alike have said religious freedom would be respected as homosexuals continue to push for LGBT rights. Pundits sneer at the idea that churches would be forced to perform gay weddings against their religious convictions. And yet such events are taking place.
Let me ask another question: if the government can force people, organizations and businesses to violate their religious convictions why can’t it force churches to do the same?