Religious Freedom My Ass
Sarah tipped me off about this article about a Ruth Malhotra.
The link to the article is at the bottom of this post, so if you want to read it, go right ahead. But heres a brief run down:
Ruth Malhotra is a senior at Georgia tech. She is a conservative Christian and a republican. She is suing Georgia Tech because they include gays and lesbians in their antidiscrimination policies. She says that because there are policies protecting gays, then those policies discriminate against conservative Christians because it's against their religion. She's upset because she can't denounce homosexuals.
Reasons why Ruth Malhotra needs to put her Big Girl Panties on deal:
1. Anti-discrimination laws don't prevent her from denouncing homosexuals. It prevents her from doing them bodily harm or going around posting flyers about how they're all going to hell. She is free to talk about how wrong gays are with her friends, or with other Christians. She just can't threaten them.
The article mentions a letter she wrote to the Pride Alliance when the Pride Alliance sponsored the Coming Out Week. In the letter, she called the Pride Alliance a sex club that can't even manage to be tasteful. (common misconception number 1: homosexuals are no more sex-crazed than heterosexuals. A group of homosexuals working towards tolerance are no more likely to engage in an orgy than the members of a companys completely hetero softball team). She, along with other students, added that it was ludicrous that the university was funding Pride Alliance. The letter even went so far as to say that if gays want to be tolerated, they should knock off the political propaganda (in reference to Coming Out Week).
Sounds to me like Ruth Malhotra wont tolerate even if everyone stayed in the closet.
Malhotra insults the Pride Alliance and then gets offended when they insult her right back by crying intolerant.
Can I get a "hypocrite" from the audience please?
2. Malhotra says that the antidiscrimination policy is an unacceptable infringement on her right to religious expression. *sighs*. If she were to walk down the street and see a Muslim women getting stoned to death by the male members of her family because she committed adultery or was raped, would Malhotra still be all for freedom of religious expression? Its called honor killings, that some Muslims practice (Notice: key word some).
No, probably not. Unless she needs clinical help.
3. In all fairness, the lawyers are not Complete Intolerant Bastards. They do make a distinction between what they call inborn qualities, such as race and gender, and life-style choices, and the inborn qualities should not be discriminated against in anyway, according to them.
(common misconception number 2: gays do not choose their life-style. Honestly, what man (or woman) wakes up and says "Im going to be gay today. This way I risk the chance of being called names, being beaten within an inch of my life with a bat and then tied naked to a fence post only to die three hours after Im found (RIP Mathew Shepard), and I will be refused the right to marry"? No man, thats who. If being gay were a choice there wouldnt be gay people, simply for the fact that they are violently discriminated against. How does God let this happen? If God says resist temptation in regardance to homosexuality, how could he create homosexuals?
I don't know, I don't proclaim to understand his every move. Ask Him)
I do agree with the article in that religion is being persecuted in America, particularly the Christian religion, but this blog is already long enough, and I'll save it for another day.
Do comment. Even if you disagree with me whole heartedly.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-christians10apr10,0,1243330,full.story?coll=la-home-nation