Christians shouldn’t shrug-off religious intolerance

Russell Moore and Robby George respond to Matt Anderson’s essay arguing that evangelicals should “shrug off” the ouster of Louie Giglio from the president’s inaugural ceremony. They write:

We don’t think we ought to “shrug it off.” Of course, no one has a natural right to pray at an inauguration. And no one is arguing that Evangelicals or Catholics or anyone else must have a designated slot on the dais. The issue is rather a point that one of us (George) has argued for years: The end result of the sexual revolution is that those who see marriage as a conjugal relationship—the union of husband and wife—and believe sexual conduct outside the marital bond to be morally unworthy, will come to be viewed as bigots, the equivalent of racists. And that has dire implications for religious liberty and freedom of conscience.

I say “hear, hear” to this and would add one other thought. I think Anderson missed the gravity of what happened last Thursday. A sitting president removed a pastor from a public ceremony because of this pastor’s Christian views. If this trampling of religious liberty were a one-off thing, then maybe we would be having a different conversation. But it isn’t. This president has done more to undermine religious liberty for Christians in this country than any other in my lifetime (e.g., see HHS mandate). In this context, I can hardly imagine why anyone would be admonishing the likes of Moore and Mohler and not a president who has just ruled Christianity out of the bounds of rational discourse.

8 Responses to Christians shouldn’t shrug-off religious intolerance

  1. Don Johnson January 18, 2013 at 10:07 am #

    I do not see Obama’s actions with Giglio as being an example of him being a bully and intimidating. The inaguration is his party and he can invite, not invite, and disinvite whomever he wants. When someone else wins, they can do the same and I do not expect the inaguration guest list will be the same for both major political parties.

    The larger issue is what to do when some group’s interpretation of their authoritative writings as to what is moral differs from another group’s claims about what is moral, perhaps based on their interpretation of their own authoritative writings. No group should be expected to get a “free pass” as the default morality, even granted the Judeo-Christian heritage in America’s past. The earliest Christians in the Roman empire certainly did not get a free pass as being the obvious bearers of moral right; rather, they were accused of atheism, cannibalism, and sexual immorality at their love feasts.

    • Glenn Carrin January 19, 2013 at 11:38 am #

      Hey, I see this comment was copy/pasted from the firstthings article’s comment section. It must be an opinion worth advertising.

      • Don Johnson January 19, 2013 at 12:42 pm #

        My post at both sites was placed in moderation and I was unsure if either would be posted at the time.

  2. Carlton Wynne January 18, 2013 at 1:46 pm #

    Dr. Burk, I just want to communicate to you my appreciation for your persistent and courageous attention to these important issues. While I’m at it, thanks for your stand on a host of biblical matters (as well as touching on the ins and outs of college football news).

  3. dr. james willingham January 18, 2013 at 3:41 pm #

    I agree that we should not allow the Obama administration to shrug off Giglio’s views as anti-American and anti-Christian. What the fellow on MSNBC had to say (Thank you Denny for providing that video) is clearly indicative of terrible times to come. Just imagine what will be called for, when that incredible debasing of the Bible is transferred to those who follow the teachings of Holy Writ! Arrest, imprisonment, the ignoring of all rights in the interests of the supposedly “safer” society dictated by the attitude of political correctness will be a horror to behold. What we are now witnessing is the beginning of an assault on our Basic, God-given freedoms which shall land this nation is a morass of unbelieveable fanaticism that will make Nazi Germany and the Communistic States look like children’s games.

  4. Collin Garbarino January 18, 2013 at 6:40 pm #

    I still think that everyone who sounds the alarm is conflating the president’s whim with the law of the land. Of course this incident tells us something about Obama and his supporters, but it doesn’t necessarily tell us anything we didn’t know about American public discourse. I maintain that nothing has changed. The president is not sovereign, so we should stop talking like he is.

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes