Christians Awake! – Your Freedom of Religious Expression is Fleeing!

A liberal arts major at the northern California Sonoma State University, 19-year old Audrey Jarvis, has filed a religious accommodation request after she said she was ordered to remove her cross necklace because it might offend other students.  “It’s amazing in this day of diversity and tolerance on university campuses that a university official would engage in this type of obvious religious discrimination,” said Liberty Institute attorney Hiram Sasser who is representing the student.

 

On June 27, Jarvis was working for the university’s Associated Students Productions (ASP) at a student orientation fair for incoming freshmen. During the event, her supervisor directed her to remove the cross necklace.  Sasser said the supervisor told her that the chancellor had a policy against wearing religious items and further explained “that she could not wear her cross necklace because it might offend others, it might make incoming students feel unwelcome, or it might cause incoming students to feel that ASP was not an organization they should join.”  “My initial reaction was one of complete shock,” Jarvis told Fox News.  “I was thrown for a loop.”

 

Jarvis said she is a devout Roman Catholic, and she wears the cross as a symbol of her faith in Christ.  “I was offended because I believe as a Christian woman it is my prerogative to display my faith any way I like so long as it is not harming anyone else,” she said.  “I was very hurt and felt as if the university’s mission statement – which includes tolerance and inclusivity to all – was violated.”

 

On a second encounter, her supervisor told her she should hide the cross under her shirt or remove it.  At that point, Jarvis became so upset she left her student worker job early.

 

Attorney Sasser said the university should apologize for its actions.  “It’s unfortunate there are university officials out there who think that it’s okay to tell Christians to hide their faith – but would cringe if somebody said the same thing about hiding someone’s pride in whatever political or cultural affiliation they may have,” he told Fox News.  He said the law is clear on the matter – “State employees may wear crosses while they are performing their duties as long as the wearing does not interfere with the employees' duties or harm the employer's business interests.”

 

University spokeswoman Susan Kashack confirmed to Fox News that the incident occurred and expressed extreme regret.  Jarvis said it’s time for people of faith to take a stand.  “We need to band together as Christians and fight back,” she said.

 

The apostle Paul told us that these final days is no time for us to back down or to shrivel up in the corner.  He said, “... brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.  May the Lord Jesus Christ Himself and God our Father, who loved us and by His grace gave us eternal encouragement and good hope, encourage your hearts and strengthen you in every good deed and word.” (2 Thessalonians 2:15-17)

 

Here is another example of the intolerance of those who are among the loudest to demand tolerance.  Imagine a university telling an Islamic student to remove her burqa? or a Jewish student his kippah (skullcap)?  Of course they wouldn’t … for that would be contrary to their diversity as a university.  Clearly, Christianity is under attack; and Christians had better wake-up and stand-up for their fleeing freedom of religious expression!  

 

May the living Lord Jesus Christ encourage and strengthen your stance in the Christian faith as established upon the absolute truth contained in God’s Holy Word.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

ACLU Loses – Parents, Minor Daughters, and Unborn Children Win

On July 11th, the Illinois Supreme Court unanimously dismissed a 17-year old American Civil Liberties Union (ACCLU) lawsuit brought against that state’s parental notification law.  Because of the dismissal, the law will take effect in mid-to-late August, and parents will have to be notified before their underage daughters have an abortion.

 

By dismissing the ACLU’s complaint, the court effectively said the well-being of young women trumps the interests of abortionists.  And the court unanimously found that the law constitutionally encourages “an unmarried, pregnant minor to seek the help and advice of a parent or other adult family member in making the very important decision whether or not to bear a child.”

 

The road to this point has been lengthy.  It began in 1977 when the Illinois General Assembly passed an abortion parental consent act, only to have it ruled unconstitutional by the courts.  Six years later, the General Assembly tried again with a parental notice act, only to have it struck down as well.  Undeterred, the Assembly passed the Parental Notification Act of 1995.  It required a parent or a guardian to be notified 48-hours before her underage daughter could have her unborn child aborted.

 

Once again, before this law could be implemented, the ACLU filed suit and obtained an injunction from a federal court.  They argued successfully that “unclear rules on the judicial bypass procedure by which a minor girl could obtain an abortion” rendered the law unconstitutional. Following this injunction, the parental consent law was non-enforceable for nearly two decades.

 

From 2006 to 2011, Alliance Defending Freedom partnered with the Thomas More Society to tirelessly chipped away at the injunction.  They filed a supplemental petition with the Illinois Supreme Court in September 2006, petitioned for the injunction to be lifted in March 2007, and in the fall of 2009 filed a writ of mandamus action “urging that the [parental notification] law be enforced.”

 

Following this, the law actually was enforced for 2-hours before the ACLU found the “right judge” and had the law stopped again.  There were other ups and downs, other hurdles that had to be crossed on the road to the July 11th dismissal of the ACLU’s case. 

 

This provides you with a brief chronological overview of this struggle to defend life.  For 17-years the ACLU has prevented this law from protecting young girls and strengthening bonds between parents and children.  Like William Wilberforce who labored for 26-years to end the slave trade in England, these modern Wilberforces have tirelessly fault for families, daughters and their unborn children … all of whom are now better protected.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Lawsuits Against Churches & Clergy for Refusing Gay Marriages

Pastor Joe Carr of Waynesville Missionary Baptist Church (Georgia) believes a day is fast approaching when pastors will be charged with hate crimes for preaching that homosexuality is a sin and churches will face anti-discrimination lawsuits for refusing to host same-sex weddings.  “What’s happening in Europe, we’re going to see happen here and we’re going to see it happen sooner rather than later I’m afraid,” says Carr.

 

And that’s why the congregation will be voting next month to change their church by-laws “to officially ban the usage of their facilities for gay marriages.  We needed to have a clear statement,” Carr told Fox News. “It’s to protect us from being forced to allow someone to use our facilities who does not what we believe the Bible teaches …”  Their amendment to the by-laws reads – “These facilities may only be used for weddings that adhere to the Biblical definition of marriage and are solely reserved for use by members and their immediate family members.  These facilities may not be used by any individual, group, or organization that advocate, endorse, or promote homosexuality as an alternative or acceptable lifestyle.  This policy also applies to birthday parties, reunions, anniversaries, weddings or baby showers, etc.”

 

The church also included a passage to protect their pastor noting that he/she is not obligated to perform any wedding ceremony that would cause him/her to violate his/her conscience or conviction.  “Under no circumstances is the pastor to officiate, participate, or endorse any wedding ceremony that violates the belief and teaching of this church body in accordance with the Bible,” the statement read.

 

Even though Waynesville is a small community, Pastor Carr said he fears they could be taken advantage of by gay rights activists trying to “intimidate us.”  And Waynesville Missionary Baptist Church isn’t alone in their fears.  Hundreds of churches around the nation are considering similar changes to their constitutions and by-laws as a result of the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act.

 

Alliance Defending Freedom, a religious liberty legal organization, has already provided churches with sample by-laws that define marriage.  “I think we’re in a day where every church needs to have a statement in its by-laws of its doctrinal beliefs on marriage and sexuality,” attorney Erik Stanley told Baptist Press.  “This is a proactive approach that churches can take to head off any claims of discrimination in the future, should they occur.”

 

Where are those who have argued the so-called “separation of church and state?”  Maybe it is time to quote the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as it is stated and originally intended – “Congress [government] shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”  Seems to me, that any anti-discrimination lawsuit against a church or clergy refusing a gay marriage is a violation of their 1st Amendment rights … Is it not?

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

You’ve Heard It Said – Buyers Beware; It’s Also Sellers Beware

Owners of a Colorado bakery are facing years in jail for refusing to make a wedding cake for a gay couple.  According to attorney Nicolle Martin, the owners of a Colorado bakery could face a year in prison for refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding, as reported by Jim Hoft of thegatewaypundit.com.  “The complainants can sue him civilly in the regular courts system or he can potentially be prosecuted by the district attorney for up to twelve months in jail," Martin told Hoft.

In June, advocate.com said the Colorado Attorney General’s office filed a discrimination complaint against the owners of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Denver after the bakers refused to bake a cake for Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig, a Denver area gay couple, last year.

Jack Phillips, one of the owners, declined to make the cake citing his Christian beliefs.  “We would close down the bakery before we compromised our beliefs,” he told CBS-KCNC, adding that protests and petitions will not make him change his mind.  The Advocate said the company also refused to cater to a lesbian couple who wanted cupcakes for their ceremony.

Mark Silverstein, legal director for the Colorado chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, which initiated the complaint process for Mullins and Craig, told the AP he respects the bakery owners’ right to their religious beliefs, “but someone’s personal religious beliefs don’t justify breaking the law by discriminating against others in the public sphere,” the Advocate reported.

But defense attorney Martin disagreed, saying the case is about ‘conscience,’ not ‘commerce.’  “I just don’t think that we should heighten one person’s beliefs over and above another person’s beliefs,” she said.

Although same-sex marriage was banned in the Colorado Constitution, civil unions are legal, and, the Huffington Post said in April, voters in Colorado support gay marriage by 51-43 percent.

The Advocate said the Colorado Civil Rights Commission is set to hear the case in September. 

Jesus’ response to a question about taxes (Matthew 22:15-21) teaches us something about how Christians are to related to government.  Jesus taught that we should obey the law of the land insofar as it does not require us to disobey God.

Those who believe in religious liberty had better earnestly pray for a Godly ruling … or the dominos will fall one after another on business owners of religious conscience.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army
Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel
 

Is Islam Un-American?

Let me ask you: If you had to select one ideology that violently disrespects the very essence of our constitutional republic – who or what would it be?  Without hesitation, I would say Islam.

 

Islam – at its very core – is a ruthless credo that doesn’t believe on the immutable tenet that “all men are created equal.”  Its foundation is constructed on a belief that all non-Muslims (particularly Jews, Christians and women) are sub-human and, therefore, worthy of the most brutal forms of subjugation.

 

Our sixth president, John Quincy Adams, wrote the following about Islam and its prophet: “The essence of his doctrine was violence and lust: To exalt the brutal over the spiritual part of human nature.”

 

While America’s system of jurisprudence is based on equal protection under the law, the legal-political-military doctrine known within Islam as “shariah” demands that all non-Muslims either convert, pay a heavy per capita tax (jizya or jizyah), or face execution.  In fact, every facet of Shariah law not only violates our 1st Amendment rights, but actually obliterates it.  If a Christian is caught persuading someone to convert to Christianity – in any of the major Islamic nations around the globe – he faces the very real possibility of being killed.  That’s right!  Those who dare utter the name of Jesus on the streets of Riyadh or Tehran face death via the very methodology deployed by the Prophet Mohammed — beheading.

 

And lest we forget, organization such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) are laboring tirelessly to replace our US Constitution with Shariah law.  Yes, these groups are toiling feverishly to shove Koranic doctrine down our collective throats.  You better believe that the leaders of these crazed Islamic organizations desire to see every American woman don a burqa garment while being stripped of all their inalienable rights.

 

John Quincy Adams capsulated Islam when he wrote: “The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.”

 

Yes, a “perpetual war” that will bring about a global Islamic empire.  What do you think holy jihad is all about?

 

Because of our obsession with political correctness and today’s demands for tolerance at the price of not speaking the truth, very few will say it; but I’m not beholding to that nonsense.  Islam is un-American.  There, I said it.  Will you?

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Public Resources Spent for One Religion’s Prayer Requirements

Alright, you’ve heard a lot about the recent plane crash at San Francisco International Airport.  But did you ever hear about the airport’s pandering to Islam?  As if things couldn’t get any more ridiculous, San Francisco International Airport has constructed a designated space for Muslims in which they can wash their hands and feet before they pray.

 

While the adherents to Islam are required to offer prayers 5-times a day, along with a ritual that also calls for a ceremonial cleansing, many San Francisco cab drivers are apparently unable to accomplish this in the existing bathroom facilities.  At least that’s what it sounds like they want us to believe.

 

According to SFGate (San Francisco Bay Area News): For many cab drivers, that’s meant either lugging bottled water around or using one of the bathrooms inside the terminal to wash — a practice not always welcomed by airport passengers.  So Royal Cab driver Hasan Khan, 52, a Pakistani immigrant, collected some 300 signatures from fellow cabbies, urging the airport to give them their own cleansing station. Airport ‘brass’ obliged — and the wash equipment was installed on the ground floor of the main garage, right next to where the drivers congregate for their breaks.  Airport spokesman Doug Yakel said, “The way we look at it … this was in the interest of maintaining a good relationship with ground transportation providers.”

 

Ah, but how was this funded?  Did they use public money?  Yes they did. Mr. Yakel says that those resources were nominal, with work done by in-house plumbers.  So can a non-Muslim use the facility?  Good luck with that!  Do Christians get a chapel at the San Francisco International Airport?  No, they get the interfaith Berman Reflection Room – a center for quiet self-reflection and meditation.  Why didn’t the cab companies that hire these Muslims or a local Islamic mosque pay for the cleansing station … rather than public money?

 

I never cease to be amazed at the hypocrisy of public officials.  Apparently the people who live in San Francisco … who seem to always cry for the ‘separation of church and state’ … are okay with this or are oblivious.  Probably both!

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

The IRS Friends and Foes

Just when you think you’ve heard it all in reference to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).  The media has told us about the IRS targeting of Tea Party and conservative groups applying for non-profit status … some of whom spent almost 3-years waiting to get their non-profit status at great personal costs in resources.  Yet, Obama’s half-brother (Malik) got his non-profit status in only 34-days.  Why, even some IRS agents tried to use their positions to coerce or extort some groups to stop picketing or protesting against Planned Parenthood (read my June 21, 2013 blog). 

 

While the IRS has been busy targeting people like you and me, they’ve ignored other groups that have illegal dealings with known Muslim terrorists according to the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC).  The AFLC has filed additional documents with the IRS concerning the activities to CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations).

 

AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel, David Yerushalmi, says that CAIR has “elaborate ties to terrorism, abuse of tax codes and corporate law, and … deliberate deception” in regards to their use of shell-corporations and suspicious funding sources.  He also says that CAIR has ties to terrorist groups including the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Yerushalmi and the AFLC have spent the past 4-years filing documents with the IRS and the federal government to prove that CAIR has been operating illegally.  They discovered that CAIR has not filed any income tax returns for three years prior to filing for tax exempt status.  Once they applied (an application that set off a host of red flags), the IRS readily approved CAIR’s application.

 

In an interview with OneNewsNow, Yerushalmi said: “While they [the IRS] were holding up perfectly legitimate applications for the 501(c)(3) status, here they simply overlooked and looked past all of these red flags and granted an immediate (c)(3) status for CAIR. … I don't believe for a moment that CAIR is going to be existing in another year or two ... because we have a lawsuit against them for fraud, and I think that the judgment on that will bankrupt them; but even more so, I think what we have planned for them in the coming months will essentially reduce them to a nonentity - and it's about time.”

 

With the fall of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, perhaps their support here in the United States will dwindle as well.  Yerushalmi hopes that Congress will get involved and start demanding answers as to how CAIR was approved so readily … even after they were red flagged … and conservatives were not.  Or will the Obama Administration exert its powers to protect them?

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Laws May Prohibit Christians from Employment and Contracts

If you want to know how the unleashed panacea of sexual orientations or gender identities is going to both impoverish and marginalize Christians from the public square in the wake of increased governmental declarations of war on religious convictions, a proposed revision in the city of San Antonio’s anti-discrimination ordinance gives us a glimpse of what’s ahead. 

 

If you are a Christian who believes that marriage is defined as a relationship between a man and a woman or that the Bible is absolute truth, then you cannot be a city employee.  Why you can’t even have a contract with the city of San Antonio.  In fact, if you are such a city employee now, and they find out that you voiced any such opinion in the past or told an off-colored joke, it can be used against you and result in you being fired.

 

Local pastors have said the proposed bill’s vague phrases are subject to interpretation.  Consider this wording on page 3 of the revised city code: “You can forget that committee appointment if you’ve ever demonstrated a bias, by word or deed against any person.”  “How do you figure out what a bias is?” asked Pastor Steve Branson of Village Parkway Baptist Church.  Branson was one of more than a dozen local church leaders who gathered in a strategy session to stop revisions to the city’s non-discrimination laws.

 

Branson said any faith-based organization with a city contract would have to abide by the new rules; and any bias — real or imagined — could cost jobs and contracts.  “This is open to interpretation to whoever is in control,” Branson added.  “I predict that believing Romans 1:18-32 is a message from God counts as bias.  It is just a matter of time, and not much of it, if the law is changed.  I feel ambiguous about this since I assume that most city governments of any larger size are such sleazy pits of corruption that they really are simply another facet of organized crime in the United States.”

 

Mark Horne of godfatherpolitics.com says, “This is a way to really hurt those Christians who aspire to enter or stay the middle class, who often depend on jobs in bureaucracies or owns small businesses.  Even if the law gets shot down, you can be sure that there will be many cities doing the same thing.  States will try to mandate it for themselves and for their cities.  And the Feds will use their own money power to do the same to the states.  Again, the IRS won’t be too holy to collect money from people who subscribe to forbidden religious ideas, but the Feds will then use the funds to reward the people who pass their test.”

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Scouting that is JC Focused – Rather Than PC Fixated

Surprise! Surprise! … but not for me.  I and others cautioned the National Council of the Boy Scouts of America not to cave-in on its long-standing pledge to America – to remain ‘morally straight’ (read my blog of April 15); and then predicted what the fall-out would be for succumbing to a change in membership policy allowing openly gay into its boy membership (read my blog of June 5).  Well, a group of conservative former Boy Scouts have announced the formation of a Christian alternative to the American institution gone gay – the BSA.

 

John Stemberger, founder of OnMyHonor.Net, a coalition of former Boy Scout leaders and participants, has announced the formation of a new soon-to-be-named scouting organization for young men.  “We have direct communication from over 30,000 leaders, parents, and people within the Scouting movement who have specifically said ‘we want to be involved,’” Stemberger told reporters on a conference call announcing the endeavor.

 

According to interim executive director Rob Green, a former 20-year veteran executive of the Palmetto Council BSA, the idea is to give families and scouts a place to turn given the Boy Scouts’ recent decision to allow openly gay members into their ranks.  “We are trying to make sure that families who have felt a little bit left behind by the divergent values of the Boy Scouts — that there is something for them that they can join and know what they stand for,” Green said.

 

Green explained that on June 29 in Louisville, Kentucky nearly 50 leaders came together to conceive of a new scouting organization.  “It’s our vision to be the premier national character development organization for young men, which produces godly and responsible husbands, fathers, and citizens,” Green said to reporters.  “The new program will be an exciting and motivating outdoor-based program focused on leadership and character development for boys, and founded on principles and values that reflect a Christian worldview.”  He said that, while people of any faith may participate, the program will stick to a “standard statement of Christian faith and values.”

 

The organization will begin the registration process for new units in November and will launch on January 1, 2014.  Its name and logo will be announced this coming September at a convention in Nashville, Tennessee.  According to Green, ranks achieved in the BSA will be transferable to the new scouting program.  “Our mission is simple and clear: to guide generations of courageous young men to honor God, lead with integrity, serve others, and experience outdoor adventure,” Green said.  “In addition, the organization’s membership policy will focus on sexual purity rather than sexual orientation,” he added.  “The policy will read, in part: ‘the proper context for sexual relations is only between a man and a woman in the covenant of marriage.’”

 

Green also said that the main goal is to keep the politics of sexuality out of the program.  “The politics that are out there about this issue, that is not something 10-year-old boys are interested in; they are interested in camping and fishing and climbing, canoeing, campfires.”  He added that a new organization is needed to restore the founding ideals of the BSA. “For 100 years terms like ‘morally straight’ and ‘clean and reverent’ that are in the Boy Scout Oath and Law were understood from a Christian worldview,” Green said.  “The founder of Scouting even said ‘Scouting is nothing more than applied Christianity.’  So we are trying to restore that ideal.”

 

Stemberger further noted that the organization will not question people’s sexuality or reject gay members, explaining that the organization hopes sexual orientation is not an issue.  “We don’t think sex and politics should be in a program for kids.  Those are issues for parents and so we are going to allow parents to navigate those waters and not a program that they put their kids in,” he said.

 

As a former member of the BSA who achieved the rank of Eagle Scout, my prayer is that this newly established scouting program … which sounds like the one I experienced as a youth … will be blessed with the support of Christian churches and adults committed to living the Christian lifestyle.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Why College Students Have Left the Church

Larry Alex Taunton is an American author, columnist, radio talk show host, and cultural commentator based out of Birmingham, Alabama who serves as the Executive Director of Fixed Point Foundation, a non-profit dedicated to the public defense of the Christian faith.  Recently the Foundation did a study of college students who are committed atheists, asking them why they chose atheism.  What they learned is interesting. Here are some excerpts from The Atlantic piece as contributed by American writer Rod Dreher:

 

They had attended church

Most of the participants had not chosen their worldview from ideologically neutral positions at all, but in reaction to Christianity.  Not Islam; not Buddhism; but Christianity.

 

The mission and message of their churches was vague

These students heard plenty of messages encouraging “social justice,” community involvement, and “being good;” but they seldom saw the relationship between that message, Jesus Christ, and the Bible.

 

They felt their churches offered superficial answers to life’s difficult questions

When the participants were asked what they found unconvincing about the Christian faith, they spoke of evolution vs. creation, sexuality, the reliability of the biblical text, Jesus as the only way, etc.  Some had gone to church hoping to find answers to these questions.  Others hoped to find answers to questions of personal significance, purpose, and ethics. Serious-minded, they often concluded that church services were largely shallow, harmless, and ultimately irrelevant.

 

They expressed their respect for those ministers who took the Bible seriously

Without fail, the former church-attending students expressed respect for those Christians who unashamedly embraced biblical teaching. “Shallow, harmless, and ultimately irrelevant” — were the descriptions of what they thought of the church during their teenage years.

 

One can understand why a bright college student would find atheism more compelling than Christianity, if that’s the only kind of Christianity he/she had seen.

 

Social science data show that the churches that have liberalized have no more luck holding on to young people than those who remain more or less traditionalist.  When young people become more liberal in their views, they don’t seek out more liberal churches, which are available to them, but quit going to church all together.  This makes intuitive sense.  If church makes no serious demands on you, and you can pick and choose what you want to believe of the tradition to suit your preferences, then the religion will have no particular hold on you.  Put another way, if church is only about teaching you how to be good, as distinct from teaching you how to be holy, then its appeal is significantly diminished.

 

Dreher can see why the intellectually curious would be frustrated by churches that downplay the ‘Big Questions’ in favor of generic moralistic uplift.  But is this the same problem that non-intellectual young people would have with church?  It may be.

 

Dreher concludes feeling comfortable asserting that a church, and church people, who don’t take religion seriously aren’t going to appeal to those who don’t face social pressure to conform.  We live in a truly secular age, in which religion is not taken for granted, but is a choice — and in which there is little or no pressure to go to church at all.  More than ever, the Church has to give people a reason to believe.  Dreher isn’t talking about an argument to believe (though that’s part of it), but a sense that the faith is true and compelling.  “You can’t get there through argument alone,” says Dreher, “at least not with most people.  They need to see more. They need to see the faith incarnate in a meaningful way.”

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

So Much for the Pro-Gay Argument of Being Born that Way

In the 6 May 2013 issue of Sports Illustrated magazine, the exclusive cover story was ‘The Gay Athlete’ written by Jason Collins himself.  This 34-year old NBA player is the first openly gay athlete from a major American sport.  Within the same issue is an article by Jarron Collins … also an NBA player, but in a heterosexual marriage with three children. So what? you ask. 

 

The ‘so what’ is because Jarron and Jason are identical twin brothers.  Identical twins have the same genes or DNA.  They are nurtured in equal prenatal conditions.  If homosexuality is caused by genetics or prenatal conditions and one twin is gay, the co-twin should also be gay.

 

Eight major studies of identical twins in Australia, the U.S., and Scandinavia during the last two decades all arrive at the same conclusion: Gays were not born that way.

 

“At best genetics is a minor factor,” says Dr. Neil Whitehead, PhD. Whitehead worked for the New Zealand government as a scientific researcher for 24-years, then spent four years working for the United Nations and International Atomic Energy Agency.  Most recently, he serves as a consultant to Japanese universities about the effects of radiation exposure.  His PhD is in biochemistry and statistics.

 

“Because they have identical DNA, it ought to be 100%,” Dr. Whitehead notes.  But the studies reveal something else.  “If an identical twin has same-sex attraction the chances the co-twin has it are only about 11% for men and 14% for women.”  Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated.  “No-one is born gay,” he notes.  “The predominant things that create homosexuality in one identical twin and not in the other have to be post-birth factors.”

 

Dr. Whitehead believes same-sex attraction is caused by “non-shared factors” – things happening to one twin, but not the other; or a personal response to an event by one of the twins and not the other.  For example, one twin might have exposure to pornography or sexual abuse, but not the other.  One twin may interpret and respond to their family or classroom environment differently than the other.  “These individual and idiosyncratic responses to random events and to common environmental factors predominate,” he says.

 

The first very large, reliable study of identical twins was conducted in Australia in 1991, followed by a large U.S. study about 1997.  Then Australia and the U.S. conducted more twin studies in 2000, followed by several studies in Scandinavia, according to Dr. Whitehead.  “Twin registers are the foundation of modern twin studies.  They are now very large, and exist in many countries.  A gigantic European twin register with a projected 600,000 members is being organized, but one of the largest in use is in Australia, with more than 25,000 twins on the books.”

 

A significant twin study among adolescents shows an even weaker genetic correlation.  In 2002, sociologists Peter Bearman and Hannah Brueckner studied tens of thousands of adolescent students in the U.S.  The same-sex attraction similarity between identical twins was only 7.7% for males and 5.3% for females—lower than the 11% and 14% in the Australian study by Bailey (et al conducted in 2000).

 

In the identical twin studies, Dr. Whitehead has been struck by how fluid and changeable sexual identity can be.  “Neutral academic surveys show there is substantial change.  About half of the homosexual/bisexual population (in a non-therapeutic environment) moves towards heterosexuality over a lifetime.  About 3% of the present heterosexual population once firmly believed themselves to be homosexual or bisexual.”  “Sexual orientation is not set in concrete,” he notes.

 

Even more remarkable, most of the changes occur without counseling or therapy.  “These changes are not therapeutically induced, but happen ‘naturally’ in life, some very quickly,” Dr. Whitehead observes.  “Most changes in sexual orientation are towards exclusive heterosexuality.”

 

Numbers of people who have changed towards exclusive heterosexuality are greater than current numbers of bisexuals and homosexuals combined.  In other words, ex-gays outnumber actual gays.  The fluidity is even more pronounced among adolescents, as Bearman and Brueckner’s study demonstrated.  They found that from 16 to 17-years-old, if a person had a romantic attraction to the same sex, almost all had switched one year later.  These ‘pro-gay’ sociologists commented that the only stability was among the heterosexuals, who stayed the same year after year.  Adolescents are a special case—generally changing their attractions from year to year.

 

Still, many misconceptions persist in the popular culture.  Namely, that homosexuality is genetic – so hard-wired into one’s identity that it can’t be changed.  “The academics who work in the field are not happy with the portrayals by the media on the subject,” Dr. Whitehead notes.  “But they prefer to stick with their academic research and not get involved in the activist side.”

 

Now, we have not only the inerrant biblical truth that God didn’t create humanity as homosexual beings (which He undeniably calls sexual immorality), but science has declared it as non-genetic.  So, let’s stop the defense of this sexual preference as “the way God created me” and call it for what it is – a chosen lifestyle.  There is nothing innate about homosexuality; therefore, not a civil right.     

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

The Rest of the Story … on the Supreme Court DOMA Decision

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 in decision accused the Congress that enacted the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), along with then President Clinton who signed it into law, and all those who supported DOMA as acting in malice … to disparage and to injure same-sex couples.  The majority of Justices concluded that the motivation for DOMA was to ‘demean,’ to ‘impose inequality,’ to … brand gay people as ‘unworthy,’ and to ‘humiliat[e]’ their children.  The decision was declared a victory for those who believe that equality should be extended to homosexuals who wish to marry.  And that’s pretty much all we heard about.  Most heard little-to-nothing of Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent where he said, “I am sure these accusations are quite untrue. To be sure (as the majority points out), the legislation is called the Defense of Marriage Act.  But to defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to condemn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions.  To hurl such accusations so casually demeans this institution.”

 

Here’s the essence of Scalia’s warning: “In the majority’s judgment, any resistance to its holding is beyond the pale of reasoned disagreement.  To question its high-handed invalidation of a presumptively valid statute is to act (the majority is sure) with the purpose to ‘disparage,’ ‘injure,’ ‘degrade,’ ‘demean,’ and ‘humiliate’ our fellow human beings, our fellow citizens, who are homosexual.  All that, simply for supporting an Act that did no more than codify an aspect of marriage that had been unquestioned in our society for most of its existence—indeed, had been unquestioned in virtually all societies for virtually all of human history.  It is one thing for a society to elect change; it is another for a court of law to impose change by adjudging those who oppose it hostes humani generis, enemies of the human race.”

 

Marvin Olasky of WNS wrote last Friday (28 June), “Now that the Supreme Court has blessed the gay lobby’s tendency to declare anyone who does not toe the line is a straight consumed by hate, it will seem perfectly proper to take away the tax exemption of churches and schools that stand by Scripture. (How can a church or school be serving the public interest if it is degrading, demeaning, and humiliating others?)  It will seem proper to deny Pell Grants or other financial help to students attending colleges that stand by Scripture … Churches and schools that have become entangled with government—that’s just about all of them—should immediately start planning for the time they’ll either have to give up those connections or give up the Bible.  Pastors and teachers who say anything negative about homosexuality should think through how they’ll react if hauled into court:  That’s already happened in other countries, and it can happen here.”

 

Scalia’s prophecy: “It takes real cheek for today’s majority to assure us, as it is going out the door, that a constitutional requirement to give formal recognition to same-sex marriage is not at issue here—when what has preceded that assurance is a lecture on how superior the majority’s moral judgment in favor of same-sex marriage is to the Congress’s hateful moral judgment against it.  I promise you this: The only thing that will confine the Court’s holding is its sense of what it can get away with.”

 

If this doesn’t drive more Christians to pray for our country, nothing will.  Some will also head for the hills, but remember: God’s still in charge and fully capable of changing hearts.  Let’s take a clear-eyed look at the realities, work hard, and pray hard for revival and reformation.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Independence Day – or Dependence Day?

The Founding Fathers intended that our religious spirit not only be remembered, but also practiced whenever we celebrated our Nation’s Independence.  This was made clear in two letters written by John Adams to his wife, Abigail, on the day after Congress approved the Declaration of Independence.  John’s first letter was short and concise, jubilant that the Declaration had been approved.  His second was much longer and more pensive, giving serious consideration to what had been done on the previous day.  Adams cautiously predicted: “[Yesterday] will be the most memorable epoch in the history of America.  I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival.”  On the day following the approval of the Declaration, Adams was already foreseeing that their actions would be celebrated by future generations.  Adams contemplated whether it would be proper to hold such celebrations, but then concluded that the day should be commemorated— but in a particular manner and with a specific spirit.  As he told Abigail: “It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.”

 

 

John Adams believed that the Fourth of July should become a religious holiday— a day when the citizens remember God’s hand of deliverance and a day filled with religious activities when we recommit ourselves to God in “solemn acts of devotion.”  Such was the religious spirit of the American Revolution as seen through the eyes of those who led it!

 

 

Is there any benefit to looking back and examining the American Revolution and the spirit underlying it?  Perhaps the best answer to that question is offered by President Woodrow Wilson, who noted: “A nation which does not remember what it was yesterday, does not know what it is today, nor what it is trying to do.  We are trying to do a futile thing if we don’t know where we have come from, or what we have been about.”

 

 

President Lincoln understood this truth.  He had studied the spirit behind the American Revolution, and he guided his actions by it.  As he once explained: “I have never had a feeling politically that did not spring from the sentiments embodied in the Declaration of Independence.”

 

 

In his speech on August 17, 1858, Lincoln urged his fellow-Americans: “[M]y countrymen, if you have been taught doctrines conflicting with the great landmarks of the Declaration of Independence, … let me entreat you to come back; … come back to the truths that are in the Declaration of Independence.”

 

 

It is time that we remember the truths embodied by the “laws of nature and of nature’s God.”  Our liberties must be cared for and diligently watched over— but the source of those liberties must first be understood.

 

 

Educator and Founder Noah Webster, a soldier during the American Revolution and a great influence in establishing American government afterwards, summarized the source of our liberties in these words: “[T]he religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His apostles … This is genuine Christianity and to this we owe our free constitutions of government.”

 

 

Perpetuating American liberty depends first upon our understanding the foundations on which this great country was built and then preserving the principles on which it was founded.  May we not let the purpose for which America was established be forgotten.  The Founding Fathers have passed us a torch; let’s not let it be extinguished!

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel