Participants: Lincoln Steed (Host), Greg Hamilton
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI000282B
|
00:03 Welcome back to our discussion.
00:05 Before the break with guest Greg Hamilton, 00:07 we were talking about very tricky topic, 00:11 the emerging gay rights and how that interacts 00:14 or inhibits even perhaps religious freedom 00:18 rights under the constitution. 00:23 You know, we can take this discussion so many ways. 00:26 I nearly mentioned before when we were 00:28 talking about it that when you are talking 00:30 within the church structure, its ministers 00:32 and its direct employees the Supreme Court 00:34 were very terrible recently with the Hosanna-Tabor act in-- 00:39 In ruling, yeah. 00:41 Ruling, I'm sorry. That's all right. 00:42 The ruling they-- I think in a way 00:45 they set us up for latest trouble 00:46 because it was so sweeping 00:47 and I think they actually said-- 00:49 Kind of nothing, yeah. 00:50 The churches can really exempt from-- 00:56 Discrimination. 00:57 Discrimination, yeah, I was gonna say prejudice. 00:59 Well, that's not gonna fly well with the people 01:01 who are trying to cut down discrimination. 01:03 So we'll see here there is rife discrimination 01:06 under the umbrella of the church. 01:07 So maybe that-- even that will be 01:10 rethought at some point. 01:11 But certainly once you get outside the church employment, 01:16 Christians, people of faith 01:17 and most faiths have a problem with this. 01:22 They are going to see they're restricted 01:26 in acting on their faith if they want to act on it 01:28 but they shouldn't. 01:30 Let me just challenge the thinking on that. 01:32 Let's look at this theologically 01:34 or in terms of practice what would Christ do? 01:36 I mean, we started that way 01:38 and I agree with you absolutely. 01:39 What would Christ do if Christ was a cake baker, 01:43 if Christ was a florist or cameraman, 01:46 would He say that He is condoning 01:47 their marriage by providing wedding services 01:51 for a gay couple? 01:52 I don't think so. 01:53 I think just as He mingled with drunks, 01:56 whores and tax collectors it doesn't mean 01:59 He was condoning their lifestyle. 02:00 The only area that I do think, you know, 02:03 I'm a writer and I would like to think writing 02:05 is creative and others and others 02:08 conceptual artistic talks. 02:11 When you are doing something like that, 02:14 you need to pull yourself into it 02:15 and your sensibility is engaged with it. 02:17 I would think a Christian could with some legitimacy say, 02:22 you know, I'm not opposed to, you know, 02:24 I'll give you the service but I have to tell you upfront, 02:26 I cannot really throw myself this really into this. 02:31 I may not do the best for you since, you know, 02:34 I'm uncomfortable with this topic but I'll do the best, 02:37 you know, I'll try but I would think 02:39 that there is a little mismatch there. 02:40 And what's wrong with that under civil rights law? 02:44 I mean, what I'm saying is when I look at the civil 02:46 rights code, they protect certain classes 02:49 in minorities, to me they are false 02:51 in the spirit of the law of God. 02:53 It's recognizing that we may not agree 02:56 with their lifestyle. 02:57 We may not agree with anything they do. 03:00 We may not agree with what they represent, 03:02 but that's not the point. 03:03 I may not like so and so, but does that matter? 03:07 The bottom-line is, we need to and the spirit 03:10 of the love of Christ provide the needs-- 03:15 besides it's just a business transaction. 03:17 Think about that. 03:18 Now, some people might argue with me but think about that. 03:20 You're operating a business for public consumption 03:22 to now say that we will only accept 03:26 these types of people, 03:27 but we won't accept this type of people. 03:28 Oh, that's very problematic. 03:30 And you know why single this even if you are looking at it 03:32 from a purely moral point of view as a Christian. 03:36 You know, people come in the door, 03:38 some of them are adulteress, 03:40 some of them are involved in gay rights-- 03:42 Somebody has been married five times or seven times. 03:45 Some of them are cheat, liars, cheats, 03:46 child abusers-- 03:47 But they will serve them. 03:48 There is a whole gamut of unsanctified behavior 03:52 even if some or them are church members 03:53 that involve some of that. 03:55 It's not given to you to be a judge and jury 03:58 and, you know, the judge on high to those people. 04:02 You need to administer human charity 04:05 in compassion to them and help them. 04:07 And you are providing a business 04:08 for public consumption. 04:10 And when you choose to provide that service, 04:13 you sign on the bottom-line with the city 04:14 and the county a form agreement saying 04:16 you will not violate antidiscrimination laws. 04:20 And I don't of the top of my head know 04:23 what you think about 04:25 the Hobby-Lobby case but I think that's a huge 04:27 step in the wrong direction. 04:29 Well, I do too but hear me out. 04:31 In some respects, in some respects 04:33 I agree with it. 04:34 Here's the point. Oh, I do. 04:36 In some respects, I agree with it too. 04:37 Because they didn't say that they wouldn't provide it to, 04:42 you know, contraceptives for women and their employees. 04:44 What they said is, it will be through another means. 04:47 That's what brought Justice Kennedy 04:49 across the line to agree with the decision. 04:51 Oh, that's the government but the employer 04:52 has the ability to withhold that. 04:56 Make a decision for someone else. 04:57 But they are not. 04:58 They've never said once they were 04:59 gonna withhold it. 05:00 What they've said is that we want to make sure 05:03 that we are not paying for it and that some other provider 05:05 is paying for it. 05:06 And that's what they agreed to. 05:08 That's really all that came out of that decision. 05:10 Not only that but that was dealing with healthcare 05:13 within their company, all right. 05:15 It was not in reference contextually in reference 05:18 to providing goods and services to customers who came in. 05:21 Well, let's say they wanted wedding service. 05:23 Let's see a gay couple came into Hobby-Lobby craft store 05:26 and wanted these fake flowers and fake plants 05:28 and all this stuff and shrubs and everything to decorate 05:31 the church that you're getting married in, 05:32 all right. 05:34 Hobby-Lobby said very clearly in their brief 05:36 that's not what this is about. 05:38 This-- we have no problem that's great. 05:40 We're dealing with only the healthcare issue here. 05:43 So it's applesand oranges comparison 05:46 so for state religion freedom acts and then cite 05:50 so for states in Hobby-Lobby. 05:51 They are citing it incorrectly. 05:56 Well, there are several sides to this 05:59 and I've tried to be fair with Liberty Magazine. 06:00 We've had about four articles in 06:02 and overlap since I don't think this is 06:05 an absolute right or wrong 06:06 if we'll add several different angels on it 06:09 but it seems to me that this is empowering 06:14 under the logic of a corporation 06:15 rather than an individual. 06:16 The right now of a corporation to act, 06:20 to withhold something based on its view 06:24 and maybe I'm connecting the wrong dot 06:27 but I heard at an annual dinner 06:30 for the Becket Foundation. 06:32 I heard the main speaker there say 06:34 something very telling. 06:35 He says and he was speaking of the Mormon Church 06:38 in particular and Catholic representatives. 06:40 So then he says there's way too much talk of the rights 06:43 of the conscience rights of the individual 06:46 and not enough talk of the corporate rights of the church. 06:50 I think corporate think is even coming 06:52 into the religious arena and that is not good 06:57 for true freedom of conscience. 06:58 I'm personally against gay marriage 07:00 and I spoke in behalf of the church, 07:03 even got slap down by somebody 07:05 within the church for testifying against 07:07 both gay marriage bills in the senate and the house 07:10 in the Washington Legislature just a few years ago. 07:13 They became the first state to actually pass through 07:18 legislative means laws that approve of gay marriage 07:23 which is interesting because not only did I testify against 07:28 but I've also been involved in terms of policy making 07:34 and decision making within the church 07:36 to shore up our institutions. 07:37 I believe that that's the attack 07:39 that we have to take and also make sure 07:41 that we don't go on the extreme 07:43 pharisaical bigotry road 07:47 of refusing of legitimizing 07:51 and making legal the right of business owners 07:54 to refuse serve-- refuse services to gay couples. 07:57 That's my stand that may not necessarily be the church stand 08:01 but that's Greg Hamilton's stand. 08:03 Well, you thought of that well and I think 08:04 most of our religious liberty representative 08:08 would be in general agreement with you. 08:10 And the bottom rule is we need to put into action 08:14 as you said, how Christ would have-- 08:16 how He treated people 08:17 and how He would have His followers straight 08:19 and that doesn't give license 08:21 to acting prejudicially on any front. 08:23 It just happens. 08:24 We're talking about gay's behavior 08:26 and gay marriage but you could almost choose 08:28 every other deviance or difference 08:31 from an orthodox behavioral stance 08:34 but we are not in that game, we shouldn't be. 08:35 I oppose gay marriage morally 08:37 but legally under the 14th Amendment, 08:40 The Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment, 08:42 I think legally you cannot win the battle against 08:46 the legalization of gay marriage. 08:48 No, it's obvious this is on a roll 08:51 and even if it's misbegotten, society has decided 08:55 to empower this behavior as it done with many-- 08:58 different other things and even one that no one even 09:00 questions now, women's suffragette thing 09:05 that didn't come easy. 09:06 No, no. 09:07 And they were religionist who gave text against them. 09:10 Right. Oh, sure. 09:11 You know, you were citing the Jim Crow era 09:13 but people forget that the gender inequality 09:17 was fought as bitterly 09:18 with even theological arguments on that. 09:21 Yeah, oh, absolutely. 09:22 Yeah, it's problematic all over. 09:24 And talking about the constitution, 09:25 that wasn't in the original constitution. 09:27 Right. Right. 09:28 Now we have to deal with these issues-- 09:29 Had to have an amendment for that. 09:31 Well, now it's an interesting discussion. 09:33 So where do you think we go from here? 09:34 I mean, this long story yet to go? 09:37 Well, I think the gay marriage is approved 09:38 by the US Supreme Court. 09:39 I think that our church 09:43 the Seventh-day Adventist Church 09:44 worldwide will continue to hold firm 09:48 in terms of its policies regarding hiring practices, 09:51 the right to choose not to hire someone whose lifestyle 09:55 does not comport 09:56 with the church's mission and mores. 10:01 And so I really believe we're headed towards 10:05 some troublesome times, issues that will-- 10:07 that clearly divide the country. 10:11 In George Orwell's book 1984 written in 1948 10:16 among other things he commented on the use of language 10:18 to almost mean the opposite of its literal meaning. 10:22 I've seen that tendency grow 10:24 and almost get out of control in the last few decades 10:27 I see it even in the gay moment and the gay rights agenda, 10:32 a word that pops up with distressing familiarity 10:35 and musical songs of only 50, 60 or 100 years ago 10:40 now mean something totally different. 10:43 Unfortunately, when we talk about religious rights, 10:46 there's the danger that we may mean 10:47 something very different in practice than 10:51 should be meant by those terms. 10:53 Religious freedom and religious right 10:55 is not a right to condemn or restrict 10:58 other pre-moral agents no matter how self destructive 11:02 and unpalatable they of course might be to us. 11:06 As we enter into this developing phase 11:09 of a new found right that may indeed 11:11 be a secularly logical as women's voting 11:16 and the civil rights moment. 11:18 We need to be careful that we don't restrict them 11:20 to other people's initiatives under the guise 11:23 of our own religious freedoms. 11:26 My name is Lincoln Steed and I'm speaking 11:28 on behalf of Liberty Insider. |
Revised 2015-06-11