Sermon for Last Sunday in Gay Pride Month....

Last Sunday, I delivered this sermon:

LBGT in Lafayette:  So, What’s the Story?

Every June, Gay Pride Month is celebrated. Because we are Unitarian Universalists (or like-minded folks), I feel I don’t have to answer the question, “Why Gay Pride Month? Why don’t we have Heterosexual Pride Month too?” But you might be wondering why June is selected for Gay Pride Month?
Forty-six years ago yesterday, on June 27, 1969, police raided a bar in Greenwich Village, New York—the Stonewall Inn. The biggest event in New York City that day was Judy Garland’s funeral, and one cannot help but think that more than a few in the bar that night were still mourning her death. Why? The film, “The Wizard of Oz” resonated for LGBT people; the song, “Over the Rainbow” had become a de facto anthem for the “Movement”, and therefore, Judy Garland was such an icon for gays that the question, “Are you a friend of Dorothy’s?” was a way to quietly determine if someone was gay. It is therefore logical that patrons of the Stonewall Inn that night were still mourning.
On the night of June 27th, the police burst in at the height of the evening’s festivities, and, under the pretense of looking for violations of a “no alcohol policy”, and demanded IDs from everyone in the bar.  Typically, if you didn’t have an ID, no matter how old you were, or if you were dressed as a woman (the Stonewall’s clientele was mostly Drag Queens and their friends), you were arrested—otherwise, you were allowed to leave.  On June 27th, most were allowed to leave, and joined a crowd of approximately 400 gathering outside. 
I’ve read a number of eye-witness accounts, and nobody seems to know what set off the riot.  Could be that, after days of mourning the death of Judy Garland, nerves were raw, and the thought of being arrested was too much.  Could be that a butch lesbian fought back when put into handcuffs.  Could be that, as one drag queen was loaded into the paddy wagon, she kicked an officer and knocked him to the ground.  In any case, the paddy wagon started to rock, and people in the crowd began to shout and throw coins and bottles at the police, who turned around and took cover in the Stonewall.
Outside, according to one eye-witness, the crowd “bellowed in triumph and pent-up rage”.  Windows in the Inn were smashed, fires were set, and anything that could be picked up and thrown was. Demonstrations took place for most of the week, but by the third night, there was talk amongst the demonstrators of actually organizing for Gay Power.  Within weeks, the residents of Greenwich Village began to concentrate their efforts on providing more places (not just bars) where gays and lesbians could be open without being arrested.   The anniversary of Stonewall henceforth was remembered with a parade; on June 28, 1970 organizers marked the first anniversary of the Stonewall riots with an assembly on Christopher Street and the first Gay Pride march in U.S. history, marching the 51 blocks to Central Park:  one could argue that it was the first positive, public stance against the discrimination and prejudice LGBT people had faced for millennia. On June 2, 2000, President Bill Clinton officially proclaimed June to be “Gay & Lesbian Pride Month”.
The gays and lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered who stood up for themselves at Stonewall Inn in 1969 may have thought they were standing alone; it wasn’t really possible to discuss homosexuality very openly back then, so how were they to know who their allies might be?
It didn’t take long for them to discover that the Unitarian Universalist Church stood with them; if you’ve looked at the insert in your Order of Service, you will see that in July 1970, there was a General Assembly General Resolution to end Discrimination against Homosexuals and Bisexuals.

Yes, even back then, our church was standing on the side of love.

There is much I could talk about regarding the LGBT community on the national level, but this morning, I want to talk about what has happened on the local level. And, to further narrow our focus today, I want to talk about things I remember—well, because I can.
In preparing for today, I reached out and visited a number of places. First of all, I recalled a service done by Rev. Libbie Stoddard on the issue of becoming an officially recognized Welcoming Congregation, so I contacted her. If you know Libble, you will not be surprised to learn that within a week, I had a copy of the entire service. The slideshow that was part of our gathering this morning comes from a display at the Pride Center on Main Street in Lafayette.  I will also draw on my own recollections of events in March and April this year—I have video clips from a Community Forum that was held at Faith West on April 5th.
Let’s go back 22 years (I know, I know—some of you were not born yet!). In May 1993, Lafayette City Council passed an amendment to their Human Relations Ordinance, adding protections for sexual  orientation; thus banning discrimination in employment , housing, and public accommodation.  The West Lafayette City Council passed a similar amendment shortly after.  For me, it was hard to imagine that all of this took place 22 years ago, and yet I remember the church service very clearly.  The service took place on January 31, 1993, some months before the Lafayette City Council vote. I should mention that a number of elements in today’s service come directly from that January 1993 service. In her opening, Libbie explains the steps leading up to this service:  In the fall of 1992, Libbie explains, “…after five or six months of discussion and planning, Jean Erb [Jean was the minister of Shalom United Church of Christ] and I co-led an adult education class, using the Unitarian Universalist curriculum, called “The Welcoming Congregation.” The intent of the curriculum is to help people explore their feelings about homosexuality. The hope of the curriculum Is that it will encourage religious congregations to be not only accepting of sexual minorities, but to be welcoming of them…We extended our series of eight class meeting[s] for an additional week in order to attend the public hearing on “gay rights” at the county library.”
Libbie goes on to say, “In addition to what we intended to include in our class learnings, something else happened that was not part of the curriculum, yet affected some of us profoundly. That was the experience of working and learning with people from another religious community, a quite clearly Christian community. We tend, here, to hold a kind of siege mentality, often feeling that no one else can or does share any of our views, or would be willing to discuss the topics we discuss.”
Today, in a reading, Kris shared a poem from Joan L—it was a part of this 1993 church service.  I would like to share another excerpt from that service—this is the part I remember so very clearly, as I was so struck by the words of Joan M (and I do have her permission to share this). Joan M’s segment of the service is titled, “Choosing to Wear the Button”:  “At the end of one of the Welcoming Congregation classes we were each asked to choose a button, expressing a pro-gay or lesbian sentiment, then to wear it one day before class the following week…All “Welcoming Congregation” participants chose buttons…Mine reads:  “Don’t Presume I’m Straight.” …While driving home after the class in which we took the buttons, I experienced my first reaction to wearing the button—“no big deal.” It did not occur to me not to wear the button to my office…..My second reaction occurred over the weekend as I thought about the week ahead. I found myself carefully checking my calendar to choose an appropriate day to wear the button. I did not want to wear it on a day where I sat at my desk and did paperwork. That seemed too safe. On the other hand, as I leafed through the calendar---I decided not to wear the button on the day I was hosting a lunch for undergraduate students from historically black institutions whom we were trying to recruit to graduate programs at Purdue. “how awful,” I thought, “if a student we wanted to attend decided not to because he or she was offended by my button.” ….Like Goldilocks of Three Bears fame, I found myself looking for the day that was, not too safe, but not too risky, “just right”. As I look back over the day I wore the button and, more importantly, the days I chose not to wear the button, I think about the questions that went through my mind, “will this reflect negatively on my office?” “Will this create problems for my
boss?” I then consider the questions homosexual and bisexual men and women ask themselves as they interact with heterosexual society. Wearing a button expressing a pro-gay or lesbian sentiment for one day does not in any way compare to the experience of being homosexual or bisexual in our community. Yet wearing a button for a day gave me a glimmer of understanding about the issues of tolerance and acceptance that members of the gay community face."
Thank you, Joan M, and thank you, Joan L.
That Sunday in 1993, listening to my fellow congregants, I knew I was in the right religious community. It was no surprise then, when members of our congregation and our minister spoke out at various City Council meetings, urging passage of the amendments to the Human Relation Ordinances. On April 29, 1997, our congregation made it official, and this public declaration went out (with rainbow cake to celebrate):  “We, the Unitarian Universalist Church, declare ourselves to be a Welcoming Congregation.  A Welcoming Congregation is a religious community that welcomes and accepts people who are gay, lesbian, transgendered or bisexual; that strives to be a safe and affirming environment for those among us who are gay, lesbian, transgendered or bisexual; that ensures all areas of congregational life are open and inclusive; and, that commits itself to work for the rights and dignity of gay, lesbian, trandsgendered or bisexual people in the larger community.” We, the Unitarian Universalists, chose to stand with our LGBT community members; they were not alone then, and they are not alone now.
We stood again with in 1996, when a conservative faction of the community asked the Lafayette City Council to REPEAL the amendment to their Human Relations Ordinance. We spoke up, we joined the newly-formed Citizens for Civil Rights, and we made a very public statement, in the form of a newspaper ad. It was part of the slideshow at the beginning of the service, but if you missed it, it read:  “PEOPLE OF FAITH SPEAK OUT. As people of different faith traditions, we draw upon shared religious principles and recognize common belief that religion should be a healing and
constructive force in public life. We affirm the dignity and value of all human beings. We challenge the forces of intolerance, coercion and fear, and commit ourselves to helping create a friendly community that honors and supports freedom, equality and respect for all its citizens. We urge the Lafayette City Council to maintain in its entirety the Human Relations Ordinance which reminds us of, and inspires us to live out, the highest ideals of tolerance, peace, and mutual respect. We reject, and call upon the Lafayette City Council to reject the current call for divisiveness and discrimination
against our fellow citizens.”
A friend of mine, Pastor Steve Viars, remembers being a “saddened bystander” in 1996 (as his church and home are outside the city limits):  He states, “The public hearings, letters to the editor, and other public and private discussions were often divisive and harsh.  The effect on our community by people (in my opinion) on both sides was at times hostile and uncivil.”  In 2001, as the Tippecanoe County Commissioners were considering a Human Relations Ordinance, they wisely hoped to avoid re-creating similar divisiveness in the community. As Pastor Viars remembers, “We wanted to try
to bring a level of civility to the conversation.  We came into the public square, at least in our minds, as peacemakers not trouble makers…I began reaching out to people [LGBT Leaders in the community]  We shared several meals and conversations together – my goal was to get to know the activists as individuals and also gain a greater understanding of their overall story and the reasons this issue mattered so much to them.  We also began meeting with certain conservative Christian pastors and leaders – in some cases particularly to attempt to rein in some of the Christians that we believed had behaved badly during the city discussions.  We wanted to suggest that religious liberty also needed to be protected in this conversation.  So my concern was never really that [Sexual Orientation] was being added to the HRO – but that religious freedom for all people also needed to be protected.  Incidentally – I still hold that position today.”
I see looks of disbelief out there! I know we, as UUs, are a very skeptical bunch. Don’t take my word for it. So, here it is, directly from Pastor Viars. [video clip]
Let’s fast-forward a bit. There are so many instances to highlight, so much—good and bad—that has gone on in our local community. But let’s talk a bit about the past couple of years.
In the fall of 2014, Freedom Indiana worked with citizens of our state to lobby the legislature. The goal? To prevent a “Marriage Amendment” from becoming a part of the State Constitution. For me, it was also important to prevent the divisiveness of the 1990’s from occurring in our community again. Our church did not hesitate to open our doors for public meetings, and the number of citizens of all stripes who felt passionate enough to attend rallies, write letters, and make phone calls was truly astounding to me. As Karen and I proudly carried an enormous stack of letters from our community to the Statehouse, I felt so…loved. I felt embraced by so many. One of our local legislators must have felt the weight of our words too, as Rep. Randy Truitt was the one to stand up and propose an amendment to the Marriage Amendment—the passage of his amendment killed the proposed Constitutional Amendment. On June 25, 2014, it all became a moot point when the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld marriage equality in Indiana. And, it really, really became a moot point this past Friday, when the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed marriage equality for ALL
citizens in ALL 50 states…….
This past March, a bill was passed by the Indiana Legislature—the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, also known as RFRA. It passed so quickly and quietly that I admit I did not even know about it until after it had been signed by our governor. The negative reaction to it was swift and passionate and….came from all over the UNITED STATES.
Let me repeat that. The backlash came from all over the United States as people stood against the blatant discrimination of the LGBT community in our state.
At this point, there was…well, confusion. Many religious leaders appreciated the language of the law, as it upheld their right to practice their religion. And, they pointed out, many other states had RFRAs of their own (however, I need to point out that most were passed years ago). Local ministers spoke about the pros and cons of RFRA to their congregations; I attended two church services to hear these thoughts; I went to Faith Church in Lafayette and Congress Street United Methodist Church. (Hey, I’m a good UU—I can hang with anyone in order to hear religious ideas!). I have spoken here before about “pre-judging” people, and many of my own “pre-judgements” were brought to my attention as I walked into each building—but that’s a sermon for another time. After I walked out of Faith Church, I felt deep despair—for our community, and world. The message I heard that day, “Does Jesus Discriminate?” did not jive with the Jesus I knew. I will admit too that I felt betrayed—I had a personal relationship with Pastor Viars and many members of Faith Church, and I knew them to be kind and giving to everyone. At this point, I could have easily decided to say, “Screw it!” and relegate everyone at Faith Church to the “Them” category—you know, the “Thems” that “Us” are opposed to. But I just couldn’t do it. Some talk about a crisis of faith—well, this was sort of like that; my feelings of betrayal went deep. Ultimately, I decided to reach out to Pastor Viars—I met Steve for breakfast in late March. By then, the RFRA “battle lines” had been drawn; incivility in the state of Indiana was at a peak, and I wondered how this breakfast was going to go—would we just shout over one another, never listening? I felt burdened when I walked into the Diner that morning—burdened with my own feelings of betrayal and hurt, and burdened with the thought that if I could not find the words to truly represent the feelings of my LGBT friends, a lot could be lost. We could come to some degree of understanding, or we could walk away to our separate lives, forever being “Us” vs. “Them”.
I talked—a LOT—that morning. Steve listened, questioned, and explained.  I walked away feeling much better; I felt that WE reached UNDERSTANDING. I think that, in the end, most of us just want to be understood, right? I was pleased to hear that Faith West was going to hold a “Community Forum on RFRA” on Sunday, April 5th; I was hoping that the opinions of those against RFRA could be heard; I was really hoping some minds could be changed. I invited Rev. Charlie and some other friends to join me that night. I wish I could play the whole video of that night (if you are interested, I can give you the link), and I’ve shared two clips so far, but here’s one last, important clip.
I have to tell you, I think it was at this point was when one of my friends leaned over to me and whispered, very sincerely, “Who is this guy? Where is Steve Viars?” Some of you may have also asked that question too.  And, I will remind you of the words of Rev. Libbie earlier:  “We tend, here, to hold a kind of siege mentality, often feeling that no one else can or does share any of our views, or would be willing to discuss the topics we discuss.” It would be wise of us to remember her words as we tackle the injustice that still permeates our human existence. We need to remember those words as we deal with the fact that you can still be fired for being LGB or T in Indiana. We need to remember to be open and willing—willing to dwell together in peace and to seek the truth in love. Every advancement in justice for all persons has come slowly. Much conversation needs to take place; communication is the key to understanding. If you read the local paper yesterday, you will know that we need to keep talking, keep having conversations with EVERYONE. I for one, will keep talking to my friend Steve Viars.
The patrons of the Stonewall Inn felt very alone that night in June 1969. Their single act became the catalyst for a movement of justice for all in the United States, with some very unlikely allies.
Allies, standing. Standing on the side of love.

Words, Words, Words--the Positive

On Thursday, Gov. Pence of Indiana signed SB 101: the "Religious Freedom Restoration Act" into law. This law goes into effect in July. According to those who support the law, the RFRA does not differ from the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Those people would be wrong.
If you read the Indiana law, it is glaringly apparent that it's not just a human person that can claim religious protection, but businesses as people can claim the same thing. Thank you, Citizens United.
There is now power, not previously given, to businesses, to discriminate on the basis of "religious beliefs". There is now more opportunity to twist and reinterpret the words in the Bible to fit one's own beliefs, no matter how discriminatory they might be. The words of Jesus will be misused, sadly, and his most important--from the Sermon on the Mount--will be conveniently forgotten.
By some.
But not by all.

Yes, there are some positives that will come from the implementation of the RFRA. Some positives already have come from it.
There has been a large, loud outcry against the law. Citizens of Indiana, celebrities, business owners--all have voiced their opinions, and have stated their belief in equality for all. If you're feeling depressed about the passage of RFRA, I suggest you spend some time on social media--the positive, uplifting comments will make you feel better. As you read the outrage, you will find you are not alone.
I firmly believe in keeping an open mind. I firmly believe in listening to both sides of an issue. And, I firmly believe I must treat others as I want to be treated. So, I have listened to the thoughts of people on both sides of this issue. I had a long conversation with a friend I completely disagree with--on this issue, and others. A conversation; not a shouting match, not a one-sided speech (it's so easy to follow the media lead, but will get us nowhere in the long run). We were able to have this honest, frank conversation because we trusted each other, and we knew the other would listen with openness. It was eye-opening for me, and I can only hope I was able to provide a good perspective from my side. I really hope he understands the impact of RFRA on my family and friends. And, I really hope he shares my perspective with others. I hope.
The passage of RFRA has prompted many discussions between parents and children; this will definitely be a teaching moment, and I do hope parents use this power for good. I fear they won't, but I hope they do.
Passage of RFRA has prompted discussions between co-workers, and acquaintances. People are sharing information on social media about businesses who will serve everyone. There are signs of support in shop windows. People will be spending more money at these businesses, I hope. People are taking the time to clarify their positions, and declare what is "not OK" with them. It might be my imagination, but in the past couple of days at my place of employment, people seem to be treating each other with a little more kindness. Maybe people are now hyper-aware of their actions and words? I hope.
I also hope that there are some, who initially thought the RFRA was a good idea, will take some time to reflect on what the real impact will be. If you only heard, over and over, "This will give us the freedom to live our religious beliefs", I hope you stop and consider. If you are a woman who uses birth control, I hope you realize this may impact your relationship with your employer. If you have family and friends who are LGBT, you might be discriminated against through your association with them. You have always had the freedom of religion; what's going to happen now is that some will not have the freedom to live their lives as they want to. I hope everyone will stop and think this through.
And the last positive that has come from the passage of the RFRA? It will motivate people to VOTE. For if you are outraged by this, angry at how this will impact your family and friends, I hope you remember this in 2016, and VOTE! Voting is the best way to tell your government how you feel, and how you want others to be treated. If you VOTE, you elect YOUR representatives.
The positives may not outweigh the negatives, but if people are talking to one another, if people are consciously treating one another as they want to be treated, and if people are VOTING, then maybe...just maybe...this world will become a little better than it is today.
I have hope.

If, After Reading These Words of Jesus...Why, On Earth, Would you Discriminate? (Part 3)

How can we work to make this world a better place for everyone if we can't even agree to follow the Golden Rule? To treat others the way we want to be treated? How can we ever find  peace in this world if we can't even agree to follow the simplest precepts of those teachers we choose to worship? Buddha, Mohammed, Jesus, God, Goddess--any preaching about the words of any of these great teachers has to start with the word "love". To teach anything else, purporting to be the words of them, is reckless and will lead ultimately to the destruction of this world--not by their "hands", but by ours. Human hands. 

The one thing you can be sure they taught, the one thing they all could agree on? The Golden Rule. It's a universal rule. Look it up.

As I wrote Part 2 of this post, I kept thinking about words that Jesus spoke during his Sermon on the Mount--these were arguably the most important words he spoke; he wanted to give guidance to his listeners, and it was a huge crowd, so you have to know he chose his words carefully.

And again, not one word about homosexuality. You would think, if that was important to him, he

would have mentioned it first, last, and in the middle. But no. 

 Jesus had a different message (I have chosen to embolden some words)...

 The Sermon on the Mount

Seeing the crowds, he went up on the mountain, and when he sat down, his disciples came to him.

The Beatitudes

2 And he opened his mouth and taught them, saying:

3 “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

4 “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.

5 “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.

6 “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.

7 “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.

8 “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.

9 “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.

10 “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

11 “Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. 12 Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

Love Your Enemies

43 "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Judging Others

“Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

The Golden Rule

12 “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

13 “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.
  
 Amen.
Our lives are short, and the list of ways to make this world a better place is long. We have far more important things to do than discriminate. 
Far more important things to do. 
Start by spreading love. 

Discrimination is Easier Than YOU Think...Why, On Earth, Would you Discriminate Part 2

I've had a whirlwind of thoughts for the past couple of weeks. I have taken some time to write, re-write, and clarify, so that you--the reader--can understand. I hope you take some time to read, and then think, about what I'm trying to say here. Please.
"Here's the church, here's the steeple. Open the door, and see all the people."
I love to read stories about lives that are different from mine. Different cultures, different situations, different periods in history. When I read these stories, I often have an "ah ha!" moment; a moment when I have a new perspective on life. I like to learn about different religions and different spiritual practices; I choose to go to my church because we draw on many religious traditions, and I've learned so much. What I've mostly learned is that there is not ONE answer to life's questions, but many answers. To think that you have all the answers, or that your religion has the only answers is misguided indeed.
I've learned that your spiritual beliefs will have a major impact on how you occupy this world, and how you treat others.
As I've gotten older, I've come to realize our time on Earth is very limited, and we can choose to leave this Earth better than when we arrived, or we can make things worse--a whole lot worse, if we choose to.

"Here's the church, here's the steeple. Open the door, and see all the people."

Because I truly want to listen, to learn the perspective of others, I recently went to church--not my church, but another church. A church so vastly different from my own that my heart was pounding (sort of a "fight or flight" mentality automatically kicked in--some of you might not understand this, but going in as a minority of any kind puts one on edge) through most of the first part of the service. I admit I went with some prejudices of my own, but by going, I was able to "call myself" on some of them. No, not every license plate was an "In God We Trust" plate. No, not every woman had to wear a dress to the service; as a matter of fact, I would have fit right in in my usual jeans that I wear to my own church services. What did surprise me--more than I expected--was how HUGE the place was! Enormous!! They have 3 services, and the place was packed at 11. According to the Order of Service, on a Sunday when the weather was snowy and driving treacherous. they still managed to have attendance of 1,000. THAT'S amazing.
I listened to the minister. I know him, have read some things he has written. I've had conversations with him, but had never heard him address his congregation. I was intrigued by the topic of his sermon: "Did Jesus Ever Discriminate?" I wanted to know what he thought, so I sat, listened, and took notes. 
The short answer to the question was:  "Yes. Jesus did discriminate." He went on to speak about Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Bill, and how important it was that this Bill be passed. And, he spoke about being true to your religious convictions.
I left feeling not uplifted, but sad. Sad for the world.
Jesus taught a message of love. "Love one another." That message was not delivered at the church on the Sunday I visited. Instead, the message was, "Yes, Jesus DID discriminate."
And that's why we need to have the Religious Freedom Restoration Bill. So you, as the owner of any business in any town in Indiana, can discriminate against those you think you can't abide.
AND LET ME BE CLEAR:  WE ARE ONLY TALKING ABOUT HOMOSEXUALS AND WOMEN.
Because to discriminate against the darker skinned? That's just not done anymore.
To discriminate against the Jew, the Muslim, the Buddhist? We don't do that as much either.

Here's the thing, You are free to open a business, provide a service, sell a product. You open your doors and welcome customers. According to some, who believe we should have a Religious Freedom Restoration Bill embedded into state law, you are also free to follow your "moral compass" and discriminate against women, if they want to control their own reproductive health; and anyone under the LGBT "umbrella" because they are perverse.
Here's the problem. Although some differences are plain to the naked eye, and therefore easy to detect and discriminate against, the ones that are actually more foul and heinous are buried under the skin--they reside in the soul.
We don't all wear shirts with our "attributes" listed for all to see:
"Hello, my name is ___________________. I have never murdered anyone, I am not a child molester, and I have never beaten anyone. I do use birth control, I am for gun safety, and I have vaccinated my children. I release spiders outside and I recycle."
Can you imagine the length of that shirt that we would have to wear??

Because we don't all wear that attribute shirt, we have to rely on the visual. For most of us, we take one look at someone, and judge them. One look.
If the person looks just like me and acts just like me, I assume they believe the exact same things I do.
If their skin is a different shade, I hesitate. I'm not sure.
If they are with someone of the same sex, I need more information before judging.
If they open their mouths to speak, and they have an accent or if I cannot understand them, I am uncomfortable.
If they appear to be more poorly dressed or smell in a certain way, I judge them.
But if they are like me, I gladly will serve them.
I gladly serve them, because I have judged them, and I've decided they must believe the same things I do.
I do not know, nor do I care, what they are really like, because they look just like me.
They could have murdered their parents, but they look like me. I will sell them a CD.
They could have raped 3 women in the past year, but they have a nice haircut, so I will welcome them into my restaurant.
They could have molested 100 kids, and sold child pornography for years, but because they appear with their fiance and ask me to bake their wedding cake, and they are a heterosexual couple, I will happily do it, just let me get them a sample of the cake......

Discriminate against the very people Jesus DID call out? The adulterers and the fornicators? Well, it's just not that easy to figure those people out...But two people, of the same sex, buying groceries together? Well, now THAT we can see, and THAT we can feel righteous about. THOSE people need to go (even though Jesus said nothing about the lesbians, or the gays). Those are the people I don't want to serve, because I am following the "teachings of my religion." Here's another crazy thing. If I walk into any place of business, I will be served, because I'm just a funny-looking older woman. I would have to walk in with my WIFE in order for you to feel you need to discriminate against me. You will look love in the face and you will throw us out, but will gladly serve the guy over there, even though I know he's been married three times, and has recently impregnated a college cheerleader. But he LOOKS like a fine citizen.
To truly discriminate, to follow your religiously-ordained set of prejudices, you actually have to get to know someone a little bit. You have to form a relationship with them. And then? You have to turn your back on them--you have to condemn them for who they are.
Think about how that feels to that person.
If you're not a sociopath, it hurts.
It hurts a lot.
And why do you do it? Discriminate against....? Do you think the person you're ushering out of your place of business with suddenly fall to their knees and thank you for showing them the error of their ways??? Really? You think they will suddenly agree with everything you believe as you refuse them service in your restaurant? Because that's not going to happen. What IS going to happen is that person will harden their heart against you, and against everything you purport to believe. They are going to feel hatred maybe...certainly will feel anger as you have basically called them a bad person, and have shunned them. Perhaps they will internalize their anger, but far more likely, they will communicate their feelings to friends and family, who will in turn feel anger toward you and your beliefs.
This! This is how wars get started.
Because in the world where we allow discrimination to legally take place, most rapists, murderers, and child molesters will be welcomed with open arms. Because they look like us.
We will gladly serve the fornicators and the adulterers. Because they are us, and are easier to understand.
But the gays? We MUST shun them.
Because the Bible says so.
Even though Jesus said...not...one...word...about homosexuality.
But he said a whole lot of words about love.
"Here's the church. Here's the steeple. Open the doors.....but don't see ALL the people."

 

Why, On Earth, Would You Discriminate? Part One

A couple of weeks ago, this Guest Column was posted in our local paper (referencing The Religious Freedom Restoration Bill now before the Indiana Senate.

The bill reads:  "Religious freedom restoration. Prohibits a governmental entity from substantially burdening a person's exercise of religion, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless the governmental entity can demonstrate that the burden: (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering the compelling governmental interest. Provides a procedure for remedying a violation. Specifies that the religious freedom law applies to the implementation or application of a law regardless of whether the state or any other governmental entity or official is a party to a proceeding implementing or applying the law. "

Here's the Guest Column from Pastor Steve Viars:

 "OK, let me get this straight. Freedom Indiana has just announced their opposition to ... wait for it ... the religious freedom bill. That's like the American Cattleman's Association opposing cows. I'm not sure these dear folks thought this one all the way through.

This is similar to our local so-called Citizens for Civil Rights whose behavior over the years demonstrates that they are really only concerned for the rights of themselves and their left-leaning friends. It seems to me that these groups ought to be more transparent in the names they choose for their organizations. How about "Freedom Just for Those in Indiana Who Agree with Us and Everyone Else Can Take a Hike" or "Citizens Concerned Only for the Civil Rights of the Cultural Liberals"?

Why is it that progressives seem hell-bent on imposing their brand of morality or — in many cases — immorality, on everyone else by force of governmental law? Are they that insecure about the quality of their ideals? Doesn't civility require — even demand — an approach to community life that seeks to balance the legitimate needs, desires, and rights of a variety of world and life views?

Good men and women of faith ought to be able to practice their religious beliefs in all spheres of life without incessant harassment from those who want to live differently. For example, a Jewish family should be able to start a video production business and choose not to make movies for the wicked pornographer down the street. An Amish man should be able to purchase a catering company and prefer not to provide food for the area swingers convention. A Muslim woman should be able to buy a wedding hall and decide to only make it available for activities she believes are consistent with her beliefs about marriage. It's not like the progressives have no other places to make their movies, buy their food or hold their celebration

Whether it is advisable for such persons of faith to practice their religion in these ways is beside the point. Truthfully, if I was a Christian baker, I'd make my gay neighbor the best wedding cake I possibly could out of a desire to demonstrate the love and grace of Christ. But there is a significant difference between living that way by personal choice versus living that way by governmental coercion. The question here is how much value we place on the religious freedom of everyone in our state, even when we find such religious expression questionable or even objectionable.

Of course some will run to the tired accusation that this legislation promotes discrimination. The challenge is — that door swings both ways. You can either discriminate against the pornographer or discriminate against the religious person who prefers not to use his privately purchased equipment for such evil purposes. How hard is that decision?

We saw this logical inconsistency several years ago during the public hearings regarding Faith West. A spokesperson for the West Lafayette Human Relations Commission appeared at the final community meeting to express their views on our development and their expectations for our behavior.

This outrageous action was completely inconsistent with the group's legal purpose and to my knowledge, is something the Human Relations Commission has never done before or since. That is the essence of discrimination — treating someone differently or illegally based on an inherent or perceived difference, in our case — our religious beliefs.

The irony was too delicious for words — a spokesperson for the Human Relations Commission discriminating against a church because of the unfounded concern that the church might discriminate against someone else. I seriously considered reporting the Human Relations Commission, to itself.

What is needed in this conversation is balance — which as one wag observed — is that elusive point we all pass on the way to our next extreme. I would encourage my friends at Freedom Indiana to reconsider their opposition to the religious freedom bill. If not, then could you at least change your name?

AND......Here's MY response:

As I read the recently-named “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” (SB 101), all I could think was, “Wow! What a great state I live in! Evidently, poverty no longer exists, everyone who wants a job has one, and all of our students must be above average! Because, if any of these were still a problem, our legislators would be working around the clock to solve them, instead of spending even one minute on a poorly-worded, divisive bill such as this one!” Sadly, I was mistaken. Our public schools still struggle to be funded, students still come to school hungry and ill-clothed, we still have unemployment. But, the politicians in the Statehouse have decided it’s far more important to waste time and taxpayer money to pass a bill that will only lead to more incivility and acrimony among its’ citizenry. Don’t believe me? One only has to read Pastor Viars’ Guest Column to begin to understand how the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” will divide.

The business owners I know serve every person who comes through their doors (except the ones without shirts and shoes). In this shaky business climate, one cannot be selective or discriminatory if one wants to be profitable. Most business owners know if word gets out that they refused service to this person or that one, word will get out to friends and relatives of said person, and people will stop frequenting their establishment and worst of all, they will take their business elsewhere. Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, Pagan business owners who want to be successful do not question the customer coming through the door, for that can be a slippery slope:  “Just one last question before I serve you your ice cream sundae—do you use Viagra? Because use of that drug is not covered in my Holy Book, so therefore I cannot in good conscience serve you.” I agree—that one was silly. As is this one:  “Your child is [insert medical condition here]? I’m sorry, if you were a better [insert religious sect here], your child would already be cured, and we could allow them to come to school here at Perfect In Every Way Private Academy.” But it’s far more likely, under SB 101, the latter would actually happen--legally. 

As Pastor Viars points out, “There is a significant difference between living that way by personal choice versus living that way by government coercion.” It’s a slippery slope indeed, as we are all fallible human beings; rather than unite, this law will divide us. Can you imagine owning a business, and having a deacon from your church say to you, “Why did you serve that customer? You know he’s Catholic. The law says it’s ok for you, legally, to refuse service. Why didn’t you do it? Aren’t you a good Lutheran?” Or, someone using the words of any religious teacher, incorrectly, to avoid treating another human being at their family-owned pharmacy? I would like to know who is going to be the final arbitrator when Sam Smith says, “I didn’t give him pills because Jesus said people wearing purple could not enter Heaven.” Of course, we all know Jesus didn’t say that, but then again, Jesus did not say one word about homosexuality, and look how that fact has been ignored and misused. It would be a worst-case scenario, but we could easily become a state with “no go zones” for Christians or Jews or Muslims or German Baptists. Our economy would suffer too; what company would want to locate to a state with sectarian areas? Or, more to the point, what company will want to relocate to a state with a poorly written law in effect, which may or may not impact who they can or cannot hire? 

SB 101, while purporting to protect ones’ freedom of religion, is just a “feel good” law; it will make some feel good, and will alienate others. Not all religious people are in favor of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act; in fact, I've seen very little religious diversity among those pushing for passage. Perhaps that’s because we see there are far greater problems that need to be solved in our state. Perhaps that’s because most people of faith stand on the side of love, and believe and practice the Golden Rule, “Treat others the way you wish to be treated,” and believe that, until all are treated fairly in our state, we all will suffer. Perhaps all of us should push for codifying the Golden Rule in the State of Indiana, but that would mean we were progressive—“favoring social reform”— and some have used this word as a pejorative. 

Words can be used to unite, and words can be used to divide. The words contained in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act will most certainly be used to divide us. To some, much has been given. The question is:  How will you use this power? For the betterment of all, or for the select few? As many religious books will advise—whatever you do, do it in love.