Liberal/Progressive/Secularist Double Standards And Other Thoughts This Week

Last week, one of the most iconic religious figures in American history, Rev. Billy Graham, passed on to his eternal reward.  Rev. Graham was a beloved figure for many, and he also introduced many people to the Christian faith in his great crusades.  Although he was by no means perfect - to be honest, his books were rather dry that he authored, and on occasion, he espoused some things I would differ with considerably - there is no doubt that he was a powerful figure and deserved the honors he received at his passing.  And, with Graham's passing, a generation of influential American Christian leaders is pretty much gone, as there are few of that era left.  I preface this story with Graham's repose because I want to talk about another very influential Evangelical Christian leader that I greatly respected for many years for his stand on social and moral issues, and the person I speak of is Dr. D. James Kennedy.

Dr. D. James Kennedy (1930-2007)

Georgia-born D. James Kennedy was a former minister in the conservative Presbyterian Church of America who for many years pastored the Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Fort Lauderdale, FL.  He was noted for his television outreach, as well as for his Evangelism Explosion program that many Evangelical churches used in the 1970's and 1980's as an evangelistic tool.   One thing that always impressed me personally about Dr. Kennedy's ministry was his demeanor - he was a brilliant theologian, pastor, and activist for decades, and I also liked watching his program that broadcast from the Coral Ridge Church for many years for the music - Diane Bish's playing of that magnificent and beautiful Ruffatti pipe organ was enough to make anyone feel like they have been to the throne of God and back.  One thing more importantly that Kennedy impacted me with was a social conscience - as a teenager, I had thought it was "sophisticated" to flirt with progressive politics, and without knowing what it was I identified with it even for a few years after my own conversion.  Dr. Kennedy's messages enlightened me a lot on what the "progressive agenda" was really about, and thanks to his insights over the years, I have solidified and developed a more consistent Judeo-Christian worldview as well as becoming an unapologetic traditionalist.  In a sense, Dr. Kennedy "mentored" me in a number of ways, and although I disagreed with his theological positions on occasion (Kennedy, as a conservative Presbyterian, was a staunch Calvinist as well, which differed significantly with my own theological convictions) as far as social and moral issues I considered it an honor to stand in agreement with him.  Although he passed away in 2007, his ministry still continues today as led by Dr. Frank Wright and Kennedy's daughter, Jennifer Kennedy-Cassidy.  It was a recent issue involving Kennedy's ministry which prompted this article, and I will go into that now.

The interior of the Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Ft. Lauderdale, with the prominent Rufatti organ.

A few years back, a number of Christian businesses were targeted by the "gay agenda" for their refusal to bake "wedding cakes" for lesbian and gay couples, and some of those people have been harassed and litigated out of business.  Many of the progressive/liberals who targeted these businesses said that they were "hateful" in that they "discriminated" against the LGBT community, which in reality was not true at all.  When I have touched on this issue before, I emphasized that patronage of the business was not the real issue - I don't think any of these Christian business owners would have any issue whatsoever selling a dozen cupcakes, cookies, or doughnuts to a gay person, and they probably have in years past.  There is no moral constraint against cookies, doughnuts, or cupcakes, and therefore no problem in selling such items or consuming them.  However, a wedding cake is a symbol of something - for the Christian, it means a sacred covenantal bond between one man and one woman that was established as God's natural order for the family unit and thus the procreation of the human race, and therefore it is not something that a civil government can legislate, define, or enforce.  Marriage is the sole sacramental jurisdiction of the Church, and 2,000 years of Christian faith and doctrine have defined exactly what it is.  So, when a gay couple decides to participate in what they define as a "marriage," it is disordered and not something that a person of devout Christian faith can participate in or endorse with business or anything else.  Quite honestly - and I may catch flak for saying this, but I don't care - a so-called "gay marriage" is nothing more than a sham, a deception, and it goes against both divine decree and natural law.  Now, for those who want to engage in that deception, they have the free will to choose to do so; however, the Christian baker or any other businessman also has the free will to refuse to participate in anything that is in opposition to their convictions as well.  After all, the Christian owns the business, and it is ultimately his or her hard work and investment that went into its construction, so they have a natural right to say "no" if they cannot in good conscience engage in something.   Of course, the secular "lamestream" media was all over this, calling the Christian bakers "haters" and of course crying for their blood, yet when it comes to recent incidents, their true colors (not the "rainbow" on their "gay flags" either!) began to show.  And, one of those things centers around Kennedy's organization.

In the wake of the Charlottesville tragedy last year, the always opportunistic and self-serving leadership of America's #1 progressive "hate group," the Southern Poverty Law Center, ramped up its ferreting out what it perceived as "hate groups," and it began to target Evangelical ministries.  One of those targets was D. James Kennedy Ministries, which was listed on the SPLC's infamous (and bogus) "Hate Map."  In response to that, some major corporations such as Amazon revoked Kennedy Ministries' donor status, and as a result it had a negative financial impact on the ministry.  The leadership of D. James Kennedy Ministries rightly launched a discrimination suit against Amazon, in addition to seeking reparations for defamation damages caused by the SPLC's slander, and they recruited David Gibbs, a prominent Christian attorney from FL, to represent them.  As of this date, the suit is still active, as Amazon and SPLC have tried to get the case dismissed (which thankfully Kennedy Ministries and Gibbs are refusing to do) based on the grounds that as a private corporation, Amazon has the right to discriminate essentially.  And, as of yet, the outcome has yet to be seen although I do pray that Kennedy's legacy is given true justice and wins this case, as a win for them is a win for all of us.  This now leads me to a few comments on the situation.

When the Christian baker aforementioned tried to assert the same right to refuse business that Amazon did against D. James Kennedy Ministries, the baker lost the case.  Let me ask this - is it fair that a big mega-corporation like Amazon can discriminate but a mom-and-pop Christian bakery cannot?  I have done a lot of business with Amazon over the years - you can pretty much get anything you are looking for on there, and the ease of buying is a major reason for its success.  But, when Amazon does dumb things like this, is it a moral imperitive to boycott them?  I have not had the conviction to do so yet, as for me personally I have worked with Amazon for about 12 years or more with no issues, and I have benefitted much from buying off their site.  Yet, Amazon does discriminate against a Christian ministry while more than likely many of its leadership would be dancing in the streets over the closure of a poor Christian baker who refused to bake a "wedding cake" for two lesbos.  It is no doubt that Amazon needs to be taught a lesson, but how does one do that?  That perhaps needs to be explored further. 

Other recent "right to refuse" incidents of large corporations - Dick's Sporting Goods, Delta, etc. - refusing the National Rifle Association business based on what happened recently at Parkland in Florida.  What is weird about this whole thing is that the NRA had absolutely nothing to do with those tragic shootings, and no NRA members were even involved in the whole thing, yet innocent members of the organization are being punished despite the fact they are law-abiding citizens with legal firearms permits.  Many of the same people denying the NRA patronage would also be dancing in the streets if a Christian baker were shut down for refusing to bake a "wedding cake" for two faeries.  If we really wanted to point out something here on that, Dick's Sporting Goods, in particular, should be an object of boycott by religious people just for its name - I mean, for a store who (facetiously or not) advertises "get your balls at Dick's" this creates a serious moral dilemma!  And, since in this day and age it pays to get "offended," perhaps I can be offended at potential advertising campaigns for Dick's because they sound obscene and offend my moral sensitivities - how about that?  I know Dick's is not intentionally pornographic, but they need to be fair and also understand that NRA members are not all psycho killers because they have permits to pack a pistol.  Plus, the potential for off-color jokes that could offend people with strong moral or religious convictions should maybe force Dick's to rethink its name, right?   Just sayin'!  As for Delta, here is the inconsistency with that - it seems as if it is OK for an illegal terrorist to fly their planes because they purchased a ticket, but not an NRA member who is a law-abiding citizen?  I mean, look at whose flights crashed on 9-11 - does not the same type of plane have the same potential to do damage?  Maybe a complaint should be filed against Delta for the type of planes it flies - if they have been identified as being used in terrorist attacks, why should passengers feel safe on them?  Again, some food for thought for the "political correct" crowd.

These inconsistencies - both against the NRA and against D. James Kennedy Ministries - are not about discrimination or anything valid.  They represent an agenda - for the Progressive/Socialist, certain types of discrimination (which may actually be really bad) are OK as long as they do it, but when someone who disagrees with them makes a similar judgment, then the goal is eradication of dissent against the "political correct" orthodoxy of the secularist by feigning "hate" and "discrimination."  It has been done before too, and to be honest it is time that people with more common sense stand up and say "NO!!!!" to these liberal/progressive/secularist bullies and for us all to stand up and reclaim our rights to conscience.  Until we do so, the liberal agenda will continue to harass, bully, and intimidate those they disagree with until they eradicate such people from the face of society.  And, that simply cannot be allowed to happen.  Information is the key to change in a positive way, and exposing inconsistencies and hypocrisy serves to empower the powerless against the "establishment" that seeks to oppress and repress them.  Hopefully that is some food for thought until next visit.