published Monday, April 8th, 2013

Smith: RELIGIOUS RELATIVIST: Laws must be squared with moral truths

By Robin Smith
  • photo
    Robin Smith, former Chairman of the Tennessee Republican Party and congressional candidate.
    File Photo/Chattanooga Times Free Press

"A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law."

This statement wasn't made by a "right-winged whacko of the Republican Party", but it applies to the current practice of redefining behavior to reflect modern culture.

The argument of "equal protection under the law" by those choosing homosexuality in their relationships and seeking "gay marriage" is being utilized under the premise that the arrangement in question is the same as traditional marriage.

The Supreme Court has been asked to act in opposition to 32 states and redefine marriage to include not only an adult man and an adult woman but also two adults of the same sex.

Today, redefining terms has become the tool of those who worship at the altar of secular relativism -- the religious world view that is absent of any absolutes or truths and is driven by cultural occurrences, justification of behavior and those who supposedly "intellectually evolve."

As a young child, I had my tonsils, or the tissue at the back of my throat, removed -- a tonsillectomy. The removal of your appendix is an appendectomy. The removal of your gallbladder is a cholecystectomy. The excision of human tissue is almost always defined by the suffix "ectomy."

But the removal of an unborn child is an abortion. Yet millions have been spent and decades of effort has been expended to redefine the unborn child as simply tissue to equate the process as simple and natural as having other tissue extracted.

Unintended consequences have already begun to surface. U.S. Rep Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., recently stated, "...all alternative sexual lifestyles should be protected under the law, and accordingly decided that pedophilia is a sexual orientation that should be equally as embraced as homosexuality" in the push for federal legislation.

In an NPR interview, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley was interviewed about the Supreme Court's deliberations.

"You cannot defend a new civil liberty by denying it to others. I think that there is a grander, more magnificent trend that you can see in the law..." Dr. Turley said in response to a question about polygamy's new standing with a redefinition of marriage.

The quote at the top of this column, by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., contrasts how the religion of secular relativism uses self-worship, called idolatry, to drive our laws to meet our behavioral whims while proving Christ's prayer for His disciples that "I have given them Your word; and the world has hated them because they are not of this world, just as I am not of the world."

God's word, from Genesis to Revelation, never blesses or condones homosexuality. Homosexuality is never referenced as the pattern of a thriving culture nor deemed as the type of relationship that should be replicated. In fact, it's always labeled sin.

Sin also includes adultery, lying, stealing, gluttony, hatred and many other human frailties. God's word never calls for discrimination against any of these sins, instead, we are to discern between right and wrong.

As a created being of our Creator, I have no authority to redefine His truth. Those who claim the name of Christ deliberately twisting and cherry-picking scripture to justify behavior simply reflect our narcissism and idolatry.

In the year of our Lord 2013, it is those with a fluid world view of relativism who are willing to "bend the rules" to justify behavior and to gain power that are embraced, praised, and socially honored. The cries for accountability and justice are being met with redefined virtues crafted by the faithful of the religious relativists.

Robin Smith served as chairwoman of the Tennessee Republican Party from 2007 to 2009. She is a partner at the SmithWaterhouse Strategies business development and strategic planning firm.

45
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
aae1049 said...

Beautifully written.

April 8, 2013 at 12:08 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Robin,

"the religious world view that is absent of any absolutes or truths and is driven by cultural occurrences, justification of behavior and those who supposedly "intellectually evolve."

You obviously haven't "intellectually evolved". You believe the myths written from oral traditions from Bronze-age Palestine. Humans have evolved from that barbarism and blatant bigotry. You're the one putting all the faith in a 2,000 year old book of desert stories.

"Yet millions have been spent and decades of effort has been expended to redefine the unborn child as simply tissue to equate the process as simple and natural as having other tissue extracted."

No one has EVER said abortions are "simple and natural". However, spontaneous abortions ARE natural. Miscarriages ARE natural. Why don't you castigate your god for those "natural" abortions?

"Unintended consequences have already begun to surface. U.S. Rep Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., recently stated, "...all alternative sexual lifestyles should be protected under the law, and accordingly decided that pedophilia is a sexual orientation that should be equally as embraced as homosexuality" in the push for federal legislation."

This is the bill: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201120120SB1172

In which clause is “pedophilia … a sexual orientation according to this bill”? LOC says that she has sponsored six bills in this congress; none of them match the description you've given. What, exactly, did the amendment say? Where is Rep. Hastings entire quote? What sources do you have for those remarks?

I can't find reliable citations for the quote you've given. I also can't find any "pedophilia" language in any of Rep. Hastings bills. That sounds like a bogus story, Ms. Smith.

"Homosexuality is never referenced as the pattern of a thriving culture nor deemed as the type of relationship that should be replicated. In fact, it's always labeled sin."

In the Bible, electricity isn't mentioned as a pattern of a thriving culture or deemed as the type of technology that should be invented. In fact, such things would have been considered witchcraft back then.

Do you get where I'm going with this? Just because your Bible says it, doesn't mean you get to make discriminatory legislation according to that 2,000 year old book of myths. 1st Amendment, remember?

"Sin also includes adultery, lying, stealing, gluttony, hatred and many other human frailties."

What about wearing mixed fabrics, tattoos, eating shellfish, and shaving sideburns and beards? Those were Mosaic laws too. Why don't you follow those, Ms. Cherrypicker?

"Those who claim the name of Christ deliberately twisting and cherry-picking scripture to justify behavior simply reflect our narcissism and idolatry."

You're one of "those". You are cherry-picking scripture to justify your own bigotry, discrimination and homophobia.

April 8, 2013 at 12:47 a.m.
AndrewLohr said...

easy, if Jesus Christ rose from the dead, he knew something Einstein didn't. (And vice versa, if you wish.) Christian miracles do happen; my wife and her mother have experienced them. (Flimflam also happens, or do you doubt the Bible where it says "all have sinned"? A COGIC preacher's daughter told me her dad roared with laughter watching Steve Martins's "Leap of Faith," knowing men who use those tricks.)

The marriage penalty is monogaphobic bigotry, right?

So: is there a God whom Jesus reveals? Yes. Should we consult His views of right and wrong? Yes. Did He create Steve to deal with Adam's loneliness? No. Did He create a floozie? No, a wife. Does He love sinners? "God show His love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us." Does He tolerate sins? "Go and sin no more." "God now orders all men everywhere to repent." Have the churches preached repentance as Jesus ordered them to (Luke 24)? No, they've emphasized the forgiveness of sins without making clear what sins are and how important it is to repent from them; so the good news that Hell is optional has been watered down into vapidity.

April 8, 2013 at 1:09 a.m.
Easy123 said...

AndrewLohr,

"if Jesus Christ rose from the dead, he knew something Einstein didn't."

Prove that Jesus Christ was a real person and did, in fact, rise from the dead. Then you must prove that he was, in fact, the son of your god. Rising from the dead would not prove that and neither would his existence. You have all your work ahead of you, sir, to prove any claim you've made or will make.

"Christian miracles do happen; my wife and her mother have experienced them."

That means nothing. Just because your wife and mother experienced something they believed to be a miracle doesn't mean it actually was. The laws of physics and nature are never suspended at any time. Whatever "miracles" your wife and mother experienced were nothing but coincidence and/or delusion.

"So: is there a God whom Jesus reveals? Yes."

Prove it.

"Should we consult His views of right and wrong? Yes."

You must first prove your god and Jesus are real and that they are who you say they are.

"Did He create Steve to deal with Adam's loneliness? No."

You must first prove your god and Jesus are real and that they are who you say they are. Also, your god didn't create humans. Many years of evolution did. And that's verifiable.

"Did He create a floozie? No, a wife."

You must first prove your god and Jesus are real and that they are who you say they are. Also, your god didn't create humans. Many years of evolution did. And that's verifiable.

"Does He love sinners? "God show His love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.""

You must first prove your god and Jesus are real and that they are who you say they are.

"Does He tolerate sins? "Go and sin no more." "God now orders all men everywhere to repent.""

You must first prove your god and Jesus are real and that they are who you say they are.

"Have the churches preached repentance as Jesus ordered them to (Luke 24)? No, they've emphasized the forgiveness of sins without making clear what sins are and how important it is to repent from them; so the good news that Hell is optional has been watered down into vapidity."

You must first prove your god and Jesus are real and that they are who you say they are.

You've got all your work ahead of you, Lohr. Everything you've just said is assumed. Nothing is proved. You believe those things based on zero evidence. You've lived a sheltered life. You've been brainwashed into thinking the way you do. Christianity has been shoved into your fragile mind for years and years. You now accept it without question. Give me evidence. Think logically. Be reasonable. But wait, you cannot. Religion has poisoned your mind. Religion has taught you to be a bigot. Religion has made you rationalize your own immorality. Religion has made you ignorant.

April 8, 2013 at 1:42 a.m.
glorygloria said...

yawn

April 8, 2013 at 7:18 a.m.
Facts said...

Hey Christians, forget the article, pray for Easy123. Sir or Ma'am, Jesus Christ died for your sins, as he did mine, because He loves us. I'm praying that you'll understand that today.

April 8, 2013 at 7:28 a.m.
conservative said...

For they sleep not, except they have done mischief ; and their sleep is taken away , unless they cause some to fall .Proverbs 4:16

April 8, 2013 at 8:12 a.m.
LibDem said...

Humans have had morality for millennia: Harm no one; help when you can. It's organized religion that has introduced moral relativism. The Reverend Billy Graham says it doesn't matter what you do to or for your fellows humans; only that you accept Christ as your savior. That's moral relativism.

April 8, 2013 at 9:27 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

"Those who claim the name of Christ deliberately twisting and cherry-picking scripture to justify behavior simply reflect our narcissism and idolatry."

I can only assume you are speaking about yourself here, Robin Smith? Admitting your own cherry-picking, are you? If you truly "claim the name" of your Jesus, then why do you even concern yourself with homosexuality? He never once mentioned it. Never. Not once. It's only found in the Old Testament, along with laws, like Easy said, concerning mixed fabrics, eating shellfish, and shaving sideburns and beards. Who is giving you the authority to ignore those laws while still clinging to your justifications for calling homosexuality a sin? Talk about moral relativism! You are as guilty of cherry picking as anyone you are pointing your self righteous cherry-picking finger at.

You have also done a splendid job of cherry picking quotes from Dr. King. I wish you would devote an article sometime to one of these other quotes from him:

"A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom."

"We have guided missiles and misguided men."

"Philanthropy is commendable, but it must not cause the philanthropist to overlook the circumstances of economic injustice which make philanthropy necessary."

"The moral arc of the universe bends at the elbow of justice."

"Any religion that professes to be concerned about the souls of men and is not concerned about the slums that damn them, the economic conditions that strangle them and the social conditions that cripple them is a spiritually moribund religion awaiting burial."

If Dr. King were alive today and as much of an activist as he was then, you would not be praising him in any way or referencing his quotes, or at least not referencing them in a positive way. You would be hurling insults at him, calling him an evil communist/socialist/Marxist. Don't even think to claim the name of MLK as being in any way aligned with your your self-centered, self-righteous, backward thinking, teabagging conservatism.

April 8, 2013 at 11:15 a.m.
dao1980 said...

Haha, hey "Facts", is that name meant to be ironic?

April 8, 2013 at 12:58 p.m.
Yano said...

Robin Smith is a monster.

She would deny legal status to millions of happy families that already exist, and that will exist in the future, in order to force innocent strangers to conform to her irrational, hateful religious beliefs.

She wants to do that because happy, productive, functional families that don't conform to her bigoted views threaten to cast doubt on those views. That's what she fears.

If gay marriages lead to polygamy, then why don't straight marriages lead to polygamy? Indeed, most of the marriages portrayed in Ms Smith's beloved book are polygamous.

Fortunately we live in a free country, not a Christian theocracy. We don't have to impose silly biblical laws like the one requiring widows to marry their brothers-in-law, or rape victims their rapists, or the one that requires women to sleep in a tent in the back yard during menstruation.

There is no rational, secular reason for gays not to marry. Gay marriage doesn't harm kids, doesn't harm straight people, and doesn't harm "marriage." It might make hysterical bigots feel foolish though, when their doomsday visions don't materialize.

It's telling that Ms Smith has to lie about homosexuality being a choice in order to feel less bad about the results of her ugly bigotry. She claims she has no authority to redefine God's truth. How about she stop trying to redefine other peoples'?

April 8, 2013 at 7:08 p.m.
Facts said...

As I posted this morning, the argument is with what "Robin Smith says". But this lady is saying what God says and continues to say through Jesus His Son.

I guess I'm trying to say, it's easy to take aim at a person who disagrees with you but it's dangerous to argue with God.

April 8, 2013 at 9:04 p.m.
Yano said...

Facts,

Nope. Robin Smith is saying what she thinks, and audaciously ascribing it to God. There are a lot of different opinions about what various interpretations of God supposedly think.

Does Robin Smith support all the laws found in the Bible or just the ones that conform to her prejudices? Does she want to ban divorce?

April 8, 2013 at 9:22 p.m.
Facts said...

Divorce is not banned in the Bible.

What I've learned in reading this article and the comments is pretty simple. We don't really care what the Bible says these days because it exposes our sins. Those are the sins that held Jesus on the cross. Instead of admitting our failure, we attack anyone with enough guts to stand up.

I am a sinner saved by grace. I am also going to say the same thing about any sin that God does, whether it's homosexuality, lying, cheating, all of the sins. But, attacking someone else for my sins is no answer.

April 8, 2013 at 9:28 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Facts,

"Divorce is not banned in the Bible."

Wrong. Matthew 5:32 & Mark 10:11 both say divorce is equivalent to adultery. Adultery is a sin according to your holy book.

Why is it that Christians don't even know what their own holy book says?

April 8, 2013 at 9:38 p.m.
MyGen said...

Give it up, Facts and any other Christian trying to talk with these angry haters. I shared a house with two hater guys that gave me my share of crap for trying to be a Christian.

Now, they've both lost their jobs from failing drug tests, one's got his "girlfriend" pregnant and the other's blaming everyone but himself for losing this job. It was the second time to be fired in just over 6 months.

But I'm the freak for having standards and discipline. I'm also the only one of the 3 employed and paying rent.

I've also learned these guys hate me because I'm not screwing up my life to match theirs.

My dad says I'm growing up.

April 8, 2013 at 9:43 p.m.
Facts said...

Marriage pictures Christ as the Groom and the Church, his believers, as the bride. So Christ would never leave his bride. The way I've been taught and read the Bible is that the remarriage causes adultery and is the sexual sin.

I believe I'm going to take the advice of the young man who just commented. God knows my heart and how very amazed I have been in reading such hatred toward his teaching.

I'll keep on praying about what I've seen today and for a time that we can understand that God sincerely loves us but He doesn't allow intentional, constant sin.

April 8, 2013 at 9:53 p.m.
Easy123 said...

MyGen,

You seem to be the "angry hater". You're the one that believes in an immoral book that marginalizes women, promotes slavery and genocide along with stoning your children, and allows rape in certain situations. You obviously have a lot of pent-up anger against your roommates as well.

You fail to see your own issues and the issues of your religion because you're self-righteous. You believe you're better than your roommates because of your "standards and discipline". Let me assure you, there are plenty of Christians that have done drugs and had children before they were married.

Doesn't you're Bible say something about not judging people? I guess that's just another part of the Bible that you self-righteous bigots don't read either.

April 8, 2013 at 9:54 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Facts,

"The way I've been taught and read the Bible is that the remarriage causes adultery and is the sexual sin."

I guess you're never read Matthew 5:32 then.

"But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery."

What you were taught and read does not coincide with what is actually written in the Bible. Thus, you're a heretic and ignorant of your own holy book.

"I believe I'm going to take the advice of the young man who just commented. God knows my heart and how very amazed I have been in reading such hatred toward his teaching."

Do you even know what the word "hatred" means? Show me one instance of hatred from myself or anyone that opposes your religion. You're the bigot here. You're the one advocating discrimination. I'm asking for proof to support your outrageous claims. Why can't you provide any?

"I'll keep on praying about what I've seen today and for a time that we can understand that God sincerely loves us but He doesn't allow intentional, constant sin."

You must first prove that your god exists. You might want to actually read your Bible instead of cherry-picking and being ignorant of the text itself.

April 8, 2013 at 9:58 p.m.
MyGen said...

Facts is a whole lot nicer man and definitely more gracious. I'm going to be the best Christian I can be. I'm not willing to insult the One I believe in and actually have hope in more than myself. I'm not going to insult you for what you believe.

For an almost 30-something year-old, here's my statement: I'm not perfect. I need some power stronger than my weaknesses. I'm going to choose to be a Christian.

Do whatever you want. It is your choice.

April 8, 2013 at 10:06 p.m.
Easy123 said...

MyGen,

"Facts is a whole lot nicer man and definitely more gracious."

You just feel that way because Facts supports your beliefs. I have been very nice and uncharacteristically gracious. You just don't see it that way because I disagree with you.

"I'm not going to insult you for what you believe."

You didn't have a problem insulting your roommates for what they didn't believe.

"I'm not perfect. I need some power stronger than my weaknesses. I'm going to choose to be a Christian."

You underestimate yourself. Religion is your crutch. A lot of people use religion in that way, but that doesn't make any of it true or real.

April 8, 2013 at 10:20 p.m.
May said...

I'm used to the bigotry written in the newspaper about men being against gay rights, but when a woman spouts such filth it really ticks me off. Robin Smith, you should be ashamed of yourself for spreading such jargon on the newspaper. Why am I upset in specific about you being a woman and against gay rights? Because back then when the battle for women's rights occurred people used the same argument; men used the Bible to tell women they had no rights and to learn their place. If you want to claim you're a religious zealot and preach the Bible then read the book for once.

What really got to me is your problem with Christians such as myself accepting that God loves everyone. You say I'm cherry picking, but you're the perfect example of a cherry picker. If you agree with everything the old testament says then you should be fighting other laws, such as not allowing pregnant women into churches on Sundays, allowing people to own slaves, allowing people to beat slaves, eating sheep fat, and a bunch of other ridiculous things. If you're calling yourself a Christian then I'd suggest you read the New Testament where Jesus preaches about love and tolerance and doesn't mention one word about homosexuality. I'd love to hear your side of the argument after you fully research the topic you're talking about.

PS this topic shouldn't be a bickering argument whether religion is true or not, it should be an argument focused on tolerance and acceptance and knowing that you shouldn't force your beliefs on others, whether you don't believe or you do believe.

April 8, 2013 at 10:44 p.m.
mitziyates1 said...

Defining what is 'moral or just' is a slippery slope Ms. Smith. How would you apply it to race? Economic justice?

April 9, 2013 at 8:20 a.m.
shen said...

mitziyates1,

Likely would have been leading the posse to arrest Mildred and Richard Loving, and a strong supporter of the misegenation laws that existed well into the 1960s in many states. Although the law is no longer being enforced, it still remains on the books in some southern states today.

April 9, 2013 at 9:34 a.m.
jesse said...

Wanna know WHY the republican party is in decline?

Reading garbage like this should give you a clue!

April 9, 2013 at 9:53 a.m.
shen said...

jesse, the republican party might be in decline, but they still have a heavy control on the outcome of many issues. That's where others are making the bigger mistake in becoming laxed. The larger damage and divisions are taking place behind the scenes. They're presently working in and on rural America.

So don't be fooled. These Kats are like the sullen kid who will break all the other playmates toys before leaving the playground in a huff.

April 9, 2013 at 10:03 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

There is a reason that slavery and misogyny are sanctioned so often in the Old Testament by the Christian God - because there was a time in our history when black people and women were perceived to be inferior, naturally endowed by their creator to be second-class citizens. Today we have evolved to the extent that we realize that that is not true at all. We know that black people - and indeed all people of color - and women deserve equal justice and rights under the law, and slavery in any form was a detestable institution.

It's funny to see these fundamentalist Christians today speaking of God's "absolute" laws and moral relativism, not even the least bit aware of how they themselves are deciding (cherry picking) what is "absolute." It is not God who is changing but the Christian perception of him that is changing, as Christians evolve in their thinking. They do evolve intellectually, by small degrees, slowly and reluctantly, and at a much slower pace than the secular society around them. But unfortunately there are too many among them who have succeeded in resisting any and all form of intellectual advancement! It will not be too many years down the road when our children and grandchildren will read about these preposterous arguments we are having today about gay rights and wonder how so many "good" Christians could have been so clueless and heartless to even consider that gays are not deserving of full rights and the love and acceptance of their God as much as they themselves are.

The only thing that is absolute about God is that he/she/it has always been and forever will be silent. Humankind invented the very name of "God," and everything that we think we know of (him) and his so-called laws is not absolute at all but the product of our collective imagination. ALL laws are man-made and relevant to the society of people who determined what those laws should be. Of course, I know better than to think that my argument will have any weight with those fundamentalists who believe in a literal God who handed a literal stone tablet of Ten Commandments to a literal Moses on Mt. Sinai! But then, those are the sort of Christians I was talking about who have resisted any kind of intellectual advancement, who sill have to suck their thumbs and wrap themselves in their security blankets of blind faith and cling to fairy tales for spiritual sustenance.

April 9, 2013 at 10:56 a.m.
inquiringmind said...

secular relativism ?? Is this code language that means anything that does not agree with your interpretation of morality? Robin, exact whose interpretation of religious morality shall we adopt? Yours? the Imam's, the Pope's, or maybe mine? I hope never to put myself in your shoes to judge another's sin, it is far too easy to see theirs and ignore mine.

April 9, 2013 at 2:49 p.m.
jesse said...

The quest for superiority in the human mind finds it's most fertile soil in the region of "MORALITY"!

If you take the moral high ground THEN you can get outraged about the MORAL decadence of the rest of humanity!

MRS.SMITH is a black belt at this kinda stuff!!

April 9, 2013 at 3:42 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Folks, this story is old news (2009) and misrepresented.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/06/democrats-accused-of-usin_n_198167.html

Hastings' speech mentions a list, but I cannot find any source of the list's content. In the You tube video from 2009 he only refers to the list but does not mention pedophilia.

A resolution (141) introduced last winter requested a ban on conversion therapy for minors, but there again was no mention of pedophilia, which all psychological and psychiatric organizations classify as a disorder not an orientation, and therefore would not apply. The definition of orientation used referred to consensual homosexual or heterosexual behavior.

BTW, there appears to be no effective therapy for pedophilia. Incarceration of offenders is the only response. Most pedophiles are males who prey on pre-pubescent girls.

April 9, 2013 at 4:02 p.m.
shen said...

jesse said... MRS.SMITH is a black belt at this kinda stuff!!

More like a walnut nutty-buddy.

Ikei said... Most pedophiles are males who prey on pre-pubescent girls.

The right wingnut christians will selective overlook that truth. Like the preacher to got the hots for one of his underage church members told her "It's in Gods plan" for them to have sex together.

April 9, 2013 at 4:14 p.m.
Ozzy87 said...

"Christianity neither is nor ever was a part of the common law." - Thomas Jefferson.

April 9, 2013 at 11:03 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Rickaroo notes: “I can only assume you are speaking about yourself here, Robin Smith? . . . If you truly "claim the name" of your Jesus, then why do you even concern yourself with homosexuality? He never once mentioned it. Never. Not once. It's only found in the Old Testament, along with laws, like Easy said, concerning mixed fabrics, eating shellfish, and shaving sideburns and beards. Who is giving you the authority to ignore those laws while still clinging to your justifications for calling homosexuality a sin? Talk about moral relativism!”

Good post and good questions, Rickaroo. Clearly, Christianity is all about the teachings of Jesus, but in her sermon Ms. Smith seems to have somehow replaced Christ’s gospel message of love with something else. From a religious perspective, I’m not sure what to call it.

Needless to say, a great number of people whose belief system is totally centered on the moral codes of the Old Testament do not even agree with Ms. Smith’s interpretation as to what is actually being referenced in the Old Testament:

“The Reform Judaism movement, the largest branch of Judaism in North America, has rejected the traditional view of Jewish Law on homosexuality and bisexuality. . . They view Levitical laws as sometimes seen to be referring to prostitution, making it a stand against Jews adopting the idolatrous fertility cults and practices of the neighbouring Canaanite nations rather than a blanket condemnation of same-sex intercourse, homosexuality, or bisexuality. Reform authorities consider that, in light of what is seen as current scientific evidence about the nature of homosexuality and bisexuality as inborn sexual orientations, a new interpretation of the law is required.”

April 10, 2013 at 7:14 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

I resent that Ms. Smith implies that liberals support child sexual abuse, and that in order to come up with an "outrage" around which to build her story she had to misrepresent what actually happened. Homosexuality may be a sin in her sect of Christianity, but thankfully that sect is not the basis of laws in this country. Morality all comes back to how we live together and treat each other, and no religion has a monopoly on moral guidelines.

April 10, 2013 at 7:34 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Ikeithlu says: "I resent that Ms. Smith implies that liberals support child sexual abuse, and that in order to come up with an "outrage" around which to build her story she had to misrepresent what actually happened.”

Yes, Ms. Smith does appear to have a personal agenda. Indeed, her commentary strongly suggests she would be more interested in establishing some of kind dictatorial system of clerical absolutism than protecting our child sexual abuse laws.

As for her anti-liberal implications, I believe most people who are familiar with our child sexual abuse laws are fully aware of the history of our laws and the key role that “liberals” played in establishing these child sexual abuse laws:

“Prior to 1974, the federal government played a useful but minor role in child protection. The Children's Bureau was founded in 1912, but the Bureau paid little attention to maltreatment until the 1960s. The Social Security Act of 1935, as amended in 1962, provided money to expand child welfare services.

Yet, as late as 1973, U.S. Senator Walter Mondale wrote, "Nowhere in the Federal Government could we find one official assigned full time to the prevention, identification and treatment of childabuse and neglect.

Due in substantial measure to Mondale's efforts, Congress assumed a leadership role with passage of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 1974 (CAPTA).29 CAPTA authorized federal funds to improve the state response to physical abuse, neglect, and sexual abuse.”

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/insights_law_society/ChildProtectionHistory.authcheckdam.pdf

April 10, 2013 at 12:07 p.m.
conservative said...

A liberal will never like a Conservative, for darkness hates light and evil hates good.

"If you just set out to be liked, you would be prepared to compromise on anything at any time and you would achieve nothing." Margaret Thatcher

April 10, 2013 at 1 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

A liberal will never like a Conservative

Thank Dog. Now I can sleep at night.

April 10, 2013 at 1:03 p.m.
conservative said...

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Isaiah 5:20 KJV

April 10, 2013 at 5:02 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

So what do you make of these guys, conservative? Not TROO Christians?

http://www.thechristianleftblog.org/1/post/2013/04/christianity-done-right.html

April 10, 2013 at 5:11 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Good post, lkeithlu. I came across that article yesterday and was pleasantly surprised. Dr. King also engaged in liberal activism, the likes of which we haven't seen since his death. He was a passionate Christian and as unabashedly liberal as anyone could possibly be. But I guess that, in the con-man's eyes, he is burning in hell now, because true Christians cannot be liberals. I think that's in the con-man's Bible somewhere. C'mon, con-man, quote us some scripture that tells us that God is a Republican and all liberals are going to hell. Or is God a libertarian? Whatever. Anything but liberal, right?

April 10, 2013 at 6:14 p.m.
conservative said...

There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.Proverbs 14:12 KJV

April 10, 2013 at 6:17 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Contrary to popular belief, we all die eventually.

Your proverb is bullsh!t, conservative.

April 10, 2013 at 6:26 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

That was pretty lame, con-man. I know you can come up with something better. C'mon...put those cherry-picking fingers to work and give us something with a little more hell-fire-and-brimstone liberal-loathing meat to it than that.

April 10, 2013 at 6:29 p.m.
chet123 said...

HA HA HA HA.....DONT YOU JUST LOVE THESE BIBLE THUMPERS...HA HA...THEY ALL FOR THE BIBLE UNTIL IT POINT A FINGER AT THEM.

ROBIN SMITH IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT....NOW SHE GETS ON HER SOAP-BOX AND GIVE LECTURE ABOUT MORALS HA HA HA

SERVING AS CHAIRWOMAN OF TENNESSEE-REPUBLICAN PARTY DISQUALIFIED HER AS A MORAL AUTHORTY.....THIS IS WHAT IS SAD!!!!WHEN A WOMAN LIKE HERSELF DONT REALIZE HER INCONSISTENCIES AND FLAWS.....REPRESENTING HERSELF AS A GOODY-TWO SHOES HA HA HA HA WHILE AT THE SAME TIME IN BED WITH THE RICH AND GREEDY....MAYBE SHE NEED TO ADOPT ALL THE TEACHING OF THE BIBLE(BOOK OF AMOS)GOD HAVE ALWAYS BROUGHT JUDGEMNET AND DESTRUCTION ON THOSE WHO HAVE TURN BLIND EYE TO GREED.....THOSE WHO TAKE ADVANTAGES OF WORKING CLASS PEOPLE AND THE POOR....THE BIBLE SPEAKS AGAINST IT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT AND THE NEW TESTAMENT.....

BUT MRS GOODY TWO SHOES IRNORE THAT FACT....Hmmmmmmm HOW CONVENIENT HA HA

IF THIS LADY WAS SERIOUS SHE WOULD OPT OUT THE SYSTEM AND BECOME AN AMNIST....OH NO....SHE WANT IT BOTH WAYS....HA HA HA WHAT A PHONY,WHAT A HYPOCRITE.....AND SO MANY SUCKERS DRINKING THE KOOL-AID HA HA HA

AND YOU CALL YOURSELF A RELIGiOUS RELATIVIST...HA HA HA HA...GOOD TRY ROBIN...."BUT I GOT YOU"

April 16, 2013 at 12:58 p.m.
dmitri66 said...

she looks frigid.

May 4, 2013 at 12:35 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.