Monthly Archives: February 2014

On Why The Anti-Gay Arizona Bill Is Not Based on Religious Freedom But Prejudice

Anderson Cooper interviewed Arizona state senator Al Melvin who voted for SB-1062 Monday night. The proposed legislation allows businesses to exercise their religious freedom to not service LGBT citizens. Senator Melvin states that the bill, ” is nothing more or less than protecting religious freedom in our state.” Cooper made the point that Arizona does not have any laws that protect LGBT citizens from discrimination, so why does Arizona need a law that specifically allows businesses to discriminate against LGBT citizens? Senator Melvin concedes the point but still argues that the bill is “not a discrimination bill but a religious freedom bill”.

Paraphrasing, Cooper responds that since Jesus was against divorce in the Bible, then shouldn’t Arizona propose a bill that allows businesses to discriminate against divorced people? Moreover, Cooper argues that Jesus never actually mentions gay people in the Bible. Senator Melvin does not accept Cooper’s point about divorced people and still repeats the same thing about how the bill is promoting religious freedom and is not based on discrimination.

The problem with proposing legislation based on “religious freedom” is that it is often motivated by people’s prejudices. Most people cherry pick parts of their religion that best fit their beliefs and biases. Senator Melvin and his supporters chose to pick parts in the Bible that rejects LGBT people because they are prejudiced against LGBT people. However, they conveniently ignored the parts in the Bible that explicitly said divorce is immoral. There is a fair argument to make about the state undermining religious freedom by not allowing church establishments or congregations but this is clearly not the case. This is discrimination based on prejudice and cloaked by religion, pure and simple.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

My Blog on Bill Nye and Ken Ham Debating Evolution vs Creationism

I just finished watching the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham on evolution vs creationism. I think a revealing moment was at 2 hours and 4 minutes into the debate when the moderator asked Ham, “What if anything would ever change your mind”. Paraphrasing, Ham’s response was “I’m a Christian and as a Christian I can’t prove to you God has definitely shown me very clearly through his word that the bible is the word of God…..”. While Bill Nye responded with “We just need one piece of evidence…”.

These answers show two very distinct viewpoints of the world. Ham will hold onto his beliefs regardless of the evidence, in other words he will believe in creationism no matter what the evidence may show. While Nye forms his beliefs based on evidence.

How can you debate someone who will believe in something regardless of the evidence? I guess Nye’s motive was to show people who are more moderate how absurd Ham’s position was.

Leave a comment

February 8, 2014 · 3:11 pm