Well I am overly caffeinated and the only thing on the idiot box is Dune. And while that is a temptation to be sure (The spice must flow!). But it has been a week since I have written on the blog and I know that you probably want a wrap of the week’s events so here is Frenetic Friday.
So let’s talk about California and in specific some of the new laws. Assembly bill 2943 is a bill that if made into law would make it illegal for conversion therapy regarding gender or same-sex attraction calling it a fraudulent practice. So if passed and someone with gender issues or same-sex attractions came to a pastor of a church and asked for help with these issues the pastor by law wouldn’t be able to help the person. In fact you could not even give that person a bible as the words in it could change the mind of the person regarding their issue. (And such were some of you. 1 Cor. 6:11)
Now the bill isn’t going unchallenged of course. Alliance Defending Freedom, the Family Research Council, Liberty Counsel, the American College of Pediatricians, and the Pacific Justice Institute, as well as two pro-conversion-therapy groups, have begun a campaign trying to marshal voters against the bill by declaring it is “anti-Christian” or constitutes a form of government censorship of free speech, even alleging it may be unconstitutional. Some even allege that therapists who agree to see patients who are struggling with their sexual orientation and gender identity may even be prosecuted if the bill becomes law.
Staying with California, venture capitalist Tim Draper has obtained enough signatures to put a proposition on the ballot to split California into three separate states. The state would become Northern California, Southern California, and California. If passed it would have to be signed into law by the Governor and passed into law by the U.S. Congress. However, it must be pointed out that if the state is split into three parts it would still be one conservative, or Republican state to two progressive, or Democrat states. Which would at least give some representation to the Republican minority in the state. <source>
Next we are going across the pond to the UK where gender equality reigns instead of the queen. Case in point: Derbyshire Constabulary Male Voice Choir is an all male choir that has toured for more than sixty years. Comprised of civilians who dress in police tunics and represent the Derbyshire police sourceduring their live performances they are the favorites of small communities and fund-raisers. But all of that is changing.
Because of the requirement of gender equality in the Derbyshire police the current chief constable can’t support an all male choir and so has said they can no longer use the name of “Derbyshire Constabulary” and must quit using the name by June. This has angered some of its members. Because the choirmaster wants to keep the choir the same he has agreed to change the name of the choir rather than change the membership. As of June the choir will be called “Derbyshire Community Male Voice Choir” a name disliked by the members. Along with the name change will come a costume change as the choir will no longer be wearing police tunics. <source>
And army chaplain, a member of the Southern Baptist Church, faces charges because he wouldn’t lead a marriage retreat when a lesbian signed up for it. An army investigator who found out that the Chaplain, Scott Squires had arranged for another chaplain that had different convictions regarding marriage than Chaplain Squires did. Chaplain Squires has explained that N.A.M.B. (North American Mission Board) under whose authority he is, specifically prohibits same-sex weddings or retreats where same-sex couples would be present. Chaplain Squires originally was scheduled to lead the retreat until the same-sex couple signed up for it. And while the retreat took place one of the lesbians file a suit against Chaplain Squire saying that they had been discriminated against.
The army investigator also concluded that the soldier had been discriminated against.
The Army EO policy states that no service will be denied to any member of the Armed Service regardless of race, color, national origin, gender, religious affiliation, or sexual orientation,”
“CH Squires behaved as if his NAMB restrictions superseded [the soldier’s] right to attend the event,” he asserted. “CH Squires should be reprimanded for his failure to include [the soldier] in the initial Strong Bonds Retreat.”
Chaplain Squire’s attorney noted this:
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) specifically prohibits the military from mandating that a chaplain “perform any rite, ritual, or ceremony that is contrary to the conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs of the chaplain.”
“Chaplain Squires should not have his career ruined for following the rules of both his faith and the Army,” said Director of Military Affairs Mike Berry. “Federal law protects Chaplain Squires and prohibits the military from punishing any chaplain who acts in accordance with their religious tenets.”<source>