Is This Not Tyranny?

Is This Not Tyranny?

tyranny alertDiane Robertson

Tyranny is defined as cruel and oppressive government or rule, or cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control. Countries that embrace religious freedom are typically free from tyranny, while those nations who insist on certain beliefs lean toward tyranny.

Nations with a state enforced religion such as Saudi Arabia or communist nations where established religions are banned like China, offer little to no religious freedom.

In the most tyrannical countries in the world, the one thing the government can never enforce or stifle is thought and belief. Unless a person declares or publicizes their thoughts and beliefs, laws can have no hold over them. Everyone in the entire world can believe or think what they will.

With the exception of violent acts, for a nation to be free of tyranny, that nation must allow the people to speak their mind and act on their beliefs without punishment. Man is only free when he can live according to his conscience.

Religious freedom has been the norm in the western world for more than two centuries. However, things are changing. Due to mass embracing of secularism and “sexual rights” in these nations, those freedoms are rapidly eroding.

Laws have been made and enforced that disallow people to speak or act on certain beliefs.

In my state, the legislature is working on forming a law that will allow the LGBT community protections for housing while still allowing people to live according to their beliefs. I like this sort of compromise. But as I started reading comments from a local online newspaper, I realized that many people do not want a compromise. Many comments were along these lines:

“Offering exemptions for discrimination on religious grounds is immoral.”

“If their ‘line of work’ is the wedding industry perhaps they should choose a line of work more suited to their belief system.”

“Religious leaders already have religious protections, its called the 1st Amendment… if you give people the right to discriminate outside of an religious organizations, you’ll open a can of worms that will be headed for court, wasting tax payer dollars in the mean time on a court case that won’t win.”

“Really? Have your “marriage beliefs” been outlawed? Not in the least; you can still believe anything you want, you just can’t use your beliefs against your customers. It is not the business of a business to make value judgements about their customers.”

 

There are hundreds such comments from people who feel like freedom to think or believe something should be enough, unless it is what they think or believe— they want the right to act on their beliefs. In fact, they want the government to enforce people to act only according to an approved set of actions– theirs. Well give the government something to regulate and enough people telling them to do so and the government will.

Today many people who dare to disclose their beliefs or act on them are in trouble. They are being fired from their jobs, fined absurd amounts of money, and forced to undergo change of belief training, politely called “sensitivity” training.

A judicial magistrate in England has been suspended for privately stating his belief that children need a mother and a father. According to the Daily Mail:

“Richard Page told colleagues behind closed doors during an adoption case that he thought it would be better for a child to be brought up in a traditional family rather than by a gay couple.

He was shocked a week later when he found he had been reported to the judges’ watchdog for alleged prejudice, and was suspended from sitting on family court cases.

He has also been ordered to go on an equality course before he is allowed back in the courtroom.”

We have all heard about Baronelle Stutzman, the Christian florist being sued by her State Attorney General for referring a gay couple to another florist for the couple’s wedding. And then there’s the photographer in New Mexico, and the bakers in Colorado and Oregon.

There’s also the CEO of Firefox fired for donating to his state’s marriage amendment campaign.

A couple in New York had to pay a fine and undergo sensitivity training for refusing to use the home they lived in for gay wedding ceremonies, and a police officer in Utah was fired for asking to direct traffic instead of performing motorcycle stunts in the Gay Pride Parade.

Is this not cruel and oppressive rule or unreasonable, and arbitrary use of power or control? Is this not the definition of tyranny?

It certainly knows no bounds. Those enforcing this new sexual secularism in our nations will say, “if your religion does not allow you to do what I say, then just change your line of work.” But as time goes, it becomes clearer and clearer that no line of work is exempted. Judges, lawyers, doctors, school teachers, business owners of all sorts, and even computer programmers have not been exempted. No one is exempt. It’s clear that if these sexual secularists could find a way for the government to regulate thought and belief, they would. In the meantime, they are doing what they can to intimidate all who do not believe as they do, and to do only what they approve.

 

 

1Comment
  • Phil S
    Posted at 23:44h, 27 May Reply

    Does anyone really believe in freedom of religion, that is, in the right for someone to practice the beliefs of their faith? Consider the ancient religions that required human sacrifice – clearly very few would say that those people can practice their beliefs. This is an extreme example, but clearly illustrates the fact that really people who claim to believe in religious freed only mean the freedom to practice any set of beliefs that do not violate the cultural laws of the society in which they live. Sexual secularists are not so much restricting religious freedom as they are changing the cultural laws of our society and consequently the set of acceptable beliefs (religious or secular).

Post A Comment

eight + fifteen =