The point is not whether you disagree with the policies and actions of the Christian groups. My point, instead, is that Christians in the U.S. face intellectual persecution which plays itself in discrimination against Christians.
> 2011 IVCF policies and gays
Is it discrimination for a Republican group on campus to disallow Democrats from being elected as their chairperson? Is it discrimination for antifascist group on campus to have a policy that Nazis are not allowed to be elected as leaders? Discrimination gets tricky, just like freedom of speech. We advocate freedom of speech, but then we discriminate against hate speech, racist speech, etc. With freedom of speech goes the understanding that hate speech and racist speech is not tolerated as part of it. Someone who spouts racist or hate speech as a TV commentator is fired, but we don't think of that as discrimination (technically it is, but civilly it is not).
So why should a Christian group not have a policy that one has to subscribe to Christian principles to be in leadership there? If they disallow or discriminate against gays attending, that's one thing, but it makes sense that to be a leader in an organization one should be required to subscribed to the basic tenets of their raison d'être.
> The school would have done the same thing if Christians where discriminated against by any other organisation
This is not true, and this is my point. Christians often get discriminated against. That was inherent in my list.
> This was to protect against discrimination
It went far beyond "protection against discrimination." It's simply a slanderous lie that "religious liberty" is a code for discrimination, intolerance, racism, etc. This is a very bigoted, biased, and false position on the part of the Commission.
> in the stupid cake case
But you'll notice that the Supreme Court showed how the action against the bakers was discriminatory.
> SPLC
Their policy and the quote by Potok betrays an aggressive position of hate speech and discrimination against Christians. I don't have a link to it. I wrote it down when it happened.
I found this here (
https://www.wnd.com/2017/07/southern-po ... hristians/): "Richard Cohen, the president of SPLC, which has been linked to a domestic terror attack, wrote in a Huffington Post commentary that Christians deserve the designation because they 'sow the seeds of hate.' ”
> an organisation is incharge of savings people's lives trust is important and someone holding belief that make it hard to trust is a problem
Are you claiming that a person who holds to a traditional view of marriage can't be trusted as a fire official?
> Shoe on other foot, if someone wrote a book on how Christians are vile, vulgar and inappropriate that will make it difficult for him to be trusted with savings people with such a view point
But the man did no such thing. He didn't write that anyone was vile, vulgar, or inappropriate, but only that he believed in traditional marriage. Isn't it part of American values that we are free to hold different opinions? Kelvin Cochran didn't denigrate anyone. You may think I'm an idiot because I'm a Christian. So what—you shouldn't lose your job over it. I value Christianity and you don't. So what? Cochran values traditional marriage, and other value alternate sexual preferences. So what? Welcome to America.
But no, he was FIRED. Fired for writing about Christian values. No discrimination, no denigration, no hate speech.
In my opinion, this is discrimination against Christians, since apparently it was the opinion of this court that we are not entitled to our beliefs. Interestingly, the US District Court upheld the firing, but also ruled that the City's rules were unconstitutional. Go figure.
But the point here is not whether you think these actions against Christians were legitimate (if you are a secular humanist, I would expect you to perceive Christians as discriminatory because we don't follow the culture's value system). The point, instead, is that Christians are under increased physical attack, court rulings, business bigotry, and cultural marginalization and exclusion—and all this is growing in the past decade. Before that, people may have disagreed with Christians, but we were allowed our religious liberty. Now, increasingly, we are not, and it's mostly because we believe that homosexuality is not God's design. It's not homophobia or discrimination, but a value based on what we consider to be truth.
A belief is different from discrimination. Chick-Fil-A, for instance, hires gays and serves gays, so where is the discrimination? Chick-Fil-A has a corporate policy of “We embrace all people, regardless of religion, race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation or gender identity.” So where is the discrimination? There is none.
Part of the wonder of pluralism and tolerance is that I do not discriminate against hiring or serving someone despite my beliefs. It works because my beliefs, though held with conviction, don’t dictate my obligation to give employment and service to people with other belief systems.
Chick-Fil-A is not a hate group just because they have Christian beliefs. They are only a hate group if they show hate, which they do not. They are not discriminatory if they don’t discriminate. Chick-Fil-A doesn’t require that all other businesses in the airport or campus share their values and beliefs. It doesn’t require that all employees share their beliefs, nor that all customers share their beliefs. THOSE would be discrimination. In actuality, in these cases it is those who are refusing to do business with Chick-Fil-A who are guilty of discrimination. They are using their belief system as the basis to shut out a business with a different belief system merely on the basis of those beliefs, but not for any discriminatory policies or actions.
The culture is ramping up its discrimination and hatred against Christians. That's what my list was about.