by

News/Politics 5-26-15

What’s interesting in the news today?

Open Thread

1. The tolerant jeweler and his impure thoughts……

From NationalReview  “In the American Conservative yesterday, Rod Dreher related the following story:

So, a Canadian Christian jeweler custom-made a pair of engagement rings for a lesbian couple, Nicole White and Pam Renouf, at their request. Later, when they found out that the jeweler personally opposes same-sex marriage, they went to pieces and demanded their money back. The couple now believes the rings they ordered will have been tainted by having been fashioned by jeweler Esau Jardon’s hands, given what impure thoughts he holds in his mind.

One could be forgiven for wondering how we are all supposed to keep up. Last month, as Indiana’s rather tame religious-freedom legislation was being torched by the mob, America’s more devout dissenters were informed that the price of participation in the marketplace was the subjugation of one’s conscience to one’s Caesar. “You can’t opt out of the law,” the agitators explained. “This isn’t the Jim Crow South!” Their core message? That if we all keep quiet about our views — and if we treat commercial transactions as commercial transactions — nobody will end up getting hurt. Or, put another way: “Cater my wedding, you bigot.”

In Dreher’s story, alas, the opposite case appears to obtain. “We can’t be expected to honor our contracts with companies that disagree with us,” the outraged couple is arguing, “for that might taint our nuptials.” The new message? That we can’t all get along by keeping quiet, but instead need to positively affirm one another or face the consequences. Or, put another way: “Even if I ask you to, don’t cater my wedding, you bigot.”

Would that the agitators could settle on a strategy.”

______________________________________

2. Disarming the PC police with a pre-apology. 

From HotAir  “It seems ever since #GamerGate kicked off last August the PC police have begun lashing out in every direction as if to compensate for their inability to cower gamers back into line.  Just a few days ago Jazz covered how an implied rape scene in the most recent Game of Thrones episode created an uproar, even though the show is full of nudity, sex, and of course, gratuitous and graphic violence against everybody.  “Never mind all that brutal murder, off-screen rape is where I draw the line!”

Just a couple weeks earlier there was a backlash against Avengers: Age of Ultron because Black Widow’s desire to have children apparently undermines her character in a way the skin-tight leather suit never did.  There was so much vitriol sent Joss Whedon’s way for this that when he left Twitter, everyone assumed angry feminists drove him off.  He later told BuzzFeedthat was not the reason despite his explanation sounding quite a bit like it was.” “And it goes on and on. Scientists wear unacceptable shirts. Star Wars fans are racist for wondering about that black Stormtrooper. Yahoo even has people complaining that the new Supergirl series’ trailer is too girly and therefore sexist.

“Well, Jurassic World star Chris Pratt decided he’s not waiting to be accused of some kind of -ism for a comment during the upcoming press junket for that film.  Instead, he issued a terribly amusing pre-apology on his Facebook page:

I want to make a heartfelt apology for whatever it is I end up accidentally saying during the forthcoming ‪#‎JurassicWorld‬ press tour. I hope you understand it was never my intention to offend anyone and I am truly sorry. I swear. I’m the nicest guy in the world. And I fully regret what I (accidentally will have) said in (the upcoming foreign and domestic) interview(s).

Has it really come to this?

______________________________________

3. Cutting member benefits while spending big on politics/politicians.  

From TheWashingtonTimes  “The Teamsters have begun informing retirees and current workers that their pension benefits may soon be cut, the final ironic twist to a lobbying campaign that saw the union spend its own members’ dollars to win the right to shrink their retirement pay.

The somber notifications began going out from the Teamsters Central States Health and Welfare Pension Fund this spring, a decision that could ultimately affect 410,000 current pension participants and a total of more than 10 million U.S. workers nationwide. Cuts could begin as early as next year.

The cuts were made possible after the lame-duck Congress late last year passed the Multiemployer Pension Reform Act (MPRA), enabling any multiemployer pension fund to cut benefits to workers and current retirees if the plan is underfunded by at least 20 percent.”

“The Teamsters pension fund has been struggling with severe shortages for years, even as the union continued to pour millions of dollars into political election efforts and Washington lobbying.

In 2014 alone, the union and its affiliates spent nearly $5.9 million on lobbying and political contributions, and one of its main legislative targets was passage of the pension reform law that finally gave it the right to start reducing benefits, according to the lobbying reports it filed with Congress.”

How convenient! 

______________________________________

13 thoughts on “News/Politics 5-26-15”

  5. On #1, a single anecdote does not a movement make. I do wish American political figures would stop using Canada as some kind of bogeyman to scare their followers. I find most of them have precious little understanding of Canadian culture and thus totally misinterpret events. I would point out, that as private citizens of a democratic country with a free market economy, those lesbians were exercising their prerogative to take their business where they pleased. We may find their reason abhorrent; but they were doing the same thing Christians do all the time, boycotting a company whose moral code they strongly disagreed with.

    Like

    Reply

  6. Kirsten Powers on the issue:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/05/26/christian-marriage-davage-rhetoric-column/27960079/

    ______________________

    ” …. This incident happened in Canada, but anyone who has been paying attention knows this could have easily happened in the U.S., where lack of affirmation of one’s beliefs is increasingly being cast as an act of aggression. We all remember the national Chick-fil-A meltdown, as if one can’t enjoy a chicken sandwich without ideological synchronicity with the owner of a restaurant.

    “It’s a zero-sum mentality that distills human beings to their least popular political, ideological or religious beliefs. Evangelical Pastor Louie Giglio — who was forced to withdraw from praying at President Obama’s second inauguration — was reduced to a homophobe and bigot after a liberal blog unearthed a 20-year-old sermon on homosexuality, while his current-day heroic work as a leader fighting for sex trafficking victims was regarded as a biographical footnote…..

    “More recently, the conservative Media Research Center launched a petition demanding ABC cancel a planned sitcom produced by columnist and LGBT-rights activist Dan Savage because he is ‘a hateful anti-Christian bigot.’ Savage can be a rhetorical bomb thrower (I’ve had my own run-ins with him), but he has also apologized for some of the comments that have put him in MRC’s crosshairs. Had he not, the petition would still be ill-advised. Christians should argue their case in the public square, not attempt to silence their critics with the exact same tactics they complain about when used against them (i.e. disagreement equals ‘bigotry’). …. We need to get back to the idea of tolerating differences and debating ideas in the public square. Perhaps it’s time for both sides to give the ‘bigot’ bomb a rest.”
    __________________________________

    Like

    Reply

  7. Roscuro,

    “I would point out, that as private citizens of a democratic country with a free market economy, those lesbians were exercising their prerogative to take their business where they pleased. We may find their reason abhorrent; but they were doing the same thing Christians do all the time, boycotting a company whose moral code they strongly disagreed with.”

    Not exactly……..

    Most of the Christians I know who boycott do so before making purchases. They don’t give them their money first and then demand a refund after the fact, as these lesbians have done.

    From the original Canadian story……

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/jewelry-store-sign-prompts-same-sex-couple-to-ask-for-refund-1.3077192

    “They just said that that’s their beliefs, and they think they can put up whatever they want. I just said it was very disrespectful, it’s very unprofessional and I wanted a refund,” White said.

    “I have no issues with them believing in what they believe in. I think everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. But I don’t think they should put their personal beliefs inside their business.”

    White and Renouf hope to get a refund when the man who sold them the rings returns to town next month — but it’s not guaranteed.”
    ————————————————–

    And the only people I see looking for a bogeyman are the 2 lesbians. And as the intolerant left always does, they found one, and the public “lynching” is already on.

    “Jardon said he’s getting a big backlash from social media.

    “I had to shut down the Facebook page because of so many hate emails and phone calls and just, really nasty stuff,” he said.

    When asked if he would offer a refund to the couple, Jardon said he won’t be bullied into apologizing for his beliefs or to work for free.

    He said the finished rings are ready to be picked up; White and Renouf just have to pay the balance.”
    ————————————————-

    So what exactly did the American press or politicians misrepresent?

    Like

    Reply

  8. Roscuro, I think the difference in #1 is that the goods were already paid for (that’s my gathering from reading only the snippet here). Maybe asking for money back is a *form* of boycott, but it’s different from simply choosing a different place for business. There’s a gay agenda; it’s certainly out there. In Canada, too! I don’t think pointing to this story is especially outrageous in making its point about motives behind that agenda.

    Like

    Reply

  11. But I should say that I agree with Roscuro’s point that one incident does not a movement make. How often have we heard or read someone holding up some bad act by a Christian to paint us all with the same broad brush?

    Having said that, I also agree that this can be a harbinger of things to come. We are being judged now not only on our actions, but also on our thoughts. Holding the “wrong” opinion can make one a pariah. As we all know, some have even lost their jobs for being on the wrong side of this debate.

    Like

    Reply

  12. The significance of the story – it isn’t just the American Conservative that is exaggerating the story (from the CBC quotes, the couple doesn’t sound as if they are in pieces or that they think the jeweler’s thoughts are impure – they admit his right to his beliefs); the Huffington Post made it sound as if the jeweler put up the sign just to insult the couple. The CBC on the other hand, reported both sides of the story quite even-handedly, going at length to quote the jeweler’s convictions as well as the lesbians’ concerns; and it only made their site as a local news story. The couple made an effort to get attention, but it petered out completely – they sounded almost sheepish when they got their deposit back: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/jewelry-store-to-refund-engagement-ring-deposit-to-same-sex-couple-1.3078557 Good for the jeweler, by the way, he went the extra mile; and he can use the jewels and metal on another piece. Quite a little tempest in a teacup – CBC didn’t even think it worth opening the comment board, which they did when they reported on the Christian graduate who thought she was discriminated against in the hiring process for her beliefs on marriage. That turned out to be a non-story too – the supposed tourism company who insultingly turned her down was a front for a seamier business and other women (non-Christians) had also been insulted on applying for the job.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  13. Karen, believing in marriage between a man and a woman may make you a social pariah to the in crowd, but that isn’t anything new. If you lived in Islamic West Africa, they would mock you for your belief in monogamy. Men there are pressured to take more than one wife. I can think of a Christian opinion which most people find far more offensive to be expressed to them: that they are sinners before a holy God, they are destined for eternal punishment, and only believing in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, can save them. That has a universal offensiveness to it, and people try to shut it down all the time. As Russell Moore points out in his most recent post, it is that position which has been muffled by the outward assumption of nominal Christianity by the West, and now that Christianity is no longer fashionable, can again be proclaimed clearly: http://www.russellmoore.com/2015/05/26/is-america-post-christian/

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a comment