Dale Courtney’s Right-Mind blog features a story from World Net Daily about a proposed requirement that Arizona attorneys not allow any religious beliefs about homosexuality to interfere with their proper representation of gay clients. Here’s a comment from the blog, warning of the slippery slope just ahead:
“More progress for the homosexuals marching toward the reaching the inevitable goal of equal rights and protections under the law.”
Equal rights and protections for gays?
Imagine that — Asking that lawyers do their best to advocate for civil and legal justice for clients, even for those clients who they believe to be in sin. To the Christian who embraces a conservative interpretation of Scripture, that would include defending the rights of racists and bigots, the un-Biblically divorced, young people who aren’t virgins, people who weren’t virgins before they married and are unconcerned by it, drunks, drug users, men who abuse their wives, women who beat their kids, people who can’t pay off their credit cards, and people like me who sometimes swear like sailors. I’d like to avoid the attorney who screens her clients through the Law before working with them. On the other hand, she’d probably want to avoid me.
All of us are guaranteed legal rights and equal protection under the law; all of us are, or should be, held equally accountable when we are found guilty of breaking the law. No one is asking the Arizona attorneys to engage in homosexual behavior, hang out in gay bars, march in Pride parades, or even like those who do. They can still believe, if Scripture compels them to, that homosexual activity is sinful. Presumably, they find the behavior of the drug users they defend sinful as well — and yet they uphold the law and advocate for its fair application for their clients.
Sorry, but I’m not upset about this. Evangelical theologian Dr. William Webb concludes in his book, “Slaves, Women, and Homosexuals,” that the Bible does teach the sinfulness of all sexual activity outside of heterosexual marriage. He adds, however, that “Within a pluralistic society, such as we experience today, Christians should actually defend the rights and freedoms of homosexuals to live out their beliefs. We should not legally impose our sexual ethic on others.” (Webb, 2001, p. 40)
I’ve met Webb, and he’s as gracious as he is brilliant. If Dale or any of his Moscow readers would like to borrow his book, I’d be grateful to loan it out. A proper exegesis of Scripture goes a long way toward reducing fear that “they” might be as safe in the world as we are.
I’m interested that Mr. Courtney now considers it inevitable that “homosexuals” will achieve equal protection under the law. Is this an admission of defeat? How curious! Abandon hope all pre-millennialists who enter Dale’s blog!
Whatever it is, I’m glad of it. Long may the Arizona attorneys treat each and every one of their clients as equals. I could never hope to match your Biblical argument, Keely, but I can say, “March on U. S. Constitution!”
Comment by Joan — January 5, 2009 @ 3:42 am
Thanks for reading, Joan. Yeah, I’d say that of all the scary things on the horizon, a requirement that attorneys treat each of their clients fairly, even if they’re dismayed by “lifestyle” issues, is pretty low on the list. And I’d say the post-millennialists, those who hope to usher in the Christianized society that will lead to Christ’s return, are feeling a bit chagrined. Tyler, Texas, must be a lonely place these days! Keely
Comment by Keely Emerine Mix — January 5, 2009 @ 7:45 pm