Not my ox

I grew up in Texas in the late 1960s. Jim Crow laws had been abolished, and black Americans living in the South were winning political offices and calling for the end of the remnants of official racial discrimination.

I remember older Texans who were astonished at the upheaval in their world brought about by these changes. Some were angry and confused. Why did blacks complain so much about the old social order? Don't those people know what is good for them? It's not like slavery is still around. What is wrong with those people?

I thought about those old-line Southerners I had known in my childhood when I read this column by William McKenzie today. McKenzie's column is about what he believes is a misunderstanding by both conservatives and liberals about the nature and scope of religious liberty in the USA. Specifically, McKenzie feels that liberals are wrong when they fail to understand opposition to the Obama Administration's HHS mandate on reproductive services, and conservatives are wrong by trying to assert what he refers to as "religious privilege". I think McKenzie was trying to suggest that deep down the two are one and the same.

Sorry, no. The HHS mandate is a specific issue about a specific set of laws, and whatever your opinion you can point to specific evidence to support it. But McKenzie's vague, blanket statement that conservative evangelicals are trying to assert religious privilege - well, he paints with a pretty broad brush while citing no specific evidence to back it up. I cannot buy into his thesis that the two must be connected.

In fact, the only attempt by McKenzie to prove what he says is accurate is this statement by William Lawrence, dean of SMU's Perkins School of Theology:

“Crusades have been launched in support of a child who wanted to distribute candy canes in the Christmas season and a teenage high school valedictorian who wanted to offer a prayer rather than a speech. The crusades raise attention and money on the pretext that the freedom of religion in America is under attack.

”Actually, what these crusaders have recognized – but will not admit – is that religious privilege is under attack. The Constitution of the United States protects religious freedom, but it also prohibits religious privilege.“

Really? Complaints about encroachments on religious freedom constitute a crusade (Lawrence's word) to establish religious privilege? It is true that America has more religious freedom that (say) Pakistan, but if you are the one who is targeted by the anti-Christian zealots it is not a minor affair after all.

I don't expect to be able to convince Mr. McKenzie or Dr. Lawrence that conservative evangelicals might conceivably have a valid point. It is not their ox which is being gored. Why should Mr. McKenzie or Dr. Lawrence sympathize with those people like Julea Ward, who was dismissed from a graduate counseling program because of her religious objection to homosexuality? Or Ken Howell, who was fired from his position as an adjunct professor at the University of Illinois for stating the Catholic Church's position on homosexuality? Or any of the growing number of Americans who have been harassed, dismissed, or fired for remain true to the Christian faith?

Sadly, I suspect that until Mr. McKenzie or Dr. Lawrence find themselves discriminated against, they will continue to wonder what is wrong with those people.

Update on Dr. Kenneth Howell

The University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana has relented and will allow Dr. Kenneth Howell to teach on Catholicism. Dr. Howell, a popular teacher, was fired for expressing the views of the Catholic Church in a class about Catholicism.

This case was truly bizarre. It made as much sense as firing a physics professor for talking about General Relativity, or a history professor for mentioning the Civil War. Likely the humiliating publicity caused the university to back down.

Make no mistake about it: at many public universities the long knives are out for Christians and any who would defend them. The princes of this world are jealous of their power.

Update on Dr. Kenneth Howell

Alliance Defense Fund attorneys have sent a letter to the University of Illinois protesting the firing of Dr. Howell because of he religious beliefs.

There are some Christians who believe that "separation of church and state" means humbly accepting every decision handed down by governments. This is not true. For the time being, Christians still have civil liberties. It is no sin to protest an unjust decision by a university that has violated its own professed belief in freedom of speech.

Remember: the world will judge Christians by their own standards. So what is wrong with pointing out that the world cannot live up to its own standards? Firing Dr. Howell was the antithesis - not the affirmation - of what the secular world professes to believe. For Christians, turning the other cheek does not mean turn away from the truth.

Witness to the faith: Ken Howell

Ken Howell, an adjunct professor at the University of Illinois who taught courses on Catholicism, was fired for stating that he believed that homosexuality is immoral. The charge that such beliefs constitute a "hate crime" is rapidly becoming the weapon of choice for the suppression of views and beliefs that happen to annoy the rich and powerful few.

The day is coming in the United States when disagreeing with state-approved religious beliefs (homosexuality, environmentalism, feminism, etc.) will be punishable by firing - or worse. More and more will suffer Ken Howell's fate.

Many American Christians have watched the persecution of Christians in Communist and Muslim countries and have breathed a prayer, "Thank God we have freedom here!" That freedom is slowly but inexorably coming to an end as the princes of this world flex their muscle and crack down on those they view as enemies.

It is safe to say that on the University of Illinois campus one could find a course or two in which tactics of the late Senator Joseph McCarthy are denounced as a dark and sinister threat to American civil liberties. Ironically, the University of Illinois has taken a page out of McCarthy's book in adopting its own blacklist and eliminating professors who will not swear an oath of fealty to the state religious belief of homosexuality.

UPDATE: (4:00 PM 7/10/10) The AP article states that Howell was recognized in 2008 and 2009 for being an outstanding teacher.

Then there is this:

Cary Nelson, president of the American Association of University Professors, said professors should be able to tell students their own views and even argue in favor of them, provided students can disagree without being penalized.

"It's part of intellectual life to advocate for points of view," said Nelson, an emeritus English professor at the University of Illinois. "Hopefully when they go out in the world, they can emulate that. They can argue a case, and do it in a well-informed and articulate way, and can make a more productive contribution to our democracy that way."

Shouldn't secular universities like the University of Illinios live up to their pledges to be places of free and open inquiry, free from discrimination and hostility towards the opinions of others?