By Jonathon Van Maren
November 10, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – Over the past two decades, it has slowly dawned on Christians that the implications of same-sex “marriage” are far greater for those who still believe in the traditional understanding of marriage than even the cynics first thought possible. The politicians, the academics, and the media have reached the collective conclusion that if gay “marriage” is a civil right, those who oppose it are not simply dissenters holding to a two-thousand-year-old tradition, but ugly bigots who deserve to be marginalized for their discriminatory views. Thus, “live and let live” turned into “you will be forced to participate and approve,” with bakers, florists, property owners, and adoption agencies finding themselves to be the targets of gay activists who show a shocking ruthlessness in their enthusiasm for prosecuting supposed thought crimes.
None of this will be news to most of you, but the impact of radical reinvention of our social structures is beginning to impact Christian communities in ways that are striking even closer to home. There is the fact that public schools across Canada (and many places in the United States) are beginning to implement sex education that runs directly contrary to the beliefs of many traditionalist communities—and governments are beginning to eye Christian and private schools as unwelcome havens of dissenting thought and education. And worse: Christian parents and foster parents are increasingly finding themselves “disqualified” from adopting children or taking children into their homes because of their views.
I’ve spoken to many prospective parents and foster parents over the last several years who were either overtly rejected as a result of their views on sexuality, or otherwise found that they were suddenly and abruptly rejected when their views were made known. Often, direct questions are put to Christian parents to find out if they still hold to Christian principles, with the obvious insinuation that answers not fitting with the current progressive ideology will render them unfit to care for children.
Considering the massive shortage of willing foster parents across Canada, this is a rather shocking and blunt move on the part of those in charge of the process: Essentially, Christian parents are being told that their views render them so dangerous that it is better that children desperate for a loving home are still shuffled from place to place rather than come into contact with views that were nearly universal only short decades ago. Such stories are now just beginning to surface in the mainstream media, with an Edmonton, Alberta couple being the latest example. From Canada’s national broadcaster:
An evangelical Christian couple is accusing Alberta of discrimination, claiming their application to adopt a child was rejected over their religious views on gay marriage and homosexuality. The Edmonton married couple say they submitted their application last year and passed a required course for potential adoptive parents.
But during a followup by officials this year, the couple say they ran into trouble when they answered questions about sexuality. The couple say they accept that same-sex marriage is a legal reality, but they don’t support it and believe that homosexuality is wrong.
“The casework supervisor explained that our religious beliefs regarding sexuality were incompatible with the adoption process,” says an affidavit filed in support of an application for a judicial review of the government’s decision.
“The casework supervisor said this stance was the ‘official position of the Alberta government.’ “
The couple said they were also asked how they would deal with a child who was questioning his or her sexuality. They told officials that children should be taught that sexuality should not be experienced or explored until a person is an adult and is married. The couple, who aren’t named in the legal documents, said they treat all people with respect and their views on sexuality would have no bearing on their ability to provide a loving, secure and happy home to a child. They said they never dreamed they would be disqualified from helping children in need because of their religious beliefs.
You’ll notice that the initial myths propagated by those who advocated for the reinvention of marriage are crumbling away. The government does not take a neutral position—after all, it is not only evangelicals who hold to a traditional understanding of marriage. Sikhs, Muslims, mainstream Mormons, Catholics, and Orthodox Jews also reject the progressive reinvention of marriage. Of course, it is so far only Catholics and evangelicals who have found themselves in the crosshairs, and so politicians feel perfectly comfortable smearing and bashing these communities as bigots without feeling as if they are undermining their vacuous virtue-signalling on multiculturalism and immigration. There is now an official “government position,” and those who do not hold it are rapidly becoming second-class citizens.
As I mentioned, I’ve heard many versions of this story over the past several years, and I expect that this will only increase in the coming years. But what is important for Christians to note here is that they are being demonized in a very, very dangerous way. The government’s rejection of Christian homes as loving environments for children is an implicit statement: They are stating that Christians are not fit to raise children—because they are Christian. This is why provincial governments across Canada are making moves to force Christian schools to change thousands of years of doctrine, and this is why Christians must be alert and aware of what is taking place, and engaged in the political process.
After all, if Christian parents are deemed unfit to care for children with nowhere else to go, how long will it be before the government decides that they are unfit to care for any children? What if they decide that any educational institution or homeschooling group that does not adhere to the “government position” can no longer be entrusted with children? What if they decide that parents who hold to Christian principles are damaging their own children because of those principles?
Listen closely to the rhetoric that is being used, and look carefully at the justification politicians like Alberta Premier Rachel Notley are using to make it illegal for parents to be told what their children are doing while at school in the care of government employees. They are already making the case that Christian parents are dangerous. And that, for Christian parents and their children, could turn into an existential threat. It is time that communities that still believe parents have the right to educate their children and pass on their own values to stand up and pay attention. If we don’t, things could get even worse very quickly.
2 thoughts on “Liberals now claim Christian parents are dangerous. This is an existential threat we can’t ignore”
Agree with this article, however I think it beneficial to point out that traditional christian beliefs about marriage and sexuality are not just religious beliefs. They are backed up with science. It is important that when engaging with the world, christians are “as shrewd as serpents and as innocent as doves”. We need to tailor our arguments to our audience (shrewd) without being deceitful (innocent) the apostle Paul before the Sanhedrin in Acts 23 demonstrates this shrewdness and innocence practically.
“Brothers,” Paul replied, “I was not aware that he was the high priest, for it is written: ‘Do not speak evil about the ruler of your people.’” 6Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and others Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, “Brothers, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee. It is because of my hope in the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial.” 7As soon as he had said this, a dispute broke out between the Pharisees and Sadducees, and the assembly was divided.…”.
Articles like this are essential in highlighting the problem. What is now needed are articles detailing what can be done to address the problem. Persecution is coming to the body of Christ and we need to prepare for it – individually, congregation-ally, denominationally, and as the body of Christ irrespective of denominational affiliations. We need articles explaining to Christians what to expect and how to respond. We need legal support set up and for that support mechanism to be made well known. We need practical support systems set up to help individual families and groups for the enemy will target small vulnerable targets first (individual families like the Norwegian christian family who had their children seized, and (like small christian businesses have been targeted ie, the christian baker). In this area, we can learn a thing or two from Jews and Muslims. Jews would set up communities within society when they faced persecution. Muslims know how to rally in numbers when their brethren are targeted (in their eyes). We need to become organized in like manner. We need to have the legal aid available and donation methods established and well known, for our brethren when targeted. We need to look into mass peaceful protest so if they unfairly target one of us, they have to deal legally with all of us. For example, take the Norwegian family who had 5 children seized because a teacher reported concerns about spanking and christian indoctrination. Imagine the difficulty the Norwegian government would have had to deal with if 25% of the Norwegian Christian population had marched and camped to Parliament house, demanding to be arrested for they support the christian parents rights. There is power in numbers, but numbers can only be achieved by organization and prior commitment. I see plenty of posts revealing the problem, I dont see anyone making any concerted effort (bar small alternative political parties and lobbyist groups) to mobilise the christian populace in peaceful civil disobedience to unjust actions and laws. For further information read Non violent action by christian Author, Ronald J Sider. In it he explains several successful mass peaceful civil disobedience movements around the world that have been successful. I dont agree with everything he advocates but the fundamental ideas are there to be developed for specific countries.