|
Victims of Political Correctness |
|
|
|
|
Written by Rev Michael Bresciani
|
|
Saturday, 31 March 2007 |
|
Word Count: 869 In the United States it is both legal and perfectly acceptable to say that
homosexuality is not immoral before anyone with an ear to listen. It is also
perfectly acceptable to the hearer or reader of such a statement to agree or
completely disagree with the statement. Or is it?
In fact it is not. While it has not become the law of the land to hold to an
opposing opinion doesn’t mean it cannot be stifled, refused and rejected
depending what platform or what place the assertion is made.
The writer of the aforementioned statement was complaining about the military’s
“don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in regards to homosexuality. He thought it was
wrong to force the homosexual soldier to have to live a lie.
It is impossible to miss yet another double standard here that has emerged with
the ongoing concept of political correctness.
I have written two books and I have hundreds of articles read throughout the
world. I have columns online as well as articles in nationally syndicated
periodicals and I have only had three articles rejected. The reasons, “not
politically correct.” The incorrectness sited was saying that homosexuality was
immoral. No, I wasn’t asked my opinion but I was told I couldn’t “tell” it.
Maybe I need help here but it sounds just like “six of one and a half dozen of
the other” to me.
Being a Christian I cannot espouse or even suggest that homosexuals should be
hated or harmed in any way whatsoever. To harm them would be clearly unlawful
and immoral. It is an opinion not a battleaxe. If it is perceived as one then
the kind of slander and character assassination that passes by political
correctness proponents of the hour might be considered something akin to a
nuclear weapon.
Few Americans have not heard the rantings of Charlie Sheen, Bill Maher, Sean
Penn and Rosie O’Donnell regarding everyone from Jerry Falwell to President
Bush.
The President has been called a murderer, a liar and some names I don’t care to
mention here. None of the chiefs or architects of political correctness had
anything negative to say about these remarks. They are acceptable under PCs one
sided definition. No one was censured for making these remarks and we can assume
no ones written statement was excluded or deleted. Where then is the balance,
where is the fairness, suffice it to say it is conspicuously missing.
Am I on a soap box? As long as my feet are planted here in America, you bet I
am. I’m not mad at homosexuals I am rather quite displeased with the one sided
and unreasonable double standards of political correctness. If that seems hard
to understand remember that even as I write I have in mind previous experiments
with political correctness that miserably failed. To be fair they did much more
than fail because at the peak of its acceptance it cost the lives of millions of
people.
Throughout history there have been despots, rulers and regimes that have decided
what people could say or not say. In modern times that is often referred to as
“the party line.”
Nazi Germany had one, Communism had one and China’s Mao had one. Has the “party
line” shown up in America incognito, perhaps even clandestinely under a
different name?
Do we need to be reminded that when taken seriously forcing people to mouth only
“the party line” can and does cost millions of lives? Joseph Stalin alone is
credited with the death of thirty million of his own countrymen for refusing to
talk the right talk. In many cases their deaths were predicated only on a
perceived truth and not based in proof that they ever spoke a single word
against Stalin’s policies.
The writer of the article previously mentioned in this article has a perfect
right under the constitution to state his opinion and to put it forth with all
argument and reason as he sees fit. Why is it that those with opposing views are
getting censured more and more?
More people then ever are questioning both the meaning and the legality or
constitutionality of the concept of “political correctness”, among them of late
has been highly respected Pastor John Hagee. He too is warning of the dangers of
leaving this threat to freedom unchecked. Others are joining the ranks against
this precursor to thought policing and I stand with them.
Suffice it to say that believers in the Christian faith that take their Bible
seriously won’t be saying a lot of things that can be considered “politically
correct.” The Bible has a message that can’t be put into such a confining slot.
The message of the Bible is neither modern nor ancient altogether but falls into
the realm of the eternal. It holds a message for all times. Christ said “Heaven
and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.” Luke 21:33
Rev Bresciani is a Christian author and columnist. His articles on many
important subjects are now read in every corner of the globe. For a list of
subjects and news from around the world visit
http://www.americanprophet.org
|
Read Articles 
![7,825,897 [Joomla reported] visitors to Webraydian since Dec. 08, 2005](http://www.webraydian.com/modules/digits/7.set003_black.gif){kind=small}
![7,825,897 [Joomla reported] visitors to Webraydian since Dec. 08, 2005](http://www.webraydian.com/modules/digits/8.set003_black.gif){kind=small}
![7,825,897 [Joomla reported] visitors to Webraydian since Dec. 08, 2005](http://www.webraydian.com/modules/digits/2.set003_black.gif){kind=small}
![7,825,897 [Joomla reported] visitors to Webraydian since Dec. 08, 2005](http://www.webraydian.com/modules/digits/5.set003_black.gif){kind=small}
![7,825,897 [Joomla reported] visitors to Webraydian since Dec. 08, 2005](http://www.webraydian.com/modules/digits/9.set003_black.gif){kind=small}
