Bubba Sounds Off

“Right From the Heart” identifies itself as “Spreading Christ through Radio, TV, and the Web”. I got a good laugh recently when I heard its founder, Bryant Wright, say the following on a radio spot:

Are you a spiritual wimp? It amazes me that men who are good athletes, who pride themselves on hard work and self reliance, are absolute wimps when it comes to being the spiritual leader in the home. Many macho men are classic spiritual sissies in this area. They scoff at religion and church, leaving their family’s spiritual well being in the capable hands of the mothers. But scripture is clear. This major responsibility belongs to fathers. The biggest reason for the disintegration of family in America is because so many men are spiritual wimps when they should be spiritual leaders, which is a servant leader.

If you’re a husband or a father, ask the Lord how to be a spiritual leader. Come on, men, rise to the challenge. The future of our land is depending on you.

This might be the most convoluted use of the word “wimp” I have ever seen. Dictionary.com defines it as “a weak, ineffectual, timid person”. If anything, such a person is more likely to be easily led by men claiming to speak for God, or more specifically, to blindly accept the divine authorship of “scripture”. They are also more likely to be easily manipulated by the rhetoric of a confused preacher challenging them to not be “spiritual wimps”. Moreover, if there are men who “scoff at religion and church”, this could very well be a manifestation of reasonable skepticism. And critical thinking isn’t exactly a hallmark of being a “wimp” or a “sissy”.

Good fathers (and mothers) will teach their children to think critically, not insist that they accept any particular religious claims as absolute truth. Being a good parent is more important than being a “spiritual leader”, and the “future of our land” will be better served by the former than the latter. But if nothing else, I’ll give Mr. Wright points for disagreeing with the thundering chorus of all those who would claim that the biggest reason for “the disintegration of family in America” is gay marriage.

Response to Thomas Sowell article

Now that a number of state courts have refused to redefine marriage to include same-sex unions, cries of “discrimination” are being heard.

The “equal protection of the laws” provided by the Constitution of the United States applies to people, not actions. Laws exist precisely in order to discriminate between different kinds of actions.

When the law permits automobiles to drive on highways but forbids bicycles from doing the same, that is not discrimination against people. A cyclist who gets off his bicycle and gets into a car can drive on the highway just like anyone else.

Mr. Sowell, there are good, safety-related reasons for banning bicycles from highways - reasons that do not apply to gay marriage. In a free society, laws that discriminate without good reason should be overturned - even those that discriminate against actions.

In a free society, vast numbers of things are neither forbidden nor facilitated. They are considered to be none of the law’s business.

Sounds a lot like something that should apply to marital choices among consenting adults.

Homosexuals were on their strongest ground when they said that the law had no business interfering with relations between consenting adults. Now they want the law to put a seal of approval on their behavior. But no one is entitled to anyone else’s approval.

Good. Then you apparently understand that Read the rest of this entry »

Response to David K. Bernard article

Bernard: Why Texans should not support homosexual marriage

God created one man and one woman to inhabit the Garden of Eden, and He created them as companions who were suitable for each other. We must uphold that ideal for marriage today, but how should we do so in modern society?

You should do so in a manner that includes peaceful coexistence with those who would make different choices for themselves. In a free society, upholding your own “ideal for marriage” should not equate to getting laws passed to restrict the options of anyone who prefers a different ideal.

Let us briefly consider the biblical teaching on this subject.

Let’s not. We’re talking about rules that everyone must live by. Biblical assertions have no place in such a discussion. If a strong case cannot be made for something independently of what the Bible has to say about it, Read the rest of this entry »