News

Trump’s presidency, ‘Christian supremacism’ criticized at Parliament of World Re …

President Trump arrives to speak at a campaign rally at the IX Center, in Cleveland, on Nov. 5, 2018. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

TORONTO (RNS) — Donald Trump isn’t at the Parliament of World Religions in Toronto, but his influence is widely felt here.

Speakers from around the world — and especially the U.S. — often refer to the situation in that country, expressing disappointment at the anger dividing Americans.

It’s hard to walk 10 feet without talking to someone from the U.S. about the election.

A number of workshops are also addressing U.S. issues, such as the Nov. 2 session titled “Faith, Secularism and Democracy.”

The session was billed as a look at the threats to religious freedom and secular democracy in the U.S. by an “aggressive, oppressive majority.” Presenter Jaideep Singh wasted no time in naming the source of that threat: Christian supremacy.

The co-founder of the Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund, Singh said the rise of Christian supremacy is a worrisome development in the U.S. Equally worrisome, he argued, is how the president has encouraged and enabled it.

Trump, he said, has “triggered fears of discrimination among Christians.”

Singh cited a poll showing American white evangelical Protestants believe there’s more discrimination against Christians than against Muslims.

As a member of a religious minority group,  Singh disagrees.

What is happening, he said, is that Christians feel threatened because religious minorities are asking for the same rights they enjoy — to practice their faith.

Christians should also be able to practice their faith, Singh said. But they shouldn’t “impose their extremist strictures on all Americans.”

Among Singh’s concerns were efforts to insist on having only Christian prayers in legislatures and schools, the elevation of Christian holidays over other religious events, the use of only Christian scriptures in public life, and attempts to make it hard for religious minorities to build sacred buildings.

Jaideep Singh. Photo courtesy of the Sikh Foundation

Things like that make religious minorities feel like they don’t belong or “are not on the same level with other Americans,” said Singh.

The result, he said, is “slowing the national shift toward national pluralism … held up by those seeking to preserve their supremacy.”

In addition to the president, Singh blamed “numerous Christian supremacist politicians” and “unprincipled white Christian religious leaders and media figures” who are polarizing Americans by playing to their fears of immigrants and minorities.

“There is a fear and loathing of Islam found in Christian pulpits in the nation, and on Christian radio and TV,” he said. That fear, he added,  “threatens the religious freedom of non-Christian communities of color.”

Singh also placed blame on the U.S. mainstream media for its “fixation upon Muslim terrorism” instead of on “white hate.”

In a response, Bruce Knotts, director of the Unitarian Universalist United Nations office, suggested one reason for the rise in hate “emanating from many Christians” comes from their “belief in a God who rewards some and punishes others in the afterlife.”

“If they stop worshipping a punishing God, they might be more loving and reconciling,” he said, adding “no one should be killed for who they are or what they believe.”

Daisy Khan, who directs the Women’s Islamic Initiative in Spirituality and Equality, blamed a vacuum in leadership for the challenges in the U.S. today.

The country needs “forward-thinking, peace-loving individuals to step up and stop extremism from spreading,” she said.

Michael Reid Trice, assistant dean of ecumenical and interreligious dialogue at the School of Theology and Ministry at Seattle University, argued that although diversity in the U.S. is a fact, “pluralism is not.”

Pluralism, he said, “is aspirational,” a “garden to be cultivated.”

“We want to blame a leader” like the president, he said, “but the truth is we did this to ourselves over decades. Our current fever is not explained by the rise of right-wing leaders. Rather, the condition of the soil was right as we disagreed too ardently, and painted opponents as adversaries.”

We have “missed the mark of a healthy pluralism” in the U.S., he said.

About the author

John Longhurst

56 Comments

Click here to post a comment

  • “Parliament of World Religions”? What “Parliament”? Tower of Babel, more like.

    “Throughout the the [Parliament of the World’s Religions] Council’s history, … there have been controversies. In 1993, the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Chicago withdrew as a co-sponsor of the Parliament because of ‘the distinctive participation of certain quasi-religious groups with which Orthodox Christians share no common ground.’ The letter outlining the rationale for the Church’s decision went on to state that ‘[i]t would be inconceivable for Orthodox Christians to establish a perceived relationship with groups which profess no belief in God or a Supreme Being. The presence of such groups seems to compromise the integrity of the Parliament’s intended purpose.’ Later that year, multiple members of the Buddhist community also lodged a complaint. In an open letter, Buddhists expressed their dismay at hearing ‘leaders of different religious traditions define all religions as religions of God and unwittingly rank Buddha with God.’ Several years later, some Australians expressed concern at the Council’s selection of Melbourne for 2009’s Parliament, arguing that the country’s significant Atheist population makes Melbourne a poor choice for a religious conference: ‘Australia is one of the least religious countries in the world, with less than 10 per cent [sic] of adults attending regular religious services,’ wrote one Atheist in an opinion piece published in The Age newspaper in 2009. ‘The fastest growing demographic in this country are those claiming not to be affiliated with any religion,’ he reminded readers.”

    Source: “Parliament of Religions, 1993 and Beyond”, The Pluralism Project, Harvard University.

  • How anyone can associate Trumpsky with Christianity is incredible.

    The POTUS is amoral, not immoral. The term ‘alley cat’ comes to mind. (At least, alley cats are felines!)

  • Maybe Jaideep Singh has some valid points, Christian zeal sometimes is greater than common sense
    TRUMP as usual dominates the conversation

    LONELY HEARTs
    WOMEN looking for MEN: Sikhism is the way to go:
    Sikhs 903 women, per 1000 males
    HOWEVER there may be requirements NOT TO SHAVE underarms and elsewhere
    so MORE religions to chose from that have less female competition:

    Women per 1000 men as divided by Registrar General of India.

    Hindus 939 females per 1000 males
    Jains 940 women per 1000 males
    Muslims 951 women per 1000 males
    Buddhists 965 women per 1000 males
    Christians 1,023 women for every 1,000, men.

    Yes in India at least, Christian men are going to be somewhat harder to come by for women,
    but for lonely heart MEN looking for WOMEN, ….
    HALLELUJAH
    https://www.deccanchronicle.com/150826/nation-current-affairs/article/sikhs-have-worst-male-female-ratio-christians-best
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikh
    sikh male female ratio

  • Christian supremacy would be fine if Christianity is boiled down in all practical applications (as it should be) to loving all of the neighbors as we love ourselves. If Christian supremacy is all the nutball junk we hear from Donald Trump and his supporters, well, the real gospel is shot and ruined. Everyone of any faith or no faith should be opposed to that latter scenario.

  • Pootie Baby, getting hot in my swamp and now the Dems got the house. Life is gonna get hard on me here and I need your strong bare chest and you ride me bareback. Your internet research boys didn’t get the job done for me this election. What up dood?

    Luv ya,
    DonnyBoy,

    Donny, no probs. Soon we build great Russamerica together and no more democracy vote problem and we send pesky Mueller and other honesties and pressers to Siberia yes. Trump Towers pretty leaky though ha ha watch out those showers. You look cute tho in orange
    jumpsuit ha.
    -Vlady

  • “In a response, Bruce Knotts, director of the Unitarian Universalist United Nations office, suggested one reason for the rise in hate ‘emanating from many Christians’ comes from their ‘belief in a God who rewards some and punishes others in the afterlife.’”

    “‘If they stop worshipping a punishing God, they might be more loving and reconciling,’ he said, adding ‘no one should be killed for who they are or what they believe.’”

    The Soviet Union tried that – “stop worshipping a punishing God”.

    It didn’t work.

    In fact it accomplished the opposite.

  • … uhm … hello … anybody in there?

    (1) “US midterm elections: Democrats disappointed at lack of ‘blue wave'”, The Straits Times, November 7, 2018.

    (2) “Democrats won the House, but Trump won the election: For the most part, when voters had to decide, the angry left was rejected and Trump was rewarded”, Washington Post, November 7, 2018.

  • I asked the question a few years ago, why did God bring Jacob and his family to Egypt to become slaves? I think the answer is found if you look at what happened to the descendants of Abraham’s sons, and Isaac’s. Each became a nation unto itself, and each became enemies of the Israelites. But when Jacob and his sons moved to Egypt, they were suddenly a distinct minority and were forced to rely on each other. They became one nation, in the midst of a foreign nation, even as they were made a nation of slaves.
    In America, we have the opposite opportunity: we have people from every nation on the planet here and we have the chance to learn to live together, love our neighbors as ourselves, indeed to love them as Jesus loves us. If you look closely at how Jesus lived His life, that does NOT mean forcing people to become Christian. It means “revere Christ as Lord; always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect” (1 Peter 3:15). When Jesus healed the ten lepers, He did not force them to fall down and worship him. He expressed disappointment that only one came back to thank him, but knowing that would happen, he still helped those who needed it.
    I don’t see the main problem with America as the secularization of the country, but the vast numbers of Christians who live their lives in fear, afraid of foreigners, terrorists, disease, growing old, not being able to retire in comfort (as if that is promised in the bible somewhere). Philippians 4:7 says “And the peace of God, which passes all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds in Jesus Christ.” I heard a sermon recently where the preacher suggested that does not mean that the peace is better than we can imagine, but rather that trusting God is better than understanding God’s plan. I believe if Christians turned back to the Lord and remembered the two Greatest Commandments, and the New Commandment, you would see far less secularization, far less fear and hatred.

  • Read Rev. 22:20…Christ said: “..surely I come quickly. Amen” ONLY those who love him and serve him will be spared, the rest of the world will be burned like in a hot oven. PLEASE, do NOT wait until the last minute. LOVE one another, now! SHALOM

  • Looks like your usual gathering of anti-American secularists who loathe Christianity and its followers. Imagine stepping forward in India and insisting there were too many Hindu prayers and holidays observed, thereby marginalizing Christians? Strange how that works.

  • If you only worship the aspects of God you like, you’re not really worshipping God. He is, in the words of the Qur’an, most merciful and most just, which are actually, I believe, contradictory notions, but both still true (because He came and died for our sins). In other words, the God of the Old Testament is the same as the God of the New Testament. For my part, I would be terrified to stand before Him at the end of my life, if I did not know I have been forgiven for my many sins.

  • Men who are of the world, come to the U.S. because they can safely practice their religion and over time they ignore the God that provided the safe place for them to worship their god. Singh now says that America is not big enough for his god. In all honesty, it always comes down to which god can bring down fire from above. Singh would have a sign.

  • Did you actually expect all of the world’s diverse religions to agree with each other? They don’t, and it’s safe to say that they won’t in future, but if people of different religions talk to one another at events like the Parliament, it will help them understand and respect one another better. It also creates opportunity for clearing up misunderstandings like the one you mention, equating Buddha with God.

  • Singh is spot-on. Evangelicals who believe that Christianity is under siege in the US do not know what they are talking about and Trump is a non-Christian who exploits their ignorance for his own purposes.

  • Says Michael Reid Trice, assistant dean of ecumenical and interreligious dialogue at the School of Theology and Ministry at Seattle University: “Our current fever is not explained by the rise of right-wing leaders. Rather, the condition of the soil was right as we disagreed too ardently, and painted opponents as adversaries.”

    Good point. But what do we do about it? We need much more willingness to stop thinking along party lines and start thinking about really solving problems somewhere in the middle. For example, there is no excuse for not resolving DACA issues, except each party insisting on controlling everything and too few willing to cross the barriers put up by the fundamentalists on each side.

    I hope Nancy Pelosi willingly steps aside from running for House leadership. That would be a beginning.

  • Kindly explain how “talk[ing] to one another [in this case, about Trump] … will help [to] understand and respect one another better”?! How does that work, exactly, when “talk[ing] to one another” about “threats to religious freedom and secular democracy in the U.S. [coming from] an ‘aggressive, oppressive majority’ … [with] the rise of Christian supremacy … [which] the president [Donald Trump] has encouraged and enabled”?! Prove to me that’ll “help [to] understand and respect one another better”.

  • Isaac love Esau and Rebecca love Jacob. It does not make sense unless you really really understand God so love the world.

    Isaac (as in Jesus) loves Esau (as of the world) but Rebecca (the church) loves Jacob (the chosen) as they rely on self righteousness to get blessed until He come (and He will) one day to sort out every thing.

  • If one believes God’s love is unconditional, then one can understand how God’s justice, i.e., what we are due, is our salvation. The name ‘Jesus’ means “God saves”, not “God saves if”. Because the idea of love has different meanings for different people (e.g., “spare the rod and spoil the child” vs. “time out for wrongdoing”), I think we cannot rely on the notion of human or divine love to settle differences of opinion about what God’s love means. On the other hand, I think Luke 15’s three parables more than demonstrate it is God, not the sinner, who takes the initiative to find us “lost” in the wilderness of sin and to welcome us back home. Elsewhere in the N.T., Jesus instructs Peter and others to initiate unlimited forgiveness (only one of several quotes mentions a sinner expressing “repentance” beforehand). It would seem reasonable to conclude that what God (in the person of Jesus) tells us to do, God will likewise do.

  • The purpose of dialogue (a better word choice here, btw) is to explore commonalities and differences so as to foster a forward path of good will for all participants. See https://parliamentofreligions.org/about/mission.

    From a Catholic perspective, such an ecumenical and interfaith effort puts into practice Vatican II pronouncements in Lumen Gentium-16 and Nostra Aetate.

  • Ah yes I remember now all those “Vatican II pronouncements in Lumen Gentium-16 and Nostra Aetate” against the “threats to religious freedom and secular democracy in the U.S. [coming from] an ‘aggressive, oppressive majority’ … [with] the rise of Christian supremacy … [which] the president [Donald Trump] has encouraged and enabled”. They sure did “foster a forward path of good will for all participants” (barring the “aggressive, oppressive majority” among them, to be sure, but of course).

    When “Lumen gentium” was promulgated on November 21, 1964 by Pope Paul VI; then on October 28, 1965, the so-called “Nostra aetate”, the U.S. President at the time was Lyndon B. Johnson (Democratic). Wait, what? You’re saying, Pope Paul VI had something to do with The JFK Youknowwhat? And that’s what the recent Parliament of Religions was toying with, concerning Trump?

  • Christian prayers are said and the Bible is used in public gov meetings because that is our national heritage. Our founders came here with Christianity and founded each colony on it. Read the original charters of the colonies and see for yourself.

  • FYII (For Your Insult to the Intelligence):

    The question you should be asking is, Why was one pope “not taking … meds???”, while another posed the same question to transsexuals?!

    (1) “The College of Cardinals elected Pope Urban VI (reigned 1378–89). But Urban’s desire to reassert the monarchical powers of the papacy, as well as his evident MENTAL ILLNESS, prompted the cardinals to renege on their choice later in the same year. In his place they elected Clement VII (reigned 1378–94), who soon took up residence back in Avignon. (This Clement VII is officially listed as an antipope …)”

    (2) “Pope John Paul II … was … a leading critic of homosexual marriage … [and] reaffirmed the Church’s teaching on gender in relation to transsexuals, as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which he supervised, made clear that the condition must be seen as a MENTAL ILLNESS and that transsexuals could not serve in church positions.”

    Source: (1) Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Roman Catholicism”. (2) 2007 Schools Wikipedia Selection by McGill University, “Pope John Paul II”.

  • As the article illustrates, they don’t talk TO each other.

    They use the event as a PR podium for their particular views.

    This organization is completely useless.

  • Your delusions are not, in any way,”fact.”  You’ve earned no “triumph” whatsoever. 

    Oh, and just to be clear, I’m neither an “atheist” nor “progressive.” I’m certain you will deny that, but no matter how vehemently you believe I am both, in truth, I’m neither. 

    So that would be three strikes — you’re out! 

  • Re: “Read Rev. 22:20…Christ said: ‘..surely I come quickly.’ 

    … except for the fact that nearly 2 millennia does not constitute “quickly.” He lied — assuming he ever said such a thing. 

  • In God’s time, the earth was formed in six days and God rested on the seventh day. In man’s time, that is a total of 7000 years, so the average man lives about two hours (75-80 years) in God’s time. So two millennia for man would only be about two days for God. Since I’ve done the math, when God says “quickly” He means a couple of days his time, so we’re down to the last few minutes. Again, as I said above, do not wait until the last minute, LOVE ONE ANOTHER NOW. OH, and GOD does NOT lie as ALL faithful Christians know. SHALOM

  • Re: “In God’s time …” 

    That’s a common retort (yes, I know all about 2 Pt 3:8!), but it’s asinine and moronic. You’re essentially admitting your deity was disingenuous … saying the word “quickly” to human beings, whom s/he/it is aware understand it in a certain way, but knowing that isn’t what s/he/it actually intended to do. 

    Why you’d want to worship a disingenuous deity is beyond me. But hey, it’s a free country, and if you want to revere disingenuousness, I guess you’re free to do so. Just don’t expect me to go along for that absurd ride — because I’m not stupid enough. 

    Re: “He means a couple of days his time, so we’re down to the last few minutes.” 

    But you can’t know that. You already admitted he uses words to describe the passage of time in ways only he comprehends. You can’t possibly be certain of that — you have no basis for thinking you do. 

    Re: “… and GOD does NOT lie ever …” 

    Of course your deity lies! He absolutely did. Here are some examples:

    “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” (Mt 16:28

    And Jesus was saying to them, “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power.” (Mk 9:1

    “But I say to you truthfully, there are some of those standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God.” (Lk 9:27

    All of those people Jesus supposedly spoke to, have most certainly “tasted death” — they lived c. 2,000 years ago, after all. So even if they should “see the kingdom of God” after being resurrected or something, the fact remains that they long ago already “tasted death.” So not only have these predictions not come true, there is no longer any way for any of them ever to come true in the future. 

    Yes, indeed … your deity lied to you! It’s incontrovertible. 

  • OK, I’ll bite one more time. Certain chosen men will not or have not “tasted death” because they were ‘twinkled” meaning their Spirits left their body but returned immediately and they were resurrected, again, immediately. My Lord Jesus cannot lie ever, He is perfect. On the other hand, Satan awaits you with open arms in hell where he will watch you burn with joy, because with all of your knowledge, he still deceived you.

  • Re: “Certain chosen men will not or have not ‘tasted death’ because they were ‘twinkled’ …” 

    Uh … hmmm … er, uh … really!? You’re actually going with that? That’s astoundingly stupid. I mean that. Really. You’re insulting my intelligence by throwing this laughable drivel at me. 

    Re: “My Lord Jesus cannot lie ever, He is perfect.” 

    Of course he lied to you! There’s no doubt whatever that he did so. His reported lies are obvious. 

    Re: “On the other hand, Satan awaits you with open arms in hell where he will watch you burn with joy, because with all of your knowledge, he still deceived you.” 

    There is no “Satan” except as a fictional character. You made him up. He hasn’t “deceived” me because a non-existent being is incapable of deception — or really, of anything! 

    I’m detecting more than just a little whiff of Poe’s Law here. 

  • The real Jesus only condemned the self righteous and accept any sinner to draw close. Sadly seems like many confuse Him with the ruler of the world, the devil.

  • There’s nothing “overheated” except American Chrishuns’ wild claims of being “persecuted.” They are not — period, end of discussion. 

  • Transexualism is not a mental illness. On the other hand, JPII ignored repeated complaints about the perverted behaviors of his good friend, the Rev. Marcial Maciel Degollado, founder of the Legionaries of Christ and its Regnum Christi Movement. For more information about this “Saint” (cough, cough) and his close friend, see https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/world/americas/01maciel.html and https://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/23/opinion/dowd-a-saint-he-aint.html.

    Folks who consistently take their meds do not write the twisted dribble found in your previous comment.

    Good luck.

  • FYII (For Your Insult to the Intelligence):

    According to Amy Ellis Nutt, “Long shadow cast by psychiatrist on transgender issues finally recedes at Johns Hopkins”, Washington Post, April 5, 2017:

    “With the title of university distinguished service professor at Johns Hopkins Medicine, [Paul McHugh] continues to wield enormous influence … Most recently his name was prominent on an amicus brief in opposition to the case of Virginia transgender student Gavin Grimm. The teen sued his school district to be allowed to use the bathroom of his gender identity — an issue that until last month was headed to the Supreme Court. ‘People with abnormalities of development should be helped to find their place as they see it best,’ McHugh said. ‘But they are a tiny number of the transgender population seeking and being given treatment.’ … A study by Jon Meyer, who ran the [John Hopkins] hospital’s Sexual Behaviors Consultation Unit … concluded that although ‘sex-change’ surgery was ‘subjectively satisfying’ for the small sample surveyed, the operations they underwent conferred ‘no objective advantage in terms of social rehabilitation.’ ‘With these facts in hand,’ McHugh later wrote, ‘I concluded that Hopkins was fundamentally cooperating with a mental illness.’ Two months later, its gender-identity clinic was shut down. … In the decade that followed, other academic hospitals often cited the research when they discontinued their own transgender surgical programs. … Last fall, a 143-page report, titled ‘Sexuality and Gender’ … in the New Atlantis … authored by McHugh and Lawrence S. Mayer, a professor of statistics and biostatistics at Arizona State University and, at the time of the publication, a scholar in residence at Hopkins … contended that neither sexual orientation nor gender identity is biologically determined. … In an interview from his home in Baltimore, where he still sees patients, McHugh explained that the ‘duty of all doctors who propose a treatment is to know the nature of the problem they propose to treat. The issue of transgender [people] is, the vast majority coming for surgery now don’t have a biological reason but a psychosocial reason.’ While McHugh successfully lobbied for more than 30 years to keep gender-reassignment surgery from becoming a Medicare benefit, he supports the operation for those born with an intersex condition, which means having a reproductive or sexual anatomy that doesn’t fall into the typical definition of male or female.”

  • excellent points!

    it’s those racist christians, no wait, its those those racist white christians that are the real problem here.

    and my goodness, he came so very close to blaming the progressive trifecta: white christian men for all of society’s evils! i’ve no doubt he’d have gotten there too if he’d only been given a little more time…

  • According to several Wikipedia entries:

    + “McHugh considers homosexuality to be an ‘erroneous desire’ and supported California Proposition 8.”

    + “In August 2016, McHugh co-authored a 143-page review of the scientific literature on gender and sexuality in The New Atlantis, a journal published under the auspices of the Ethics and Public Policy Center.” “The Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) is a conservative Washington, D.C.-based think tank and advocacy group. Founded in 1976, the group describes itself as ‘dedicated to applying the Judeo-Christian moral tradition to critical issues of public policy…'” “George Weigel, Catholic theologian and [JPII] papal biographer, is distinguished senior fellow.”

    + “In 2002, McHugh was appointed to a lay panel assembled by the Roman Catholic Church to look into sexual abuse by priests. This appointment was controversial, as McHugh had previously served as expert witness in the defense of numerous priests accused of child sexual abuse.

    + McHugh was featured in a 2017 Netflix Documentary, The Keepers, for his role in the defense in the 1995 trial, Jane Doe et al. v. A. Joseph Maskell et al., which was a case involving the sexual abuse of two women at the hands of a Catholic Priest, Father Joseph Maskell.”

    Huffington Post offers a critique of McHugh & Mayer’s ““Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences” at https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/debunking-the-new-atlantis-article_us_58d5242ee4b0f633072b36a4.

    Thank you for sharing some of the Washington Post’s “Long shadow cast by psychiatrist on transgender issues finally recedes at Johns Hopkins”, which notes the widespread criticism of McHugh’s thinking by other healthcare professionals at Johns Hopkins. The article reports that the university would be resuming transgender services including surgery.

  • “Paul McHugh, a university professor of psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, has emerged as the leading voice challenging the ‘born-this-way’ hypothesis. He encourages psychiatric therapy for transgender people, especially children, so that they accept the gender assigned to them at birth. …Last year he co-authored a review of the scientific literature published in The New Atlantis journal, asserting there was scant evidence to suggest sexual orientation and gender identity were biologically determined. … McHugh told Reuters he was ‘unmoved’ by his critics and says he doubts additional research will reveal a biological cause. ‘If it were obvious,’ he said, ‘they would have found it long ago.'”

    Source: Daniel Trotta, “Born this way? Researchers explore the science of gender identity”, Reuters, August 3, 2017.

  • Just because McHugh “has emerged as the leading voice challenging the “‘born-this-way’hypothesis” does not mean he is correct in his conclusion. Most scientists think the contrary.

  • “To challenge the standard biological observation that human sex like all animal – and some plant – sex is binary, formed at conception and immutable … does so not with new bio-scientific observations and arguments but with social justice arguments and some therapeutic presumptions. … The existence of ‘intersex’ births and the issues these patients have in later development … cannot serve as an argument against a binary conception of human sex in that all the intersex patients are subjects of errors in embryogenesis or fetal formation in the same way as Down Syndrome and the like are developmental afflictions. They, like intersex individuals, do not provoke an assumption of some distinct human kind or species but rather a way development can go awry . We are all in favor of social justice and have therapeutic concerns and proposals for these subjects but I do not see any reason for believing that denying the biological truth about sex will bring better justice to them or others or more successful therapies – more likely the opposite.”

    Source: Paul McHugh in Sam Dorman, “Medical Professionals Clash Over Trump Admin’s Leaked Gender Definition”, Independent Journal Review, November 8, 2018.

  • The question of this conference is, whether or not they are referring to real Christians or “Lord, Lord” pretenders.

    Matthew 21 [Jesus] “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’

    And no inappropriate burning or killing:
    Romans 12:18 [Paul] If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.

  • I can’t drive more than half a mile without seeing a Christian church in just about every populated area of this country. I’m pretty sure that wouldn’t be the case if Christians were actually oppressed in the United States.

  • What does the presence of Christian churches have to do with the triumph of fact over your atheist/progressive propaganda and how did Christian oppression enter the discussion?

2019 NewsMatch Campaign: This Story Can't Wait! Donate.

ADVERTISEMENTs