Private Christianity Alone is Tolerable

Foxy Secularism

Secularism thinks of itself as uber tolerant.  It's version of tolerance is so advanced and righteous, secularism insists upon and demands compliance with its dogma at every point.  It is profoundly intolerant in the matter.  

The urbane secularist will tell you that he smiles upon all religions.  Why would one get upset at the equivalent of a childish nursery rhymes?  Does the secularist get all wound up about Jemima Puddleduck?  Does the secularist get agitated over the Christian?  Never.  Provided, of course, that Christianity is restricted and restrained to the private square.  It has no place in the public square.  The secularist's perversion of tolerance demands an exclusive hold over the public square.  As soon as the Christian offers a scintilla of Christian reasoning or argumentation in the public square for a Christian position or belief, off to the gas chambers with him.  The public square is for secularism only and the secularist is the sole licensed operator therein.

Now even Jemima Puddleduck, that most gullible of ducks, knows that the sly secularist fox has endless conniptions and consternations when defining what is public and what it private.
 Does the "private square" refer to anything and everything which occurs behind a closed door?  Yes, of course, says the smooth talking secularist.  So, if the door to Jemima's shop is shut and Jemima happens to refuse the foxy gentleman's wish to purchase her eggs on the grounds that she does not quite trust the foxy customer, it's all kosher?  Her shop is not the public square.  The transaction has taken place--or, in this case, not taken place--behind a closed door.  What ducks do behind closed doors is their own business.

No, no, no retorts the insistent secularist.  Jemima is operating in the public square, even though behind a closed door.  When we secularists talk about tolerance we only mean what happens in Jemima's house, not her shop.

So, if Jemima wishes to home school her ducklings, surely the foxes of the world would accept that. She would be home schooling within the confines of, well, her home.

No, no, no barks the oleaginous gentleman.  Jemima's home as well is part of the public square.  It will never do at all to teach her children anything other than what is acceptable in the public square.  Her home is the public square.

It is at this point that even the gullible Jemima notices that the foxy tolerant gentleman has some rather sharp teeth.  Secular tolerance extends only to those beliefs and practices secularists find tolerable. Anything else is to be squashed.  It is the most totalitarian of beliefs--aptly captured and characterised in Orwell's 1984.

Here is an example of the foxy gentleman at work:

More than £100,000 in litigation costs have been spent on the Ashers “gay cake” case has so far. The original made-to-order baked confection cost just £36.50 for retail.  The startling expenditure was revealed just as Northern Ireland’s Attorney General, John Larkin QC, intervened to slam Northern Ireland’s anti-discrimination laws that allegedly persecute people who hold certain religious beliefs.

The case rose to public prominence after an LGBT activist asked for a cake to be decorated with the slogan “Support Gay Marriage”, but the order was declined by the bakers because it promoted same-sex marriage, rather than because the customer was gay.  Despite arguing it was the message they were objecting to, not the customer, the Ashers Baking Company run by the McArthur family was taken to court and found guilty of ‘discrimination’ in May last year.

Then, in December 2015, shortly after the country voted for gay marriage in a referendum, Ireland stripped away laws protecting freedom of religion when in conflict with gay rights allowing business “to maintain the religious ethos of the institution”.  Simon Calvert of the Christian Institute argued that the wasteful case has led to the bakers being “punished for having mainstream, deeply-held religious beliefs” and raised serious concerns about freedom of religion. He told Christian Today:

“The Attorney General has decided to intervene, using his constitutional power to raise questions about the validity of the legislation used against the McArthurs.  “And it is clear from the decision taken by the three judges, including the Lord Chief Justice, that he has raised matters of importance. These will now be fully argued when the appeal comes before the court in May."  By the time the full hearing takes place it will be two years since the cake at the centre of what has become a legal, political and theological saga was ordered.

Daniel McArthur (R) alongside his wife Amy McArthur (R) leave Laganside Courts after a judge ruled that their Christian-run bakery discriminated against Gareth Lee, a gay rights activist, by refusing to make a cake with a slogan supporting same-sex marriage on May 19, 2015 (Charles McQuillan/Getty)

Mr. Calvert continued: “So far, the case has generated legal costs on both sides which, combined, have broken the £100,000 barrier. . . . But the McArthur family had no choice but to defend themselves. For them there is a lot more at stake than a cake, or the £500 damages they were ordered to pay by the county court, because they are being punished for having mainstream, deeply-held religious beliefs.

“Those beliefs don’t leave them when they leave church on a Sunday. Nor can they be thrown off when they leave home for work.  They are committed, every minute of every day, to trying to follow the teachings of Christ, including his plain teaching about the nature of marriage. For that reason they could not help promote same-sex marriage by making the campaign cake they were asked for."  [Breitbart London.]