Today I’d like to address what I call the fallacy of religious neutrality—the prevailing idea that a person or institution can be religiously neutral or unbiased.  To illustrate this maladroit form of thinking, I wish to direct your attention to a rather disturbing development in the UK.  In a recent court ruling, a Christian couples petition to foster orphaned children was denied simply because of their traditional orthodox Christian views on the family and human sexuality.  Throughout the trial the court maintained that it was religiously neutral; that the issue at hand was purely a question of ethics.  The judge defended his ruling thusly:  “there is no religious discrimination against the Johns [the couple applying to foster] because they were being excluded from fostering due to their moral views on sexual ethics and not their Christian beliefs.”

If we take the term ‘religion’ in its broadest and most basic sense, to mean a particular worldview which governs the way we view and explain reality, it is painfully evident that the court’s claim that its ruling does not constitute religious discrimination is disingenuous.  For it’s quite obvious that the Johns’ religious beliefs do, in fact, govern their moral views on sexual ethics.  Their personal conviction regarding homosexuality did not develop in a vacuum; rather, it stems directly from their belief in the Bible as God’s word.  The court’s embarrassing attempt to deny the obvious suggests one of two things . . .

READ THE REST AT: The Christian Watershed 

 

Advertisement