Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Homosexual rights advocacy

2020-05-05T16:12:12Z

Susan4Right:

{{Homosexuality}}
The gay rights movement seeks to promote acceptance of [[homosexuality]] and recognition of their rights to sexual/romantic expression and legal recognition.

The gay rights movement argues for tolerance of homosexuality by arguing that either,
# Homosexuality is an immutable trait, and discriminating against immutable traits is wrong (e.g., race discrimination);
# Homosexuality, if not immutable, is highly correlated with personality; or
# Homosexuality should be respected.

'Gay rights' are often promoted by [[liberal]]s. Although people should be free to label themselves as they choose<ref name="Rainbow">{{cite book |title=Redeeming the Rainbow: A Christian Response to the "Gay" Agenda |author=Scott Lively |url=http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09b/Redeeming_rainbow/Redeeming%20the%20Rainbow%20smaller%20file%20for%20e-mail.pdf |pages=47, 161 |quote=We should not, however, discriminate against persons who define themselves as homosexuals. They should be free to label themselves as they choose, no less so than other groups whose beliefs or goals are disapproved by the majority. Indeed, we can compare homosexuals to their chief adversaries, the radical nationalists. Both groups hate each other, and would like to do away with the other.
Neither side is embraced by the majority, but both deserve the right to freedom of their beliefs and to freedom of speech within reasonable limits.
}}</ref>, from perspective of [[human rights]], assertions about human nature must be empirically provable and they cannot be based on fundamentals and instances that are not methodologically verifiable<ref>{{cite book |title=Menschenrechte: Ein interdisziplinäres Handbuch |author=Bernd Ladwig et al. |editors=Arnd Pollmann & Georg Lohmann |publisher=J.B. Metzler |place=Stuttgart, Weimar |chapter=2.3 Anthropologie und Naturalismus |year=2012 |url=http://www.springer.com/de/book/9783476022714 |pages=220 |isbn=978-3476022714 |quote=page indication is from Slovak 2017 translation |language=German}}</ref>. The self-identification as so called "LGBT+ person" fails this criterion<ref name="Rainbow"/> and is in fact a manifestation of [[Göring's syndrome]].

==History==
[[Harry Hay]] is regarded as the father of the modern homosexual liberation movement. As a [[Communist Party of the United States]] (CPUSA) organizer, he turned out "essays, position papers, critical studies, and manifestos concerning what it means to be gay in the world."<ref>[http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/A269_0_2_0_C/ Red Roots Of Gay Movement], Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in Media, September 10, 2003.</ref>

The first step Hay took in organizing the homosexual rights movement was to recommend to the CPUSA that he be expelled. In
light of his 18 years of service to the party<ref>[http://www.sojournertruth.net/ipp.html#i In Partial Payment Class Struggle, Sexuality and Gay Liberation (1978)], by A. Rausch. Retrieved from ''Urgent Tasks: [[Leftist|Journal of the Revolutionary Left]]'', Sojourner Truth Organization Digital Archive , 10 May 2007.</ref> they released him as "a security risk but a life-long friend of the people." The early leadership of the Foundation shaped the organization to reflect the cell structure of the Communist Party, in which "secrecy, hierarchical structures, and centralized leadership predominated." <ref>John D'Emilio, ''Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities: The Making of a Homosexual Minority in the United States'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), quoted in Martin Meeker, Behind the Mask of Respectability, ''Journal of the History of Sexuality'', (2001) 78-116.</ref>
Hay and his fellow homosexual rights activists began circulating the [[USSR]] and the East European Communist parties sponsored anti-war [[Stockholm Peace petition]] against the [[Korean War]]<ref>[http://www.kimsoft.com/2000/germberia.htm New Russian Evidence on the Korean War Biological Warfare Allegations: Background and Analysis,] Milton Leitenberg, Cold War International History Project, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.</ref> at a beach frequented by homosexual men in Los Angeles. The first months produced hundreds of members.

Amid growing public focus on gays and lesbians, 91 homosexuals were found to be employed in the [[U.S. State Department]]. Congressional investigators discovered homosexuals employed in 36 of 53 branches of Government, as well as in the armed forces. Between Jan. 1, 1947 and April 1950, 4,954 cases had come to light among some three and a half million people in Government service. Most were in the armed services. 574 cases were found involving civilian Government employees; in all the other cases the accused had either quit, been cleared or fired. The investigators found the greatest batch of civilian cases—143—in the U.S. State Department. State had cleared or gotten rid of all but a dozen whose cases were still pending. The Veterans Administration was found to have 101 cases. Others included the Atomic Energy Commission, 8; EGA, 27; Congress' legislative agencies (Library of Congress, congressional employees, etc.), 19. One Senator remarked, "It follows that if blackmailers can extort money from a homosexual under threat of disclosure, [[espionage]] agents can use the same type of pressure to extort confidential information."<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,859060,00.html Object Lesson], ''TIME magazine'', Dec. 25, 1950.</ref>

The [[Human Rights Campaign]] referred to Hay as "founder and architect of the modern movement for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender rights" and "Harry was one of the first to realize that the dream of equality for our community could be attained through visibility and activism".<ref>[http://www.hrc.org/Content/ContentGroups/News_Releases/20021/HRC_Mourns_the_Death_of_Gay_Rights_Pioneer_Harry_Hay.htm Human Rights Campaign Mourns the Death of Gay Rights Pioneer Harry Hay], Press Release, Oct. 24, 2002.</ref> Hay not only promoted homosexual rights, he actively campaigned for the "rights" of pedophiles. ''The Boston Phoenix'' noted that nowhere was this more evident than in Hay's persistent support of the right of the North American Man-Boy Love Association, [[NAMBLA]], to march in [[gay pride|gay-pride]] parades.<ref>''The Boston Phoenix'', [http://bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/other_stories/documents/02511115.htm The real Harry Hay], Michael Bronski, October 31 - November 7, 2002.</ref> NAMBLA maintains a website with a body of Hay's work and a tribute to Harry Hay on its homepage. The Human Rights Campaign and other homosexual rights organizations, while revering Hay for his contributions to homosexual rights, do not support NAMBLA or communism.

== Timeline ==

* Henry Gerber starts Society for Human Rights under a State of Illinois charter for a non-profit organization for people with "mental abnormalities" on December 25, 1924. Several issues of ''Friendship and Freedom'', the first American publication for homosexuals were printed but the organization was shut down by Chicago police. Gerber was arrested but not convicted of any crime. As a result of his efforts, Gerber lost his job as a post office clerk, his life savings, and found himself abandoned by his friends.<ref>[http://www.gayhistory.com/rev2/factfiles/ff1924.htm "Gay History"]. ''gayhistory.com''.</ref>

* [[Alfred Kinsey]] publishes ''Sexual Behavior in the Human Male'' in 1948, allegedly the first scientific body of work that examined the subject of homosexuality. Mainstream publications started printing their opinions about this formerly taboo subject.<ref>[http://www.indiana.edu/~kinsey/library/mediaresponses.html "The Kinsey Institute - [Library & Special Collections]"]. ''indiana.edu''.</ref><ref>[http://www.indiana.edu/~kinsey/library/kinsey.html "The Kinsey Institute - [Library & Special Collections]"]. ''indiana.edu''.</ref>

* Rev. Elder Troy Perry founded the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches in 1968 which served as a specific outreach to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender communities.<ref>http://www.mcccharleston.org/about/troyperry.htm</ref>

*[[Stonewall Riots]] of 1969 marked a turning point within the Civil Rights Era of the United States. New York City police raided the Stonewall Inn and for the first time the homosexual patrons fought back which started several days of rioting.<ref>[http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/eresources/exhibitions/sw25/case1.html "Stonewall 25: Cases 1-2"]. ''columbia.edu''.</ref> This bar had been operating illegally by bribing the police and was owned by the [[mafia]]. The riots occurred when the police finally came to shut down the illegal activities occurring at the site.

* American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses in 1973.<ref>http://archive.psych.org/edu/other_res/lib_archives/archives/197308.pdf</ref>

* 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy as crafted by Gen. Colin Powell and approved by Pres. Clinton takes affect in 1993. This measure allows homosexuals to serve in the US military. Sexual orientation will not prohibit anyone from serving though they must not engage in homosexual conduct or openly say they are gay.<ref>http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CE5D81F30F933A15754C0A965958260</ref>

* Same-sex "marriage" became legal in Massachusetts on May 17, 2004 when homosexual couples were granted the same right as heterosexual couples. This right was preceded by years of legal wrangling in the state courts.<ref>http://www.hrc.org/issues/5489.htm</ref>

== Legal Success ==
Courts, including the Supreme Court, have accepted either one or both of these rationales. In ''[[Romer v. Evans]]'', the Court found that discriminating against homosexuals could only be explained by a rational of animus laid bare, which was not enough even to allow state condemnation of homosexuality under the [[rational basis review]] test. ''Romer'', then, protects the status of homosexuality from undue discrimination that occurs without a rational basis.<ref>Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620</ref>

Homosexual conduct was formerly illegal in many states.<ref>See generally ''Bowers v. Hardwick'', 478 U.S. 186</ref> In the last decade of the twentieth century, although these laws existed, they were rarely (if ever) enforced.<ref>''Lawrence v. Texas,'' 539 U.S. 558, Justice Anthony Kennedy, in the Opinion of the Court, found this in his historical analysis.</ref> Without disclosing whether it saw homosexuality as a status protected from discrimination at as high of a level as gender and race, the Court struck down bans on homosexual conduct, framing it as an expansion of its privacy jurisprudence.<ref>''Lawrence v. Texas'', 539 U.S. 558</ref>

The status of homosexuality before the law, then, is in some degree of flux. While bare discrimination against homosexual status is facially unconstitutional lacking a rational basis, and while preventing homosexual conduct is similarly unconstitutional, the Supreme Court has held in these landmark cases that the state may discriminate against homosexuals to preserve an "institution that the law protects" - namely, [[marriage]].<ref>''Lawrence v. Texas''; Kennedy & O'Connor both reached this conclusion explicitly.</ref> As such, the standard to be applied in deciding if discrimination against homosexuals is wrong is somewhere in between [[rational basis review]] and [[strict scrutiny review]]. Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] thinks that this uncertainty will surely be resolved in the favor of gay rights, and he warns that such a legal erosion will result in the downfall of the law's moral authority.<ref>''Lawrence v. Texas'', Scalia, J., dissenting.</ref>

In 2006, Catholic Charities of Boston closed their adoption program after more than a century of finding homes for [[orphan]]s and unwanted children when it was reported by the ''Boston Globe'' that homosexual couples had received children placed from the agency.<ref>[http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/03/11/catholic_charities_stuns_state_ends_adoptions/ Catholic Charities stuns state, ends adoptions], By Patricia Wen, ''The Boston Globe'', March 11, 2006.</ref> Massachusetts law, barring "orientation discrimination", prohibited one of the nations oldest adoption agencies from refusing service to homosexual activists, and a mass resignation of the agency's Board in protest followed.<ref>[https://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/191kgwgh.asp Banned in Boston], by Maggie Gallagher, ''The Weekly Standard'', 05/15/2006, Volume 011, Issue 33.</ref>

== Opposition to Gay "Rights" ==
A poll reveals that a majority of US citizens<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/18/AR2007031800484.html Clinton, Obama Slow to Respond to Questions on Homosexuality] Washington Post, March 18, 2007</ref> disapprove of homosexuality, or at least consider it less than ideal, and prefer that public policy does not encourage it. They also believe that accepting homosexuality would require the loss of rights to free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of association, and traditional [[marriage]].<ref>Traditional Values Coalition - [http://www.traditional values.org/modules.php?sid=2963 Homosexual "Marriage" In Canada Killing Free Speech]</ref>
Conservatives criticize attempts by homosexual rights activists to prohibit any statements which are critical of homosexuality, such as the idea that it is "unnatural" or "sinful", using [[hate crime]]s statutes and anti-[[discrimination]] laws. These laws violate the rights of those against homosexuality to continue trying to restrict the rights of homosexuals.

Conservatives also oppose attempts by homosexual activists to indoctrinate children by using liberal tactics such as ''tolerance'' or forcing ''diversity'' programs onto children in schools which strongly encourage the acceptance of homosexual behavior. Notable figures including [[Tony Perkins]] have expressed concerns. As any logical examination of the world would have one conclude, tolerance is an insidious construct which breeds relativism and lack of judgment.

*The [[European Union|EU]] parliament called on [[Poland|Polish]] authorities to publicly condemn and take measures against declarations by officials "inciting discrimination and hatred based on sexual orientation."<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OOFTCO5&show_article=1]</ref>

== Support for Gay "Rights" ==
An April 2009 CNN poll showed the public evenly divided over the US military's Don't Ask Don't Tell policy, with 48% in favor and 47% opposed.<ref>Polling Report http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm</ref> Polls consistently show that most people are opposed to same-sex marriage. Thirty states have had a public referendum on same-sex marriage, and all thirty have voted against it.

==Tactics==

*Kirk and Madsen, in their LGBTI [[Mein Kampf]] titled "[[After the Ball]]," predicted a mass public change of heart would follow, even among opponents, "if we can actually make them like us."<ref>[http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/socarides.html How America Went Gay], by Charles W. Socarides, M.D., ''America'', November 18, 1995.</ref>

Advocates routinely use [[deceit]], notably pursuing various goal while pretending not to. For example, some advocates will claim:
*The movement does not seek to convince others that homosexuality is ''right''

Yet clearly the drive for "[[tolerance]]" is only one step toward the ultimate goal of "[[approval]]."

Blurring distinctions: Advocates routinely fail to distinguish between [[homosexual behavior]] and homosexuality as an "identity."

===Presenting outstanding homosexuals as contributors to society===

Turing was arrested in 1952 for [[homosexuality|homosexual acts]] and subsequently lost his security clearance. He was allowed to stay out of prison by agreeing to be injected with female hormones (which would supposedly decrease his sex drive). He later confided to a friend that the hormones caused him to grow breasts.<ref>''Oddballs and Eccentrics''. Shaw, Karl. Edison, New Jersey: Castle Books, 2004</ref> This may have contributed to his suicide by [[cyanide]] poisoning in 1954.<ref>[http://www.turing.org.uk/turing/index.html "Alan Turing: the enigma"]. ''turing.org.uk''.</ref> The British Government issued a formal, official apology for the way Alan Turing and other homosexuals were treated in the past.<ref>http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page20571</ref>

==See also==
* [[Liberal values]] and the "Gay Culture" of:
** [[Hollywood values]]
** [[San Francisco values]]
** [[Fashion industry values]]
* [[ACT-UP]]
* [[Anti-Defamation League]]
* [[H.R. 1592: Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007]]
* [[Human Rights Watch]]
* [[Liberal Catholic Church]]
*[[Hate crime hoax]]es

== References ==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_2_queering_the_schools.html Queering the Schools]

[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Homosexuality]]
[[Category:Hollywood Values]]
[[Category:Snowflakes]]

Cafeteria Christianity

2020-05-05T16:03:33Z

Susan4Right:

'''Cafeteria Christianity''' is a (generally derogatory) term used to refer to the practice of deciding for oneself which parts of the [[Bible]] to accept. The term derives from the idea of selecting certain foods in a cafeteria while rejecting others.<ref>[http://www.churchofgoddfw.com/monthly/cafeteria.html "Cafeteria Christianity," from the Church of God - DFW]</ref> This implies that the person believes in a deity, but may not adhere to any particular creed of Christianity, preferring to decide for themself how to express their faith. Other terms include "salad-bar Christianity" and "[[cherry picking|cherry-picking]] Christianity." Cafeteria Christianity is an example of self-generated Christianity, i.e., "Christianity" interpreted in the context of one's own beliefs.<ref>{{cite book| first1=Robert |last1=Ekelund |authorlink1= Robert Ekelund |first2= Robert |last2= Hébert |first3= Robert |last3=Tollison |authorlink3= Robert Tollison |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=FP08EXnwP3YC&lpg=PA334&dq=cafeteria%20Christianity&pg=PA258#v=onepage&q=cafeteria%20Christianity&f=false |title=The Marketplace of Christianity |publisher= MIT Press |year= 2006 |page = 258 |isbn=9780262050821 }}</ref>

This associated practice is particularly common among [[Liberal Christianity|liberal]] denominations, which often cite passages showing Christ's forgiveness and mercy in order to deny the existence of [[Hell]] or the necessity of [[faith]] for redemption. Matt. 7:1, "Judge not, that ye be not judged" is quoted particularly often for this purpose. Likewise, they do not adhere to passages which refute [[evolution]], condemn [[abortion]], make statements about the role of [[women]] that refute modern [[feminism|feminist]] dogmas, condemn [[homosexuality]], [[adultery]], and [[remarriage]] after a [[divorce]], and conflict with other liberal views.

However, cafeteria Christianity is not limited to the left side of the political spectrum: conservative Christians often cite Scripture selectively in order to expose hypocrisy while explaining away the same issues in their own camp (such as criticizing the Catholic Church for covering up child molestation among its priests—arguing that the problem is due to the Church's prohibition against priests marrying—while ignoring similar cases involving married pastors or leaders within major Protestant churches or denominations). A notable example of "right-wing" cafeteria Christianity can be found on Coservapedia. For instance, Conservapedia articles cite the Bible to condemn homosexuality, while denouncing abortion despite certain passages of the Bible in support of it. (e.g. Numbers 5: If feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure... The priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, "If... you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband... may this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.")

Due to contradictions found in the Bible and Christian organizations, adhering to every part of the Bible is technically impossible. Thus, anyone could theoretically be argued to be a "Cafeteria Christian".

==Bible teaching against cafeteria Christianity==

The Bible quotes [[Jesus]] as saying:
{{Bible quote|But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.|book=Matthew|chap=4|verses=4|version=KJV}}
Note: "every word," not "some words." The counterargument of many cafeteria Christians is to assert that the word of the authors of certain parts of the Bible is not necessarily the word of God.

Confusion as to just how literally Biblical texts should be taken abounds, even amongst those who generally accept the Bible to be the word for God. Few would argue, for example, with the statement: 'However, the bible cannot be interpreted literally, if this was the case then rebellious children would be killed: Deuteronomy 21:18-21. Also, Women may not speak in church: Cor 14:33-36. The bible is not a collection of dogmatic and strict rules, it is a book of God that promotes compassion, faith in God, truth, and love.'<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality</ref> Conversely, many would argue for and against those passages in the Bible which command obedience to tradition <ref>2 Thessalonians 2:15; 3:6; 1 Corinthians 16:13; 11:2; </ref>, to established authority <ref>Romans 13:1-2</ref>, to the leaders of the church <ref>Hebrews 13:17</ref>, to human institutions <ref>1 Peter 2:13-18</ref>, and against ''[[sola scriptura]]'' private interpretations of the Bible <ref>2 Peter 1:20-21; 3:14-18</ref><ref>See [[Five Solas]] and [[Sola spiritu]]</ref>.

==Proof texts==

A common tactic used by cafeteria Christians is reliance on '''proof texts'''. A proof text (sometimes spelled prooftext) is a short passage from Scripture that is cited, to support a doctrinal position that the [[Hermeneutics|Bible when read as a whole]] may not support.<ref>[http://www.biblestudy.org/beginner/definition-of-christian-terms/prooftexting.html Definition of Christian Terms - Prooftexting]</ref>
::"A text without a context is a pretext for a prooftext" —''Evangelical Protestant scholar Dr. Donald A. Carson, who attributed this saying to his father''.
When cafeteria Christians are confronted with Bible verses that contradict the results of their prooftexting, they typically respond that such beliefs only reflect ancient Jewish/Christian tradition, not God's word.

Conservative Christian historians and [[Christian apologetics|apologists]] are mindful of this statement by [[John Eck]] addressed to [[Martin Luther]], in the year 1521:<ref>Eck's statement here is supremely appropriate in light of Luther's refusal to submit to the judgment of the Church, the emperor Charles V, and the [[Pope]], and the teaching of Paul in [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13:1-5&version=KJV Romans 13:1-5].</ref><blockquote>
"...there is no one of the heresies which have torn the bosom of the church, which has not derived its origin from the various interpretation of the Scripture. The Bible itself is the arsenal whence each innovator has drawn his deceptive arguments. It was with biblical texts that [[Pelagianism|Pelagius]] and [[Arius]] maintained their doctrines. Arius, for instance, found the negation of the eternity of the Word—an eternity which you admit, in this verse of the New Testament—''Joseph knew not his wife till she had brought forth her first-born son''; and he said, in the same way that you say, that this passage '''enchained''' him. When the fathers of the [[council of Constance]] condemned this proposition of [[John Huss]]—''The church of Jesus Christ is only the community of the elect'', they condemned an error; for the church, like a good mother, embraces within her arms all who bear the name of Christian, all who are called to enjoy the celestial beatitude."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/luther/lutherbyluther.html#secondnarrative|title=Life of Luther (Luther by Martin Luther)|author=Martin Luther|publisher=}}</ref>
</blockquote>

==See also==
*[[Cafeteria Catholic]]
*[[Christian In Name Only]]
*[[Fast Food Christianity]]
*[[Fluffy bunny]]
*[[Liberal Christianity]]
*[[Situational ethics]]
*[[Casuistry]]
*[[Sophistry]]
*[[Specious reasoning]]
*[[Hypocrites]]
*[[Confirmation bias]]
*[[Schism]]
*[[Heresy]]
*[[Apostasy]]

==References==
<references/>

{{Liberalism}}
[[Category:Christian Theology]]
[[Category:Liberal Falsehoods]]
[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Slang Terms]]

Cafeteria Christianity

2020-05-05T16:00:34Z

Susan4Right:

'''Cafeteria Christianity''' is a (generally derogatory) term used to refer to the practice of deciding for oneself which parts of the [[Bible]] to accept. The term derives from the idea of selecting certain foods in a cafeteria while rejecting others.<ref>[http://www.churchofgoddfw.com/monthly/cafeteria.html "Cafeteria Christianity," from the Church of God - DFW]</ref> This implies that the person believes in a deity, but may not adhere to any particular creed of Christianity, preferring to decide for themself how to express their faith. Other terms include "salad-bar Christianity" and "[[cherry picking|cherry-picking]] Christianity." Cafeteria Christianity is an example of self-generated Christianity, i.e., "Christianity" interpreted in the context of one's own beliefs.<ref>{{cite book| first1=Robert |last1=Ekelund |authorlink1= Robert Ekelund |first2= Robert |last2= Hébert |first3= Robert |last3=Tollison |authorlink3= Robert Tollison |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=FP08EXnwP3YC&lpg=PA334&dq=cafeteria%20Christianity&pg=PA258#v=onepage&q=cafeteria%20Christianity&f=false |title=The Marketplace of Christianity |publisher= MIT Press |year= 2006 |page = 258 |isbn=9780262050821 }}</ref>

This associated practice is particularly common among [[Liberal Christianity|liberal]] denominations, which often cite passages showing Christ's forgiveness and mercy in order to deny the existence of [[Hell]] or the necessity of [[faith]] for redemption. Matt. 7:1, "Judge not, that ye be not judged" is quoted particularly often for this purpose. Likewise, they do not adhere to passages which refute [[evolution]], condemn [[abortion]], make statements about the role of [[women]] that refute modern [[feminism|feminist]] dogmas, condemn [[homosexuality]], [[adultery]], and [[remarriage]] after a [[divorce]], and conflict with other liberal views.

However, cafeteria Christianity is not limited to the left side of the political spectrum: conservative Christians often cite Scripture selectively in order to expose hypocrisy while explaining away the same issues in their own camp (such as criticizing the Catholic Church for covering up child molestation among its priests—arguing that the problem is due to the Church's prohibition against priests marrying—while ignoring similar cases involving married pastors or leaders within major Protestant churches or denominations). A notable example of "right-wing" cafeteria Christianity can be found on Coservapedia. For instance, Conservapedia articles cite the Bible to condemn homosexuality, while denouncing abortion despite certain passages of the Bible in support of it. (e.g. Numbers 5: If feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure... The priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, "If... you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband... may this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.")

Due to contradictions found in the Bible and Christian organizations, adhering to every part of the Bible is technically impossible. Thus, anyone could theoretically be argued to be a "Cafeteria Christian".

==Bible teaching against cafeteria Christianity==

The Bible quotes [[Jesus]] as saying:
{{Bible quote|But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.|book=Matthew|chap=4|verses=4|version=KJV}}
Note: "every word," not "some words." The counterargument of many cafeteria Christians is to assert, typically [[Logical_fallacy#Manufacturing_facts_from_a_theory|without evidence]], that the word of the authors of certain parts of the Bible is not necessarily the word of God. However, absent evidence that a certain passage of the Bible is not God's Word (e.g., Paul's explicit statement that he is expressing a personal view), that counterargument is [[beg the question|circular]], as it assumes the propriety of cherry-picking the Bible in order to justify cherry-picking the Bible.

Confusion as to just how literally Biblical texts should be taken abounds, even amongst those who generally accept the Bible to be the word for God. Few would argue, for example, with the statement: 'However, the bible cannot be interpreted literally, if this was the case then rebellious children would be killed: Deuteronomy 21:18-21. Also, Women may not speak in church: Cor 14:33-36. The bible is not a collection of dogmatic and strict rules, it is a book of God that promotes compassion, faith in God, truth, and love.'<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality</ref> Conversely, many would argue for and against those passages in the Bible which command obedience to tradition <ref>2 Thessalonians 2:15; 3:6; 1 Corinthians 16:13; 11:2; </ref>, to established authority <ref>Romans 13:1-2</ref>, to the leaders of the church <ref>Hebrews 13:17</ref>, to human institutions <ref>1 Peter 2:13-18</ref>, and against ''[[sola scriptura]]'' private interpretations of the Bible <ref>2 Peter 1:20-21; 3:14-18</ref><ref>See [[Five Solas]] and [[Sola spiritu]]</ref>.

==Proof texts==

A common tactic used by cafeteria Christians is reliance on '''proof texts'''. A proof text (sometimes spelled prooftext) is a short passage from Scripture that is cited, to support a doctrinal position that the [[Hermeneutics|Bible when read as a whole]] may not support.<ref>[http://www.biblestudy.org/beginner/definition-of-christian-terms/prooftexting.html Definition of Christian Terms - Prooftexting]</ref>
::"A text without a context is a pretext for a prooftext" —''Evangelical Protestant scholar Dr. Donald A. Carson, who attributed this saying to his father''.
When cafeteria Christians are confronted with Bible verses that contradict the results of their prooftexting, they typically respond that such beliefs only reflect ancient Jewish/Christian tradition, not God's word.

Conservative Christian historians and [[Christian apologetics|apologists]] are mindful of this statement by [[John Eck]] addressed to [[Martin Luther]], in the year 1521:<ref>Eck's statement here is supremely appropriate in light of Luther's refusal to submit to the judgment of the Church, the emperor Charles V, and the [[Pope]], and the teaching of Paul in [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13:1-5&version=KJV Romans 13:1-5].</ref><blockquote>
"...there is no one of the heresies which have torn the bosom of the church, which has not derived its origin from the various interpretation of the Scripture. The Bible itself is the arsenal whence each innovator has drawn his deceptive arguments. It was with biblical texts that [[Pelagianism|Pelagius]] and [[Arius]] maintained their doctrines. Arius, for instance, found the negation of the eternity of the Word—an eternity which you admit, in this verse of the New Testament—''Joseph knew not his wife till she had brought forth her first-born son''; and he said, in the same way that you say, that this passage '''enchained''' him. When the fathers of the [[council of Constance]] condemned this proposition of [[John Huss]]—''The church of Jesus Christ is only the community of the elect'', they condemned an error; for the church, like a good mother, embraces within her arms all who bear the name of Christian, all who are called to enjoy the celestial beatitude."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/luther/lutherbyluther.html#secondnarrative|title=Life of Luther (Luther by Martin Luther)|author=Martin Luther|publisher=}}</ref>
</blockquote>

==See also==
*[[Cafeteria Catholic]]
*[[Christian In Name Only]]
*[[Fast Food Christianity]]
*[[Fluffy bunny]]
*[[Liberal Christianity]]
*[[Situational ethics]]
*[[Casuistry]]
*[[Sophistry]]
*[[Specious reasoning]]
*[[Hypocrites]]
*[[Confirmation bias]]
*[[Schism]]
*[[Heresy]]
*[[Apostasy]]

==References==
<references/>

{{Liberalism}}
[[Category:Christian Theology]]
[[Category:Liberal Falsehoods]]
[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Slang Terms]]