An athlete can come out as a cross-dressing homosexual and they are praised by the media as being a heroic example, while another athlete speaks out as a cross promoting Christian and they are castigated by the media as being a bigot and are told to keep their beliefs at home.
A politician that sees no sin in anyone other than those who call a spade a spade can sing “Amazing Grace” and they’re called the “reverend-in-chief”, while another politician who sees and calls out the sin that causes humanity’s need for amazing grace and they’re called a “homophobe” who clings to an out-of-date book.
A law can be created to “protect” an individual’s lifestyle from those who disagree with it and it’s seen as just and fair, while the same law can force those who disagree with being forced into doing something that goes against their lifestyle into doing that very thing and somehow there’s no inequality or injustice in it.
So what happened to that idea that said diversity of thought was a good thing? I guess it’s only good until the thought differs from the desired diversity…which doesn’t sound very diverse at the end of the day, now does it? EA
“He who is often rebuked, and hardens his neck, will suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy. When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice; but when a wicked man rules, the people groan. Whoever loves wisdom makes his father rejoice, but a companion of harlots wastes his wealth.” (Proverbs 29:1-3)