FAQ :: Can Christian beliefs result in job loss, education discrimination and travel restrictions?

Yes, a number of incidents have transpired that are clearly discriminatory against Bible-believing Christians. In March, 2014, Brendan Eich was appointed as the new chief executive officer (CEO) of Mozilla. Two weeks later, he resigned his position, following pressure from the board of directors and amid complaints from his subordinates. In fact, during his short tenure, half of Mozilla’s board resigned from their positions and some of his employees made comments on Twitter and other social media sites intimating that they could not work with Eich.

Normally, when there is this much upheaval over an executive, leading to his dismissal, it is brought on by a serious act of misconduct on his part. So, upon learning of Mr. Eich’s summary ouster from his position, the obvious question is: what did he do to justify short tenure?

Brendan Eich was one of the co-founders of Mozilla, which makes the popular Firefox internet browser. He had been with the company since its founding, and was certainly well-known by the board of directors. There is no question that he was knowledgeable about the company. He also created JavaScript, and is well-known in the technology industry as a whole.

Mr. Eich’s “crime” was to donate $1000 for the passage of Proposition 8 in California. Proposition 8 was a ballot initiative to write into California law that which should be obvious: a marriage is between a man and a woman. This ballot initiative passed in the very liberal state of California, having the support of the majority of voters of the state in 2008. At this point, President Obama was stating his support for marriage defined the same way. Yet, six years after the fact, Mr. Eich was punished by the board at Mozilla (a company he co-founded) by being forced out of his position as CEO due to the outcry over giving money he earned as a private citizen to a cause in which he believed.

Nowhere in the outcry against Eich was it ever stated that he tried to proselytize others into believing as he did. He was not accused of any discriminatory practices against homosexuals. In fact, Mozilla has a “same-sex partners” provisions written into their insurance policies, and Eich even stated that he would enforce these provisions, even though he apparently didn’t believe in them.

Mitchell Baker, the chairman of the board, stated after the dismissal that people had a right to be angry (at Eich’s appointment as CEO) because they “haven’t stayed true to ourselves.” This is rather ironic, given that he and the others on the board forced Eich out of office because his views differed from their own. In other words, they were opposed to Eich being allowed to “be true to” himself and his principles. Of course, it also speaks volumes about the way Mozilla values the loyalty of long-term service, even of a co-founder of the company.

Unfortunately, Brandon Eich’s story is not an isolated incident, but rather symptomatic of the way the homosexual activists are aggressively going after anyone who even remotely disagrees with their agenda of recognition of their actions and lifestyle. Last year, former NFL football player Craig James was fired after a week from Fox Sports Southwest, where he worked as a commentator. Like Eich, he was not fired for anything he said or did on the job. He was fired because of a statement he made during an earlier run for the U.S. Senate in 2012.

During a debate that year, James was asked his position on homosexual “marriage.” His response was direct and clear. He said he opposed “leaders” who participate in “gay” parades, and that he opposed so-called “marriages” on biblical grounds.

What likely led to hysterics among the left, however, was when he said that homosexuality is a choice. The left has long sought that elusive gene that will prove that homosexuals are “born that way” and have promoted this notion, seeking to destroy anyone who would disagree with this opinion. He stated clearly that he believes, just as the Bible teaches, that homosexuals will “have to answer to the Lord for their actions.” This statement, while certainly true to what is taught in the Bible, goes against what many of the more liberal denominations of “churches” teach today.

Fox fired James, claiming that his statements would not “play in our human resources department” and that “he couldn’t say those things here.” Of course, he never did say those things on the job, and was never accused of doing so. Fox fired a man who they never showed to be incapable of doing his job, but because they were afraid of something he said on an important issue a year earlier.

This attack on free speech, and specifically on Christian free speech, is not unique to the United States. In April 2014, Peter La Barbera who is a Christian and American citizen, was asked to speak in Regina, Saskatchewan. Mr. LaBarbera is the director of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality, but was called to Canada to speak to the Saskatchewan Pro-Life Association in early April.

At the Canadian airport, LaBarbera’s passport was seized and he was subjected to hours of interrogation. He explained that he was asked about the content of his speech, while the customs agents went through his luggage, his laptop, a DVD of an earlier speech he made, and went over his organization’s website with a fine-tooth comb.

Apparently, LaBarbera’s appearance was opposed by a pro-homosexual group called Intolerance Free Weyburn, which referred to him as a “purveyor of ‘hate’.” They opposed his presence in Canada, arguing that it would violate Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” law, designed supposedly to prevent incitement against homosexuals. Of course, like all “hate crime” laws, it has been used for the purpose of silencing speech that the left doesn’t like.

Mr. LaBarbera was going to speak on the link between homosexual and pro-abortion activist policies. He was ultimately denied entry into the country under the authority of the country’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, contending that the content of his website “targets” people based on their “sexual orientation” and was not allowed to speak at the event.

Academia has long been the bastion of Marxist thought, and most of the colleges across the country have adopted the homosexual agenda, with the addition of “LGBT” clubs and organizations having a prominent position at many of these universities, even in areas that are deep within the Bible belt.

In 2010, Julea Ward http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/01/30/appeals-court-revives-suit-dismissal-anti-gay-psychology-student – sthash.dnMRsYKp.dpbswas a masters psychology student at Eastern Michigan University, which has a policy that students in their masters provide counseling to students in a way that is “affirming” to the student. This is a graduation requirement for the masters program at that university. Miss Ward, a Christian, sought an exemption that would prevent her being forced to counsel homosexual students in a way that would affirm their homosexuality. Instead of accepting that Miss Ward had a legitimate religious reason for not counseling these types of students, they kicked her out of the masters program under the claim that she was trying to skirt the academic requirements.

After being kicked out of the masters program for her religious objection, she filed suit against the university. A federal judge sided with the university, and an appeals court in the sixth circuit (which covers Michigan) found that there were grounds for the suit to continue, partially finding in Miss Ward’s favor, citing the fact that she had a religious objection to counseling students in this manner and that she had stated she would refer such students to other counselors.

In Canada, Trinity Western Universityhttp://news.nationalpost.com/2014/04/11/trinity-western-university/ is seeking recognition and accreditation for its law school. There was opposition to the university because of its ban on homosexual acts on the campus. Trinity is a private Christian university that is planning on opening its law school in 2016. The Law Society in British Columbia, after much discussion, decided not to blacklist the school, which allows for the accreditation process to go forward however two other provinces are refusing to recognize any degree’s from the school, including Canada’s largest province Ontario.

The University of North Carolina at Wilmington was recognized as the second most liberal public university in the state of North Carolina. They have a LGBT group prominently displayed at the university union, and certainly have several Marxist policies. At the orientation for students in August 2013, a mandatory event featured a lesbian speaker, who attacked white Christian males as a group and talked about the need for “tolerance.”

Mike Adams, a professor in the Criminology department of the university, was hired by the university in 1993 and became an associate professor in 1998. At the time he was hired by the university, he was an atheist and a liberal. However, when he became a born-again Christian in 2000, he started writing for Townhall.com and other publications from a decidedly conservative, Christian perspective.

Needless to say, his opinions and articles soon earned the disdain from the heavily liberal staff at the university, including Kimberly Cook, who is the chair of his department and an avowed liberal feminist. Cook, in fact, reprimanded Adams for his political columns, but said that her ideal candidate for a teaching position at the university was a “lesbian with a dog collar.”

Professor Adams related numerous problems that started to develop with the university, including numerous incidents where he was singled out by Cook and was consistently denied tenure. It should be noted that Adams was praised by Cook’s two predecessors, and Adams has a 4.4 (out of 5.0) rating on ratemyprofessor.com.

After Adams filed a lawsuit alleging discrimination against him because of his Christian and political viewpoint in 2007, a seven-year battle continued until April. A federal judge ruled that the university acted inappropriately in denying Adams tenure and awarded him with $50,000 in back pay. They also ordered that Adams had to be immediately promoted with full tenure.

There are numerous incidents that have come to the forefront that are indicative of an atmosphere hostile towards Christianity. A growing movement for speech codes that extend past the university to public life, with sanctions against people who do not accept the homosexual agenda. “Hate crime” laws have been adopted in several states, and liberals in Congress have long been lobbying for federal “hate crime” legislation, which would punish those who speak out against sodomy.

A recent case involving a photographer who refused to work on a lesbian “wedding” ceremony, and a bakery that refused to make a cake in a similar “wedding” are illustrative of the strategy that is being enlisted by homosexual activists, who find Christians and specifically target those businesses with frivolous lawsuits to “punish” them for holding firm on their beliefs. These high profile cases, and the federal government’s refusal to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act (passed during the Clinton administration) show the troubling direction in which the country is headed.

Homosexual activists are employing a new brand of McCarthyism, “calling out” those that disagree with them and seeking to shut down their businesses or otherwise silence viewpoints with which they disagree. If this trend continues unabated, the United States may find itself in the same position as countries in Europe, where pastors have found themselves incarcerated for preaching sermons that included biblical admonitions against homosexuality.

This would have been unthinkable twenty years ago, but seems far closer to reality today. Christians will be left with the choice of accepting a watering down of their beliefs or being punished for defending them. This punishment may include loss of jobs, destruction of their reputation, or even imprisonment. While the McCarthyism so often spoken of from the 1950s was more hype than reality, the situation that conservative Christians find themselves in today is very real.

The only way to defend against it is to first acknowledge that it exists. The situation as it exists did not happen overnight; nor will it be overturned immediately. If Christians are prepared to defend their beliefs, however, the process must start quickly before any more ground is lost.

This type of discrimination (persecution) of Christians is becoming more and more prevalent in our culture. Each Christian must be aware of this and be equipped to handle such situations:

“Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand” (Ephesians 6:10-13).

Stand therefore, having girded your waist with truth, having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace; above all, taking the shield of faith with which you will be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked one. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God; praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, being watchful to this end with all perseverance and supplication for all the saints—and for me, that utterance may be given to me, that I may open my mouth boldly to make known the mystery of the gospel” (Ephesians 6:10-20).