Is The News hostile to LGBTQ people?
We read the 765-word bloviation of Mike Westfall, representing some basement fringe organization called the American Family Association of Michigan, arguing that potential expansion of protections for LGBTQ persons is a serious threat to Christians and other “people of faith.” (We recall, in Westfall’s letters through 2019, that the greatest threat was impending reefer madness. Times change.)
Westfall’s op-ed piece refers to Michigan Republican legislators arguing, without evidence, that LGBTQ anti-discrimination protections, where passed, have resulted in “reverse discrimination against people of faith.” (We try to imagine what this reverse discrimination could be. Our imagination fails.)
Westfall claims that “influential Christian leaders, pastors, and pro-family activists began loudly voicing their genuine concerns about the discrimination in the (proposed federal) act directed at Christians and the Bible.” (We try to imagine discrimination “directed … at the Bible.” Again, our imagination fails.)
There is extended favorable reference to Franklin Graham, never one to shy away from hyperbole and the histrionic. There is the laughable suggestion that Christians could be criminally prosecuted for “hatred.” There is favorable reference to James Dobson, possibly more self-aggrandizing and histrionic than Graham.
We read that the proposed federal legislation “is incompatible with God’s Word, the historic teaching of the church, and it is riddled with threats to religious liberty and the sanctity of human life.” We search the Constitution for reference to this country operating on “God’s Word.” No luck.
We read this, barely suppressing laughter: “If the Equality Acts are passed, those Christians will awaken from their slumber to a discrimination and nightmarish hostility. At that point, the Christian persecution will have commenced in America.”
Space is limited. Our question: Is The News all-in with virulent anti-LGBTQ sentiment masquerading as “pro-Christian,” or has Westfall merely found a loophole in the word limit for letters to the editor?
CLYDE A. SHUMAN,