Psst … your bias is showing
By Carmen Fowler LaBerge, The Layman, May 27, 2011
The Wall Street Journal ran our ad. So did the Los Angeles Times, the Atlanta Journal/Constitution and the Houston Chronicle. But the Minneapolis Star Tribune said no. There’ll be no room for you unless you conform your ad to suit our censors.
It’s not that the people of the Twin Cities are uninterested in the issues raised. Nor that the region lacks a Presbyterian presence. Minneapolis was the city in which the Presbyterian Church (USA) General Assembly adopted an amendment to remove the sexual behavior standards from its Book of Order. The Star Tribune celebrated when the Twin Cities presbytery cast the deciding vote for its ratification. But they won’t run material advocating another position.
“Our advocacy specialist has reviewed your ad,” said the Star Tribune, “and 2 of the copy lines would need to be removed: the second that references limiting sexual activity to Christian marriage, and the 3rd referencing 2000 years of Christian faith and moral teaching.”
Ironically, this is a paper that prides itself in its “tolerance.” The Star Tribune vaunts the First Amendment as its guiding light and tolerance as its north star. A recent editorial finds it “disappointing” that Minnesota lawmakers are even considering a marriage amendment, which, according to the editor, “would wrongly enshrine bigotry and discrimination in the state Constitution.” Nothing, the Star Tribune asserts, should be allowed to wound the message of tolerance.
So, tolerance has now become unashamedly intolerant. Increasingly, the only viewpoint welcome in the public square is that of self-declared inclusivists. Those who hold other viewpoints are castigated as bigoted exclusivists. And further, anyone who doesn’t welcome every idea is now excluded from participation in the public debate by blatant censorship.
The classical definition of tolerance refers to people. Those who espouse a Biblical worldview, believe that all people are equal because people are created in the image of God. From this perspective, although all people are equal, all ideas are not. Postmodern tolerance has turned the concept on its head, claiming that all ideas are equal as are all people who regard all ideas as equal. However, anyone who does not regard all ideas as equal may be mistreated, maligned, censored and excluded from further conversation. All this in the name of tolerance: the very people who claim to be the most tolerant are thus actually exposed as the most intolerant of all.
In a Back Page article in Christianity Today, Chuck Colson warned a decade ago that, “in today’s relativistic environment, pluralism no longer means tolerating competing ideas, but rather forced neutrality: no one should express any idea that could offend another.” Colson continues, “This redefinition of tolerance could have a serious effect on Christian witness. It is one thing to restrain religious activities in church-state conflicts, but something else when cultural pressures stifle the practice of religious beliefs.”
It is unlikely that the Presbyterian Lay Committee will be stifled by the Star Tribune’s effort to limit its freedom of speech on the matter of Biblical sexual standards for ordained leaders. With or without their welcome, we will deliver the news to Presbyterians.