An open letter to the Texas Republican Party chairman

I interrupt the regularly scheduled blog post to bring you this important political message. I received no response, and so am posting here as promised.

Dear Chairman Rinaldi,

Our family received a postal mail correspondence from you as a representative of the Republican Party of Texas, stating “The Republican Party of Texas stands with Ken Paxton because he stands with us.”

[Personal information redacted.] Yes, we certainly can argue that Attorney Paxton is better than the Democratic alternative. He has done some good things as Attorney General. However, I am unwilling to settle for the lesser of two evils. Mr. Paxton has shamed the Republican Party of Texas, and brought us into disrepute for our moral inconsistency – saying one thing and doing another. For my part I am not only a fiscal conservative, but a moral conservative as well. The Republican Party of Texas platform is both fiscally and morally conservative.

I think you may be correct that the impeachment process is politically motivated. However, it does not logically follow that this means Ken Paxton should continue in the office of Attorney General. He needs to go. The second-best way for him to go would be for the voters who voted him in to vote him out. The best and less painful way would be for him to go voluntarily, either by resigning or not running again. Neither of these two options seem likely, based on the actions of Mr. Paxton and support of the state Republican Party chairman.

The Party platform says, “We affirm God’s biblical design for marriage and sexual behavior between one biological man and one biological woman, which has proven to be the foundation for all great nations in Western civilization” (p. 29).

For you, perhaps, and for some members of the party, this may only be a generic plank to show a reason for the opposition to the marriage of people of the same gender. It certainly is and should be that, but it is more than that. It affirms “God’s biblical design for marriage and sexual behavior” – which Attorney General Paxton has flaunted. All have sinned and come short of the glory of God, and we could forgive him for the sin of adultery. However, after this sin he multiplied sin upon sin. Attorney General Paxton lied to his wife, lied to his supporters, lied to Texas, continued to pursue the adultery he promised to put behind him, and used his position as Attorney General of the great State of Texas in doing so! I do not and cannot trust liars.

I intend to share this letter as an “open letter” to my church, my Facebook friends, and on my blog. Before doing so, I will give you an opportunity to respond. Is there any reason to believe that these things that Mr. Paxton did (mentioned in the previous paragraph) are not so? I will not support Ken Paxton simply because he is better than the Democratic alternative. He needs to support this plank of the State Party platform by living it. If not, we need a better Republican alternative.

Thanks for reading and considering my opinion. May you have a blessed day.

Church's and employee's rights in firing

* Virginia pastor defends decision to fire unwed mother

Though this does not appear to be widely disseminated news, it is interesting to me. It fits the ongoing saga of the place (and rights) of churches in pre-post-Christian America. The Staples Mill Road Baptist Church of Glen Allen, Virginia fired employee Apryl Kellam from their day care. Apryl is not married and expecting a baby. Though no one put it clearly in anything I read, conceiving/having a baby out of wedlock appears to violate the church's policies. One would think so! (But I still live in the stone age.) It is not clear whether she lives with the father of the expected baby, but according to the couple Apryl was advised to get married in order to keep her job. She was hired in September, and according the boyfriend Coalson, she never should have been hired if the church feels that way. It is not clear just what he meant, but that seems to imply that the church knew they were living together at the time Apryl was hired. Also sounds like she was already pregnant when she was hired, though the church would not have necessarily known it (Sept-Apr is not 9 months). It is not clear whether Apryl Kellam is a member of Staples Mill Road Baptist Church.

Another angle of this, though, is when churches step into the role of employer they are going to come in contact with hiring laws, including those against discrimination. In most employee-employer relationships the employee usually can't be fired for getting pregnant (or can she?). How will these murky waters be waded? Only time will tell. 100 years ago most churches didn't have "employees" in the sense that would be so regarded today. 50 years ago some churches had some employees, but those employees probably had a strong sense of church doctrine and practice, and the likelihood of the church, employee and state running afoul with one another was probably relatively minor. Now we have detailed laws regarding employment, hiring and firing. Most of those were developed more with businesses in mind (as opposed to churches). Many people, even those who attend the more conservative churches, often have personal beliefs that vary widely from the church. The overall mixture in 2015 is definitely ripe for conflicts of the interests of a church and its employees and the state.

My personal solution is that churches get out of "business" -- not be an employer and have no employees. But that is only in line with my beliefs and not with those of the majority of churches. For the rest, as a religious entity a church needs to be able to hire and fire within the parameters of her doctrines and policies. Only when she steps outside of those parameters should she be found in violation of her "employer" role.

Do Christians make the least faithful spouses?

This morning I linked the Huff Post article, Christians Make The Least Faithful Spouses, According To A New Survey.

The survey was conducted by Ashley Madison. Ashley Madison is a dating website "for people already in relationships." According to Wikipedia, "Ashley Madison is an online dating service and social networking service marketed to people who are already in a relationship with the slogan 'Life is short. Have an affair'."  It further states that the service has over 21 million members in 30 countries.  Supposedly they "sought to discover the link between religion and infidelity by asking 105,000 of its members about their religious affiliation."

I fear that the article is far too accurate to be simply be cast off by Christians, but far too "messy" to yield up any quickly consumed conclusions.

First of all, many Christians are unfaithful to their spouses.

But, second, the very nature of the website makes the answers of those surveyed suspect. They are unfaithful and probably lying to their spouses, so whether we can get much accurate and faithful data from them is questionable.

Third, where were most of the people polled located? For example, are they in primarily "Christian" countries?

Finally, it does not take into account self-reporting and the "definition" of what a Christian really is. If the respondents are in primarily "Christian" there is a likelihood of nominal attachment to a religion. IOW, they say they are Christians because they aren't atheists or Muslims or Buddhists, their parents were Christians and so on. This survey may tell us a lot about all the sorts of people who claim the Christian name, but little about those who are actively trying to live out their faith. There are (at least in the United States & western world) lots of nominal Christians. On the other hand, there are not likely many "nominal" atheists.

Just something to think about.