Rick might wish this to be so, but it is not. The support for slavery in the Bible, and Old and New T., is overwhelming. For a sampling of some of the religious arguments see (modestly), my most resent book: Paul Finkelman, DEFENDING SLAVERY: PROSLAVERY THOUGHT IN THE OLD SOUTH (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2003). Proslavery ministers had enormous textual support for their views. Support for racism is less clear, but some of it is surely there.
Paul Finkelman Univ. of Tulsa College of Law Quoting Rick Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Jack may be right that Bible believing Christians will > see the light about the equal goodness of homosexual > conduct; but I doubt it. Religious views supporting > slavery and race discrimination do not have strong > support in the text of the Scriptures; indeed, quite > the contrary is true (black and yellow, red and white, > Jesus does indeed love all the children of the world). > > But the Bible's teachings about human sexuality are > clear and central to the faith (from Genesis through > Revelations.) Moreover, common sense and common > experience are on the side of those who understand the > inherently heterosexual nature of human sexuality. The > rectum is not a sexual organ, and most people outside > certain elite circles realize that. Powerful elites > can suppress the truth for a time, but truth has a way > of returning stronger after a period of suppression. > > I'll take Jack's bets--both about the mainstream of > Christianity (and the mainstream of America) and about > the Boy Scouts. I'll meet you in Fenway Park for the > first game of the 2033 World Series to collect (or to > pay). > > Cheers, Rick > > > --- Jack Balkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Rick's point is quite important. There will always > > be social pressures on > > people to conform to society's dominant views of > > what is equal, fair, and > > just. That is how successful social movements work. > > > > But he begs the question about whether his attitudes > > or those of the > > Catholic Church will eventually change. That may > > seem a scandalous > > statement, since we know that God's laws are > > eternal. But the history of > > religion shows that whether God's own laws are > > eternal or not, the > > interpretations placed on them by the social > > organizations called churches > > do change over time. For example, churches that one > > supported slavery and > > preached the inferior status of blacks no longer do > > so. Those churches are > > not ostracized for once having taken positions that > > today we would find > > reprehensible. Rick may imagine that his views on > > homosexuality will never > > change, and it would be unprincipled of him to do > > so, but let's have that > > conversation in thirty years. (Indeed, let's have a > > conversation about my > > own views in thirty years. I have no idea what they > > will be on a whole > > host of subjects. But I have seen my views on a > > number of issues about > > religion and morality shift since I was young, and I > > have no doubt that > > they will change again.) > > > > It is very unlikely that the Catholic Church is > > going to change its views > > on homosexuality in the same way that the Mormon > > church changed its views > > on polygamy. That is especially so since the center > > of gravity of the > > Catholic Church is increasingly in the Third World, > > not the more liberal > > climes of North America. But what is likely to > > happen is that the Church > > in the United States and Canada (as opposed to the > > rest of the world) will > > stop making as big a deal about homosexuality. What > > we will see is an > > accommodation, in which the Church will eventually > > support (or at the very > > least refrain form opposing) all sorts of > > antidiscrimination laws for > > homosexuals without giving up its view that > > homosexuality is morally > > wrong. The closest (although by no means perfect) > > analogy would be the > > attitude that the the Church takes toward the very > > large number of > > Catholics who have sex before marriage or who are > > divorced. Fornication > > is still wrong, and the Church requires and > > encourages abstinence before > > marriage, but more time appears to be spent on > > pointing out the evils of > > abortion or homosexuality than on fornication. The > > Catholic Church no > > longer spends very much time or effort attempting to > > abolish divorce laws, > > and although it may in some cases defend existing > > laws on the books against > > adultery or fornication, it does not actively try to > > put more restrictive > > laws on the books, as it does in the case of > > abortion. This accommodation, > > ironically, will be made possible when the gay > > rights movement is so > > successful that pressing its claims no longer > > becomes a matter of the same > > degree of urgency as it is today. Again, the sexual > > revolution is the > > appropriate analogy. Once a very large number of > > Americans began having > > sex before marriage, and premarital sex was fully > > normalized, lots of > > churches began spending more time complaining about > > other forms of sexual > > misbehavior. (You might call that defining deviancy > > down. I call it > > social change.). > > > > The Boy Scouts, it seems to me, is an easy case. > > I'll bet Rick that the > > Boy Scouts completely backtrack on their current > > views on homosexuality > > within a decade. No judge will have to quit the Boy > > Scouts because it is a > > homophobic organization. Boy Scouts v. Dale will > > be overruled, not in > > doctrine, but in practice. (There's the conlaw hook > > for Eugene!). > > > > > > Jack Balkin > > > > > > > > At 12:00 AM 7/12/2003 -0700, Automatic digest > > processor wrote: > > >Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 10:45:05 -0700 > > >From: Rick Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Subject: Re: "Agenda" > > >MIME-Version: 1.0 > > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > > > > >I think there is an "agenda" that homosexual > > political > > >activists are trying to impose on society. The > > agenda, > > >which includes things like gay rights laws and > > >same-sex marriage and, maybe, the lowering of the > > age > > >of consent, is ultimately about getting society to > > >affirm the goodness of homosexuality and the evil > > of > > >"HOMOPHOBIA." Ultimately, it is about demonizing > > >people who believe that homosexual conduct is > > >unnatural or immoral or unhealthy. > > > > > >A few years ago Prof. Larry Yackle wrote a law > > review > > >article (73 B.U. L. Rev. 791) predicting the > > success > > >of the gay rights cause. Yackle went on to predict > > >that when the gay revolution succeeds, the "old > > order" > > >will be crushed and "private homophobia, deprived > > of > > >legal sanction, will ultimately be discredited and > > >forced to the margin." Id. at 792-793. Homophobia > > >equals Racism, and to be a homophobe (i.e. to > > believe > > >that homosexual conduct is immoral or unhealthy or > > >unnatural) is equivalent to being a racist. > > Cardinal > > >O'Connor has the same moral standing in the > > community > > >as David Duke and the Boy Scouts are equivalent to > > the > > >KKK. > > > > > >Sounds crazy doesn't it? You would have to be crazy > > to > > >believe that anyone has an agenda like this. No? I > > >mean what's next? Will judges be forced to quit the > > >Boy Scouts under rules of judicial ethics? > > Ridiculous! > > >Will the Christian Legal Society be banned from > > >interviewing on campus at elite law schools? What > > >nonsense! Next thing you'll be saying that judges > > will > > >have to leave the Catholic Church or the Knights of > > >Columbus to satisy their ethical obligations. Not > > yet! > > > > > >But wait awhile. > > > > > >Maybe this is what Scalia had in mind in Lawrence. > > The > > >greatest intolerance I have ever witnessed has come > > >from people goosestepping under the banner of > > >tolerance. The homosexual agenda embraces tolerance > > in > > >order to crush those who have a different view of > > the > > >goodness of homosexual conduct. > > > > > >Cheers, Rick Duncan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >===== > > >Rick Duncan > > >Welpton Professor of Law > > >University of Nebraska College of Law > > >Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 > > > > > >"Politics is not a bad profession. If you succeed > > there are many rewards, > > >if you disgrace yourself you can always write a > > book." Ronald Reagan > > > > > >__________________________________ > > >Do you Yahoo!? > > >SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! > > >http://sbc.yahoo.com > > > ===== > Rick Duncan > Welpton Professor of Law > University of Nebraska College of Law > Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 > > "Politics is not a bad profession. If you succeed there are > many rewards, if you disgrace yourself you can always write a > book." Ronald Reagan > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! > http://sbc.yahoo.com > >
