chesley wrote:
“Nonsense! the right to free speech means the government shall not interfere with it. It doesn’t mean private individuals can’t bring social pressure on the speaker. That would interfere with their free speech.”
That last sentence - about interfering with free speech. Isn’t that what this is all about? Unless you agree with women having bridles in their mouths, and short whips stuck-you-know-where, and prancing around like pretty ponies with long tails.
Just because “she is the pastor’s wife”, does NOT shut off her right to open her mouth and say what she thinks, parishoners be damned.
I did notice, when in my days of insanity as a Pentecostal, there was a sort of Pentecostal ‘PC’ speech, too.
The woman has the right to say whatever she wants. But there are always consequences for our actions. The church disagrees with her at a fundamental level. Should she convert to Islam, would that be enough in your mind for the church to separate itself from this couple?
No one owes anyone anything. The church does not owe her husband a position. And why should it give him one from which to spout views at variance with its own?
“Freedom of speech” is about government interference. ONLY!
Not the responses of private individuals to offensive speech so long as it doesn't interfere with the lives and property of others.
And that comment about women having bridles in their mouths and short whips, etc. What does that have to do with anything? Totally gratuitous and reveals something about your mind.
The thing is, a married couple is a unit, and the husband is certain positions of responsibility, not just in the church, but in the corporate world, will be judged on his wife's behavior. Not necessarily as to his character, but as to his suitability to fill that position. There's nothing wrong with that. Does a corporate officer from GM advise his friends to buy a Ford?