More intolerance from the Thought Police

By Tom Quiner

The words “inclusion” and “tolerance” drip from the lips of liberals like they were honey.

These words are the standard of a civilized society in their value system. Or so they say.

They don’t mean it.

They, in fact, despise diversity.

They, in fact, have no interest in inclusion.

The latest victim of the Thought Police of the Left is Dr. Frank Turek. He was fired by Bank of America for espousing politically incorrect views. He is the author of Correct, Not Politically Correct:  How Same-Sex Marriage Hurts Everyone.

Before we talk about his firing, here is the essence of the dilemma, in Mr Turek’s own words:

[Advocates of gay marriage equate] “my opposition to a behavior as prejudice toward people who engage in that behavior. That’s the central fallacy in virtually every argument for homosexuality—if you don’t agree with homosexual behavior, you are somehow bigoted against people who want to engage in that behavior. How does that follow? If conservatives and Christians are “bigots” for opposing homosexual behavior, then why aren’t homosexual activists bigots for opposing Christian behavior? And if we are bigots for opposing same-sex marriage, then why aren’t homosexual activists bigots for opposing polygamous or incestuous marriage?”

In other words, Dr. Turek views same-sex marriage as being detrimental to society. He wrote a book about it. He makes his case.

It so happens that Dr. Turek is a highly regarded trainer in the fields of leadership and team building.

Bank of America has been his client since 1995. He was invited to speak at  one of their recent meetings. His presentation was titled: “Why can’t you be normal just like me?”

His presentation trains participants on how to work more effectively with diverse personalities on the job.

His presentation was all about increasing productivity through the power of inclusion and diversity.

His views on same-sex marriage was not part of his presentation.

His political views were not part of his presentation.

His religious views were not part of his presentation.

They were separate from his training profession, as they always had been in his professional dealings with Bank of America.

Nonetheless, a woman in their human resource department Googled Dr. Turek and discovered his views on same-sex unions.

Bank of America canned him three days before their meeting.

So much for diversity.

So much for inclusion.

So much for religious freedom.

Dr. Turek’s approach has always been to treat people with respect, whether he agrees with them or not.

Can the same be said for the Thought Police at Bank of America?

Here is what Bank of America is saying:

Jews who believe in traditional marriage because of their religious views are not welcome at Bank of America.

Catholics who believe in traditional marriage because of their religious views are not welcome at Bank of America.

Fundamentalist Christians who believe in traditional marriage because of their religious views are not welcome at Bank of America.

Baptists who believe in traditional marriage because of their religious views are not welcome at Bank of America.

Muslims who believe in traditional marriage because of their religious views are not welcome at Bank of America.

You get the idea.

Bank of America has bought into the intolerance of the Thought Police on the political left, as has America’s president who refuses to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act.

Let us put this into context.

Suppose Dr. Turek had written a book waxing eloquent on the beauty of same-sex marriage, and Wal-Mart had canned him by disinviting him to their meeting.

Would Bank of America been upset?

Would the Thought Police on the Left been upset?

Would the President of the United States been upset?

Yes. Yes. Yes.

They’d be screaming.

Free speech means nothing to this crowd. Religious freedom means nothing. “Inclusion” and “diversity” mean nothing, unless it is according to their definition.

Let me leave you with a little of Dr. Turek’s clear-thinking:

“Everyone puts limits on marriage—if marriage had no definition it wouldn’t be anything. Recognizing that marriage is between a man and a woman is not bigotry, but common sense rooted in the biological facts of nature. That’s why the state recognizes marriage to begin with—not because two people love one another but because only heterosexual unions can procreate and best nurture the next generation.

Everyone also puts limits on behaviors. But opposing behavior is not the same as opposing or “hating” people. In fact, to really love people, we often have to oppose what they do! Parents know this, and all former children know it as well.”

We’ve come to a point in American culture where this kind of value system is a source of economic martyrdom.

Ask Dr. Turek.