The so-called “lake of fire” incident in the 2012 Alberta provincial election has become legendary. According to the official narrative, the Wildrose Party under Danielle Smith was poised to win when one of her candidates – Allan Hunsperger – had a “bozo eruption” condemning gays to hell. Support for the Wildrose subsequently collapsed, with Allison Redford’s Tories winning another majority government..This official view has served the establishment well, providing party elites with an excuse to disqualify outspoken candidates who might disrupt the comfortable status quo. You don’t want another “lake of fire” incident, do you?.But much of the official narrative is grossly distorted..In June 2011, almost a year before the election, Allan Hunsperger – in his capacity as a pastor of an evangelical church – posted a blog entry on homosexuality. It was this post that was discovered during the election, setting off a firestorm. According to the media, Hunsperger said that homosexuals would burn in a “lake of fire.” This supposedly demonstrated that he was an intolerant hater, and had no rightful place running as a candidate..However, the media largely misrepresented Hunsperger’s blog post. It was not about condemning LGBT people to burn in hell. Rather, the point was that LGTB people – like everyone else – were invited by God to renounce their sin and turn to Him, and that Christ’s death on the cross made such renunciation possible. In other words, the media misrepresented traditional, orthodox Christian doctrine as hateful extremism..Hunsperger began the blog post by saying that he was going to make a sequel to Lady Gaga’s “Born this Way” CD. Hunsperger’s CD was going to be “Born this Way – And that’s why Jesus came.” As he put it, “The world is believing the lie that because you were ‘born this way’ you now have a right to live this way – the way you were born.” Hunsperger next pointed out that there would be serious consequences for accepting this line of reasoning: “You see, you can live the way you were born, and if you die the way you were born then you will suffer the rest of eternity in the lake of fire, hell, a place of eternal suffering.” Anyone who does not repent of their sin will go to hell, in other words..To drive home his point he recounts a particular story. A number of years ago while traveling in California, he spoke with a couple members of the LGBTQ community. They told him that he could not understand what it was like to be born a certain way and have society expect you to live a different way. Hunsperger responded, “You know, I do understand, because I was born the same way. I was born living one way and God expects me to live another way. I can’t do that on my own and that’s why Jesus Christ came so I could be changed.” In other words, we are all born sinners and need Christ to change our lives. Hunsperger was putting himself in the same position as the people he spoke with, and pointing out that he needed Christ to change him just as much as they did..Hunsperger was simply stating the historic, traditional Christian position. Everyone is a sinner and needs to accept Christ to receive pardon from God and the power to live a changed life. Yes, even LGBTQ people need Christ. Despite all of Canada’s “human rights” legislation and bans on conversion therapy, God will not exempt gays – or anyone else for that matter – from the demands of the gospel..Media reports give the impression that Hunsperger had written a harangue singling out LGBT people for condemnation and damnation in hell – and this continues to be the official view, trotted out whenever convenient to justify excluding social conservatives from politics. While the blog post did focus on homosexuality, the point was not condemnation but salvation. Yet many people declared Hunsperger and his views to be beyond the pale of electoral politics. By implication, then, all others who share his views would be similarly excluded..And this seems to be the point of the official narrative, namely, that anyone holding to traditional Christian views should be banned from office. If holding the view that unrepentant sinners go to hell when they die disqualifies someone from being an electoral candidate, then all conservative Christians are disqualified. In other words, there is now a religious test for office-holders that excludes people who hold traditional Christian views..Of course, some conservative Christians currently hold elected office and have not had to publicly recant their religious views – although they’re probably careful not to mention their views in public. Nevertheless, as the Hunsperger example demonstrates, a candidate may realistically be faced with the prospect of public shaming and condemnation simply for upholding historic Christian doctrine..Hunsperger’s blog post – the one that caused such controversy – is actually a balanced and compassionate discussion of a timely issue. The fact that it aroused a vitriolic response from much of the media provides clear evidence that traditional Christianity is being marginalized in Canadian public life..In short, the implication of the official narrative on the “lake of fire” incident is unmistakable: holding to traditional Christian doctrine violates the new religious test for political office, so anyone believing it must be preemptively excluded. In other words, conservative Christians are second-class citizens who are uniquely disqualified from participation in public life. This should be concerning to anyone who believes in genuine equal citizenship..Michael Wagner is a columnist for the Western Standard
The so-called “lake of fire” incident in the 2012 Alberta provincial election has become legendary. According to the official narrative, the Wildrose Party under Danielle Smith was poised to win when one of her candidates – Allan Hunsperger – had a “bozo eruption” condemning gays to hell. Support for the Wildrose subsequently collapsed, with Allison Redford’s Tories winning another majority government..This official view has served the establishment well, providing party elites with an excuse to disqualify outspoken candidates who might disrupt the comfortable status quo. You don’t want another “lake of fire” incident, do you?.But much of the official narrative is grossly distorted..In June 2011, almost a year before the election, Allan Hunsperger – in his capacity as a pastor of an evangelical church – posted a blog entry on homosexuality. It was this post that was discovered during the election, setting off a firestorm. According to the media, Hunsperger said that homosexuals would burn in a “lake of fire.” This supposedly demonstrated that he was an intolerant hater, and had no rightful place running as a candidate..However, the media largely misrepresented Hunsperger’s blog post. It was not about condemning LGBT people to burn in hell. Rather, the point was that LGTB people – like everyone else – were invited by God to renounce their sin and turn to Him, and that Christ’s death on the cross made such renunciation possible. In other words, the media misrepresented traditional, orthodox Christian doctrine as hateful extremism..Hunsperger began the blog post by saying that he was going to make a sequel to Lady Gaga’s “Born this Way” CD. Hunsperger’s CD was going to be “Born this Way – And that’s why Jesus came.” As he put it, “The world is believing the lie that because you were ‘born this way’ you now have a right to live this way – the way you were born.” Hunsperger next pointed out that there would be serious consequences for accepting this line of reasoning: “You see, you can live the way you were born, and if you die the way you were born then you will suffer the rest of eternity in the lake of fire, hell, a place of eternal suffering.” Anyone who does not repent of their sin will go to hell, in other words..To drive home his point he recounts a particular story. A number of years ago while traveling in California, he spoke with a couple members of the LGBTQ community. They told him that he could not understand what it was like to be born a certain way and have society expect you to live a different way. Hunsperger responded, “You know, I do understand, because I was born the same way. I was born living one way and God expects me to live another way. I can’t do that on my own and that’s why Jesus Christ came so I could be changed.” In other words, we are all born sinners and need Christ to change our lives. Hunsperger was putting himself in the same position as the people he spoke with, and pointing out that he needed Christ to change him just as much as they did..Hunsperger was simply stating the historic, traditional Christian position. Everyone is a sinner and needs to accept Christ to receive pardon from God and the power to live a changed life. Yes, even LGBTQ people need Christ. Despite all of Canada’s “human rights” legislation and bans on conversion therapy, God will not exempt gays – or anyone else for that matter – from the demands of the gospel..Media reports give the impression that Hunsperger had written a harangue singling out LGBT people for condemnation and damnation in hell – and this continues to be the official view, trotted out whenever convenient to justify excluding social conservatives from politics. While the blog post did focus on homosexuality, the point was not condemnation but salvation. Yet many people declared Hunsperger and his views to be beyond the pale of electoral politics. By implication, then, all others who share his views would be similarly excluded..And this seems to be the point of the official narrative, namely, that anyone holding to traditional Christian views should be banned from office. If holding the view that unrepentant sinners go to hell when they die disqualifies someone from being an electoral candidate, then all conservative Christians are disqualified. In other words, there is now a religious test for office-holders that excludes people who hold traditional Christian views..Of course, some conservative Christians currently hold elected office and have not had to publicly recant their religious views – although they’re probably careful not to mention their views in public. Nevertheless, as the Hunsperger example demonstrates, a candidate may realistically be faced with the prospect of public shaming and condemnation simply for upholding historic Christian doctrine..Hunsperger’s blog post – the one that caused such controversy – is actually a balanced and compassionate discussion of a timely issue. The fact that it aroused a vitriolic response from much of the media provides clear evidence that traditional Christianity is being marginalized in Canadian public life..In short, the implication of the official narrative on the “lake of fire” incident is unmistakable: holding to traditional Christian doctrine violates the new religious test for political office, so anyone believing it must be preemptively excluded. In other words, conservative Christians are second-class citizens who are uniquely disqualified from participation in public life. This should be concerning to anyone who believes in genuine equal citizenship..Michael Wagner is a columnist for the Western Standard
