Hagedorn doesn't want you to "attack" his faith, but he did the same thing to Mormons in his past writings
Judge Brian Hagedorn, a conservative candidate for this spring election's state Supreme Court race, has taken a lot of heat for the many writings he's made over the past decade that display a bigoted attitude toward entire groups of people.Notably, Hagedorn's attacks have centered on the LGBTQ* community. In one example of his hateful writings, the candidate said that a ruling by the Supreme Court in 2005, which deemed laws restricting people from engaging in "homosexual acts" as unconstitutional, would lead to other laws banning bestiality being deemed acceptable as well.
(It should go without saying that comparisons to bestiality and homosexuality are not just nonsensical, but offensive as well.)
Other comments like these abound, and put doubts in voters' minds that Hagedorn can be an impartial member of the state's highest court if he's allowed to serve there. Hagedorn, for his own part, has had an interesting strategy for countering these and other contentions against his questionable background: he's tried to say these are attacks on his faith. And he's trying to connect so-called "attacks" against himself toward a broader attack on Christians in general.
"Some of the arguments made against me are a blatant attempt not just against me but against people of faith more generally," Hagedorn has said during this campaign.
I know plenty of Christians, being raised one myself, and in my experience most have not condemned homosexuality to being equivalent to bestiality. The Christians in my social circle have, in fact, embraced their gay and lesbian brothers and sisters, choosing love instead of hate in attempts to emulate the message of Christ from the Bible.
Hagedorn's use of his set of beliefs as a shield to criticisms demonstrates that he still doesn't get it: this isn't about his faith, but rather whether Hagedorn will allow his beliefs to direct his views on the law when he hears cases before him on the Supreme Court (if he gets elected). So far, he's done nothing to convince anyone his viewpoints could be neutral.
There's another problem Hagedorn faces: his comments from the past don't just include attacks against the gay community, but also against other faiths themselves.
As WisPolitics reported on last week, Hagedorn has also made callous comments toward those who are part of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. "Here’s the bottom line: Mormon theology is blatant heresy," Hagedorn wrote, adding, "Mormons are polytheists who believe we can become gods and who believe that both Jesus and Satan are sons of God the Father."
Hagedorn here was clearly making attacks against people for holding a different faith than his own. He's free to hold those views, but it puts a huge hole in his line of defense this election season — he has a history of attacking others for their beliefs, but now wants the media and others who criticize his past statements to stop talking about his religious views.
Again, no one is suggesting a Christian cannot serve on the state's highest court — certainly members of the state Supreme Court already include Christians, and that's perfectly fine. What's at issue is whether Hagedorn's radical interpretation of Christian theology, and the blatant ways in which those beliefs have been used by him to attack others on a legal basis in the past, render him incapable of being an impartial member of the bench should he be selected to serve.
It should be clear to most that Hagedorn's bias, and the insincere way he has attempted to defend his bigotry so far, disqualify him from the role.
Featured image credit: Royalbroil/Wikimedia
No comments:
Post a Comment