- I am not in favor of homosexuality but am even more NOT in favor of coersed religious piety.
Posted on 07/25/2004 1:39:37 PM PDT by familyop
FORT WORTH, Texas (BP)--My mailbox is deluged weekly with fundraising letters from pro-family organizations that invoke the threat of same-sex “marriage” being legalized by liberal judges in various states.
As important as it is to stand for the truth, these groups are tilting at windmills as long as American Christians continue to have a less-than-biblical respect for opposite-sex marriage.
That point was brought home to me recently with astounding clarity. A young lady who my wife grew up with decided to divorce her husband of two years, with a young daughter relegated to being tossed back and forth in a joint custody arrangement. There was no abuse or adultery, but since marriage is hard when two people are young and broke, she decided they made, in her words, “better friends than marriage partners.”
As far as I know, the young lady has never made a profession of faith, does not attend church and does not claim to know Jesus Christ, so to no one’s surprise she sees no problem with a quickie divorce when things have not worked out the way she wanted.
It’s time we quit being “huffy” when a pagan acts like a pagan -- what else do you expect?
What disgusted me was the response of the young lady’s mother and grandmother, which is symptomatic of how lightly modern American Christians esteem marriage. Both the mother and the grandmother claim to be Christians and attend church regularly. The mother said very little except to offer her daughter a place to stay. The grandmother, however, was bolder. “I don’t believe in divorce,” she said, “but sometimes it can’t be avoided.”
Well, in this case we’ll never know if it could have been avoided. No one tried to counsel the young lady or her husband or share with them what God has to say about marriage.
As a quick review for the sake of convenience, God said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24, NASB). Expounding on the theme, Jesus added, “So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate” (Matthew 19:6, NASB). Jesus went on to add that Moses gave the exception allowing divorce because of the hardness of people’s hearts. Therefore, the exception is not absolute and does not have to be followed.
God’s opinion on divorce of any kind is quite clear: Malachi 2:16 says that God hates divorce.
As God’s children, should we not also hate divorce? Of course we should, and we should seek to avoid it wherever and whenever possible. But the simple fact of the matter is that corporately we do not hate divorce, nor do American Christians avoid it any better than our non-believing fellow Americans. A 2001 survey by George Barna showed that the divorce rate among evangelical Christians is “statistically identical” as the divorce rate among the general population.
When marriage means that little to the people of God, why should the broader culture care what we think about the subject?
The pro-homosexual “marriage” crowd is the one making all the noise and actually having the courage to stick up for what they believe, as perverted as it is. They understand that the first rule of getting what you want from the government in a democracy is to make more noise than the other guy.
There is really only one way for Christians to respond to this nightmare and silence the critics of traditional marriage and proponents of homosexual “marriage.” It’s not easy. It’s not always fun. It takes everything a person can give all the time.
It’s called staying married, even when times are tough and you want out more than you want another breath. Beyond that, Christians should seek to glorify not themselves but God with their marriages.
If the broader culture should see the divorce rate among Christians go through the floor, they would know that there really was something different about us. Who knows what kind of opportunities this radical strategy would bring about for evangelism and national revival?
Right now, roughly a third of Americans say they support homosexual “marriage.” But in another few years, homosexual “marriage” will be the law of the land if Christians – too many of whom see no problem with easy, no-fault heterosexual divorce -- have not recovered a respect for marriage beyond sending the occasional check to a pro-family organization.
--30--
Samuel Smith is a student and a news writer at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas.
Okay, but they want legal recognition. If we ban this on moral grounds, let's just get jiggy with it: Here's what's next, in the interests of a moral society AND equal protection under the law:
1. Harry Potter, and his likeness, are hereby forbidden.
2. Bikinis are forbidden. Bathing suits must cover those areas in addition to: thighs, knees, ankles, chest, neck, arms and head. Can't just go leave out the Muslims if we're converting Holy books into Law books.
3. Curfew is 11 pm. Nothing moral happens after that hour anyway. You should be sleeping and preparing to work hard the next day. (Thanks, Amos, for this suggestion- the Amish have been very helpful)
4. The public display of the human body or its likenesses is now forbidden, so as to avoid the possibility of idolatry.
5. Women should be appropriately dresses at all times. If I can tell you're there, you're not appropriately dressed.
6. Books with magic, magick, witchery or sorcery are forbidden. These works include, but are not limited to Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Piers Anthony and anything from the Wheel of Time series.
7. While we're at it, don't get caught dancing, using playing cards, UNO cards, or even Go Fish! cards. These are used for gambling, and we don't go for that.
8. Drunkenness in any form will not be tolerated. Let's just go ahead and ban beer, wine, and spirits. To avoid the APPEARANCE of impropriety, grape juice is forbidden as well. Oh, hell, let's just ban the grapes- they have juice in 'em.
9. All internet pornography will be moved to a separate section, disconnected from the rest of the internet, and then silently destroyed. Why not?
10. Divorce is now illegal. Make it work, whether he hits you or not. You probably deserved it.
11. Teenagers who bad-mouth their parents or are disrespectful are to be led to the preditermined locations that have been set up, where they will be pummeled with rocks until they are dead. That'll teach them, and it's biblical.
12. Per the Apostle Paul, marriage will only be granted with a signed affadavit affirming that the two parties simply cannot abstain. It's better to abstain altogether, though, because the human body is evil.
13. If a man lies with a man as he would with a woman, then both are to be stoned to death. We're starting to run low on rocks, so it would be helpful to bring your own.
14. If a woman is raped and she is single, from now on she and her rapist should be considered wed. Objectors will be considered fornicators and stoned until dead. Also- we're out of rocks. Bring glass bottles or full cans of food.
15. If a man dies, his wife shall be given to his brother, even if he is already wed. If she objects, she's probably an adulteress. Please bring some old plates and framed pictures of people you don't like anymore.
16. Any woman on her period is to now be considered ceremonially unclean, and should remain in hiding, behind closed doors as well as under two or more burqas. Can't be too careful.
17. After you have sex with your wife, in the missionary position, and only to have children, please burn your bedding outside the city. And be ceremonially unclean to others all day long.
18. All persons who are able must complete the hajj. It's mandatory. And you wouldn't want to offend Allah. Because we'd have to kill you if you did. Probably get killed on the way anyway.
See how bad it can get if we decide to throw away our democracy for a theocracy? You see, we have many cultures here. We have to incorporate everyone's views on God and morality, as we are an enlightened, egalitarian nation.
You grossly overstate your case. There is no Constitutional right to marry absolutely anyone you wish, government has regarded marriage as a legal contract for centuries and has laid down rules for both entering into and dissolving the contract. Children under a certain age can't marry under the laws of any state, bigamy is a crime in every state, and there are any number of other limitations placed on the right to marry by various states. The state does not recognize marriage contracts entered into without a license, and there are requirements to be met for those authorized to perform marriages. None of the things you say will happen if homosexual "marriage" (I put "marriage in quotes because there is no such thing as same-sex marriage) is refused legal standing have happened because of government's imposition of those other restrictions, and none will happen just because of a Constitutional amendment that simply defines marriage as it has been defined for thousands of years.
Christian principles and morality have taken far too many judicial hits in America in the last few years for Christians to sit idly by while this Satanically inspired attack on the most basic unit of all civilized societies and cultures is perpetrated by the sodomites and their leftist apologists. If homosexual "marriage" becomes the law of the land, as it will be by judicial fiat if the amendment is rejected, it is only a mtter of time until traditional man-woman marriage as instituted by God in the the Garden of Eden will be reduced to just another choice within an entire menu of marriage options.
Marriage license clerk:
"So you want to marry young man? What is your preference in a marriage partner sir, a nice young lady, a successful young man, your daughter perhaps? A six year old girl? A six year old boy? How about a chimp? Perhaps a nice young Holstein heifer? The choice is yours sir, because who are we the people, aka the government, to say who you can or can't marry? Or to say what actually constitutes marriage anyway?"
Does that scenario suit your libertarian ideals?
I do not judge anyone's spiritual condition without knowing a lot more about the person than I know about you, the sum total of which is your opinion on this matter. But to me it is utterly incomprehensible that a truly born again Christian committed to the institutions established for man by God and revealed in His word could support such a vile corruption of one of God's own institutions, i.e., marriage/family, the most basic unit of every human society and culture.
Homosexual sodomy is a form of murder, since it destroys both the soul and the body.
Cultists believe what they want, CJ. Facts do not count to them.
As such it infringes on the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Absurd idea. Feel free to demonstrate how this 'infringement' takes place, CJ.
The DOI doesn't state that our God-given unalienable rights include "an early death, slavery to vice, and the pursuit of unneeded suffering" although moral-liberal ideologues think otherwise.
Of course it doesn't. Bizarre 'quote' you made up, CJ; -- is it from your own ideology?
Ah, the libertarian ideologues will mandate the toleration of evil and outlaw caring, supposedly.
Mandate? How weird.
You want to quote Bible verses in favor of a theocracy, fine. But I disagree, and if Christ truly wants me to feel good that some people have different sins than me, then I will refuse to worship him. You see, I am morally opposed to it. Sin is sin. I am not saying we can't tell him it's sin. I am not saying we should remain quiet. What I am saying is that we cannot disenfranchise him from government, and restrict his behavior under threat of imprisonment because we disagree. You have to understand that our laws are backed up with force. Our government offers three things to lawbreakers: fines, imprisonment and death. None are consistent with spiritual choice. I am not in favor of homosexuality but am even more NOT in favor of coersed religious piety.
My Jesus is different than your Jesus. That's all. I see him as the bringer of choice. We can choose him or not. Our abstaining or attempting to abstain from sin is a gift we try to give him. We don't avoid sin to avoid Hell, but do it because we appreciate what Jesus did for us. It's done of love, not fear. We disagree on the why, not the how.
Ping.
I am ... unpersuaded.
Who would have thought that the Bible as given might somehow refer to a government of men by G-d. What an amazing idea!
I wonder how you remain calm when homosexual propganda is becoming standard cirricula at schools across the country. And parents either aren't told, can't "opt out", or the kids aren't even allowed to leave the auditorium (high school age kids) or are bussed to special seminars so they can learn the joys of the fisting art.
I wonder how you or other other people who consider themselves conservatives can stomach that. Of course, liberals like it; that's their doing.
I think you're missing my point. My point is that if we use our Holy Bible to create our law, then we have no democracy, but a theocracy led by our clergy. What then? There exists little secular reason to deny government recognition. And secular reason is all that matters to me. If we allow purely religious morality to affect the legislature, we better be prepared for the repurcussions that the equal protection laws have in store for us. After all, if you can do it, why can't Mullah Omar?
Explain the difference between a restrictive moralist American theocracy and Iran.
BUMP!
Regardless, you CANNOT divorce in this country, without a five year seperation.
There is a lot of criticism on these boards about how liberal Ireland is, but in terms of divorce and abortion we are just about as conservative as they come.
I understand your point completely. It's just that I am ... unpersuaded. The more the porn flows, the more the people will be persuaded.
If we allow purely religious morality to affect the legislature, we better be prepared for the repurcussions that the equal protection laws have in store for us. After all, if you can do it, why can't Mullah Omar?
Oh but he can and he will unless you have a better equipped military.
Explain the difference between a restrictive moralist American theocracy and Iran.
In Iran you have a reign of terror under the Islamic judges and terrorists with no meaningful vote. In a restrictive moralist American theocracy you have a secular reign of terror under liberal judges and homosexuals with at least one more meaningful vote.
There is always more to these "clean" divorces where there is not infidelity or abuse. (ie no sex from either husband or wife)
No fault will never be undone HOWEVER we need to undo the "cash out" value of a marriage via divorce.
The ABSOLUTE first step is to create a ne model divorce code for all states to work from.
The ABA created a model divorce code and this code is used by all states in creating divorce law. (the current project even accomodates homosexual divorce and the ABA is pushing for its adoption)
This will take legislative time but it requires 1. TELL people that the only model legislators have to work with is a left wing liberal anti marriage model code and 2. CREATE AN ALTERNATIVE!
If done correctly, the ABA's model code can eventually become forbidden in any legislators or capital's legislative libraries.
You're getting very transparent.
You said:
"See how bad it can get if we decide to throw away our democracy for a theocracy? You see, we have many cultures here. We have to incorporate everyone's views on God and morality, as we are an enlightened, egalitarian nation."
A theocracy means rule by religious hierarchy. It doesn't mean a country whose laws are informed by traditional moral values as stated in the religions of the world. The founders of the country agreed that our country was founded on virture, as exemplified by the 10 Commandments and the Bible. While I accept other scriptures of the world as enlightened and worthy of learning from, the founders of this country were specifically drawing on the moral codes of Judeo Christianity. That doesn't mean that they espoused intolerance towards other religions; Jefferson wrote that people of other religions - including Muslims and Hindus - should be allowed to practice their religions in America.
Another point that is extremely important is that the basic moral codes in the Bible (and Jewish teachings such as the Talmud) are essentially the same in Hindu scriptures - the Vedas, and in the Koran, and Buddhist canon, and even Taoist and Confucian writings. So morality is non-sectarian; it is basic to human civilization.
You said:
"You see, we have many cultures here. We have to incorporate everyone's views on God and morality, as we are an enlightened, egalitarian nation."
Hmm, "everyone's" views on morality? Everyone's except the universal monotheistic and even non-monotheist such as Buddhist as mentioned above? Which ones are left? I guess New Guinea grandfather eating and boy-sodomizing was left out - should those be the standard?
If morality is every man for himself, barbarianism is next, with totalitarianism not far behind.
That was actually pretty spectacular wry wit in the last paragraph. Point taken. But will you substitute their will to control you with your will to control them? From an outside standpoint it would appear that your desire to control others is euqal to those same activists you despise. My opinion is that both should stop. They stop trying to cram their ideology down your throat and you stop doing it to them too. And we could coexist without trying to kill each other.
With theocracy, where does it stop? Is their any liberty at all to your blessed utopia? Does your paradise have an exit ramp? How would you go about forcing people to adhere to the word of God? How would you keep the Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists from doing this to you? And most important- can people still masturbate?
Did you do this deliberately? Complain that your intellectual opponent was setting up a straw man, and then in the next breath, set up a ridiculous straw man argument?
Your views of a theocratic and very Godly America are completely at odds with any concept of liberty and free will.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.