Posted on 05/04/2005 9:30:26 PM PDT by Unam Sanctam
I am not a Christian, or even a religious believer, and my opinions on social issues are decidedly middle-of-the-road. So why do I find myself rooting for the "religious right"? I suppose it is because I am put off by self-righteousness, closed-mindedness, and contempt for democracy and pluralism--all of which characterize the opposition to the religious right.
One can disagree with religious conservatives on abortion, gay rights, school prayer, creationism and any number of other issues, and still recognize that they have good reason to feel disfranchised. This isn't the same as the oft-heard complaint of "anti-Christian bigotry," which is at best imprecise, since American Christians are all over the map politically. But those who hold traditionalist views have been shut out of the democratic process by a series of court decisions that, based on constitutional reasoning ranging from plausible to ludicrous, declared the preferred policies of the secular left the law of the land.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
Um...ok, so you'll put common sense morality aside as long as you can get laid. I mean, its not like exposing younger children to sexual themes/issues, illegitimate children as a result of promiscuous behavior, children with one parent, and STD's are a detriment to a free society of anything.
Ah...to be young and dumb.
I remember hearing Tipper interviewed by Dr. Dobson way back when on the issue. She was talking about printed lyrics that could be reviewed before buying the album. Seemed reasonable to me; just the facts and let the buyer decide.
For one, the end of hypocrisy of the double standard. Used to be that young men were pretty much excused for premarital sex and young women condemned.
My observation as well, k2.
I'm of the notion that with the exception of some of the better established notions of right and wrong the church should remain nuetral in politics and the law. For example, I don't care if gays get "married". It's a joke but so what. I do care if the church sanctifies it or performs the ceremony. There is secular marriage (justice of the peace) and christian marriage (before a minister, priest or other church leader recognized by the state to perform such marriages). In addition, I don't care to see 2nd marraiges performed by a minister as most of these are cases of adultry anyway.
I've always believed that if the church was tending to business, they would be enticing more people to become of the faith rather than becoming all things to all people and polluting the christian faith pool. Should that happen, all these crazy laws would be unneeded. More people would be leading lives of faith and the remaining idiots, well will be idiots.
But as it is, the church has lost it's direction. No longer are they safe havens for fellowhship, learning, explaining, nurturing, discipling and other christian functions. Out of marriage births are at an alarming rate among the churched. Divorce among evangelicals rivals that of the secular world. Honesty in business dealings is something long forgot about. It used to be you could get good workmanship at a fair price with a christian businessman. That's no longer the case. A joke among the seculars in our town is not to business with the those listed in the Christian blue pages as they are bigger shysters than the secular business folks.
The other joke among seculars is if you want some sexual action, go the the mega churches singles gatherings. The more evangelic the better. In our town, many churches Weds night singles group is known among the divorced men as the Wed night meat market. It's easier to score there than at the bars. Sad. Why should it be easy to score sexually with christian women meeting at a christian setting than a secular woman in a secular setting? That's why I say the church has lost it's voice of leadership among the faithful.
When the chruch can restore
what of those majority in ohio who voted to maintain the smoking ban. They won by 55% of the vote, yet the minority is still trying to instill their values on those who dont' want to dine in an ashtray.
To many, morals are for someone else. I've met many prolifes who are pro choicers in the right circumstances.
I believe the great commision was to spread the word, not force it down everyones throat. I love those who can do this without the brow beating. I learn much from them. The cram it down my throat types just get tuned out.
"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." Article 11, Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary. Ratified by the Senate, June 10, 1797 and signed by John Adams.
More than that, they get rejected, and commensurate with this rejection is the rejection of the Christ. That is the cryin' shame.
Boy how many times I've heard this from the cram it down your throaters. There is a scripture where Jesus says something to the extent that many will not follow him. The cram it down your throaters use this as their version as to why it's ok to push you away rather than attract you in.
How could you allow for equal access and enforcement of ownership.
Big government types, left or right, can always think of a argument to justify more governmment.
And as in this case, it's often a common argument. However bizarre as it seems, in this case the Progressive Left is more rational than the Talibornagain Right.
At least they apply the "we wouldn't allow unregulated use of nuclear weapons so why allow ..." to firearms not sex organs.
Sorry, your spousal relationship grants no special privilages. The normal laws against assault and murder apply.
I'd agree, if you are willing to take total responsibility for your choices. If you get AIDS or some other chronic STD, don't expect public money for expensive treatments or guaranteed insurance. If you father a child, don't rely on WIC and Welfare to support her to majority. Don't use our court systems to unsnarl whatever entanglements your sexual escapades lead you into. If you get fired because your boss disapproves, don't appeal to Uncle Sam to sue for your job.
If you want the right to non-involvement of the government, be prepared to take the consequences if (when) the bad stuff happens, without appeal to the government.
Perhaps you could explain the relevance of your post - to my query. Thank you...
Well said!
You've posted a number of points on which you disagree with the Christian Right. That's all well and good, but it still fails to explain why the Christian Right should be marginalized out of the political process.
You're crazy!
And don't call me "bucko."
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.