Replies

The thing that is very frustrating to some extreme social conservatives is that they can't cope with the idea that there is sometimes no practical policy component to match some of their niche concerns.

Making it illegal to cheat on a spouse just doesn't make any sense.

Making it illegal to be sexually turned on by the same sex just doesn't make any sense, either.

Some issues are broader and do have policy components: for example, not wanting to change the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples. Still, that doesn't stop same sex couples from forming, living together, living their lives, etc.

Reminds me of people who are very pro marriage and against divorce as a matter of policy. They don't want people to divorce, which is a good thing, but their proposed ban just forces people to remain together who have no interest in remaining together. I don't see the cultural upside in that, and I have to wonder what some of those advocates find appealing about their policy goals making other people miserable in life.

Unless they like the idea that other people are miserable, in which case they don't belong in politics, but rather belong in some kind of therapy.

The thing that is very frustrating to some extreme social conservatives is that they can't cope with the idea that there is sometimes no practical policy component to match some of their niche concerns. Making it illegal to cheat on a spouse just doesn't make any sense. Making it illegal to be sexually turned on by the same sex just doesn't make any sense, either.

I don't know many folks engaged in trying to enact these specific policies. I know plenty whose "practical policy component" is simply to try not to elect people who endorse these activities - after all, THAT is the topic at hand (who we elect).

Would I elect a homosexual or an adulterer? Maybe. Would I elect someone who seeks to convince people that there's nothing wrong with homosexuality or adultery? Extremely unlikely.

You are simply talking about personal responsiblity.. in which we have to own up to our own lives with God. God didn't give us free will and choice simply for Governments to take it away(ie no adultry, no homosexuality, no divorce, no gossip, no saying the Lords name in vain, no stealing, etc.). He wanted us to have an opportunity to make that choice and to pay the price of that choice in the hear and now or in the next life.

Everyone has the chance at forgiveness and by having laws in place that enforce some of these moral values we may in fact might be just causing people to become jaded and dismissive of Christians in general.. is that what we want? Don't we want to include people?

We can only do that through teaching and love.. not through punishment and hate.