While I can sympathize with my Christian Brethren, they are wrong…

Full Disclosure: I am a Christian, if you’ll read my “about me” section on here, you will see here I stand doctrinally.  To be clear, I am not active in a Church anywhere at the moment. But I still believe.

An Interesting quote from the Christian Newswire, by a Robert Peters who the President of  Morality in Media, commenting on passage on the Gay Marriage Iowa and the shootings in New York:

“Having lived in New York City for more than 30 years, I am all too aware of the harm that firearms in the hands of criminals can cause. Having grown up in a small town in Illinois, where citizens owned guns without misusing them, I am also aware that guns aren’t the underlying problem. I am not an opponent of gun regulation; I am an opponent of making guns the scapegoat for mass murder.

“The underlying problem is that increasingly we live in a ‘post-Christian’ society, where Judeo-Christian faith and values have less and less influence. Among other things, Judaism and Christianity taught that murder was wrong and that included murder motivated by anger, hatred and revenge. Both religions also taught that we are to love our neighbor as ourselves and to forgive others.

“For many citizens, what has replaced Judeo-Christian faith and values is the secular value system that is reflected in films, rap/music lyrics, and videogames and on TV and now the Internet, where the taking of human life for just about any reason is commonplace and is often portrayed in an appealing manner and in realistic detail. Murder motivated by hatred and revenge is also justified.

“This secular value system is also reflected in the ‘sexual revolution,’ which is the driving force behind the push for ‘gay marriage;’ and the Iowa Supreme Court decision is another indication that despite all the damage this revolution has caused to children, adults, family life and society (think abortion, divorce, pornography, rape, sexual abuse of children, sexually transmitted diseases, trafficking in women and children, unwed teen mothers and more), it continues to advance relentlessly.

“It most certainly is not my intention to blame the epidemic of mass murders on the gay rights movement! It is my intention to point out that the success of the sexual revolution is inversely proportional to the decline in morality; and it is the decline of morality (and the faith that so often under girds it) that is the underlying cause of our modern day epidemic of mass murders.

“I would add that if conservative media’s irresponsible talk of revolution can ‘poison weak minds,’ the liberal entertainment media’s irresponsible portrayal of mayhem can also poison weak minds.”

Also, Pastor Eric Schumacher comments over at Baptist Press also comments as to how Christians should handle the situation as well; and I must admit, I agree with his way of doing things as well. Let me just say that these arguments may work in the realm of Christianity and in the Church World, these arguments, unfortunately, fall flat in the secular society that we live in today.  Donald Douglas over at American power weighs in on this:

While I agree with the main points of the religious morality angle, I don’t think that argument will prevail amid the growing hegemony of secularism Peters decries. A powerful secular case can be made against same-sex marriage, based in the logic of biological reproduction and the regeneration of societies. The gay marriage extremists can do little to change the logic of social reproduction and the facts of biological procreation. To win the argument, gay radicals have to argue in denial of the fact that social institutions are normatively substantiated in such terms. The left has yet to do so, of course, which is why the notion of “same-sex marriage” remains a fantastic radical progressive ideological construct.

I hate to say it, but I do agree. (Mark your calendars, this does not happen often at all.) The reason all this is happening is because the Religious right made the gay marriage thing a “Hot button” topic years ago. One of the worst things, I believe, that happened was the melting together of Religion and Conservative politics, this happened in the 1980’s with the whole “God and Country” movement. I remember it well, as I was a young lad that grew up in that era. Before this, Christianity and Conservative politics were two very different worlds. President Ronald Reagan and his whole “Reagan Revolution” changed all that, some say for the worse.

Let me give you an example of why I believe this is so very wrong. You see, years ago, Christians did not want to be have a voice in Government. This quote is from a book called “The Trail of Blood”, which was written by Dr. James Milton Carroll, in 1931; it is taken from the fifth lecture in the book:

24. Some serious questions have many times been asked concerning the Baptists: Would they, as a denomination, have accepted from any nation or state an offer of “establishment” if such nation or state had freely made them such an offer? And would they in case they had accepted such an offer, have become persecutors of others like Catholics or Episcopals, or Lutherans or Presbyterians, or Congregationalists? Probably a little consideration of such questions now would not be amiss. Have the Baptists, as a fact, ever had such an opportunity?

Is it not recorded in history, that on one occasion, the King of the Netherlands (the Netherlands at that time embracing Norway and Sweden, Belgium, Holland, and Denmark) had under serious consideration the question of having an established religion? Their kingdom at that period was surrounded on almost all sides by nations or governments with established religions, religions supported by the Civil Government.

It is stated that the King of Holland appointed a committee to examine into the claims of all existing churches or denominations to see which had the best claim to be the New Testament Church. The committee reported back that the Baptists were the best representatives of New Testament teachings. Then the King offered to make the Baptist “the established” church or denomination of his kingdom. The Baptists kindly thanked him but declined, stating that it was contrary to their fundamental convictions and principles.

But this was not the only opportunity they ever had of having their denomination the established religion of a people. They certainly had that opportunity when Rhode Island Colony was founded. And to have persecuted others, that would have been an impossibility if they were to continue being Baptists. They were the original advocates of “Religious Liberty.” That really is one of the fundamental articles of their religious faith. They believed in the absolute separation of church and state.

This is what Christians should believe in. Christians never should have ever attempted to meddle in the affairs of the Government, as Christians are supposed to be about “The Father’s Business”. (Luke 2:49, 1 Thess 4:11) While I believe it is important to be aware of what is happening in our Government, the idea that Baptists and Christians alike are to try and sway Government into a theocracy is totally wrong, and goes against what Christians and yes, even Baptists of old practiced.

I hate to say, but the Christianity community seriously messed up in the 1980’s with the whole Reagan revolution, and we are going to pay a dreadful price for it. The sick and sad part is, George W. Bush and his Neo-Conservative friends, harvested and took full advantage of that crop during his tenure in the White House, and because of this, the Republican Party and Conservatism as a whole will pay for that.

It is going to be a bleak, long four years in a America. 🙁

5 Replies to “While I can sympathize with my Christian Brethren, they are wrong…”

  1. The “biological procreation” argument has never made sense to me. Are they saying that Marriage should be based on a persons ability to reproduce? What about sterile adults who cannot reproduce? Should they also not be allowed to marry since they cannot produce offspring? Gay couples can biologically procreate through artificial or surrogate means if they wish. Whereas a sterile person can never biologically procreate.

  2. Nice one. Impressive. Hey, what if the Obama admin continues faith based initiatives but they get Wiccans and Yoruba priests to handle them? Just one possible consequence of bringing your faith into the halls of power.

    Theocracy sucks.

  3. I am a believer as well. I have a different problem with the christian right.
    My reading of the scriptures is that Daddy does not hold unbelievers responsible for national sins. He holds His people accountable.
    If my people will humble themselves and pray and turn from their wicked ways…
    In regards to the whole issue of homosexuality the church needs to, as heard a speaker comment once, repent of our homo sect uality.
    Sinners sin. We are the light of the world. It’s His kindness that leads to repentance not our name calling and condemnations.

  4. Where was this “Christian morality” when the Nazis were murdering millions of Jews? Where was this “Christian morality” in the slave-owning South? Where was this “Christian morality” when GWB was blowing apart Muslim women and children? Where is it now, when the slaughter continues? What divine right do these self-deluded hypocrites have to dictate to us what our most private convictions should be? What basis do they use when limiting the choices of others? Membership in the “body of Christ” is supposed to be based on a transformational rebirth in Christ, not on loyalty to a belief system or membership in a religious organization or the agreement of fellow believers. How many “Christians” have ever actually had that experience? By the evidence of their choices and behavior, I must say, “Very few, if any.”

Comments are closed.