About Me

Name: Playful Walrus
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

No, Really, It's a NO, Dawg

The Los Angeles Times got some responses to their recent editorial on marriage neutering, which I analyzed here.

They printed some letters to the editor.

D. Paul Thomas of Pasadena wrote:
And though there is little empirical evidence that "families and the institution of marriage" will be "strengthened" by same-sex marriage, those in the "strong grip" of tradition and religion are asked to believe that gay marriage is an inalienable right, benefiting both the institution of marriage and culture itself.

When will there be vigorous dialogue on the efficacy of same-sex marriage as a greater good for the body politic?
As I have said, it is up to those who want to neuter marriage to convince the rest of us that doing so would be of net benefit to society. Simply calling it a right doesn’t make it so.

The paper posted comments attached to the editorial itself.

"purplearies" wrote 11/04/2009, 4:56 PM:
Keep your "closely held beliefs" to yourself, and stop enshrining them into law.
So I guess this person does not vote according to his personal beliefs? Strange. Does he vote by closing his eyes and waving his finger over the ballot?

"flanoggin" wrote 11/04/2009, 6:21 PM:
Supreme Court stated marriage was a right in Virginia v Loving, over 40 years ago
Notice that the court did not order the neutering of marriage licensing in that case. But nice try.

"MikeJ123" wrote 11/04/2009, 8:26 PM:
I was NOT using my morals as the standard for everyone, but here YOU are using YOUR morals as the standard that SHOULD be held by everyone, as if I think something different than you I'm automatically a bigot. How dare you! I have the right to hold my opinion and the right to defend it. It is MY OPINION. You have the right to your opinion as well.
Precisely.
Anything the State licenses, it can regulate.
Yup.

"poodlegirl2009" wrote 11/05/2009, 7:36 AM:
Many young people start off their adult lives with very liberal notions (I was very liberal in my early 20's). Once they get a little older and start careers (paying taxes), start a committed relationship (slow the party mentality), get married, have kids, send those kids into school, etc., etc., the realities of this world set in and they move more towards a conservative position.

Thus, I wouldn't count on the "next generation" to be anymore helpful than the "counter-culture" generation of the 60's & 70's because they are the ones rejecting homosexual marriage at the ballot box.
Ouch.

"esquireD" wrote 11/05/2009, 1:40 PM:
To timecronk (or should I say "time warp?"), I have to disagre with you about marriage being defined by god. Your imaginary friend has nothing to do with marriage.
Mind you, this is coming from someone who, in another comment, said he is collecting the comments to aid in the federal court consideration of a lawsuit against the California Marriage Amendment, to try to demonstrate that somehow, a few anonymous comments on an editorial are proof that everyone voted for the CMA due to animus. He's demonstrating animus against someone's Constitutionally enumerated right to their religion. Does that prove the lawsuit is motivated by animus?
It was, and always has been a LEGAL contract between TWO persons and their government.
And the state can, and does, have limits on that. Or are you also arguing to allow two siblings to legally marry?
Keep church and state separated, as the framers of our Constutition (many of whom were staunch anti-Christians, and believed in Deism) intended it...
Emphasis mine. This is a demonstrable lie. See here, here, and here. Of course, when they lose the argument about the Founding Fathers, they usually resort to dismissing them as sexist slaveholder witchburners.

"JonR." wrote: 11/05/2009, 1:59 PM:
By all means start to get real tired of this 'crap'. It'll make it that much easier for those of us who have any sense of justice to run the bigots and fundamentalists over like so much roadkill.
Somehow I doubt this last comment will be included in what "esquireD" submits to the court.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Are You Ready For Post-Christian America?

Christians in this country have had things relatively easy compared to most of the world through most of history.  We haven’t had to meet in secret under threat of death, we haven’t had to take up arms to defend ourselves from invading armies or hordes of Muslims, barbarians, pagans, or atheists.  We haven’t had politico-sectarian strife as in the British Isles.  Since the time of Christ’s earthly ministry, Christians have had to face the wrath of Jewish establishment authorities, oppressive pagan governments, violent pagan hordes, Islamic armies and terrorists, and atheist iron-fisted governments.  While we are right to stick up for our representation in our national, state, and municipal heritages, and our right to self-government under this Constitution, we hardly have faced the oppression that so many of our brothers and sisters have faced.  In turn, we did not force everyone in the nation to adopt Christianity, and in general, while some identifying themselves as Christians have been clumsy or annoying in the behavior, people have generally enjoyed broad freedom.

That’s because this has been, in a sense, a Christian nation.

Okay, whenever someone claims that we are or were a “Christian nation”, someone else is likely to declare that most of our founding fathers were Deists and not Christians.  Those who want us to shut up will often cite “low” church membership rolls in comparison to total population in the early days of our nation.  But in those days, being a “member” of a church typically meant that one not only attended that church regularly, but had undergone baptism and/or confirmation into that church, regularly tithed to that church, and practiced, as far as anyone knew, the morals and doctrines of that church – violation of which would mean not being a “member” until repentance and restoration  Rolls were also likely to only include the head of the household.  The pews certainly contained many more souls, and the influence of the church extended strongly beyond its walls.  The naysayers will cite some actual or perceived historical injustices or evils as evidence that we’ve never been a Christian nation.  These people can’t tell us why those things are wrong, only that they believe or feel them to be wrong, or at least contradictory to Biblical teaching…which they don’t believe anyway.

By referring to the U.S.A. as a “Christian nation”, I don’t mean that there were never injustices or evils or mistakes in our history – just like when I call myself a Christian, I don’t mean I’ve never done (and never do) unchristian things.  Certainly slavery as practiced in America was unchristian, as were actions by anyone who denied the humanity and human rights of Africans and African-Americans.

By “Christian nation”, I mean that we are a nation of individuals who have traditionally identified ourselves as Christians or affiliated with a Christian church; a nation where Christian churches are the most prominent religious institutions dotting the landscape; where you can glance at our founding documents, the writings and speeches of the founders, legislation, court decisions, proclamations, public art, marketing, and other media through most of our history and find citations from, references to, and allusions to God, the Bible, and Jesus Christ; where churches and preachers have held significant influence in public opinion; where most people publicly used and accepted basic tenets of the Bible or lessons from Biblical texts; where the Bible was used in public instruction; were the prominent academic institutions, hospitals, and charities where expressly implementing a Christian mission; where in the halls of government or academia, or in the workplace, a person could loudly and unapologetically lead a group prayer, or appeal to Christ; where the religious aspect of holidays and cerebrations were not downplayed; where crèches were common on city land around Christmas; where mottos, seals, and artwork on public buildings openly paid homage to the Christian foundations of that institution or the local or state or federal government.

The major movements and changes were accomplished with sturdy appeals to the Bible
– the exploration and colonization of the land, the American Revolution, the Emancipation, the fight against Nazi Germany and its conspirators, standing our ground through the Cold War, the fight for civil rights.  Even those who currently fight to neuter marriage licensing often misappropriate “judge not” and “love your neighbor” from the Bible.

But even as most people in the country still identify themselves as Christian (or cite Jesus or the Bible as some authority), we are becoming a post-Christian nation through the tyranny of the minority and the apathy and cowardice of those who are supposed to be salt and light.

We allowed a clause in the Constitution that was meant to prevent the adoption of one denomination as the national religion to be used to slowly but surely remove our heritage and our free exercise of our religion from the public square, to divorce our governing from natural law. Perhaps out of complacency and in a botched attempt to be welcoming to the immigrant, to be fair and tolerant and “nonjudgmental” to the atheists and hedonists as well as anyone who believed differently, we allowed the aggressive secularization of our society the degradation of our culture, and the enshrinement of license as a “right”.  Maybe we went along with it because of our own materialism.  In the process, we have trampled on our basic rights to freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of association, and to do with our property and our labor what we will, as long as it wasn’t destructive.

We thought the family and church and its charities too constricting, personal responsibility and self-reliance too scary, raising our own children too burdensome, and now we are settling into the clutches of the nanny state, which gains more power the less moral and responsible its citizens, the less those citizens believe their rights and obligations - and those of everyone else - flow from God.

So out goes the Bible, the cross, prayer, and the Ten Commandments.  Out goes discernment, sound reasoning, shame, and humility.  Out go the moral constraints on sexual behavior.  Out goes the expectation of marriage as a lifetime commitment uniting a man and a woman to care for each other and their children ahead of their own wants.  Out goes valuing human life, in comes using human beings for our own convenience and and dispensing of other human beings when they are inconvenient.

In our churches, we’ve allowed another Jesus and another gospel.
  We reward people like Oprah as they recast Jesus and his teachings in a philosophical mold that is based on Eastern religious concepts antithetical to the Bible.  Their “Christianity” demands nothing of them.  It does not ask that they change their behavior.  Yes, most Americans say they believe in God or a unifying spirit, but many don’t believe that such a being has authority over their lives, or at least they don’t act like it.  After all, if we’re confronted with our sins, we cover ourselves with moral relativism, twisting Scripture (“judge not!”), and appealing to evolution as an explanation.  We want God there at the wedding, at the hospital bed, and the funeral - but not in the wallet, or the marriage, or the bedroom.

So get ready for post-Christian America, where rights are granted – and can be abridged – by the government which is not "of, by,  and for the people" but rather an elite class, and we “can’t” govern by Christian principles.  Heck, Christians are being told they shouldn’t even vote by their personal convictions.

We can see how far we’ve come. Years ago, for example, our current President was ridiculed for citing Jesus Christ as his favorite philosopher.  Yet Thomas Jefferson, whose “wall of separation” phrase in a letter has been misused by such people, compiled and presented a codification of Jesus’ moral teachings.

Right now, they’ve got enough people believing that tolerance means we can’t do anything with which they are uncomfortable.  But we are already seeing that where they gain power, they won’t even practice the true meaning of tolerance.  Those who live by their Christian principles will not only be marginalized, they will be kicked out of the classroom, fired from the job, and successfully prosecuted and sued in the courtroom.  I wonder if we’ll get to the point where killing a Christian will be okay, as long as you can cite that they expressed “hate speech fightin’ words” by affirming Christian morals, making someone else feel “threatened”.

Are you ready for post-Christian America?

Related post: Are You Really a Christian?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »