Christian influence in political debate in recent times has taught Christians that they cannot legislate morality. However, when a debate arises on a real issue, and Christians take a stance, the secular American republic assumes that Christians are trying to force their moral values down the country's throat.
Rosie O'Donnell, in a now infamous episode of The View, compared Christianity to Islam, saying that Radical Christianity was as much of a threat as Radical Islam.
She is gay, and The Church's stance on her sexual orientation, I am sure, provided a lot of fire behind her statement. But is she so naive to believe that Christianity, like Islam, would wish for her to be placed in jail for her independent sexual decisions?
Morality has its place in society, but it cannot be legislated. However, as much as those that are not Christian desire that Christianity not be imposed upon them, so do Christians believe that secularism should not be imposed upon them.
Let's take Gay Marriage as an example. Though Christians feel that being gay places the individual outside of God's teachings, a Christian, under the envelope of "Freedom and Liberty for all" and responsible common sense, will not impose any law, nor support any law outlawing homosexuality. There may be some fringe radicals that will call for it, but based on biblical teachings and American liberty, gays are rest assured that their orientation decision is protected. However, marriage is a Christian institution, and though it is used by the entire society as a means of creating a union between a man and a woman, its Christian roots is well known and respected. Gay Rights activists are currently trying to convince our governing body to force homosexuality upon a Christian practice. Civil unions through the government is one thing, but marriage has Christian ties and should not be compromised by gays. This is not legislating morality, this is protecting a Christian institution from secularization.
It seems to me that liberals think that conservatives would like to be able to legislate morality. They misunderstand abortion to be one such issue, when in reality conservatives see it as a genocide issue just as much as an issue of morality. And what is morality. Let's really think about this. Morality, as defined by the Cambridge Dictionary, is: a personal or social set of standards for good or bad behaviour and character, or the quality of being right, honest or acceptable. So in a sense, being a law abiding citizen is being moral. So really, the argument by the secular progressive liberal left is not about legislating morality. It is about legislating their morality over Christian or Conservative morality.
Jenn from ScrewLiberals dot com says that she is a huge fan of responsible decision making. I concur.
Now, let's take this a step further. Liberal America wishes to crush Christianity, or at least numb the effects of The Church on society, yet they also demand that we make certain concessions to our Muslim citizens - even if it means allowing them to impose their moral system on us.
Fact is, Islam is spreading through Europe, and gaining strength here in the United States as we sit and quibble over the Democrat's "getting their point across" with wasteful legislation that is doomed to be vetoed. The heart of the matter is that no nation is legitimate in the eyes of Islam without obeying the main teachings of the Sharia. No religion is more worldly than Islam. No religion keeps its eyes more fixed on the way the world is run. Politics is combined with religion in Islam. Islam is a complete way of life, and they are willing to impose their ideology on the West by force.
The Islam religion is the main frame of reference for the constitution and laws of predominantly Muslim countries because they believe that it is God, not man, that rules. God is the source of all authority, including political authority. Virtue, not freedom, is the highest value.
Islam provides no distinction, as Christian religions do, between what should be rendered unto Caesar and what is rendered unto God.
In Islam, everything is rendered unto Allah.
The Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran says that Islam rejects the idea of a nation based on the approval of laws in accordance with the opinion of the majority. Islamic states are autocracies under the Sharia, and pressure for any other political arrangement is punishable by death. The Sharia is sufficient in itself for the governing of society, according to Islamic leaders. The Sharia's ability to govern extends to the totality of "religious, political, social, domestic, and private life."
An Islamic Superstate is the goal, with state power and religious power fused, centering on a caliph as the leader chosen by Allah for his people. Such a caliphate has been no more since the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, but fanatical Muslims like Obama bin Laden calls for its restoration.
An Islamic State ruled by the Sharia leaves little room for representative government. There is no separation of church and state in Islam. Islam is a complete way of life. Muslims advocating the separation of religion from politics are considered to be unbelievers, and Muslims are ordered to kill these apostates.
This is one of the major reasons we must remain in Iraq. The people that have welcomed Democracy and support the American presence are apostates in the eyes of the leaders of Syria, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and so forth. We are not only there to control terrorism, take away Iraq as a safe haven for terrorism, and protect America from its enemies, but we are also present in that region to protect the citizens of Iraq from their neighbors. A pull-out from Iraq would open the nation up for a blood bath, embolden our enemies, and strenghen the Islamic cancer growing in Western Society. The values at the heart of American law and society is changing as the Muslims seek a majority. In Europe, increasing Muslim populations may herald substantial change in these societies.
In the United States Christian moral value helped forge our supreme values and are embodied in the Constitution and the law of our land. The Muslim world has its own set of values, and it is their goal to replace our Western values with theirs.
Muslim populations are expanding in Europe and the call for Islamic values will be carried westward with them. Christians look down upon homosexuality and request that gay marriage not become the law. Islam looks down upon homosexuality as a sin punisible by death, and homosexuals are stoned to death for their sexual orientation. And trust me, if able here in America, Islam would have no problem legislating morality.
8888888888888888888888888888888888
Tune in to Political Pistachio Radio tomorrow at 4pm Pacific/7pm Eastern for more on my commentary regarding this, and many other, issues that now face our society.
11 comments:
Hi Doug,
Well when it comes to Rosie O'Donnell, I would like to see her put into jail, not because of her sexual stance but because of her lying leftist/socialist agenda.
You think Islam is spreading? It's here....check out this link posted by one of my commenter's.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm
Scary stuff.
Hi Jenn & Doug,
Yea I sent that info to Doug via email and your commenter got that info from Michael Savage it's been on his site since early Friday. There are several links to about that at this time one can do a google search for Islamberg and find all kinds of sources for that.
I see that you base your view of homosexuality on the bible. Being a bible literalist, that makes sense.
I'm confused, though, that you favor the wealthy in taxation, and I'm further perplexed that you haven't given away all of your stuff to the poor.
Your Lord and Savior commands it, yet you ignore Him. I wonder why?
17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. 20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. 21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.
23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! 24 And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!
25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
And notice Jesus says nothing about hating on homosexuals.
“However, marriage is a Christian institution, and though it is used by the entire society as a means of creating a union between a man and a woman, its Christian roots is well known and respected.”
Can't you get married in front of a judge with no reference to god what-so-ever? Despite its “roots”, marriage in America is not uniquely a religious ceremony anymore. You even say that. How can we then fully respect the christian roots of marriage without removing these practices? How is gay’s getting married any different than if I were to marry a woman in front of a judge?
No one is saying that god has to agree with a marriage between homosexuals. What people in this country want, is fair, just laws benefiting all persons. And if it’s a discussion about the meaning or roots of a word, then that’s just absurd.
“Liberal America wishes to crush Christianity, or at least numb the effects of The Church on society, yet they also demand that we make certain concessions to our Muslim citizens - even if it means allowing them to impose their moral system on us.”
Radical islam scares the hell out of me. But so does radical any religion. Yes, many islamic beliefs are flawed by our standards, but if you actually read the bible, so are many christian beliefs. I'm sure that there are many islams that do not believe in this radical version that your portray on your site.
Just as you, and your fellow christians, aren't following the words of the bible exactly as they’re written.
This is America where each and every person has the same rights and privileges as the next. As a liberal I’m all for any person to practice whatever religion they want to in America. I don’t believe in your religion or islam or any of them, but you’re free to worship how you wish. Provided your actions continue to abide by the laws of this country.
What liberals are against is the radicals trying to impose their religious beliefs into our constitution and laws.
“…a Christian, under the envelope of "Freedom and Liberty for all" and responsible common sense, will not impose any law, nor support any law outlawing homosexuality. There may be some fringe radicals that will call for it, but based on biblical teachings and American liberty…”
I see that you’re somewhat against that, which is good, but I don’t see how you can say that liberals are not tolerant of your religion. There are some on the radical left that may disagree, but as you’ve said there are those on the radical right that disagree with some of your stances as well.
And those fringe radicals you mention are the ones leading this country at the moment.
Steve.
Even though the last two comments are from liberals, they are written in a way to add to the discussion rather than disrupt, so I am allowing them. However, there are a number of flaws in these comments and I wish to address them with this comment:
Getting married in front of a judge rather than a pastor is not the point - it's the institution of marriage as a whole that I am talking about. Biblical beliefs are not flawed as Steve states, only the misinterpretations created by those like yourself who look for little things to call contradictions, and the like. Some of the Bible is historical record, some is advice, some is teachings, and so forth. You can't lump them all into one. And yes, I do follow the Bible exactly as it is written, but unlike you I recognize the context in which each part is written. I am free to worship as I wish, and you are free to disagree. However, the Qur'an (read it, study it, learn why their religion is what it is) is not a Holy Book that teaches. It is a manifesto that demands the violent spreading of Islam. All Muslims are radical if they believe the Quran - I understand there are some that have discounted some of the teachings, and many that are secular. It is them, I suppose, you can call moderates. But here's the real kicker: Liberalism wishes to appease these people because if they didn't, they would have to admit they are dangerous, and in the meantime the left is making a concerted effort to silence Christianity and Conservatism in a "Mussolini" style way. Study the upcoming "Fairness Doctrine." Learn about your party before you come here claiming you know what you follow. Really deeply learn about your beliefs. As for the taxation that Tom applied, what those verses are saying is that being right with God is more important than Riches - and Riches tends to ruin the man, but does that mean I should not yearn to be successful? Don't be an idiot. Like I said before, read the Bible in the context it was intended - don't go looking for what isn't there. I never said I favor the wealthy in taxation, I said that taxation should be fair to all - and we should not be penalized for wealth - the idea of the distribution of wealth the left has come up with is pure Marxism.
biblical text says it is an abomination for a man to lie with a man as with a woman, or a woman to lie with a woman as with a man (Lev. 18:22; 20:13) and it says that because of certain abominations such as homosexuality, a land will vomit out its inhabitants (Lev 18:25). The apostle Paul called it shameful and the result of being given up by God to "vile passions." (Romans 1:24-27)
Daniel 7:25 speaks of the end times of which I believe we may be entering. The verse says "And he shall speak great words (referring to the anti-christ, but I believe this also recognizes the prevailing attitude of the times) against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws (read those last few words carefully): and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time." What this is saying for you libs that like to take the Holy Bible out of context: He will "try to change the set times and the laws." No one really knows what the change set times means. It may involve somehow adjusting the time schedule so that we no longer have a 24-hour day. Or he may invoke a five-day week. Or maybe a 15-month year. Changing the laws, however, it clear. It obviously indicates that he will attack the moral foundations of society. When the antichrist comes to power, wrong will become right and right will become wrong. Moral values will be inverted as he makes his final mad bid for world domination. This is what is happening now, led by the secular progressives, people with socialistic agendas like George Soros, and the Democratic Party. You, my dear friends (Steve and Tom) have fallen victim to the trap that has been laid. You are part of the problem. You are following the evil agenda to a tee.
Sky Dive Rick references Leviticus.. which also has a whole host of other prohibitions. Eat a shrimp and the village is required to stone you to death, etc. I'm perplexed why people pick and choose which parts are "correct"? If it's the "divine word of God", it must all be correct, right?
The issue is Christianity and what Jesus directly commanded. Give away your stuff to the poor. I don't understand how context plays into that? He didn't say anything about homosexuality (it's not a "choice" or a "decision" btw), but he said very plainly what is required to enter heaven. Follow the commandments, give away your wealth.
If God commanded me to sell all my stuff and give everything to the poor, I'd do that post haste. It would seem pretty important.
Steve Law seems to think people like me are ushering in the "end times"? Our entire form of government is based on secular principals. It's always been that way. In fact, the founding father's (7 of the 9 anyway) were not even Christians. Why has the "end times" not come long before now?
Steve is right.. religious fundamentalism of any stripe is dangerous.
I am a fool for continuing this debate with you, but since you are sort of behaving I am going to keep going, primarily in the interest of educating you. Leviticus is filled with laws provided for the Israelites at a time when the standards were different from today, as was the understanding of bacteria and such. Many of the laws are no longer necessary and were superceded by Jesus Christ as stated in Matthew 15:17-20 - - - 17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven. - - - Jesus Christ was not against the law. As a devout Jew he honored it. But he neeeded to make the change from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, from the law of Moses to the law of Christ. That was his mission.
In those verses key words and phrases are used. One of them is "I have come": These words make the entire four verses Christ-centered. Indeed, this fits into the four Gospels. He is the one who fulfills the Old Testament by his sinless life. He is the one to fulfill its prophecies about his first coming. He fulfills it by his death and resurrection. He is the one to fulfill it by the establishment of his worldwide church. And he will fulfill it at his Second Coming.
"Abolish": this translation is appropriate for a literary context, but it does not express the full meaning. The Greek word is kataluô, whose primary meaning is "destroy," "demolish," "dismantle" as in a house or temple, or "detach a stone from a building." It is found in the context of destroying the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:2; 26:61). But outside of the New Testament in a literary context, it can mean to rescind not a law here or a law there, but the whole law at once, thus destroying the People of God. This is revealing of Matt. 5:17. Jesus does not destroy the law as a whole, but he does fulfill passages, such as animal sacrifices.
the key is understanding that though the Old Testament is revered and Leviticus is followed in some ways, the book was not written completely for those of us that live under the New Covenant of Christ. But then the accusation would be that Christians can just pick and choose. No necessarily. If Christians want to practice the commandments in the Old Testament, they should learn from Christ’s wisdom revealed in Matt. 22:24-40. As noted in the analysis of Matt. 5:17, the Pharisees wanted to trap Jesus with words, so one of them, an expert in the law, asked him which commandment was the greatest.
22:37 Jesus replied: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: "Love your neighbor as yourself." 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.
Jesus boils down all the commandments in the Old Testament to these two. They are the best way to obey all of them. Jesus’ followers should live a life of divine love through the power of the Holy Spirit in Jesus’ name.
Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, is in perfect agreement with his Lord and Savior, using the key words "fulfilled" and "fulfillment" (Romans 13:8-10):
13:8 [F]or he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not covet," and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: "Love your neighbor as yourself. 10 Love does no harm to the neighbor. Therefore, love is the fulfillment of the law.
Only the life and love of Jesus Christ that he sends into our hearts through the Holy Spirit can enable us to walk in divine love. Our love for God cannot be self-initiated. God draws us to love him by his Spirit. This is the first great commandment. Only as we love him, we love others. That is the second greatest commandment. As for righteousness coming from keeping the two greatest commandments, only his righteousness that he offers us freely after his death on the cross and resurrection can save us. Our own righteousness cannot.
We must trust in Jesus Christ and receive the Holy Spirit and his righteousness in his name.
We Christians honor and revere the Old Testament, but we interpret it through Jesus Christ and the new era of salvation and fulfillment that he ushered in on the day he was born.
So when it comes to Homosexuality you will never hear me say that I hate those people, but I will recognize that my Lord, through scripture, and through the common decency I have attained through being a Christian, has deemed that such practice is a sin and cannot be used to infiltrate the Church or to compromise Christian Institutions such as marriage. As for all fundamental religious beliefs being different, notice the primary difference between scripture based Christianity and Islam. Christianity teaches that the primary commandments are to love the Lord with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind, and to Love your neighbor as yourself. The anti-gay attitude is not hate, and anybody who claims that anybody is to be hated for their actions are not following biblical outlines. However, the actions of homosexuality are not accepted and should not be imposed on Christians be it through exposure or the comporomise of Christian Marriage. Also, back to the fundamental religions are dangerous thing, think about it, Christianity bases their fundamentalism on love and spreading the gospel to "save" souls, while Islam uses hate and violence to force conversion, and if you refuse resorts to killing you. Christianity hardly seems dangerous in that context.
Okay.. I understand your point then. That makes sense.
I still think religious fundamentalism is dangerous from any religion however. I've been reading that the secular Turkish government is under assualt from the radical Muslims, and even the secular Indian governement is being subjected to extreme hindu pressure.
Religions tend to not be very tolerant of other religions and the rise of religious fundmentalist governments is just a powder keg waiting to explode.
Post a Comment