Links
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(295)
-
▼
Aug 2010
(15)
- Syncretism and Politics
- Convicting Verse of the Day
- The Wolf Says Sorry
- How Should We Then Worship?
- Is Smoking a Sin?
- Tyranny
- Parental Responsibility
- A Titantic-Like Feel
- Interview With a Heretic
- I Deserve This
- Prop 8
- Osteen Impersonates a Pharisee
- How Many Anecdotes Does it Take?
- Managing Political Expectations
- The Ditches of Parenting and Education
-
▼
Aug 2010
(15)
Labels
Thursday, August 05, 2010
Prop 8 went down to defeat (for now) in the courts yesterday. This is a huge case as it will make or break every other state law currently on the books defining marriage as between a man and a woman. If this brick falls, the entire wall is demolished.
Here is a good analysis of the foundational issues at hand.
Here is a good analysis of the foundational issues at hand.
The more interesting question is why gay marriage is so fashionable. The elites of society strongly support it, and many who nominally oppose it (e.g. President Obama) simply say that in order to protect their political careers. And these people support it so strenuously because it gives them the victim group they need to silence Christians. They are already committed to the philosophical basis of homosexual marriage, and live it out in their lives. They fornicate, commit adultery, divorce, procure abortions, despise masculinity and (especially) femininity, treat children like luxury items, etc… However, this menagerie of sins isn’t enough to explain their views, since these sins are hardly restricted to the modern elite. The crucial difference is that the modern elite is passionately committed to justifying all of it. They do not repent. Far more precious to them than their education or career status, or their fashion, or anything else is their moral superiority. They want to be selfish (especially with regard to money and sex) without feeling guilty. So they embrace the politics and morality of the gesture–saving the planet from global warming by buying a Prius, or shutting down timber mills, or blathering about diversity–while being thorough selfish in their personal lives.
Consequently they cannot bear criticism, whether implicit or explicit. Having no concept of repentance, they cannot admit their sin. The parts of their political and social outlook that they are most passionate about are those that assure them that they have done nothing wrong, and that seek to silence those who say otherwise. And they do seek to silence Christians. It’s no accident that they compare us to those who opposed interracial marriage–they want us banished just as thoroughly.
The opposite of this is not the philosophy of the righteous, but that of the sinner. I don’t want to base my philosophy on my own righteousness, because that’s a very small quantity. Rather, I want to face up to my own sinful nature and actions, and, recognizing that sin in thought and deed is the common lot of man, construct political philosophy accordingly {emphasis added}.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment