Far right "Christians" for years have been touting the view that the bible should be the basis of US law. They oppose homosexuality and gay rights by quoting bible verses about homosexuality being a sin. They ignore Jesus' commandments to give to the poor (far right Christians tend to give less directly to charity, as well as opposing tax paid welfare) They oppose aid to people who are deep in debt, often claiming that it's the person's fault and they should have to deal with it. Now, I am not a Christian. I am a Unitarian-Universalist, and a deist. However, since I grew up Christian, I tend to use the bible as a basis for my personal moral code. However, I am noticed that many Christians do not stay true to the the bible overall. Here are a few example to counter the examples above. Jesus ordered, not suggested, but ordered his followers to give to the poor. He stated that the only way to be perfect would be to sell all you own and give the money to the poor. Now only do the Christian right overall fail to do this privately through charity, being among the least charitable in most surveys overall, but they oppose any attempt by government to create provide for the welfare of the poor. I would say that Jesus would be ashamed to call them his followers just on that note. Now, on homosexuality, I would not have a probably them Christians opposing homosexuality on religious grounds if they were consistent with their application of religious law. Jesus himself said nothing about homosexuality, and I am sure homosexuals were among the "sinners" he hung around with and ate with on a very regular basis. My issue is that is you bring up something in the old testament that is counter to the political or social views of the far right, they will usually tell you that the old testament is void, and does not need to be followed by Christians. Then, why oppose homosexuality? Jesus didn't say it was bad, and if the old laws are void, then it shouldn't matter? Only Jesus' direct teachings should matter. They pick whichever parts of the Old Testament they like and ignore the rest. Another example of this Is their view on debt. Now, most far right Christians will tell you that if some is heavy in debt it's because they made bad choices and they should have to deal with the consequences and not be bailed out. Now, according to the bible, a debt should be erased after 7 years. It even calls holding a debt over someone's head for extended period a form of slavery. Now, I will admit that the bible applies this only to Hebrews holding debts over other Hebrews, but I would think since Christianity holds the view that we are all brothers and sisters under God, that it would be applied to everyone.
I guess I could be considered far right but I have no problem with homosexuality. I even support gay marriage. So your point?
There was a time especially during the 1960's when there was a vocal Christian Left and thatvgang dud the same thing they used parts of the the Bible to "fight" for peace. They also used parts for their quest to "help " the poor and the down trodden. So I am not at all surprised that the right has, is, and will use the Bible to push a politic al, social, or sexual position. Sexual position being the "approved " Protestant missionary position of course. he he!
Giving money to a church so that church can put in a Starbucks isn't really charitable. - - - Updated - - - To churches. It definitely helps the poor to build gold plated buildings with six figure valued stained glass windows.
What makes you think we haven't heard this rant a million times before? You're rant is just not that special.
I was just pointing out where the OP post was in error. There are Starbucks in churches in 17 states?
On the plus side it is surprising how many Evangelical Christians tend to support the ultimate expression of freedom of religion for Jews, which is the right to rebuild their Jerusalem Third Temple and offer sacrifices thereon that fulfill the directions given by Moses. Ezekiel chapters 40 - 48 is taken seriously by many Christians. Apparently....... so did somebody else...... Luke 24:25 "Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: "
There's delicious irony in believers making moral judgments on a book that they claim their morality is based on.
but as you say your not a Christian so what do you care if Christians fail at their own agreements of what a Christian ought to be? your not bound to them. you agree to a set of rules according to you, how many laws have you failed to fulfill? its easy to be your own majesty isn't it? break your own rules change them so you don't do it again. why repent when you can change things to your own likening and desires? thing is, what if every evil heart is socially justified by that thinking? And so what if a certain portion of the population disagree with the gay life style they are allowed to disagree with someone else's choice. doesn't mean they can make someone do something they don't want to. no one has to agree that homosexually is a correct life style at all, just because maybe you do. its not required. so those who agree that gay is incorrect are always going to disagree, but no one is forcing you to be a Christian, or agree with Christians or worship or acknowledge their God either. so I don't have to say or agree or acknowledge that homosexuality is in anyway a good or a acceptable thing. the law may say you can, but that doesn't mean anyone has to say it is the right thing to do under any circumstances.
Because far right Christians often want to force their ideals on others through law, such as bans on gay marriage. So, it's good to show that they do not following all biblical law, only those that back their own personal social views.
so isn't that what gays do? want to force their ideals on others through law such as force the states, and businesses to accept their want to be married? doesn't any special interest group use the system in place to accomplish their goals? and aren't those goals based on beliefs on what is right? the system works if the majority rules. and special interest isn't the majority's interests in all most all cases. if the lawmakers serve they sever the majority, but in most cases the lawmakers appease, for fear of retribution of the squeaking wheel, (like media for example) which corrupts the system set in place by the writes of the constitution.
Gays do not force anything on anyone A gay couple getting married does not effect you, nor is there any legitimate argument to deny marriage rights based on sexual orientation. Rights are not a voting issue. The will of the majority doesn't matter.
