Don’t think this is weird. . .

. . .I’m just doing a post for the category “What This Blog Is/Ain’t,” in case anyone is interested in a list of my positions on hot-button issues.

Abortion: Pro-Life

Death penalty: Opposed (but only because of the wrongful conviction issue)

War on Drugs: Opposed (I think pot and a number of other drugs should be legalized)

Gay Marriage: For (but churches/religious officials should be able to abstain from     performing ceremonies).  Note: I am for civil unions under the principle of separation of church and state.  I am NOT for the marriage of homosexual people in the Christian church.  Contrary to what a lot of rationalizers and false teachers claim, the Scriptures are very, VERY clear about homosexual conduct. 

*  “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”:  This policy disgusts me.  It should be abolished immediately.  

Military Spending:  The more, the better.  Peace through strength.

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict:  I’m for the Jews all the way.   No question about it.

*   The UN:  Dismantle it.   It’s toothless and irredeemably corrupt.  Any organization that puts Sudan and China on a human rights commission should be immediately destroyed. 

Global Warming: I think it’s the biggest crock of shite ever foisted upon the world (besides the notion that Islam, as it is taught and practiced today, is a “religion of peace”)

Use of Race in Admissions/Hiring/Adoption:  Utterly and completely against

War in Iraq: For!  I just wish we would stop pussyfooting around and catering to idiots who think wars can be fought without unintentional casualties.  Terrorists hiding in a neighborhood?  Flatten the neighborhood.  The “innocent civilians” would learn real quick not to harbor terrorists (oops, I mean “insurgents”).

“Single payer” (translation: government-run) health care system: Oppose, big time

Welfare Reform:  VERY much “for.” Every able-bodied person should work, period.  If they don’t, yank the aid and let ’em sink.  No mercy for the lazy.

Advertisements

~ by lewdandlascivious on March 14, 2007.

26 Responses to “Don’t think this is weird. . .”

  1. Ok, I think we may be twins separated at birth. It is almost scary.

  2. Make that triplets. That is a great list.

    Just one concern: What do you think of the logical consequences of gov’t recognition of “gay marriage” – i.e., re-doing textbooks with gay couples, teaching kindergarteners on up that it is normative, etc.? (basically the nonsense going on in Massachussetts.

    Also, if it is a civil right, then what about the inevitable hate crimes issues for preaching the Word? Those are some of my concerns with it.

  3. Haha! I KNEW my parents were keeping something from me!

    Neil, I hear ya on those concerns. They worry me, too. My brother is a Methodist minister, and I have visions of him being thrown in jail for refusing to marry some couple. Seriously. I don’t think regular gay people would ever consider doing such a thing (none that I’ve met, anyway, and I’m a bit of a fag hag), but the gay activist groups (who seem pretty radical and thuggish to me) could cause some real problems.

    As for the teaching part, it would pretty much fit in with the secular curriculum of today. At any rate, it’s up to parents to teach their kids right and wrong: there’s a lot of junk kids hear at school, but good parents trump B.S. school lessons every time. Personally, I think the bigger problem is that kids are being taught about sex (as opposed to merely biology and the science of reproduction) in public schools at all, and at such young ages.

  4. I have been working on a post about the whole marriage thing, but I have yet to get it published. Mostly because I am a big ol’ chicken, but also because I have to get it generic enough so as not to cause embarrassment to family members. I am not very anonymous, and I would not want to “out” anyone who doesn’t want to be outed, you know?

  5. Definitely!
    I’ll look forward to reading your post–lemme know when it’s up!

  6. I’ve got a piece part-drafted as well. I am sensitive to a few of their concerns, such as hospital visitation and estate issues, but I think there are other solutions to those problems.

    P.S. When you see your parents, tell them they owe me 44 years of back allowance.

  7. If polygamy were legal I would serisously consider you for the position of second wife…lol. And it just might be within the next 20 years.

    I love ALL your positions and ifnd so little to disagree with. You even agreed with my homosexual marriage position on each and every subpoint.

  8. BTW I am not mormon, and do not endorse polygamy. While God toleated it for a while, it is hard not to notice how polygamy created problems even for otherwise Godly men.

    Sorry, I had to do that. Some people on here take jokes too seriously.

  9. You are sort of right on target with me as well. However, I would like to point out that the Scriptures are also very, VERY clear on charging interest, drunkenness, and interfaith marriage. We already are picking and choosing based on cultural changes. Does this make it right? I can’t say, but it is important to remember that the core of what makes someone a Christian (see Nicene Creed for an example) focuses on faith in God and receipt of grace, not whom he chooses to share a bed with. While I believe in the divine inspiration of the Scriptures, I do not forget that it was fallible, culturally influenced humans who put the pen to parchment.

  10. J.K. you crack me up. 🙂

    Pink Elephant, I agree with you completely that there is no Scriptural basis for “ranking” sin, and I personally find it abhorrent that the Christian mainstream has elevated homosexual conduct to the status of Super Sin. Having sex with someone of the same gender is defined clearly as a sin in the Bible, but what makes it a “worse” sin than the, oh, 8000 I commit every day? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. And we absolutely should not pick and choose which sins are “ok” and which ones we’re comfortable leaving in the “bad” category–when we do that, we trade God’s unchanging word for our own shifting desires and secular “values.” All of this is terribly wrong for a Christian to do.

    You are correct that the very core of Christianity is entirely about grace–unmerited favor–which I think is much harder for us humans to grasp than evil (at least, it is for me). It is certainly not for me to judge when a person is forgiven for something or saved, and I would never want that job (it belongs to JC). But to receive grace and forgiveness, I do know that it is necessary to acknowledge that we have sinned. I know this because the Bible tells me.

    Although the Bible was written at a certain time and in a certain cultural environment, instead of say, floating down from Heaven on a golden platter every 30 or 40 years, the fact it was channelled through human beings (who were saints and wholly devoted to God, let’s remember) does not change its unchanging validity and truth. Think about it this way: if God is powerful enough to create everything that exists, don’t you think His omnipotence can overcome unwelcome human influences that might otherwise creep into His divine message? Also, remember that Christ did all He did in human form, in a very human body, while living in that same culture and time. Does that change the utter divinity and singularity of His nature and acts? Furthermore, Christ and the apostles were not in the least afraid to demolish outdated practices and all kinds of conventional wisdom–that’s what got ’em all killed. Homosexual conduct (notice I distinguish between conduct and feelings/impulses) had been condemned as a sin for time out of mind–if it were in fact unsinful behavior when Christ brought the New Covenant into the world, “cultural influences” could not have stopped Him from pointing it out loud and clear. Unlike the Buddy Jesus being peddled to us by the revisionist clan, Christ was a gutsy, nervy brawler with a sharp tongue.

    If any of us picks, and chooses what we “think” or “feel” is OK to believe in the Bible, rejecting other parts we find unpleasant for whatever reason, then the entire Bible is up for grabs, the Cross and all. Which it is–there are mainstream denominations openly questioning the singular nature and divinity of Christ Himself.

  11. “I would like to point out that the Scriptures are also very, VERY clear on charging interest, drunkenness, and interfaith marriage.”

    The problem is that no one justifies the drunk and tells him that his actions aren’t sinful. While interfaith marriages are heavily discouraged Paul makes it clear that such a mistake should be solved by divorce, but by living the kind of Christian witness that will bring your spouse to Christ.

    In addition, the only prohibitions I know against interest are covered in Deuteronomy, and therefore only apply to theocratic Israel- a not existant state.

    “We already are picking and choosing based on cultural changes. Does this make it right? I can’t say, but it is important to remember that the core of what makes someone a Christian (see Nicene Creed for an example) focuses on faith in God and receipt of grace, not whom he chooses to share a bed with.”

    Does not Paul point out that our freedom in Christ is misspent if we use it as an excuse to continue on in sin. The problem isn’t struggling with a homosexual lifestyle (or any sin for that matter)- it is denying that your actions are sinful in the first place. For how can you seek forgiveness for actions you don’t even believe are sinful?

    I would also point out that grading sin is probably not the best thing to do. There does however appear to be one biblical distinction. Fornication (extra-marital sex) and several other sins are considered “abominations,” (this even ignored the “unpardonable sin” of blaspheming the Holy Spirit). So the homosexual is no better or worse that the adultery, the young couple that engages in the pleasures of the flesh before marriage, etc.

  12. All correct–and these are not denominational quirks: it’s 2000 years of Christian doctrine and teaching as advanced by the saints and martyrs.
    And it goes back to a point I feel I cannot emphasize enough–my usual disclaimer–I am no innocent little angel.
    I just hate it that so often, taking sides with the Scripture and calling something a sin is interpreted as a personal attack on someone, or a condemnation of their eternal soul. I suppose there are many people who use the concept of sin to do just that.
    I do want to make it clear, however, that I am not one of those people. I don’t view my own sins as less bad than anyone else’s, and really, it’s a person’s individual choice whether or not to accept the Scriptures. I hope my words can be taken not as an attack, but as encouragement not to listen to false teaching. I think we will all require a hefty dose of mercy in the end–I know for sure that I will.

  13. *standing ovation from the deacon’s bench*

  14. “I just hate it that so often, taking sides with the Scripture and calling something a sin is interpreted as a personal attack on someone, or a condemnation of their eternal soul.”

    I share that view. I think part of the challenge is the uniqueness of homosexuality. I am as pro-traditional marriage as they come, but when I sense people getting too fired up about it I like to remind them that we shouldn’t grandstand on sins that aren’t temptations for us.

    Having said that, when someone preaches against greed, envy, pride, lust, etc., I am rightly convicted but I don’t get defensive and try to rationalize it away.

    I’ll offer an illustration which I want to expand on over at my blog someday. I was sharing the Gospel with a young man once who happened to be gay. He was all over the place with his religious beliefs and questions. At one point he asked, “Doesn’t the Bible say homosexual behavior is a sin?” (He might have said “homosexuality” but you get the point). I could have glossed over it and said it was a debatable matter, but that wouldn’t have been true or loving.

    I could have spent an hour explaining all the verses around this topic, but that would have been overkill. Instead I just confirmed that yes, the Bible does say it is a sin (despite how some try to twist it). But then I just shifted back to the basic Gospel – namely, that we are all sinners in need of a Savior (basic Roman Road stuff). It was a great back-and-forth conversation on a lot of topics and I pray that it planted a seed and that the young man kept searching.

  15. “Unlike the Buddy Jesus being peddled to us by the revisionist clan, Christ was a gutsy, nervy brawler with a sharp tongue.”

    Buddy Jesus – heh!

    “If any of us picks, and chooses what we “think” or “feel” is OK to believe in the Bible, rejecting other parts we find unpleasant for whatever reason, then the entire Bible is up for grabs, the Cross and all. Which it is–there are mainstream denominations openly questioning the singular nature and divinity of Christ Himself.”

    Double Amen!

  16. Great post, and in many cases as with many of your views, GMTA.

  17. If polygamy were legal I would serisously consider you for the position of second wife…lol. And it just might be within the next 20 years.

    Yes, it probably will be legal soon – Equal Protection and all that. Never mind the fact that anyone’s spouse can violate marriage vows (“forsaking all others,” etc) and acquire another significant other… the chaos will be endless.

    Why don’t you set up your architect friend wtihLewd & Lascivious? They only live a few hours away from each other. 😉

  18. Why not both of you? After all polygamy will be legal soon enough…lol.

  19. As long as Miss L&L is in charge of having the kids and I can be in charge of working and doing domestic stuff.

  20. Well, just remember that I am an old-school disciplinarian: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAEBJce2Yw8

  21. I have a copy of her book!

  22. Hence the reason you would be in charge of the kids. That and your genes are better than mine for passing along to the next generation.

    I’ll just bake my triple-Ghirardelli’s chocolate Gran Marnier brownies.

  23. “Think about it this way: if God is powerful enough to create everything that exists, don’t you think His omnipotence can overcome unwelcome human influences that might otherwise creep into His divine message?”

    Yes, I do think God CAN overcome these unwelcome influences, but that is not the same as saying He DOES. From what I can tell, free will is very important and God did not override that aspect simply to deliver His message. Indeed it is clear that God does not His message from these influences today. Corrupt and hypocritical ministers plague every denomination. Some churches preach an intolerance for sexual sinners that leads some to violence. As you point out yourself, some churches are even questioning something as central to Christianity as Jesus’ divinity. Why should God have made sure that the Biblical message was uncorrupted when it is often presented to people through another layer of human fault that can destroy it completely? I think it speaks to the power of God’s message of undeserved grace that it can (and I believe does) reach anybody with all these obstacles.

    One of the recurring themes in Christ’s ministry is that a narrow focus on what people DO will quickly lead us astray. The legalistic Pharisees were a frequent target. I’m not saying that Christ condoned the sins of those whom he ministered to, but to Jesus the message of grace was something more important than the deeds of those who received the message. In the end, whether homosexual acts are sinful or not is unimportant to that message because there is NO ONE for whom that the determining factor in his or her status as sinner.

  24. P.E., we will prolly just continue to disagree about the integrity of Scripture and the crucial role that repentance and confession has in the offering of grace. That’s aight w/me.
    I hope you can understand that I am not being legalistic or self-righteous here–the Pharisees were arrogant jerks who nitpicked everyone else’s sins and had no love in their hearts–they used the Mosaic law as a weapon. There’s a difference between that and defending the essential truth of the Scriptures when it is questioned or undermined. As far as I’m concerned, we could just as easily be debating whether or not my excessive smoking is a sin (it is!).
    This is apropos of nothing, but yo, I’m watching this show about this dude who raped and murdered a woman and her daughters while they were on vacation. I might have to rethink that whole “no sin is greater than another” deal, for SURRIOUS.

  25. Indeed we could debate ad infinitum, and i promise to stop after just a few more points:

    1) To clarify, I was not accusing you a being a legalistic Pharisee, rather pointing out that the exercise of “this is a sin that is not a sin” leads us astray. The Pharisees got caught in this trap, and that is why I mentioned them.

    2) The main point of my comment is the last sentence.

    3) As you can tell, I wrote the comment at a quarter to seven in the morning, which is not my most lucid time of day.

  26. Dude, I’m impressed you were up that early. Are you one of those Morning People? 😉

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: