Religion, Secularism and Homosexuality

[pbrower2a]

(06-14-2016, 06:47 PM)radind Wrote:

(06-14-2016, 10:57 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(06-14-2016, 10:29 AM)radind Wrote: I am concerned about freedom of speech and freedom of religion. There does not seem to be much tolerance for Christian values. 

Based on my conclusion that Christians are now a minority, there are no effective political actions open to alter the plans of the secularists majority. I can only pray for the country & my family and try to influence those around me. 

I joined this forum because of my interest in the Generations theory. One of the reasons I have stayed is to dialogue with others with different views. However, I doubt that many are interested in religious discussions.

We are all in minorities unless we want to identify ourselves as straight, white or female* above all else, neither of which is particularly admirable. Sheer numbers can protect Christian values. Maybe Christians cannot stop abortion or same-sex marriage, but they can at least create a climate in which abortion is rare, safe, and legal -- which is far better than commonplace, dangerous, and illegal with laws easily evaded or capriciously enforced. Christians have a place in the discussion of teen pregnancy, date rape, and practical availability of contraception. They also have the responsibility to recognize that homosexuality, let alone transgender identity is not a choice. So what is a good Christian response to homosexuality? I once had an exchange with a fellow who could not reconcile his Christian faith with his homosexuality. I suggested that he accept the idea that God made him gay and that he can still testify to Christian principles of charity and sexual fidelity as a gay male. If one is 'wired' to be homosexual, then one is 'wired' to be homosexual just as someone 'wired' to be a moron or a schizophrenic is a moron or a schizophrenic, and there is little that anyone can do about such. If you had to choose between being homosexual, of low intelligence, or schizophrenic, then which would you choose?  

Simply being in the majority is not enough to protect one's rights. Was being Russian good for protecting one's rights in the late and unlamented Soviet Union? Was being black in South Africa under Apartheid rule? Was being a Shi'ite under Satan Hussein? Did German nationality (even if the Reich apparatus not determine one non-Aryan) prevent one from being abused for even minor dissent against the government? Support the rights of all people and you earn your own rights. Being poor and in the majority has always been a precarious situation for one's own rights, let alone for democracy itself. Elites tend to destroy democracy when it challenges the power and privilege of those elites -- think of Chile under Pinochet. The majority of Chileans under the vile military-fascist regime were poor, and they had practically the same rights in Chile as Russians did in the Soviet Union in the 1970s and early 1980s.

*Anyone "pro-white" above all else, or identifies oneself first of all as "straight" -- reasonable exception for "straight" identity, dating -- is a scoundrel. Female chauvinism is as obnoxious as male chauvinism.

What  I choose to do is to try be be a Christian to the best of my understanding. Of course , those who do not have a Biblical worldview will reach their own conclusions.

Fine. I have no problem with devout Christianity. i can imagine far, far worse \\ like having no principles whatsoever.

Quote:Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; for it is written, “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.” So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.  Romans 14:10-12 ESV

[/quote]

I think that we can all pass judgment on someone so horrible as Charles Manson or Ted Bundy.