Religious Freedom and Conflicting Beliefs

Please stop rallying behind Kim Davis as an example of someone who's First Ammendment Rights were violated. She's not. Her rights are fully intact. The government is not asking her to perform the ceremony. It is not asking her to add her personal stamp of approval on these unions. It is merely asking her to issue a certificate. Her approvoal or disapproval is not needed. Rather, this is an example of Ms. Davis imposing her convictions on others. "I believe that is sin, therefore, I will not allow you to do it." This is totally different than if she were being forced to do something she didn't believe in. If she is deeply convicted that it is wrong for her to be involved even incidentally, then she needs to ask for a transfer to a different job. At that point, if the state fires her, then it is worth considering as an issue with her First Ammendment Rights. If the state imprisons her for leaving her job because she feels she can't in good conscience provide marriage licenses to same sex couples, THAT is a violation of her First Ammendment Rights. This is most definitely not the same as a pastor who is asked to perform a same sex marriage. He has every right to refuse, just as the couple has every right to find someone else who won't refuse.

I've seen parallels drawn between Ms. Davis and Germans working in the government in Nazi Germany. People have applauded her "standing up to evil" and resisting a government that is trampling her rights. Please stop. These situations are in no way related. A German soldier told to execute a person merely for the crime of being born into a different race, should have been able to recognize that what he was told to do was wrong, and should have refused to do it. (However that brings up the discussion of evolution, and the beliefs that the people they were executing were not "fully evolved" or "fully human", that their DNA was mixing with the "true humans", and preventing further evolution, and therefore, by exterminating them, they were doing humanity a service. But that's a discussion for a different day.) The crux of the matter is who is being forced. Let's set aside arguments about right and wrong, moral and immoral for a moment (not that they don't matter, they most certainly do, but in *this* discussion, they don't. This disussion is about who is being forced to do something they don't believe in. Ms. Davis believes homosexuality is a sin. The gay couple who comes in believes they have every right to get married. By refusing to issue them a marriage liscense, Ms. Davis is imposing her beliefs on the couple. Does that mean she must act against her conscience? Absolutely not. She can seek a different job. Now, let's change the discussion. Should that gay couple be able to go into any bakery and demand that they make them a wedding cake? No. That would be imposing their beliefs on someone else. The business owner has the right to politely refuse, because they don't want their business associated with gay marriage. The couple has every right to look somewhere else. The same goes for officiants. A pastor can refuse to marry them, because it would be a violation of his consience to do so. They have every right to find someone else. The pastor and the baker are not imposing their beliefs on the gay couple. Forcing them to comply would be imposing the gay couple's beliefs on them.

Let me make one thing clear. I believe homosexuality is a sin. It's laid out fairly clearly in the Bible. If you disagree, just read Romans. Personally, I find it repugnant. However, I realized something. My reaction to homosexuality is what God feels about sin. It is repulsive to Him. I am repulsive to Him, because I am a sinner, and yet He looked past my sin, saw me, and sent His Son to die on the cross to pay the penalty for my repugnant sin. If He can look past my sin to me, and love me in spite of myself, how can I do any less for my fellow man? My job is not to enforce my morality on those around me. My job is to live my life consistently, following God's law to the best of my ability, and doing everything in my power to show love to those around me. Did Jesus braid a whip and beat the prostitutes and drunks of his day? No. He went to the temple, to those who were practicing a false form of religion, and beat them. He spent so much time with the drunks and prostitutes that He was labeled as one of them by the religious leaders of His day. Does that mean that He was endorsing their lifestyle? Absolutely not! But He saw past the sin, to the sinner in need, and knew that reaming them out for not living a holy life was not the message they needed to hear. "I forgive you, I love you, go and sin no more," was the message they needed. I can't forgive people, I'm not the one who has been sinned against, but I can show them that regardless of their condition or their actions, God loves them.

What is our nation coming to?

Wow, time does fly. I can't believe how quickly the past weeks have gone. Things are still busy, but at least it seems like they may be settling into a normalized pattern. Thankfully Daniel's teething has abated somewhat. I think he was hit with a doubly whammy, of teething and a cold, making him miserable for a while.

Well, tomorrow California becomes the second state to legalize same sex marriage. As far as I know, Massachusetts is the only other state to legalized it. Vermont and New Hampshire both have laws permitting "civil unions" not same sex marriage. Oddly enough, the law in California did not come from the legislature, rather it came from the courts. The state had actually banned same sex marriage, but the courts stepped in and vetoed it. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the purpose of the legislature to create the laws, and the purpose of the courts to uphold them?

There are some who may try to construe what I have just said, and the comments I am about to make as bigoted, or hate speech. Let me clarify. I have no problem with homosexuals. I do not condone hate crimes or discrimination against them. I do believe they are sinners, and living in sin, but as the Bible says "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God" Rom. 3:23. That means that we are all of us sinners. We also know that God hates all sin equally, so it doesn't matter if you've told a lie, murdered, committed adultery, live a homosexual lifestyle, or have over-eaten (gluttony). It's all equal in God's sight. We as humans try to put a different degree on different sins, but we shouldn't. Sin is sin, we are all sinners, and we all have access to the same forgiveness in Christ.

That being said, I do believe homosexuality is a sin, and as such should not be promoted or condoned by our government. There is a huge difference between "not discriminating against" and actually condoning. Ensuring that homosexuals are afforded equal employment opportunities, are not the objects of hate crimes, etc. is totally different from coming out and advocating homosexuality as an "alternative life-style".

All that to say that I think we as Christians today are really missing a golden opportunity that has been given to us by the rise of homosexuality. The current popular belief is that homosexuality is a "genetic pre-disposition" and that we have no choice in our sexual orientation. This is diametrically opposed to another popular belief - the theory of evolution! To sum up the current philosophy, we are told that mankind and all living things are constantly evolving, and becoming better and stronger. Mankind is viewed as innately good and getting better. However, if evolution is true, and if homosexuality is genetic, the very process of evolution would have weeded out that very homosexual pre-disposition. For obvious reasons, homosexuals do not usually procreate. This should mean, if the evolutionary world view is correct, that we would see a downward trend in the number of homosexual people, because those who have that disposition would not procreate, and therefore the genetic code would die out.

However, this is the exact opposite of what we're seeing. In fact, we are seeing a rise in homosexuality. While this contradicts the evolutionary world view, it is actually predicted by a biblical world view. Biblicists see man as innately sinful and getting worse each day. We understand that God created a perfect world, but since man introduced sin, it has been consistently degrading. We also call homosexuality by its real name, not an "alternative life-style", but rather sin. Starting with a perfect world created by God that was damaged by sin, viewing mankind as sinners in need of a Savior, and calling homosexuality by its real name leads the Biblicist to draw the following conclusions - Mankind are sinners. Sin is increasing. Homosexuality is a sin, therefore homosexuality is increasing. Unlike the popular (albeit mistaken) world view of evolution, a biblical worldview explains the data.

Well, I apologize for any grammatical errors, it's late and I'm falling asleep, so I'm going to have to proofread at a later time

Goodnight!