Manhattan Declaration:

[jrance@iacwds.com 716]

Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience

Drafted on October 20, 2009

Released on November 20, 2009

Preamble

 

Christians are heirs of a 2,000-year tradition of proclaiming God's word, seeking justice in our societies, resisting tyranny, and reaching out with compassion to the poor, oppressed and suffering.

 

While fully acknowledging the imperfections and shortcomings of Christian institutions and communities in all ages, we claim the heritage of those Christians who defended innocent life by rescuing discarded babies from trash heaps in Roman cities and publicly denouncing the Empire's sanctioning of infanticide. We remember with reverence those believers who sacrificed their lives by remaining in Roman cities to tend the sick and dying during the plagues, and who died bravely in the coliseums rather than deny their Lord.

 

After the barbarian tribes overran Europe, Christian monasteries preserved not only the Bible but also the literature and art of Western culture. It was Christians who combated the evil of slavery: Papal edicts in the 16^th and 17^th centuries decried the practice of slavery and first excommunicated anyone involved in the slave trade; evangelical Christians in England, led by John Wesley and William Wilberforce, put an end to the slave trade in that country. Christians under Wilberforce's leadership also formed hundreds of societies for helping the poor, the imprisoned, and child laborers chained to machines.

 

In Europe, Christians challenged the divine claims of kings and successfully fought to establish the rule of law and balance of governmental powers, which made modern democracy possible. And in America, Christian women stood at the vanguard of the suffrage movement. The great civil rights crusades of the 1950s and 60s were led by Christians claiming the Scriptures and asserting the glory of the image of God in every human being regardless of race, religion, age or class.

 

This same devotion to human dignity has led Christians in the last decade to work to end the dehumanizing scourge of human trafficking and sexual slavery, bring compassionate care to AIDS sufferers in Africa, and assist in a myriad of other human rights causes - from providing clean water in developing nations to providing homes for tens of thousands of children orphaned by war, disease and gender discrimination.

 

Like those who have gone before us in the faith, Christians today are called to proclaim the Gospel of costly grace, to protect the intrinsic dignity of the human person and to stand for the common good. In being true to its own calling, the call to discipleship, the church through service to others can make a profound contribution to the public good.

 

We, as Orthodox, Catholic, and Evangelical Christians, have gathered, beginning in New York on September 28, 2009, to make the following declaration, which we sign as individuals, not on behalf of our organizations, but speaking to and from our communities. We act together in obedience to the one true God, the triune God of holiness and love, who has laid total claim on our lives and by that claim calls us with believers in all ages and all nations to seek and defend the good of all who bear his image. We set forth this declaration in light of the truth that is grounded in Holy Scripture, in natural human reason (which is itself, in our view, the gift of a beneficent God), and in the very nature of the human person. We call upon all people of goodwill, believers and non-believers alike, to consider carefully and reflect critically on the issues we here address as we, with St. Paul, commend this appeal to everyone's conscience in the sight of God.

 

While the whole scope of Christian moral concern, including a special concern for the poor and vulnerable, claims our attention, we are especially troubled that in our nation today the lives of the unborn, the disabled, and the elderly are severely threatened; that the institution of marriage, already buffeted by promiscuity, infidelity and divorce, is in jeopardy of being redefined to accommodate fashionable ideologies; that freedom of religion and the rights of conscience are gravely jeopardized by those who would use the instruments of coercion to compel persons of faith to compromise their deepest convictions.

 

Because the sanctity of human life, the dignity of marriage as a union of husband and wife, and the freedom of conscience and religion are foundational principles of justice and the common good, we are compelled by our Christian faith to speak and act in their defense. In this declaration we affirm: 1) the profound, inherent, and equal dignity of every human being as a creature fashioned in the very image of God, possessing inherent rights of equal dignity and life; 2) marriage as a conjugal union of man and woman, ordained by God from the creation, and historically understood by believers and non-believers alike, to be the most basic institution in society and; 3) religious liberty, which is grounded in the character of God, the example of Christ, and the inherent freedom and dignity of human beings created in the divine image.

 

We are Christians who have joined together across historic lines of ecclesial differences to affirm our right - and, more importantly, to embrace our obligation - to speak and act in defense of these truths. We pledge to each other, and to our fellow believers, that no power on earth, be it cultural or political, will intimidate us into silence or acquiescence. It is our duty to proclaim the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in its fullness, both in season and out of season. May God help us not to fail in that duty.

 

 

Life

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. Genesis 1:27

I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full. John 10:10

 

Although public sentiment has moved in a pro-life direction, we note with sadness that pro-abortion ideology prevails today in our government. The present administration is led and staffed by those who want to make abortions legal at any stage of fetal development, and who want to provide abortions at taxpayer expense. Majorities in both houses of Congress hold pro-abortion views. The Supreme Court, whose infamous 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade stripped the unborn of legal protection, continues to treat elective abortion as a fundamental constitutional right, though it has upheld as constitutionally permissible some limited restrictions on abortion. The President says that he wants to reduce the "need" for abortion - a commendable goal. But he has also pledged to make abortion more easily and widely available by eliminating laws prohibiting government funding, requiring waiting periods for women seeking abortions, and parental notification for abortions performed on minors. The elimination of these important and effective pro-life laws cannot reasonably be expected to do other than significantly increase the number of elective abortions by which the lives of countless children are snuffed out prior to birth. Our commitment to the sanctity of life is not a matter of partisan loyalty, for we recognize that in the thirty-six years since Roe v. Wade, elected officials and appointees of both major political parties have been complicit in giving legal sanction to what Pope John Paul II described as "the culture of death." We call on all officials in our country, elected and appointed, to protect and serve every member of our society, including the most marginalized, voiceless, and vulnerable among us.

 

A culture of death inevitably cheapens life in all its stages and conditions by promoting the belief that lives that are imperfect, immature or inconvenient are discardable. As predicted by many prescient persons, the cheapening of life that began with abortion has now metastasized. For example, human embryo-destructive research and its public funding are promoted in the name of science and in the cause of developing treatments and cures for diseases and injuries. The President and many in Congress favor the expansion of embryo-research to include the taxpayer funding of so-called "therapeutic cloning." This would result in the industrial mass production of human embryos to be killed for the purpose of producing genetically customized stem cell lines and tissues. At the other end of life, an increasingly powerful movement to promote assisted suicide and "voluntary" euthanasia threatens the lives of vulnerable elderly and disabled persons. Eugenic notions such as the doctrine of lebensunwertes Leben ("life unworthy of life") were first advanced in the 1920s by intellectuals in the elite salons of America and Europe. Long buried in ignominy after the horrors of the mid-20^th century, they have returned from the grave. The only difference is that now the doctrines of the eugenicists are dressed up in the language of "liberty," "autonomy," and "choice."

 

We will be united and untiring in our efforts to roll back the license to kill that began with the abandonment of the unborn to abortion. We will work, as we have always worked, to bring assistance, comfort, and care to pregnant women in need and to those who have been victimized by abortion, even as we stand resolutely against the corrupt and degrading notion that it can somehow be in the best interests of women to submit to the deliberate killing of their unborn children. Our message is, and ever shall be, that the just, humane, and truly Christian answer to problem pregnancies is for all of us to love and care for mother and child alike.

 

A truly prophetic Christian witness will insistently call on those who have been entrusted with temporal power to fulfill the first responsibility of government: to protect the weak and vulnerable against violent attack, and to do so with no favoritism, partiality, or discrimination. The Bible enjoins us to defend those who cannot defend themselves, to speak for those who cannot themselves speak. And so we defend and speak for the unborn, the disabled, and the dependent. What the Bible and the light of reason make clear, we must make clear. We must be willing to defend, even at risk and cost to ourselves and our institutions, the lives of our brothers and sisters at every stage of development and in every condition.

 

Our concern is not confined to our own nation. Around the globe, we are witnessing cases of genocide and "ethnic cleansing," the failure to assist those who are suffering as innocent victims of war, the neglect and abuse of children, the exploitation of vulnerable laborers, the sexual trafficking of girls and young women, the abandonment of the aged, racial oppression and discrimination, the persecution of believers of all faiths, and the failure to take steps necessary to halt the spread of preventable diseases like AIDS. We see these travesties as flowing from the same loss of the sense of the dignity of the human person and the sanctity of human life that drives the abortion industry and the movements for assisted suicide, euthanasia, and human cloning for biomedical research. And so ours is, as it must be, a truly consistent ethic of love and life for all humans in all circumstances.

 

 

Marriage

The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, for she was taken out of man." For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. Genesis 2:23-24

 

This is a profound mystery - but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband. Ephesians 5:32-33

 

 

In Scripture, the creation of man and woman, and their one-flesh union as husband and wife, is the crowning achievement of God's creation. In the transmission of life and the nurturing of children, men and women joined as spouses are given the great honor of being partners with God Himself. Marriage then, is the first institution of human society - indeed it is the institution on which all other human institutions have their foundation. In the Christian tradition we refer to marriage as "holy matrimony" to signal the fact that it is an institution ordained by God, and blessed by Christ in his participation at a wedding in Cana of Galilee. In the Bible, God Himself blesses and holds marriage in the highest esteem.

 

Vast human experience confirms that marriage is the original and most important institution for sustaining the health, education, and welfare of all persons in a society. Where marriage is honored, and where there is a flourishing marriage culture, everyone benefits - the spouses themselves, their children, the communities and societies in which they live. Where the marriage culture begins to erode, social pathologies of every sort quickly manifest themselves. Unfortunately, we have witnessed over the course of the past several decades a serious erosion of the marriage culture in our own country. Perhaps the most telling - and alarming - indicator is the out-of-wedlock birth rate. Less than fifty years ago, it was under 5 percent. Today it is over 40 percent. Our society - and particularly its poorest and most vulnerable sectors, where the out-of-wedlock birth rate is much higher even than the national average - is paying a huge price in delinquency, drug abuse, crime, incarceration, hopelessness, and despair. Other indicators are widespread non-marital sexual cohabitation and a devastatingly high rate of divorce.

 

We confess with sadness that Christians and our institutions have too often scandalously failed to uphold the institution of marriage and to model for the world the true meaning of marriage. Insofar as we have too easily embraced the culture of divorce and remained silent about social practices that undermine the dignity of marriage we repent, and call upon all Christians to do the same.

 

To strengthen families, we must stop glamorizing promiscuity and infidelity and restore among our people a sense of the profound beauty, mystery, and holiness of faithful marital love. We must reform ill-advised policies that contribute to the weakening of the institution of marriage, including the discredited idea of unilateral divorce. We must work in the legal, cultural, and religious domains to instill in young people a sound understanding of what marriage is, what it requires, and why it is worth the commitment and sacrifices that faithful spouses make.

 

The impulse to redefine marriage in order to recognize same-sex and multiple partner relationships is a symptom, rather than the cause, of the erosion of the marriage culture. It reflects a loss of understanding of the meaning of marriage as embodied in our civil and religious law and in the philosophical tradition that contributed to shaping the law. Yet it is critical that the impulse be resisted, for yielding to it would mean abandoning the possibility of restoring a sound understanding of marriage and, with it, the hope of rebuilding a healthy marriage culture. It would lock into place the false and destructive belief that marriage is all about romance and other adult satisfactions, and not, in any intrinsic way, about procreation and the unique character and value of acts and relationships whose meaning is shaped by their aptness for the generation, promotion and protection of life. In spousal communion and the rearing of children (who, as gifts of God, are the fruit of their parents' marital love), we discover the profound reasons for and benefits of the marriage covenant.

 

We acknowledge that there are those who are disposed towards homosexual and polyamorous conduct and relationships, just as there are those who are disposed towards other forms of immoral conduct. We have compassion for those so disposed; we respect them as human beings possessing profound, inherent, and equal dignity; and we pay tribute to the men and women who strive, often with little assistance, to resist the temptation to yield to desires that they, no less than we, regard as wayward. We stand with them, even when they falter. We, no less than they, are sinners who have fallen short of God's intention for our lives. We, no less than they, are in constant need of God's patience, love and forgiveness. We call on the entire Christian community to resist sexual immorality, and at the same time refrain from disdainful condemnation of those who yield to it. Our rejection of sin, though resolute, must never become the rejection of sinners. For every sinner, regardless of the sin, is loved by God, who seeks not our destruction but rather the conversion of our hearts. Jesus calls all who wander from the path of virtue to "a more excellent way." As his disciples we will reach out in love to assist all who hear the call and wish to answer it.

 

We further acknowledge that there are sincere people who disagree with us, and with the teaching of the Bible and Christian tradition, on questions of sexual morality and the nature of marriage. Some who enter into same-sex and polyamorous relationships no doubt regard their unions as truly marital. They fail to understand, however, that marriage is made possible by the sexual complementarity of man and woman, and that the comprehensive, multi-level sharing of life that marriage is includes bodily unity of the sort that unites husband and wife biologically as a reproductive unit. This is because the body is no mere extrinsic instrument of the human person, but truly part of the personal reality of the human being. Human beings are not merely centers of consciousness or emotion, or minds, or spirits, inhabiting non-personal bodies. The human person is a dynamic unity of body, mind, and spirit. Marriage is what one man and one woman establish when, forsaking all others and pledging lifelong commitment, they found a sharing of life at every level of being - the biological, the emotional, the dispositional, the rational, the spiritual - on a commitment that is sealed, completed and actualized by loving sexual intercourse in which the spouses become one flesh, not in some merely metaphorical sense, but by fulfilling together the behavioral conditions of procreation. That is why in the Christian tradition, and historically in Western law, consummated marriages are not dissoluble or annullable on the ground of infertility, even though the nature of the marital relationship is shaped and structured by its intrinsic orientation to the great good of procreation.

 

We understand that many of our fellow citizens, including some Christians, believe that the historic definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman is a denial of equality or civil rights. They wonder what to say in reply to the argument that asserts that no harm would be done to them or to anyone if the law of the community were to confer upon two men or two women who are living together in a sexual partnership the status of being "married." It would not, after all, affect their own marriages, would it? On inspection, however, the argument that laws governing one kind of marriage will not affect another cannot stand. Were it to prove anything, it would prove far too much: the assumption that the legal status of one set of marriage relationships affects no other would not only argue for same sex partnerships; it could be asserted with equal validity for polyamorous partnerships, polygamous households, even adult brothers, sisters, or brothers and sisters living in incestuous relationships. Should these, as a matter of equality or civil rights, be recognized as lawful marriages, and would they have no effects on other relationships? No. The truth is that marriage is not something abstract or neutral that the law may legitimately define and re-define to please those who are powerful and influential.

 

No one has a civil right to have a non-marital relationship treated as a marriage. Marriage is an objective reality - a covenantal union of husband and wife - that it is the duty of the law to recognize and support for the sake of justice and the common good. If it fails to do so, genuine social harms follow. First, the religious liberty of those for whom this is a matter of conscience is jeopardized. Second, the rights of parents are abused as family life and sex education programs in schools are used to teach children that an enlightened understanding recognizes as "marriages" sexual partnerships that many parents believe are intrinsically non-marital and immoral. Third, the common good of civil society is damaged when the law itself, in its critical pedagogical function, becomes a tool for eroding a sound understanding of marriage on which the flourishing of the marriage culture in any society vitally depends. Sadly, we are today far from having a thriving marriage culture. But if we are to begin the critically important process of reforming our laws and mores to rebuild such a culture, the last thing we can afford to do is to re-define marriage in such a way as to embody in our laws a false proclamation about what marriage is.

 

And so it is out of love (not "animus") and prudent concern for the common good (not "prejudice"), that we pledge to labor ceaselessly to preserve the legal definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman and to rebuild the marriage culture. How could we, as Christians, do otherwise? The Bible teaches us that marriage is a central part of God's creation covenant. Indeed, the union of husband and wife mirrors the bond between Christ and his church. And so just as Christ was willing, out of love, to give Himself up for the church in a complete sacrifice, we are willing, lovingly, to make whatever sacrifices are required of us for the sake of the inestimable treasure that is marriage.

 

 

Religious Liberty

The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners. Isaiah 61:1

Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's. Matthew 22:21

 

The struggle for religious liberty across the centuries has been long and arduous, but it is not a novel idea or recent development. The nature of religious liberty is grounded in the character of God Himself, the God who is most fully known in the life and work of Jesus Christ. Determined to follow Jesus faithfully in life and death, the early Christians appealed to the manner in which the Incarnation had taken place: "Did God send Christ, as some suppose, as a tyrant brandishing fear and terror? Not so, but in gentleness and meekness..., for compulsion is no attribute of God" (Epistle to Diognetus 7.3-4). Thus the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the example of Christ Himself and in the very dignity of the human person created in the image of God - a dignity, as our founders proclaimed, inherent in every human, and knowable by all in the exercise of right reason.

 

Christians confess that God alone is Lord of the conscience. Immunity from religious coercion is the cornerstone of an unconstrained conscience. No one should be compelled to embrace any religion against his will, nor should persons of faith be forbidden to worship God according to the dictates of conscience or to express freely and publicly their deeply held religious convictions. What is true for individuals applies to religious communities as well.

 

It is ironic that those who today assert a right to kill the unborn, aged and disabled and also a right to engage in immoral sexual practices, and even a right to have relationships integrated around these practices be recognized and blessed by law - such persons claiming these "rights" are very often in the vanguard of those who would trample upon the freedom of others to express their religious and moral commitments to the sanctity of life and to the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife.

 

We see this, for example, in the effort to weaken or eliminate conscience clauses, and therefore to compel pro-life institutions (including religiously affiliated hospitals and clinics), and pro-life physicians, surgeons, nurses, and other health care professionals, to refer for abortions and, in certain cases, even to perform or participate in abortions. We see it in the use of anti-discrimination statutes to force religious institutions, businesses, and service providers of various sorts to comply with activities they judge to be deeply immoral or go out of business. After the judicial imposition of "same-sex marriage" in Massachusetts, for example, Catholic Charities chose with great reluctance to end its century-long work of helping to place orphaned children in good homes rather than comply with a legal mandate that it place children in same-sex households in violation of Catholic moral teaching. In New Jersey, after the establishment of a quasi-marital "civil unions" scheme, a Methodist institution was stripped of its tax exempt status when it declined, as a matter of religious conscience, to permit a facility it owned and operated to be used for ceremonies blessing homosexual unions. In Canada and some European nations, Christian clergy have been prosecuted for preaching Biblical norms against the practice of homosexuality. New hate-crime laws in America raise the specter of the same practice here.

 

In recent decades a growing body of case law has paralleled the decline in respect for religious values in the media, the academy and political leadership, resulting in restrictions on the free exercise of religion. We view this as an ominous development, not only because of its threat to the individual liberty guaranteed to every person, regardless of his or her faith, but because the trend also threatens the common welfare and the culture of freedom on which our system of republican government is founded. Restrictions on the freedom of conscience or the ability to hire people of one's own faith or conscientious moral convictions for religious institutions, for example, undermines the viability of the intermediate structures of society, the essential buffer against the overweening authority of the state, resulting in the soft despotism Tocqueville so prophetically warned of.¹ Disintegration of civil society is a prelude to tyranny.

 

As Christians, we take seriously the Biblical admonition to respect and obey those in authority. We believe in law and in the rule of law. We recognize the duty to comply with laws whether we happen to like them or not, unless the laws are gravely unjust or require those subject to them to do something unjust or otherwise immoral. The biblical purpose of law is to preserve order and serve justice and the common good; yet laws that are unjust - and especially laws that purport to compel citizens to do what is unjust - undermine the common good, rather than serve it.

 

Going back to the earliest days of the church, Christians have refused to compromise their proclamation of the gospel. In Acts 4, Peter and John were ordered to stop preaching. Their answer was, "Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard." Through the centuries, Christianity has taught that civil disobedience is not only permitted, but sometimes required. There is no more eloquent defense of the rights and duties of religious conscience than the one offered by Martin Luther King, Jr., in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Writing from an explicitly Christian perspective, and citing Christian writers such as Augustine and Aquinas, King taught that just laws elevate and ennoble human beings because they are rooted in the moral law whose ultimate source is God Himself. Unjust laws degrade human beings. Inasmuch as they can claim no authority beyond sheer human will, they lack any power to bind in conscience. King's willingness to go to jail, rather than comply with legal injustice, was exemplary and inspiring.

 

Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other anti-life act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar's. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God's.

 

 

 

¹Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

[aresv 49]

tl;dr

 

Cliffs Notes:

 

We as Christians declare ourselves to be good people. Even though there are all different kinds of Christians, we recognize that everyone has freedom of conscience to believe what they want and worship as they see fit.

 

But abortion is wrong, and homosexuality is wrong. As Christians, we believe it is our duty to stop this wrongness, and we're going to tell all the wrong people just how wrong they are. No liberty or freedom of conscience for them, no sir!

[ktcm7271 999]

A good read, here's my take. Most Christians, Catholics, Atheists, Satanists, Republicans, Democrats, Homosexuals, etc. that I have met are good people and fun to be around as individuals, but put any of them into a group long enough and they change. They become the oposite of the person I was just talking to. The Christians did a lot of great things throughout history, but evil does walk among them. American slave owners, Crusaders, Inquisitors, and even Hitler flew the rightous banner. It all boils down to stick to your ideals but leave the judging and persicutions to whoever you pray to to sort out. I used to be Republican and Methodist, now I'm an independent agnostic that tolerates nearly anyone's point of view, so long as it doesn't interfere with my right to happiness. And I would never dream of interfering with someone elses lifestyle just because it's not like mine. I guess all I'm saying is now would be a good time for chrches to use they're influence for unity so we can focus on real problems of division in this country and save gay marriage, abortion, etc. for when the real problems of corruption and corporate tyranny are solved and we're bored again. While I don't agree with some of your post, I respect the passion and the freedom of expression you used and all I ask is that you recognize others' as well.

[jrance@iacwds.com 716]

Just passing along information. Do with as you will. My only job is me.

 

1911

[Juggernaut 11,054]

Wow.. I hope we can Continue to squash my Christian ideology so we can be liberal pussies just like all of Europe!!!

 

To tolerate something does not mean I HAVE to support it.......

 

Enough blood has been shed at the alter of convenience and political correctness.... and it's apathy to a peoples values that destroys cultures.....including the American culture.....

 

Soooo... tell me why I can't display a nativity scene again this holiday season??????

 

If your lifestyle and beliefs DO interfere with mine, do you expect me to lie down and take it???? & Tell me how my Savior said turn the other Cheek????

Do you even know what it meant at the time Christ said those words and what it meant to hit someone with your left hand in roman culture....???

 

Every one here owes a debt of gratitude to jedo/christian values..... our culture would not exist in their absence......

[Paulyski 2,227]

^^+1^^

 

But our society has changed.

The message has been perverted & many are being decieved.

The world truly has become once again as Sodom & Gomorrah.

People's priorities are so askew they are doomed to failure if not cradled by society.

Our leaders are weaklings. Our government is corrupt.

There's little hope for us.

Edited November 27, 2009 by Paulyski

[RobRez 1,895]

I think it's all about God-given "free will". I think that making something illegal or banning behaviors will never have the intended effect when it comes to sin. Sin is a choice you make. You can't fool God, my friends. Making porn illegal doesn't stop people from wanting to see Boobies, and it is the WANTING to see the Boobies that is the sin. You cannot raise a child in a closet with no exposure to the world, and without the ability to choose for himself whether to do good or evil, and then say "look, I have raised a Righteous child." It really comes down to an individual choice of desires and behaviors within your relationship with God.

Remember, the Sin is in your thoughts not just your actions. Including the lack of compassion, understanding, or love you give to your brothers who may make different choices than you.

[Juggernaut 11,054]

No worries... Christianity will be banned long before boobies are......

[RobRez 1,895]

Thank GOD!!

[RobRez 1,895]

I mean to say, Thank God Boobies won't be banned!

[BuffetDestroyer 969]

I have no problem with Jewish/Christian values as I think they have helped humanity over the past few millenniums.

 

But, I have a problem with people leaving church claiming to adhere to these values as they cut you off trying to get out of the church parking lot.

 

Too few people actually live by these values (whether Christian or not), instead of just preaching them!

[Juggernaut 11,054]

 

 

Too few people actually live by these values (whether Christian or not), instead of just preaching them!

 

Amen...

[ktcm7271 999]

Gotta love religious topics, always spirited and enlightening. My tolerating others philosophy may have got jumbled a bit. I do not and everyone else should not tolerate any kind of behavior that we don't view as acceptable. Example, break into any of our homes or attempt to harm us or our loved ones, take away any of our rights and a painful demise will ensue. I'm sure we all agree to that. I have trouble believing that any of us can not display religious themes on our property, I live in central Pa, and I see a lot of really nice Christmas decorations out already. My wife and I take walks and drives just to admire them even though I don't belong to any religion 'she's Christian'. I pass a lot of churches on the way to and from work and a lot of people seem to be using them. I have no problem with 'under God' on our money or in the pledge. The religion under attack argument I just don't get. Best I can figure is some parts of this country are more liberal than others, but none of that is happening here. I live near Dover Pa, remember the evolution vs. intelligent Design case that bankrupted the school and got the whole board voted out. That was corrupt people flying the Christian banner trying to push their agenda. The people who attempt to use faith as a tool are some of the worst around and they are relentless. Research an organization called 'the family' they believe rich and powerful people have better rights than poor people under God. I lost my best friend to similar warped people, he joined a weird little church and it was like he was brainwashed. We no longer speak, because he has to constantly pursue new recruits and belittle everything that doesn't fall in line with their doctrine. I love this forum and respect everyone on it, and I'd hazard a guess the stuff we have in common out ways the stuff we don't. It's the one place a gun loving, metal head, beer drinking, machinist can read and interact with honest people. Stay true to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and above all-freedom for all!

[Paulyski 2,227]

tl;dr

 

Cliffs Notes:

 

We as Christians declare ourselves to be sinners given salvation through Jesus Christ. Even though there are all different kinds of Christians, we recognize that everyone has freedom of conscience to believe what they want and worship as they see fit.

 

But abortion is wrong, and homosexuality is wrong.

^^+1^^

I did edit it for accuracy.

Edited November 29, 2009 by Paulyski

[shades_of_grey 1,092]

tl;dr

 

Cliffs Notes:

 

We as Christians declare ourselves to be good people. Even though there are all different kinds of Christians, we recognize that everyone has freedom of conscience to believe what they want and worship as they see fit.

 

But abortion is wrong, and homosexuality is wrong. As Christians, we believe it is our duty to stop this wrongness, and we're going to tell all the wrong people just how wrong they are. No liberty or freedom of conscience for them, no sir!

 

You're wrong.

 

Sure, there are some nuts out there, (as there are in any group), but the vast majority of Christians do not necessarily want all abortions to be outlawed, we simply want the States to decide this issue themselves, at the ballot box, not to have some activist judges on the Supreme Court decide the issue for the entire country by fiat. Hell, you don't have to necessarily be a Christian to hold this point of view, you simply have to support the Constitution as written and States' Rights. Ever heard of the 10th Amendment?

 

When it comes to gays, most of us don't hate a person simply because he/she is homosexual. But, we do not support special rights for homosexuals; e.g. making any crime committed against them automatically a "hate crime" or perverting the definition of marriage, (which has been pretty well defined as between one man and one woman for thousands of years), to suit these deviants.

 

Let them have their "civil unions", with all the legal rights of marriage. I have no problem with that, but don't try to use the courts to redefine what marriage is. Put "gay marriage" up for a vote, that's the correct route for any desired change in the law. When that is done, the people almost always reject it, even in the PRC, (Peoples Republic of California). I don't give a damn what gays do in the privacy of their homes and I don't support any kind of hatred or violence against a person simply because he/she is gay. All I ask is that homosexuals stop trying to use the courts to subvert the will of the People to gain special rights for themselves and pervert the definition of marriage. Is that really too much to ask??

Edited November 26, 2009 by post-apocalyptic

[seanie 6]

Sure, there are some nuts out there, (as there are in any group), but the vast majority of Christians do not necessarily want all abortions to be outlawed, we simply want the States to decide this issue themselves, at the ballot box, not to have some activist judges on the Supreme Court decide the issue for the entire country by fiat. Hell, you don't have to necessarily be a Christian to hold this point of view, you simply have to support the Constitution as written and States' Rights. Ever heard of the 10th Amendment?

Not to be a dick, but you just made an argument against the entire incorporation debate that's been going around with the Heller case, and soon to be Chicago.

 

Beside that, I live in one of the most liberal areas of the country(the Chicagoland area) and even we don't have any of this war on religion/Christmas stuff that's always talked about. Granted, now our schools have what is referred to as "winter break" as opposed to what used to be "Christmas break" when I was a kid, is it really that big of a deal? For every person out there that gets genuinely upset that a Wal-Mart greeter says "Happy holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas", I'm sure there's someone who is completely indifferent to the entire situation.

 

I was raised Catholic, and went to a Catholic school for eight years, and I can honestly say, that around sixth grade, I started seriously questioning my faith, and by eighth grade I was ready to get the hell out of there. Religion just isn't for me, so I just don't pay any attention to it. It's not a part of my life, so I could honestly care less about what someone has to say or think about it. I think that's an outlook that more people need to have.

 

In regards to the whole liberal/gay whining and all that, this goes back to my previous point. For every gay rights activist, there is a bible banger. I've been in between crowds of Born-agains promising me that I'll burn in hell for all eternity unless I'm saved, and pro-abortionists calling me a pig for not supporting a woman's right to own everything that goes on with her body, and I don't care much for either crowd. I, personally, wish there were more intermediates like myself, because it seems that whatever wing you join up with supplies you with a sweet pair of blinders to wear. But, maybe that goes the same for my indifference.

 

Bottom line: I firmly believe that people should mind their own business. You don't like my Christmas tree? That's cool with me, just don't try to make me take it down. You're in love with a man? Whatever, just don't throw a hissy fit when I turn away while you make out in public.

[Wolverine 10,360]

I don't want my tax dollars to fund abortion which I find to be morally wrong on every level. Neither do I want to sanction marital status between two males that want to butt fuck each other with the full social and legal blessing of American society. There was something to be said for closet homosexuality. Both abortion and homosexuality are symptoms of a decaying society. It doesn't sound enlightened but I am not a progressive liberal hellbent on their kind of hope and change. I am a conservative with traditional values rooted in the Judeo-Christian ethics that the country was founded and flourished on. Corruption has brought us to this place and it won't be easy working out of it.

[jrance@iacwds.com 716]

[aresv 49]

tl;dr

 

Cliffs Notes:

 

We as Christians declare ourselves to be good people. Even though there are all different kinds of Christians, we recognize that everyone has freedom of conscience to believe what they want and worship as they see fit.

 

But abortion is wrong, and homosexuality is wrong. As Christians, we believe it is our duty to stop this wrongness, and we're going to tell all the wrong people just how wrong they are. No liberty or freedom of conscience for them, no sir!

 

You're wrong.

 

Oh here it comes

 

If you don't want to see people who are different than you, here's a hint: don't come out in public.

[ktcm7271 999]

I guess the only real problem I have with any group targeting things they don't approve of is where is the line? what's to stop people from coming after the things that I like? Heavy metal-always under attack look at the pmrc, the Gores, Newt Gingrich and churches tried to silence it. UFC-Mccain went after it. Pornography-it took Larry Flint and Hugh Hefner to protect it. Obscene comedy-Lenny Bruce and George Carlin protected it. Fatty foods-liberals try to ban them. Alcohol-our government banned it and created a crime state. Those are all freedoms protected by the constitution yet they need to be constantly defended from people who don't approve. I miss the old days of "if you don't like the show, change the channel" now everyone feels a need to champion movements to cast blame on everything but real problems. You don't like gays-don't be gay. You don't like abortion, teach and practice birth control and hope to God that a rape never occurs to someone you know and they are faced with a burden no one should ever face. These are examples of many different groups, not a religion bash, because that too is a freedom that needs to be protected. I agree that values are in the tank and are getting worse as time goes on, but to blame the slide on gays and abortions is short sighted. The reality is that if someone can make a buck off of something, it won't be illegal for long and there will be a commercial for it eventually.

[BpS12 512]

"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth. "Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782"

 

 

That said, MOST Christians, like MOST other people are or try to be, good people. And their faith often makes them better people. However Monotheistic Religions tend to make them so much worse because it gives them "license" to dictate to/coerce others. Ie the above document, which I see as a political "Call to Arms".

 

 

There is a Common Good that we ALL should adhear to, but it cannot be dictated by ANY religion as religious movements are often twisted by their leadership for personal reasons.

 

A further point, I believe that the current Homosexual issue(explosion) is due to Monotheism ie Judeo/Chrisitanity/Islam just as the Divine Kingship(institutionalised by the Church in the first place) and the Sufferage Movement(the women of N. Europe could own property/conduct busines/etc. just as a man, UNTIL the Christian incurssion) listed above. As Homosexuallity is belived to be a genetic "abnormality", would it not be better to allow them to be open and married amongst themselves, thus keepking their genetics to themselves, rather than forcing them underground, as has been done for centuries, and to marry Heterosexual women/men and thus perpetuate their "abnormal" genetics? Given time, would not the "abnormality" not defeat itself via lack of breeding?

 

And may I point out that the statistics that I've read(yours may indicate otherwise, of course) show that the vast majority of children adopted by Homosexuals, grow up to be heterosexual, thereby pointing to genetics once again. I actually know at least 2 of these cases. Shoot, I dated one.

 

I'm sorry if this comes off as religious bashing. However I find that many Monotheist(and most people in general) tend NOT to accept the wrongs of their Religion but blame it on the OTHER denominations. And thus they never do learn from those mistakes. My own religion is little different, but mine is not one that is seeking world domination(and I would fight that to the end if needed). One religion CANNOT work for so many DIFFERENT peoples.

[RalphXL 9]

tl;dr

 

Cliffs Notes:

 

We as Christians declare ourselves to be good people. Even though there are all different kinds of Christians, we recognize that everyone has freedom of conscience to believe what they want and worship as they see fit.

 

But abortion is wrong, and homosexuality is wrong. As Christians, we believe it is our duty to stop this wrongness, and we're going to tell all the wrong people just how wrong they are. No liberty or freedom of conscience for them, no sir!

 

You're wrong.

 

Sure, there are some nuts out there, (as there are in any group), but the vast majority of Christians do not necessarily want all abortions to be outlawed, we simply want the States to decide this issue themselves, at the ballot box, not to have some activist judges on the Supreme Court decide the issue for the entire country by fiat. Hell, you don't have to necessarily be a Christian to hold this point of view, you simply have to support the Constitution as written and States' Rights. Ever heard of the 10th Amendment?

 

When it comes to gays, most of us don't hate a person simply because he/she is homosexual. But, we do not support special rights for homosexuals; e.g. making any crime committed against them automatically a "hate crime" or perverting the definition of marriage, (which has been pretty well defined as between one man and one woman for thousands of years), to suit these deviants.

 

Let them have their "civil unions", with all the legal rights of marriage. I have no problem with that, but don't try to use the courts to redefine what marriage is. Put "gay marriage" up for a vote, that's the correct route for any desired change in the law. When that is done, the people almost always reject it, even in the PRC, (Peoples Republic of California). I don't give a damn what gays do in the privacy of their homes and I don't support any kind of hatred or violence against a person simply because he/she is gay. All I ask is that homosexuals stop trying to use the courts to subvert the will of the People to gain special rights for themselves and pervert the definition of marriage. Is that really too much to ask??

 

 

Well said!

 

RalphXL

[BpS12 512]

"...perverting the definition of marriage, (which has been pretty well defined as between one man and one woman for thousands of years)...."

 

Sorry P-A, but I have to disagree with you on this. I do realize that you are speaking from a Judeo-Christian thought base here. However, HISTORICALLY speaking, and worldwide, marriage has been more defined by finances than doctrine. Ie. the more wealth an individual has, the more spouses allowable. You should never have more than you can support. Only since the rise of Judeo-Christianity has there been a doctrinal stricture on it. And thats only been about 1800yrs save for the Hebrews themselves. And even within that culture I am dubious of such strictures until more recently.

 

Also in some tribes, bisexual relations were/are acceptable.

 

Though I wouldn't want more than one wife. By Hel's withered hand, I have enough trouble with the one's I've had.