TwitterFacebookYouTubeEmailRSS

Category Archives: Homosexuality

Answering the Top 10 Pro-Choice Arguments: #6

Posted on by

#6. Reproductive restrictions do not end with abortion. Many people also argue that contraception itself is wrong—another mainly-religious philosophy—and will deny women the protection they need based on this belief. There are legislative acts that allow actual pharmacists to deny women their birth control because of their beliefs; does this not violate the Hippocratic Oath, especially if thousands of women are on birth control because their very lives depend on it? Also, since it is my belief that men should not rape women, if I were a pharmacist, would I have a right to deny a man his Viagra just in case he uses it to rape? You never know.

Is this not the same line of reasoning that is used by those who oppose gay marriage? And are they not criticized for it? This is the classic “slippery slope” argument: “If we deny women the right to abortion, what is next? They will want to ban all contraception.” Such line of reasoning is as incoherent as those who oppose gay marriage and say, “If we allow gays to marry, what’s next? They will want to marry their dog.”

Again, this argument distracts from the real issue. Essentially, this argument assumes that abortion is morally right, and then says that restricting abortion is wrong because it will lead the restricting of something that is morally right, and to further restricting of something that is also assumed to be morally right. But this is not an argument, it is circular reasoning. The author assumes the rightness of his/her position, and then argues that because it is wrong to restrict that which is right (an assumption in and of itself), it is wrong come to any conclusion other than the authors. We’ve already discussed the simplicity of defeating such an argument in a previous post, but let us do so again briefly here.

Using the pro-choice line of reasoning, if every woman has the right to choose abortion, what of the unborn woman in the womb? By killing an unborn woman, are we not denying the unborn woman the right to choose? You see where this logically leads. At some point someone’s “right” is going to have to be violated, but that is assuming that the choice to murder a human being is an actual right.

The slippery slope argument doesn’t work. The issue of contraception is a different discussion from the issue of abortion, and, therefore, ought to be discussed separately. The real issue at hand is the issue of restricting the murder of an unborn human life. Science made its final ruling: human life begins at the moment of conception. Therefore, an unborn life is a human life, and every human life has a right to live. If an adult woman has the right to live, so does the unborn woman.

Check back every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday as we count down from arguments #10 through #1. Your comments are welcome below. You don’t have to agree, but we do ask that you be polite and respectful.

Why I Did NOT Eat at Chick-Fil-A: RP from Stephen Altrogge

Posted on by

This is a thoughtful post that I think summarizes the issue very well. It puts it in a proper gospel focus and causes us to rethink our attitudes toward the gay community and how the gospel guides our actions. – Mario

 

Yesterday millions of conservative Christians went to Chick-Fil-A in support of the company’s stand against gay marriage. Now, if you got a chicken sandwich or three yesterday, this post isn’t to condemn in any way. But, I think it’s really important that we think about how our actions reflect upon the gospel. So think out loud with me.

I didn’t eat at Chick-Fil-A yesterday. Yes, I believe the Bible teaches that marriage is supposed to be between a man and a woman. Yes, I believe that homosexuality is a sin. But yesterday’s mass show of support for Chick-Fil-A didn’t bring the gospel of grace and repentance to homosexuals. It simply erected another barrier. It didn’t display the glory of Christ, it simply demonstrated that we don’t like it when someone attacks our faith. It didn’t glorify the life-changing, sin-destroying power of Christ, it simply said, “We won’t stand for this.”

My biggest concern is that we may win the culture war on gay marriage and yet drive homosexuals away from Christ.

Instead of voicing our disapproval of homosexuality by buying chicken sandwiches, what if we followed Jesus’ example instead, and made friends with homosexuals? Hung out with them, ate with them, listened to them, heard their stories, and then shared the life-changing gospel with them? What if we asked them to tell us about their experiences with homosexuality, then showed them how the gospel meets them at every point in their lives? What if we told them about how Jesus has completely changed our lives?

Consider how Jesus led people to repentance. He hung out with the wino’s so much that people called him a drunkard! He asked the Samaritan woman (an “us” vs. “them” situation if there ever was one) at the well for a drink of water. He ate dinner with Zacchaeus. Jesus demonstrated a beautiful boldness and gentleness.

The cause of the gospel will lose if we ban gay marriage and yet at the same time create an “us” vs. “them” battle. Our ultimate goal should be to win homosexuals for Christ, not win a culture war.

If a homosexual comes into my church I want him to feel welcome. If everyone came into the church carrying Chick-Fil-A bags, I think that would create the opposite effect. It would make him feel very unwelcome. Excluded. Hated. Like no one wanted him around.

I don’t believe homosexuality is right, but if we’re going to effectively reach those in the gay community, we’ve got to find better ways to do it. The only people Jesus boycotted were the religious leaders. With everyone else, he entered into their world. Yes, he called them to repentance, and we need to do that. We can’t back down from what the Bible says about homosexuality. But we need to do it with the love, gentleness, and affection of Christ Jesus. Not with snarky Facebook comments and loud demonstrations.

Jesus was called a friend of sinners. I don’t think that buying chicken sandwiches puts us into that category.

 

You can find the entire article posted at: http://www.theblazingcenter.com/2012/08/why-i-did-not-eat-at-chick-fil-a-yesterday.html

Gays and Gay Marriage

Posted on by

With  all the buzz lately about gays, gay marriage and Chic-fil-a in the news, I thought at least one post about it was warranted. I personally take the side of Tim Keller on this issue and so will not venture to try to come up with an original post, but elaborate on Keller’s position.

In a recent interview with Lauren Green (of Fox News), Green asks Tim Keller a question about how Christians should view gay rights and gay marriage. You can watch the whole clip of their interaction on this question here.

Lauren Green:  As a church, how should we as Christians and how should the church view gay rights and gay marriage?

Tim Keller responds:  

I would definitely say… a thoughtful Christian Biblical response doesn’t fit into any of the existing categories out there. It’s not a simple matter of saying there should be no moral differentiation between any kind of sexual activity. Christians can’t go there. They can’t say no it doesn’t matter. It’s also true however, that this is a country where we’re supposed to love our neighbor. This is a country where a Christian is supposed to care about a just society for ALL our neighbors whether they believe like we do or not. And that’s gotta mean our gay neighbor.

And I would say people in the more conservative movement don’t really want to talk too much about that because they’re very upset because they feel like the gay agenda is too anti-Christian and too anti-religious.

So I would say – the reason it’s good to end on this question is – it’s not something, the way forward, I don’t see spelled out anywhere in public. I don’t see anybody in public taking all the Biblical concerns about justice and mercy in that area and speaking about them.

For me these remarks from Keller spark in me another thought that continues on his theme. With all the backlash that Christians, the Church, and political conservatives are making to resist the gay movement, in particular gay marriage, why is this the only issue that seems to consume their efforts? Why do we not see other issues being taken up by Christians? After all the Bible certainly defines as sin a whole host of behaviors and practices other than homosexuality.

What about adultery? divorce? greed? selfishness? lust? pride? Where are the national organizations lobbying to outlaw sabbath breaking? Why aren’t foundations being established to fund the work of passing a constitutional amendment banning anger? Obviously there has been a serious misunderstanding in the Church about the application of Scripture in general, but even specifically to society. We can’t pick and choose what issues we think God is passionate about and pass laws about them on conviction.

As Keller advocates, we must work, as Christians, toward the flourishing of our society. The gospel defines and empowers that for us. And while Scripture strictly forbids gay marriage within the Church, it doesn’t necessarily mean it should be forbidden in all society. What is clear from Scripture is that every “Christian is supposed to care about a just society for ALL our neighbors whether they believe like we do or not. And that’s gotta mean our gay neighbor” as well.

Neither the Apostle Paul nor any other NT writer ever advocates the pursuit of social modification through law. Why not? Because that’s not the proper application of the gospel. The gospel changes society one person at a time.

 

Is Homosexuality a Sin? How Should I Treat Gays and Lesbians?

Posted on by

This is an incredibly important question to answer. Tim Keller does a very good job in a short amount of time trying to explain the biblical view of gays and how Christians should respond to their gay neighbors.

 

CyberChimps