Insane?
Submitted by Forgiven on September 2 2001 18:40:06
In reply to I need cat dady's god in order to have rights? submitted by A.I. Watcher on September 2 2001 08:37:04
|
well - the KGB had a similar belief about Christians in the last days of the Soviet Union, so you are in good company.... There are a number of steps of political thoery and theology underlying your post - and it would be painful to try and analyse them completely, and my knowledge isn't really up to it. I can attempt a few comments however... 1) The idea that God is needed to grant me rights at its base is a statement that God is in some sense the creator - whether by means of the Big Bang or Evolution is irrelevant. If we want to reject Him as creator, then fine - but please don't then claim that the God you are claiming to believe in is the Christian God. For an extended discussion on this, Romans 9 is enough to make your hair curl!! 2) The concepts of rights against the ruler is one that has a long history - there is the story of Elijah and King Ahab that clearly indicates that the Jewish concept of kingship was inherently limited. However the core idea beneath such 'rights' is one of justice; that the individual has the right to be treated in a certain way because that is the 'just' thing to do. The problem here is that any concept of justice is extremely subjective - as the abuse of the term 'fair' by children to impose emotional blackmail quickly demonstrates. Is it fair that I earn $25 / hour, he earns $50 and she earns $100, and the peasants of Peru earn $2 a day? Our KGB friends claim not to have believed that - though in fact their society probably had more inequality than modern day America. 3) One of the concepts of the bible that we don't understand very much any more is the reference to being 'Slaves to Sin'. Since slavery has largely disappeared from the West (except perhaps in the lives of addicts - and that is a paradigm we should look at more) we don't understand what the bible is getting at most of the time when it talks about this. The underlying theology - to my understanding - is that when a person sins, they have surrendered the rights that they did have because the penalty for their sin is death. The central message of Christianity is that the death of Jesus releases us from that penalty so that we are free again; but only because of God's grace. 4) Finally - the real shocker. The argument that gays deserve equal treatment is based on the assumption: 'The things we want can't hurt you'. This is theological claim - as it argues that God will not act in judgement of a nation because homosexual practice is widespread. This may or may not be true - but as it is a religous belief, to deny me the right to hold the opposite belief is a denial of my 'right' to freedom of religion. I may be wrong - but you cannot deny me the right to believe something other than that. Are you serious about your appeal to rights - or are you slipping in a liberal presupposition as well? I am reminded of the row over the British national soccer manager who was forced out of his position as a result of stating that 'handicapped people are that way because of the wrong things that they did in a previous life'. This is, of course, standard Hindu and Buddhist teaching - but wasn't acceptable to the liberal establishment. I don't agree with his belief - but I will defend his right to state it.... |
Follow ups: