Offline
Marriage is between a man and a woman. This is dogmatic and a part of patriarchal culture. If a man and woman can marry, then so can and should a man and man. Christians will rebel. Christians cannot in good conscience accept this. Therefore society divides. There is no reconciliation unless the State abandons marriage overall. The State abandons the legal concept of marriage. Christianity rests in part on marriage. Christianity is thus far destroyed.
Offline
Ergo, all those who hate Christianity have a cause to deny the truth of marriage. For they intuit that grace builds on nature; and since grace is God, then nature must die; and if these mean their own friends/family, then so be it.
Offline
Speaking as a Hegelian, the abandonment of marriage as a state institution seems to me by no means to amount to the destruction of Christianity except insofar as institutionalization is the inner-essence of Christianity realized, but in that case this particular weakness was immanent in Christianity itself.
On the other hand, and this is what I often say of natural law arguments for merely defensive legislation also, the idea that God on Earth (or the nature of man) can be "destroyed" by nothing but propaganda and politics seems to me to border on an impious insult to the divine. Am I to seriously believe Will and Grace, The L Word, some many dozen of pride parades, and legislation has of itself entirely outflanked both God and human nature?
Offline
So-called gay marriage is intended to put Christians between a rock and a hard place, so to speak. All of the enemies of truth and goodness rally behind that flag of so-called gay marriage because only Christianity believes in love in truth. Many other cultures believe (so to speak) in marriage; but the Christian idea of it is a threat to their ideas of culture.
The truth is: Children deserve to know and be raised by their mother and father. Christianity is the only culture that exists that affirms this. Ergo Christianity and Christian values must be destroyed at all costs.
Last edited by Timocrates (3/13/2016 5:41 am)
Offline
iwpoe wrote:
Speaking as a Hegelian, the abandonment of marriage as a state institution seems to me by no means to amount to the destruction of Christianity except insofar as institutionalization is the inner-essence of Christianity realized, but in that case this particular weakness was immanent in Christianity itself.
On the other hand, and this is what I often say of natural law arguments for merely defensive legislation also, the idea that God on Earth (or the nature of man) can be "destroyed" by nothing but propaganda and politics seems to me to border on an impious insult to the divine. Am I to seriously believe Will and Grace, The L Word, some many dozen of pride parades, and legislation has of itself entirely outflanked both God and human nature?
That is true until you are a martyr for truth.
Offline
Timocrates wrote:
The truth is: Children deserve to know and be raised by their mother and father. Christianity is the only culture that exists that affirms this.
In history or today?
Offline
iwpoe wrote:
Timocrates wrote:
The truth is: Children deserve to know and be raised by their mother and father. Christianity is the only culture that exists that affirms this.
In history or today?
As a historian I can confidentially tell you that only in Christianity was there ever the idea that a child has the right to be raised by their natural father and mother. Or do you want to get into children's rights in non-Christian cultures? Or the idea of marriage?
Offline
Timocrates wrote:
That is true until you are a martyr for truth.
Actual martyrdom (as opposed to having your cake business made into spectacle) was insufficient to put down Christianity, and should Christianity prove true it cannot even in principle do so.
Offline
iwpoe wrote:
Timocrates wrote:
That is true until you are a martyr for truth.
Actual martyrdom (as opposed to having your cake business made into spectacle) was insufficient to put down Christianity, and should Christianity prove true it cannot even in principle do so.
"As opposed to"? Those people had every right to own their business and operate it according to their faith, iwpoe.
You might entertain the idea that a livelihood being destroyed in your own country is something cheap. But if you do, then I pity you.
Offline
Timocrates wrote:
As a historian I can confidentially tell you that only in Christianity was there ever the idea that a child has the right to be raised by their natural father and mother. Or do you want to get into children's rights in non-Christian cultures? Or the idea of marriage?
This is a much more specific claim than your prior "Children deserve to know and be raised by their mother and father. Christianity is the only culture that exists that affirms this." But, I mean, just off the top of my head, Confucian culture was hardly hostile to mother and father with children. Even in Greek and Roman culture (though in the former love between spouses, as far as I can tell, seems considered nearly utterly optional), despite homosexual tolerance to a degree seemed to consider marriage and family a civic duty.