| Blogs > alpinemeadow > My Blog |
|
Jesus Had 2 Dads and He Turned Out OK.........  Based on a true story. |
|||
|
I have to agree with you here. Altho I still hold that homosexuality is a sin, I do NOT believe that people must be able to completely be devoid of sin before they can become Christians. When I witness to people, I explain to them that what is important is what one believes and accepts about Jesus Christ. I don't get into their sinful natures, cos we all have them. What I DO tell them, is that as their faith in Christ grows, they are likely to start feeling changes in themselves, perhaps suddenly or perhaps over a long period of time. By that, I mean that even though they accept and commit to Christ, it may be a long time before some aspects of our sinful natures seem to lose appeal or have any control over us. And quite possibly, it may never happen in this lifetime. Every day I commit sins. Everyone does. Whether we actively decide to or not. I'm not suggesting that the Church ever recognize or condone homosexuality or gay marriage. But I AM saying they should not tell others that they must stop sinning before they turn to Christ. The notion that a homosexual cannot be a Christian is absurd. Christ didn't come for the pure and sinless ones. He came for the sinners. Sure, homosexuality is a sin. But so is damaging, neglecting, or abusing one's body ("Temple"). So for example, when I have the strength to quit smoking, AND stop ANY kind of sin, I'll tell others they have to become sinless before they can come to Christ. (It's never gonna happen. In this lifetime I will always be a sinner.) Meantime, I'd invite ALL sinners to consider Christ's promise to mankind, and don't wait until you are sinless before you take Him and His offer seriously. That's my religious viewpoint. As to how it coincides with my political view, I'd say that even if I am not pleased with the society for condoning homosexuality, it's NOT my place to tell others they can't live as they choose, so long as they harm no one else. For actions that are recognized as sins by the Church, does NOT mean that all sins should be regulated by man's law! The Constitution was never adopted as a means to stop what a church labels as a "sin." It was adopted to provide guidance regarding how the State and citizens must conduct themselves with respect towards others and their rights to live their own lives. As to gay marriage, I feel if two same sex people want to form a legally recognized union with all the same legal rights and responsibilities as heterosexual couples, it should not be the State's right to stop them. As a practical matter and in fairness to the majority of humankind that has always considered marriage to be between a mix of genders rather than elements of only one, I think I'd prefer a new word for such a union, that would carry the same legal rights and responsibilities as traditional marriage. ("Civil Union" is too generic. All such unions, including traditional marriages, are already by definition a "civil union".) But that's just my suggestion and preference. If the State chooses to use the same terminology as that of heterosexual couples to describe such a union, I suppose I'll get used to it eventually tho. Finally, since your pic here has implications regarding parenthood, I have to say that I have no opinion on the matter. I have no idea whether kids fair better in homes with two parents of the same or different genders. I just know it takes at least two loving parents. GBU, Gavin
|
×
×