Shouldn’t American Christians Retreat from the “Gay Marriage” Issue? | Challenge Response
Alan Shlemon responds to the challenge that American Christians should retreat from the same-sex marriage issue because it is unwinnable.
#StandtoReason #Apologetics #Christianity
————— CONNECT —————
Website: https://www.str.org/
Stand to Reason University: https://training.str.org/
Stand to Reason Apps: https://www.str.org/apps
Twitter: https://twitter.com/STRtweets
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/standtoreason93
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/standtoreason
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/stand-to-reason/
Have a question or comment? Call Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason live Tuesdays 4-6pm Pacific Time – (855) 243-9975. If you’d like to submit your question ahead of time, fill out the online form here: https://www.str.org/broadcast.
————— GIVE —————
Support the work of Stand to Reason: https://str.org/donate
source
The answer to his questions are no, no, no, no, no, yes, yes, yes. And don't call gays "bullies". Just quit with the name calling.
Why don't you just leave the state to deal with same sex marriage and you mind your own damn business.
Seriously, if someone came into your community and said "The state has annulled your marriage, we're taking away your privileges," would you be pissed off? If that is the case then the state either has no business rewarding people for being married or is permitted to marry any two people above the age of consent.
Into the 21st century!
If your opinion on an issue does not follow the main stream's flow of the day, you are LABELED a bigot, homophobic, a drama queen, a hater, a discriminator and minority oppressor. Someone who's negatively against that flow in a harmful way!. You become the ENEMY that must be silenced/stopped by any means and at all costs (legally or socially) possible .That does not translate into a democratic thought but to a double standard one when assessing two different issues.
On one hand X group want to have the right to same sex marriage (all love is equal) and on the other hand Y group wants to have the right of free speech and free choice, parents must accept/comply with the way their children are been taught and indoctrinated (concerning sexuality and marriage) in schools, even if it goes against their moral/family values and believes. If we restrain ourselves from applying double standards, who is at fault?.
I am not against equal rights been granted to all Americans, if the state grants the Gay community the right to get married, I have to comply and respect the law of the land I was born. That does not means that I share the same view on marriage. I will still raise my children (which is my right and prerogative, not the state) with a traditional view of marriage and family values.
I advice those citizens, that share the same view of marriage and family values that I have, to do the same and raise their children accordingly!.If our kids later on get a different view of marriage/sexuality from our education system, government or social media, at least they will have a choice to make based on how they were raised. Our ever faithful government someday will rule against the way we raise/teach our children, based on the conflict that it would create with our system of education indoctrination. They would base their opinion on a "psychological" point of view , we would be creating a conflict/confusion on our children's minds when 2 different "realities" are presented!.
I'm not denying Gays their rights or HATING them for choosing their life style, THAT'S THEIR PREROGATIVE AND FREEDOM OF CHOICE AND THAT I DO RESPECT. I am taking a personal stance at home by raising my children according to the traditional family believes/values and not that of our government or a sector of our society believes/values.
Here is a typical "objective" response from a Gay activist; "Bigots (heterosexuals) want to UNFAIRLY deny their constitutional rights to individuals belonging to other groups to get married. Just because they find it offensive/immoral or because they HATE homosexuals, that is the description of a bigot".
Today the definition and concept of marriage has been redefine. IF DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE BEEN CONSTANTLY APPLIED, democracy (the right of free speech and free choice) should also be redefined. It seems like the words "bigotry" and "homophobic" are being strategically used (by the Gay community, the social media and the ever supporting government) to gain national support and leverage.
The final objective seems to be to persuade Americans to view Y group as been unjust/discriminatory/hateful and X group as the victim/tolerant/righteous. Public opinion does matter after all, AND MORE SO (votes=power and power=control) TO OUR TRUSTING "FRIEND", THE USA CONGRESS!.
For obvious reasons, group X love to play the VICTIM role, the persecution complex at full capacity!. The prevailing view on marriage today is ; (1) if 2 people are in LOVE they should have the right to get married (2) marriage should be defined and stipulated by our government only, based on legal authority (3) all other elements of marriage (gender/sex orientation, number of people getting married, ect) should be IRRELEVANT!.
Love has its importance within the context of marriage but I for one don't share the view that LOVE should be the ultimate reason for marriage. There are other elements and objectives in the institution of marriage which are of equal importance (family, maintain a world population/reproduction, social/religious moral values, tradition, ect).They are essential to the wellbeing and future of our society, they have a much greater positive impact on the long run.
Our American society, as we see it today, has been through a social/political process that took more than 200 years, starting in July 4, 1776 to the current year, 2014!!.
It was on May 17, 2004 that Massachusetts became the first state in the union to approve same sex marriage.10 years is just a small fraction (aprox.4.3%) of our history as a nation to measure the impact of same sex marriage on society/family. Maybe we won't see that impact on our life time but America's future generations will. Those decisions we make today will always have an impact (+ or -) on the long run, there is no way around it!.
It seems like America is obsessed in looking for a short term solution (same sex marriage=equality) to satisfy X group's needs than for assessing long term issues in a responsible manner, family values and tradition!.
While I’m personally against gay-marriage- it’s kinda stupid, isn’t it– I’m pretty ambivalent about the issue since marriage is more of a civil contract than it is a religious “sacrament”. In other words, you need a civil issued license to get married, but you don’t need a minister, yet even if you have a minister, you still need a license. Same goes for divorce. It’s a civil matter, plain and simple. The religious part is optional and personal.
Maybe Christians should withdraw from the issue until you can provide the world with proof obtained via the scientific method that God exists and that he opposes same-sex marriage. That would be the logical thing to do. But, as many of us are aware, religious fundamentalism (and, let's not forget, religion in general) is inherently illogical.
They will push us all the way into prison, eventually. Or into a ditch.
I suggest to explain what the issue actually is.
A thought I had as I watched your video…There are way too many "they versus us" language in your video. If you have a disagreement with your sister or brother, do you talk to them as if they are your adversary? As the black eye peas would say…"Where is the love"…Can you be married to each other without agreeing on every single issue?! Or do you want a divorce from your brothers and sisters over this issue? And Christians are not always the bullied. Aren't we bullies too and have been throughout history? Maybe we should learn from history and learn to listen to how God can work outside of our church walls…
These pro-homosexuality bullies will NEVER stop.
Therefore, neither can we.
And another thing. Why would it be crazy to think that even beastiality might be brought to the table to be legalized. I mean according to the Constitution we have not right to deprive someone of life, liberty, and pursuit of happines right? If one says that an animal cant decide speak for itself then fine but animals dont use language the way we do. Some creatures especially social ones may object to an action by biting, scratching, making some type of noise or movement right? What about teens and adults? Wasnt it okay in earlier times for the two to marry i mean a teenage girl can still get pregnant and consent right? What if that makes them happy we would be infringing on their rights. If one says that it is between two or more adults please explain to me what happens to a person when they go from age 17 to 18 that makes them an adult officially? Where do we draw the line?
I'm not going to challenge the arguments against same-sex marriage here (there's no point; I retreat). Instead, I'd like to pose a question: why does STR have about 20 videos devoted to same-sex marriage, and about 0 specifically devoted to the topic of greed? Is greed not affecting our nation?
What about the issue of Cannibis?