My Take: Chick-fil-A Takeaway

Okay, so it’s my turn.

Now that the dust is settling a bit, I’ve been reflecting about what’s happened over the last few weeks surrounding Dan Cathy’s statements about biblical marriage and what ultimately culminated in Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day this past Wednesday. And while I’m not the first or last to make these observations, please take them for what they are: simply observations about what has become perhaps the most polarizing social/religious issue of the year. They are not meant to critique anyone who chose to participate or anyone who chose not to. There have been thoughtful opinions on both sides (here and here for example) and I think it’s safe to say that choosing to eat or not eat a chicken sandwich is truly (in a divine twist of humor) something that we can file under Romans 14.

(For the record, we did not eat at Chick-Fil-A on Wednesday primarily because we ate there last week and as much as we believe in freedom of speech, we also believe strongly in supporting a balanced family budget and lower cholesterol.)

So first things first…

  1. Chick-Fil-A makes a really good chicken sandwich. And waffle fries. And coleslaw. And lemonade. I wish we could settle this whole thing right there on the merits of what a company produces, but in this day and age…

  2. Companies are no longer just companies. Matthew Lee Anderson has an interesting explanation on why this is the case. Because we have become primarily a consumption-based society, the things we choose to consume are intrinsically linked to our identities. And because we are a society driven by the marketplace, we will naturally articulate our values in the marketplace. Unfortunately, this makes us easy prey for companies that choose to leverage social issues in the marketing of their products, and so for my part…

  3. I respect Chick-Fil-A for choosing to distance itself from social policy as much as I respect their decision to remain closed on Sundays. Unlike some companies (JC Penney, for example), Chick-Fil-A has decided to let their business rise and fall on the merits of their product. JC Penney, on the other hand, currently in the midst of a last-ditch effort to re-invent themselves (unofficial slogan: “This is not your Grandma’s JC Penney.”), has actively embraced controversial social issues in an effort to drum up business. Part of their make-over included featuring same-sex couples for both their Mothers’ Day and Fathers’ Day ad campaigns; so that instead of re-inventing their products to appeal to a younger generation, it seems like they simply looked at statistics, saw that the Millenials and Xers tend to support same-sex marriage, and made an advertising decision based on a targeted demographic. To me—a member of that very demographic—it came off as patronizing and cheap. Still…

  4. Homosexuality is the defining issue of this generation. As such, Christians are going to have to learn to navigate it with charity and boldness, grace and truth. We are going to have to be both wise and harmless, and that means coming to accept that…

  5. Public statements are likely to be misunderstood. What we mean to say (“I’m standing up for civil liberty.”) and what others hear (“I hate gay people.”) will rarely be the same thing; and while we can’t control someone’s interpretation of our actions, we better make certain that we’re not erecting extra barriers that might lead him to think that his conclusion is justified. And to do that, we must be willing to take the beam out of our own eye first, and…

  6. We must be honest about our own lack of God-honoring marriages and families. Every time we accept divorce as normal; every time we deny a man and woman the sacrament of marriage based simply on skin color; every time we entertain ourselves with movies that highlight heterosexual couples living together but shudder when the same movies portray gay couples; or let’s get even more personal—every time we complain about how inconvenient our children are, we are overlooking our own sin in favor of judging another’s. Because in the end, if we don’t hold biblical family values privately, we have very little ground to be promoting them publicly. And speaking of being honest with ourselves…

  7. We must not confuse the privilege of freely practicing our faith with the power to practice our faith. Many have rightly understood the current debacle as a threat to the basic freedoms of speech and religion. (Public officials simply have no right denying permits based on their own personal values.) But if we’re completely honest with ourselves, I wonder how many of us are standing up for civil liberties, not because we understand that they are essential to a just society, but because we have so long intertwined them with our faith that we can’t imagine how we could be Christians without them. We have confused the freedom that comes from Jesus Christ with the freedom that comes from the United States’ Constitution. The first empowers us to follow Him, while the second simply makes it socially acceptable. Please don’t misunderstand. We must certainly fight to protect constitutional rights (for Christians and Jews and Hindus and Muslims), but we must not fight for them simply because we can’t envision our faith surviving without them. Because in the end…

  8. We need to remember what we’re really about. As of August 1, the conservative church proved that we can marshal a movement. We proved that when given a call to be part of something bigger, we will show up. So now, I’m issuing a call. Let’s have the same show of support for the gospel. Let’s muster the same enthusiasm for the grace and power of Jesus Christ to change lives. And let’s put our energies and time and money into proclaiming that the love of Christ is by far the best solution for what ails us as a society.

Note about the title: When my husband and I lived in NZ a couple years ago, we quickly learned that what we Americans refer to as restaurant “take out” is termed “takeaway” by our English speaking cousins. I simply couldn’t resist the pun.

[node:bio/handerson body]

5899 reads

There are 28 Comments

jlamarcrowder's picture

My Bible belt town sadly doesn't have a Chik-fil-A it though the chain has a place in my heart though as the place me and my wife had our first official date at the one nearest to where we live. My employer served Chik-fil-A in the cafeteria on appreciation day but I work the night shift so missed that. I though agree 100% with Dan Cathy, what he said, and the stance Chik-Fil-A chooses to hold. I've got failings as I do watch movies where people unmarried live together on occasion or it is hinted at they had sex outside marriage. I don't buy that it is at all the same thing to be the consumer of a movie that teaches sin and someone that commits open sin in celebration. One movie I watch which was given to me along with many old VHS tapes is the "Money Pit" which stars Tom Hanks another is "Forrest Gump" also with Tom Hanks. In both movies you have people unmarried having relations and examples of sin. If we throw out these movies we might as well not watch any movie that isn't Christian based then you have to worry about theology another set of issues.

Jim's picture

You said:

 

As of August 1, the conservative church proved that we can marshal a movement. We proved that when given a call to be part of something bigger, we will show up.

Response:

  • It was a conservative response but
  • The church (for those who participated) was just a small part of it (disclosure ... I did not as I am not in a Chick-Fil-A market area)
  • The larger movement:

    • A free speech ... freedom of expression movement
    • An anti-thought police (overlaps above) movement. Anti-political correctness
    • A Pro-family (not necessarily anti-gay) movement
    • An anti-fascist politician movement (anti Chicago / Boston mayor & Philly councilman)
    • A pro-business movement .... particularly small business!

Not that it was a bad thing ... but it was not a gospel movement! An analogy would be when Reagan beat Carter. The Moral Majority was pro-Reagan but the Reagan election was a conservative movement.

 

But kudos all around on your article and I appreciate you

handerson's picture

Just to clarify, I don't want to suggest that Christians cannot watch movies that portray sin--a lot of that question rests in how the sin is handled, whether or not it is glorified, the maturity of the audience, etc. 

Instead I wanted highlight a tendency that I've noticed. It's very easy for us to accept certain types of sin while we react strongly to others.  In this particular case, we have become so culturally accustomed to heterosexual couples living together that we hardly even think about it anymore, and yet we object strongly when the same industry portrays same-sex couples. Neither situation is consistent with a biblical definition of family, but we seem to get agitated by only on one of them. To me this is inconsistent and (perhaps in a stretch) prejudicial.

Lee's picture

handerson wrote:

Instead I wanted highlight a tendency that I've noticed. It's very easy for us to accept certain types of sin while we react strongly to others.  In this particular case, we have become so culturally accustomed to heterosexual couples living together that we hardly even think about it anymore, and yet we object strongly when the same industry portrays same-sex couples. Neither situation is consistent with a biblical definition of family, but we seem to get agitated by only on one of them. To me this is inconsistent and (perhaps in a stretch) prejudicial.

All sin is not equal, contrary to popular belief. 

"Abomination" is a categorization of particularly grievous sin.  Basic heterosexual immorality is not classified as such.  Now, that doesn't make the entertainment value of depictions of shacking up any more acceptable, but it does explain the normal, and expected, revulsion of the spiritual mind to those things abominable.

Lee

handerson's picture

I agree with you completely that this was not a gospel movement.

My referencing the "conservative church" was more in respect to the sociological entity than the theological one. And, like you, that is a significant part of my concern: the "conservative church" (aka, the conservative religious demographic of our society) seems more often concerned with political statements than with the gospel itself.  This religion of "Americanism" walks hand in hand with conservative Christianity and it's very difficult for the person in the pew to differentiate between the two.  

 

 

 

 

handerson's picture

Perhaps the real trouble is that there are a lot more things that are also abominations to the Lord beyond homosexuality.

Case in point,

"These six things the Lord hates, yes, seven are an abomination to Him:  A proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood,  a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that are swift in running to evil,  a false witness who speaks lies,  and one who sows discord among brethren." (Proverbs 6 : 16-19)

I agree that certain sins have deeper ramifications than others and that certain sins show the depth of our falleness more than others. But we have to be very careful about categorizing other people's sins in a way that is distinct from ours.

Jim's picture

Responding to:

handerson wrote:
... the "conservative church" (aka, the conservative religious demographic of our society) seems more often concerned with political statements than with the gospel itself.  This religion of "Americanism" walks hand in hand with conservative Christianity and it's very difficult for the person in the pew to differentiate between the two.  

 

Answered:

  • If I support Chick-Fil-A on Aug 1st as a conservative. That's good motivation.
  • If I support Chick-Fil-A to propagate the gospel ... that's a misunderstanding of the Gospel
  • If the church did not promote the Chick-Fil-A appreciation day (my church did not but then again we are not in market area) ... well then it is not an admixture of church and conservative movement.
  • Question and response to "it's very difficult for the person in the pew to differentiate between the two". Q: Did your church or do you actually know of churches who supported C-F-A day? Response: church should not promote movements like this. Same thing with politics / politicians. What it should do

    • Teach principles ... vote your principles. (eg ... abortion is murder ... know where the candidate stands ... incorporate that knowledge in the voting process. (it gets complex if both candidates have the same position.)
    • Teach principles ... live principles.
    • But don't tell us how to vote or don't promote movements (thinking of the folly of the Moral Majority)

By the way ... my plumbing company is run by a Christian and has many Christian plumbers. I found them when we had a squirting valve spraying all over the basement. Starting at 7:00 a.m. I called plumbers. The first one that picked up the phone happened to be this company. I did not choose the plumber because they were Christians. I found that out later. The company: Weld Plumbing.

 

About chicken. I don't care how Christian Chick-Fil-A is ... if they didn't do chicken right, I would not be a customer

handerson's picture

that I'm simply relying on my personal experience to understand how conservative Christianity and political statements overlap. Among my circle of friends, neighbors, etc., the people most vocal about supporting Chick-Fil-A were conservative Christians who were tying it directly to their Christianity--both in terms of standing for a biblical definition of family AND their religious freedom. My secular and libertarian friends were not strongly energized.

And just as a anecdotal example, my husband went to buy a truck from a family up the road on Saturday. As they were talking, it came up that he was a pastor. The very next question was "So did you eat your Chick-Fil-A on Wednesday?" In the culture where we live now (a generally conservative faith-based community), supporting Chick-Fil-A was most definitely seen as an expression of Christianity.

 

 

Aaron Blumer's picture

EditorAdmin

It's an ancillary point but...

"Abomination" is a categorization of particularly grievous sin.  Basic heterosexual immorality is not classified as such.

This is a widespread misunderstanding. The truth is that all sorts of things are called abominations in the Mosaic law, including eating certain things (Deut. 14:3) which are then declared "clean" in the NT (Acts 10:15). Abominations included giving dirty money in offerings (Deut. 23:18) and remarrying a woman after you have divorced her and she has been married to another (Deut. 24:4) and dishonest business transactions (Deut. 25:15-16).

So, as a category, "abomination" is not all that special. And very, very sobering things are said of heterosexual sin in the NT (Matt. 5:28, 1Cor.6:15 and 18, for example).

But homosexuality is special in a couple of ways:

  • Specially self-degrading (this is the point of "dishonor" and "vile" and "against nature" in Rom. 1:18ff)
  • Specially indicative of cultures in deep decline (e.g., Sodom and, Gibeah - Judges 19:22)

In the case of "gay marriage," what's also special is that what's aberrant is being used to denigrate an important social institution--it's an attack on a fundamental norm of civilized society.

handerson's picture

I was thinking the other day about why Christians tend to have such a visceral reaction to homosexuality when we don't respond as aggresively toward other sins.

Some of it I do believe is the result of cultural conditioning like I mentioned earlier. We often read Romans 1, not as an expression of the spiraling degredation of humanity as a whole, but as a progressive listing of sins. When we do this, we end up identifying homosexuality as the "ulitmate" expression of depravity and by consequence, end up categorizing people who struggle with ssa as somehow farther gone than those who don't.

At the same time, the nature of ssa is so fundamentally unnatural that I think some of our reaction is also due to having to come face to face with how broken we are as people. We are just this messed up--we have fallen so far from Eden that we can't even do what "comes naturally" to us.  The very existence of ssa is a condemnation of all of humanity. And we don't like that. So we try to distance ourselves as much as possible. We try to assure ourselves that we are not broken to that extent; and so maybe what we're really reacting to isn't so much other people's sins as what their sins remind us about ourselves.

Susan R's picture

EditorModerator

On the note of being disgusted by some sins and not others- Personally, I think some of the hysterical reactions to ssa and homosexuality is less that people are horrified by sin, and more that they are afraid if they aren't vehement enough, someone will think they are soft on the topic, and thus will think that maybe they are gay.

It's like high school, only with gray hair, wrinkles, and second mortgages.

Rob Fall's picture

And I think many who have this reaction live in a straight cocoon.

Susan R wrote:

On the note of being disgusted by some sins and not others- Personally, I think some of the hysterical reactions to ssa and homosexuality is less that people are horrified by sin, and more that they are afraid if they aren't vehement enough, someone will think they are soft on the topic, and thus will think that maybe they are gay.

It's like high school, only with gray hair, wrinkles, and second mortgages.

Hoping to shed more light than heat..

Jim McLeish's picture

We don't have Chik-Fil-A, but I lusted in my heart after one...

Jim McLeish
Plymouth MN

Ron Bean's picture

I have family members who hold management positions in CFA stores on the east and left coasts. There were homosexuals in line on Wednesday to support the store and said so on TV interviews. And CFA hires people without discrimination. You'll find employees who are atheists, muslims, homosexuals, Mormons, Roman Catholics and even Christians.

"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan

Lee's picture

Ron Bean wrote:

I have family members who hold management positions in CFA stores on the east and left coasts. There were homosexuals in line on Wednesday to support the store and said so on TV interviews. And CFA hires people without discrimination. You'll find employees who are atheists, muslims, homosexuals, Mormons, Roman Catholics and even Christians.

And, since it is fast food, you will find plenty of hires with a zero work ethic.  Not sure what that has to do with the discussion, but I didn't want anything left off the list.  :) 

Lee

L Strickler's picture

One customer told a Chik Fil A team leader, "People are just tired of being told what to do,"  For many August 1 was an early vote, more political than religious.  While one can hope Christians will avoid an "us versus them" mentality, many Americans saw this day as support for freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and protection of property rights.  Christians are rightly concerned about those issues because ideally our Constitutional law is equal to "the powers that be" to which we are subject.  Ideal and real...well, not always the same, I know.

L Strickler

SamH's picture

One writer in fundamentalist circles seems to see the matter roughly with the same significance as Moses' commitment to YHWH... http://www.proclaimanddefend.org/2012/07/27/i-ate-a-chicken-sandwich-on-purpose/   

Nice...

I commented elsewhere that this would likely become something of a shibboleth (not for Christian activism--whatever that is) but for Christian obedience. Hoping many more agree with the OP author's point #8 than with the link I provided...

 

SamH

Dave Gilbert's picture

1) Yes, they do.

 

2) Correct. IMO, companies are throwing in more and varied tactics to get someone to purchase their products. First rule of marketing: Know your customer ( or at least appeal to them in some way )

 

3) I respect Chick-Fil-A and Dan Cathy for standing up for what he and they believe IN, and he very carefully stated it in a way so as not to include what he or they were AGAINST. That would have been preaching, and a money-making business that depends on public dollars should not pander to politics, religion or any other "hot topics" unless they are prepared to suffer the loss of at least part of their potential customer base. Specialty shops ( such as Christian bookstores ) are of course, not figured into this opinion.

 

4) Homosexuality may be the defining issue of this generation ( which has slidden exponentially farther than my grandfather's ), but my opinion of it hasn't changed one iota since I was a newly-converted believer in 1978...it's basically vile, which is what abomination means. However, my treatment of those who practice it has matured in grace and I now look at them as other wretched sinners just like me.

 

5) Yep...and they were misunderstood. Quite profoundly, and especially by those militant anti-Christian / anti-God / anti-religion people who can't stand the hint of correction in even the softest of manners, IMO. Cathy stated what he did plainly, and without a shred of offensive meaning...yet many were quick and VIOLENT with their opinion almost to the point of rage. I remember seeing on the news the story of Miss USA Pageant runner-up Carrie Prejean's reply to Perez Hilton's question about same-sex marriage during the 2009 Pageant; and his subsequent off-stage violent reaction which led to calling her a very short and disparaging term. His reaction was fairly typical of people ( and children, sad to say ) who don't like being "told what to do". Proverbs 15:32, Jude 1:8

 

6) Definitely. The best policy before God and the world is honesty and repentance.

 

7) True as well. I can't believe how mixed up public officials are these days, either. One set in Illinois refuses to do their jobs and uphold the 16-year ban on same-sex marriage AS ATTORNEYS FOR THE STATE, and they aren't reprimanded ( or were they? ) for not being willing to carry out their duties. That would have gotten me at least a stripe taken away in the Navy 20 years ago. Personal beliefs should never interfere with duties, unless and until they get in the way of God's will or law. Once they do, then it's time to temporarily or permanently step down or get out.

 

Cool Absolutely. We're about walking with the Lord and doing His will.

 

Dave.

 

 

Aaron Blumer's picture

EditorAdmin

handerson wrote:
At the same time, the nature of ssa is so fundamentally unnatural that I think some of our reaction is also due to having to come face to face with how broken we are as people. We are just this messed up--we have fallen so far from Eden that we can't even do what "comes naturally" to us.  The very existence of ssa is a condemnation of all of humanity. And we don't like that. So we try to distance ourselves as much as possible. We try to assure ourselves that we are not broken to that extent; and so maybe what we're really reacting to isn't so much other people's sins as what their sins remind us about ourselves.

Very interesting way to look at it. Not sure I agree with the last couple of sentences, but it bears thinking over a while.

handerson's picture

I'm not sure I agree with it entirely myself Smile but I've been trying to fit our strong reaction to homosexuality into the bigger picture of our common understanding of depravity and how we view our condition before God. It seems that people who have a firm grasp of human brokeness should be the people least surprised and offended by unnatural sins, and yet we continue to be so.  I suppose it could be answered either by:

1. We retain the image of God so certain things will naturally repel us... but that doesn't explain why homosexuality does so more than something like lying or stealing, which are both entirely antithetical to God's nature. If we are rooting our distaste in the residual image of God, then we should expect to have a strong visceral reaction to these things as well.

Or another option is that...

2. We do not have an adequate view of our own brokeness. We continue to believe that the human condition (including our own) is in better shape than it really is and that redemeption is not a fundamental re-creation but merely a corrective agent. So when we're faced with behavior that is so unnatural that it reveals the depth of our brokeness, it presents a reality that our theology simply can't handle. Our paradigm doesn't have room for the human condition to be THAT broken; and instead of correcting our paradigm, we react to the behavior (and those who engage in it) as somehow fundamentally different from what WE suffer from. 

Chip Van Emmerik's picture

I think part of it is that homosexuality is a sin we never partake of, even vicariously. But we partake of many others, if only in the privacy of our own minds.

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

handerson's picture

why do we insist on categorizing same-sex lust in an entirely different category than heterosexual lust? Isn't same-sex attraction simply a perversion of healthy brotherly/sisterly love the same way that heterosexual lust is? The object, is different of course, but in the end, both forms sexually objectify a person that we should be engaging as a brother or sister.

So many thoughts swirling around... I suppose this is important for me to tease out the nuance because in my generation, SSA is no longer a theoretical issues. I have too many friends who have and who are struggling through it. 

Chip Van Emmerik's picture

Yes, it's a perversion too, but it is a more familiar sin that we more often face in our own hearts.

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

JNoël's picture

handerson wrote:

[...] SSA is no longer a theoretical issues. I have too many friends who have and who are struggling through it. 

Just curious - do you believe SSA is akin to alcoholism in the sense of being involuntary and/or hereditary/genetic?

 

V/r

Ashamed of Jesus! of that Friend On whom for heaven my hopes depend! It must not be! be this my shame, That I no more revere His name. -Joseph Grigg (1720-1768)

Bert Baker's picture

The biggest reason, {and because we have been born again it becomes more natural for it to be so,} Christians react more against homosexual sin which often leads to homosexual marriage, is because in the 

Holy Scriptures, marriage is a picture of our Lord and His Church.  

 

Eph. 5, Paul speaks about the relationship between the husband and wife, then concludes by saying he is speaking about Christ and His Church.  This in itself makes it important for born again believers to

understand and take strong positions against the direction we are being told to take by our leaders and society itself to embrace this wicked sin.

 

It is also important to look at the historical record of Holy Scripture to recognize the destruction of the cities in Genesis brought about in a super large way by this sin.  

 

It is true however, Romans 1 does detail other sins, but the sin of homosexuality is linked to those who would not honor God as God, but became vain in their own imaginations.

 

When born again believers speak out against homosexual sin in our country, we are also trying to help preserve our country by being salt.

 

It is also true, we must be willing to share the  Good News to a world that does not want it.  D.L. Moody stated that about his life and ministry and it should be ours as well.

Ex. 15:2

handerson's picture

From my understanding of the nature of sin and the nature of human beings, I believe that the attraction to the same sex is not inherently sinful but is a symptom of the greater brokeness of the human condition. I believe it is possible that there is an involuntary aspect to SSA as well as a formative aspect (nature AND nurture). Even at that, as I read somewhere recently, both our nature and nurture are devastated by the far-reaching effects of the Fall and both are subject to divine Providence so the exact source of the temptation isn't all that important whether it's alcoholism a tendency toward gluttony or SSA.

I do however believe that engaging in lust and actively embracing and engaging a homosexual lifestyle is not consistent with Scriptural understanding of sexuality and as such is sin. My concern is that we be careful that we extend grace to those fighting the very desires and affirm that they are no more "broken" than any of the rest of us. 

handerson's picture

I agree that homosexuality (and gay marriage) in their very essence undermine the image of Christ and His Bride, but aren't divorce and infidelity and pre-marital heterosexual sex equally destructive? And still, we don't react the same way. Please understand that I am not arguing for the normalization of homosexuality, merely for a heightened awareness of our own inconsistency in responding to it as something "worse" than other sins that undermine truth.

For me the greatest argument against homosexuality is that God designed men and women to equally and collaboratively reflect aspects of His character through the gift of gender. The nature of marriage and male/female interaction display things about Him that same-sex relationships simply cannot. At the same time, divorce and infidelity are wrong for the exact same reason that homosexuality is--they don't tell the truth about God's nature. When we, as His image bearers, act in ways that are inconsistent with His character (in this case, His loving faithfulness), we lie about Him and sin.

Dave Gilbert's picture

Bert Baker wrote:

The biggest reason, {and because we have been born again it becomes more natural for it to be so,} Christians react more against homosexual sin which often leads to homosexual marriage, is because in the 

Holy Scriptures, marriage is a picture of our Lord and His Church.  I agree.

 

Eph. 5, Paul speaks about the relationship between the husband and wife, then concludes by saying he is speaking about Christ and His Church.  This in itself makes it important for born again believers to

understand and take strong positions against the direction we are being told to take by our leaders and society itself to embrace this wicked sin. I agree in the fact that marriage is a picture of the bridegroom ( Christ ) and the bride ( the entire existing body of believers ), but I disagree in spirit with devoting time to change society. Voting my conscience is one thing, but "Christian Activism" isn't something I care to expend time doing. Walking with the Lord and edifying the saints takes up enough of my time...societal activism seems a waste of time, and only appears to slow down the inevitable decline of America and the rest of the world. Christ said "My kingdom is not of this world.." and Hebrews 11:8-16 makes it plain that people of faith seek a better country. With that in mind, I'm satisfied praying for this country and its leaders, that God would provide a place of peace where we can live out our lives working quietly. I'll vote my conscience and let the Lord's will be done in earth, as in heaven.

 

It is also important to look at the historical record of Holy Scripture to recognize the destruction of the cities in Genesis brought about in a super large way by this sin.  Sodom and Gomorrah were not destroyed specifically because of homosexuality, they were destroyed because they were so wicked that they ( and the other cities of the plain south of the Dead Sea ) had degenerated into violence, sexual perversion of all kind and all manner of sin. Rampant homosexuality is an indicator of a society's last "throes" before God judges it IMO...America has a ways to go before God judges it, but the only thing that can stop the slide is God in His sovereignty using people to spread the Gospel and His children walking with Him in their daily lives.

 

It is true however, Romans 1 does detail other sins, but the sin of homosexuality is linked to those who would not honor God as God, but became vain in their own imaginations. I disagree. Those that would not honor God include all unregenerate mankind, and we have all ( outside of saving grace and repentance ) have done that to some extent. The sin of homosexuality is linked to mankind's rejection of God and His ways, and is further proof that man has no wish to have God "calling the shots" in their lives.

 

When born again believers speak out against homosexual sin in our country, we are also trying to help preserve our country by being salt. True, but I think if we spent more time proclaiming the Gospel ( like you state below ) and living the lives He wants us to live for Him, it would benefit both us and the unregenerate: Proverbs 16:7

 

It is also true, we must be willing to share the  Good News to a world that does not want it.  D.L. Moody stated that about his life and ministry and it should be ours as well. True.

Ex. 15:2

 

 

My replies in bold.

Dave.

Help keep SI’s server humming. A few bucks makes a difference.