“[T]he landscape of protecting religious liberty has changed. Permanently”
Our fellow citizens have absorbed and are committed to a particular view about the meaning of human sexuality and its place in our lives. Millions of people have ordered their lives around these beliefs. They are not going to give up those views, in the absence of an attractive alternative.
Haven’t read on to see what, if anything, would be “an attractive alternative.”
But I think the writer is on the right track. Culturally we have strong commitments to some foundational ideas about sexual ethics and recent trends have really only exposed those by changing the social environment a bit. The roots are deeper than they may seem.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Aaron, her alternative is that we speak up against ALL the ways the S’xual Revolution has been affecting society— abortion, birth control, divorce, s’x ed in schools– not just against one aspect of it (homos’xuality).
She concludes:
Christianity has a viable, humane, intellectually coherent alternative to the Sexual Revolution. Sex makes babies. Children need their own parents. Men and women are different. These are facts: trying to build an entire society around their opposites is inhuman and impossible.
It’s interesting to me because I just finished reading one of the best parenting books I’ve ever read, and it’s an evangelical talking about ways we can glean great things about parenting from the Amish—work ethic, community, caring, avoiding technology use to the levels that it erodes our real-life relationships, passing on our faith, living out the value of family, respecting children as contributors to family life (letting them do valued work). The Amish, interestingly, have probably the highest retention rate of any religious group the world over.
These are very interesting things to think about.
…..with regards to one of our religious freedom issues—that of whether we ought to force nuns to buy birth control—is a very simple question that might even influence the promiscuous; if he’s not willing to pony up $10/month for birth control, how much does he value you?
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
If heterosexuals can get divorced and remarried for any old reason, if they can have sex outside of marriage with a person of the opposite, WHY CAN’T THEY have sex with a person of the same sex, or even get married to a person of the same sex?
The author was right, we have to battle against the entire Sexual Revolution, not just part of it.
We who stand for Christian sexual ethics are now the revolutionaries.
Discussion