I recall Jesus defending the prostitute from a mob of people prepared to kill her because the did not like how she behaved. We’re told that we are not to judge, but to love. We are all sinners. Jesus bore the burden of man’s judgement on our behalf. It was sin in the Garden that opened man’s eyes to right and wrong. Prior to sin, man knew no wrong. It wasn’t until Jesus took upon himself the punishment for man’s sin, that the union between God and man was restored. Each will be judged on ones own actions, not how many sins we brought to light in others.

Too many Christians believe that they have a monopoly on the knowledge of good and evil, like it’s some kind of heavenly gift. It was a curse from the beginning. All men have within them the knowledge of good and evil because all men are are inherently sinful. It is not man’s duty to determine what is wrong for someone else and enact punishment. We do a pretty bad job of it every time we try. I mean it was man after all that found Jesus, a sinless man, depraved enough to deserve death on a cross. It should be each individual’s life quest to seek truth. This most important facet of life is too often neglected.

I support any individuals right to choose how they conduct themselves so long as they do not attempt to use force to coerce others to live as they deem proper, whether directly or through the state.

I say, let those who stand with the owner of Chic-Fil-A gorge in support. Let those who appose protest. Just keep the state out of it. We do ourselves a great disservice every time we go running to congress, pleading with them to pass a new law to force others to behave in a manor that better meshes with our world view. If marriage had not been hijacked by the state years ago, the argument for gay marriage wouldn’t have a leg to stand on. It’s only argument is that sexual orientation can not constitutionally render a couple less deserving of state benefits. I say get the state out of marriage all together. If a homosexual couple can find a minister to marry them, that is between them and God. I have no right to ask the state to interfere in that contract between willing parties. I on the other hand have the right to voice my moral objection and attempt to persuade others to see the truth. I don’t have the right to force others to comply.

The majority was fine and dandy with the state’s definition of marriage when it jived with their opinion on the matter. But now they balk at the notion that it has the authority to change it’s mind. News flash – the state should have never been granted the authority to define of marriage in the first place.


4 thoughts on “Chic-Fil-A

  1. Excellent! Good thinking. Honest and clear. Unsurprisingly, a glimpse of the living truth.
    If we were in old testament Israel, then the ‘state’ would already be in the mix – just as in some muslim countries. But we live in a country that was founded upon recognizing and protecting the inalienable and God-given right to choose our own way – freedom, including that of religion. Even though I may disagree (who cares?), they harm noone – so I must let them choose freely.

  2. Baron:except that one notices that the EU is complicit in this via the European Parliament.Exactly! The only question is, who’s next? What country?El:the whole racism charge is not an attempt to appease minorities, but a convenient tool to keep the wallonians on the fleming teat.Oh, it’s about cracking down on the “far right”, “racists” etc. as well, be sure!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s