Imagine that you were working as a server in a restaurant, and a customer came in and was seated in your section. You look over at the table, and it occurs to you that the man is familiar. You ran across him just last week in a parking lot. He had made an illegal turn, and broad-sided the car your spouse was driving. Only instead of admitting the mistake, or even being half-way polite about it, the man jumps out of the car, pulls your spouse out of their car, and starts screaming at the top of his lungs, and then, just for good measure, spits in your spouse's face before driving off without waiting for the police to show up.
Now imagine that not only were you prevented from taking any legal action against this person seated in your section, but you were required, by law, to serve them their lunch. No swapping sections, no breaks, no going home sick. When you try to explain the situation to your boss, he informs you that anti-discrimination laws prevent you from refusing to serve the customer. If you do, you can be fined or imprisoned.
I know that there are a lot of people out there who couldn't make heads or tails out of this story, or relate it to the current battle over religious rights if their lives depended on it. I suppose that's the point really. The secularists, the judges making the rulings, even a lot of the more "casual" Christians do not understand because they cannot understand.
My "religion" is not a hobby, a philosophy, or a means of giving to charity. It isn't a place to go on Sunday morning, with occasional picnics. My "religion" is a relationship. Specifically, my religion is my relationship with God. It doesn't stop Sunday at noon, and it doesn't end at the church parking lot. I take it with me everywhere I go, 24-7, 365 days a year. It's how I worship, how I live, and what I aspire to become over time. It is my inspiration, love, and loyalty. It is my purpose and strength. And through Christ, it is my salvation and my hope. It is the gift that I do not deserve and can never repay, and yet have been given.
And it is personal. That's something that is missed in the discussion of rights. How does God compare his relationship with his followers, his care for those who trust Him? He compares it to a marriage. Over and over in the scriptures, the metaphor of marriage is used to show God's love for his people. The church is his bride. Christ loved the church so much that He died for us, and later, through Paul, commanded that husbands maintain that standard, that they too should be willing to die for their wives, if need be. Arguably, that is the reason that God instituted marriage from the beginning.
In the short space of a few years, we have gone from a nation with a clear and unanimous definition of marriage, one that has been the basis of every successful civilization for thousands of years, to a nation at odds with itself. In many cases, the change was not accomplished using the legal methods, but forced by unelected officials deciding by their own will what was right. Soon after that, people of faith, the same ones who accept that marriage symbolizes the relationship between Christ and forgiven Man, were not only required to accept a perversion of the sacrament, but they were then told that they must participate in the perversion if their job duties would normally provide service to a Christian service. If not, they could lose the ability to work, or be fined, or imprisoned.
And the gay activists have no idea why we seem to believe our religious liberty is being threatened...
Last night, the latest round in the battle for religious liberty was lost in Arizona. An amendment that would have given a little bit of help for people of faith in discrimination cases was defeated. That wasn't surprising, considering that its opponents painted it basically as the return of Jim Crow via the Spanish Inquisition. There are likely to be more losses as well, but the battle will continue.
In the book of Acts, Paul was given the choice of obeying God or man. He chose God. I think the modern secularists might be surprised at how many Christians are still willing to do the same. The times may have changed, but some things haven't. In a world were more marriages end in divorce than not, some of us are determined to keep our word, both to our spouse, and our God.
Love, honor, and obey.
Totally agree with your thoughts, perspectives. So, what do we do? I believe there are many, perhaps a majority, that agree that things have gotten way out of hand. But whether it is a majority or not the actions of the court system are illegal. They violate the 1st amendment, How do you respond when a branch of government acts illegally? Are you obliged to comply? I don't think so. What do you think?
ReplyDeleteHere's where the hedging begins a bit...
ReplyDeleteIf (when) I come across a situation where the law puts me inconflict with the laws of God, I think that will be a pretty easy decision for me. Not without pain certainly, but not complicated. Likely it will a case similar to the Christian baker who lost his business license because he would not make a cake for a gay service, something that affects my ability to make a living, though there are possibilities that there could be worse things on the horizon.
As far as more general "illegal" actions by the government, the situation becomes more difficult. Most people who are paying attention and taking an honest look know that our current administration is acting illegally. They also know that because of the current climate in Washington and the culture in general, nothing is going to be done about it, at least as long as the current president is in the White House. So where does that leave us?
I am very big on "law and order." Most conservatives I know are the same. As long as there is a chance to restore things to a semblance of a Constitutional republic using the systems in place, that's what I cling to, along with trying to inform, educate, persuade if possible. If the situation changes after the next couple of elections, I think there may still be that chance. If not, if we continue to go down the current path, we will soon arrive at that place where law abiding people have no effective means of redressing problems with their government. At that point, morally we are certainly not obliged to comply. The question becomes what level of sacrafice will we be willing to go through to resist? I pray it doesn't come to that.