Is the culture war reversal a boon for Christians?

posted at 11:01 am on April 6, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

The emergence of popular support for same-sex marriage and ever-loosening moral norms in the US have Christians backpedaling on their perceived mission to shape the culture with their faith. Matt Lewis wrote a few days ago at The Week that this may be good news for Christians and Christianity in America, in part because it allows for a return to focus on faith rather than politics:

Just as political parties wrestle with whether or not it’s better to be a big tent, or (to paraphrase Reagan) to fly “a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors,” there is an argument that “nominal” Christians cause more problems than solutions. In politics, numbers matter, of course, and Christians who are still looking for a political savior may view this trend as bad news. But for Christians focused on something more transcendent — saving souls and winning real converts — there is a silver lining to losing the culture. …

The problem of “nominal” Christianity seems to have observable societal consequences, too. In his latest column for the New York Times, Ross Douthat hints at it, observing that “the social goods associated with faith flow almost exclusively from religious participation, not from affiliation or nominal belief.”

Another possible silver lining: As Christianity recedes as the dominant cultural paradigm, it might also have the ironic affect of sparking a renewed interest and curiosity about spirituality. Absence, I suppose, can make the heart grow fonder. With Noah triumphing at the box office, and a new show called Resurrection on ABC (a show filled with biblical allusions), it would be easy to conclude that a disenchanted and dispirited nation — having given up hope that salvation will come in the form of traditional American institutions — is yearning for some sort of spiritual fulfillment.

Christ promised that genuine Christianity would be met with opposition. And the entire book of 1 Peter was written for this purpose: how do we live as a faithful minority? I don’t think anyone should be rooting for persecution, of course, but I do think there may be some very positive developments to come from a nation that no longer pretends to be Christian. It’s hard to be a rebel when you’re The Man.

If this sounds familiar, it might be because it’s a phenomenon not limited to cultural ascendancy. Recast this argument in terms of political parties, and one reaches the same conclusion.  When the GOP was out of power completely in 2009-10, it was easy for  party leaders to stick to conservative orthodoxy, since they couldn’t impact much in terms of governance. The same was true for Democrats in 2002-6; it was easy to proclaim the progressive agenda when they had no power to enact it. The problem for both came when they actually had to govern, in whole (Democrats in 2009-10) or in part (GOP control of the House, 2011-present). It’s not so much a lack of political commitment as it is the complexity of interacting in a society where those really of the True (Political) Faith are actually a minority.

Now, this isn’t a perfect analogy, because despite the hysterical accusations of the coming American theocracy!, Christians don’t want to establish clerical rule in the US. The faith has always been about shaping the culture, with the policies and politics a natural end result. That’s why the activist Christians who got into politics in the late 1970s and early 1980s engaged on culture more than, say, budgetary policy in the first place. The cultural upheavals of the 1960s that Matt described were the focus of this counter-Deformation, to employ a pun. To a large extent, they still are — which is why it’s called the culture war.

The question remains, though, as to whether politics — and especially partisan politics — has co-opted the cultural mission. To some extent it has, and that has drawn some odd divisions as politics trump faith. For instance, the Gospels are filled with demands on Christians to prioritize their efforts on the poor. When Pope Francis warns about the poor being left behind in a global culture that idolizes money and capital, though, he ends up having to rebut the notion that he’s a communist for talking about poverty and exclusion:

In a March 31 interview with communications students, Pope Francis responded to previous accusations of being a communist, explaining that his preference for the poor is in fact based in the Gospel.

“I heard two months ago that a person referred to my preference for speaking about the poor, saying: ‘This Pope is a communist, no?’ And no, this is the banner of the Gospel, not of communism — of the Gospel,” the Pope explained during the meeting.

Given to three Belgian youth who are studying communications, the interview was broadcast on April 3 on the Belgium website deredactie.be., and it was later picked up by Italian news agency ReppublicaTV.

During the interview, one student asked the Pope where his preference for the poor and most needy comes from, to which the Holy Father responded: “Because this is the heart of the Gospel, and I am a believer, I believe in God, I believe in Christ, I believe in the Gospel, and the heart of the Gospel is the poor.”

“And because of this, I believe that the poor are the center of the Gospel of Jesus. This is clear if we read it,” he affirmed.

As I explained in my notes on Evangelii Gaudium, anyone who read the document would never have concluded otherwise — especially those with some knowledge of Catholic teachings on economics embraced by John Paul II and Benedict XVI, two men hardly disposed towards communism. If Christians cannot discuss poverty and the shortcomings of economic policies towards the poor without being summarily dismissed as crypto-communists, then the mission to change the culture and then its politics has been replaced with simple power struggles. And in service to what?

Still, the point here is that the cultural battlefield is precisely where Christians must work, and setbacks are not going to make our job of proclaiming the truth of the Gospel any easier. If we needed evidence of that, Mozilla proved it after the publication of Matt’s column. Matt cites 1 Peter as a model for living as a faithful minority, and that’s solid advice; Matt isn’t prescribing a retreat, but more of a reorientation and consolidation. However, I would recommend 1 Corinthians as a warning to Christians about the impact of culture to the faith as well as the other way around. Paul discovered that the church he founded in Corinth still proclaimed the Gospel but had largely stopped living it. They had re-adopted the practices and mores of the notoriously-hedonistic Corinthian culture as a way of getting along with everyone and “fitting in.” They did not want to provoke the dominant culture or really to shape it outside of their own enclave — and that led the outside culture to shape their practice of Christianity instead. Under Paul’s direction to Corinth and the wider Christian world after the publication of his letters, Christians did shape the culture and created post-Greek Western Civilization.

In our long history, Christians have had many setbacks in addressing cultural decay and misdirection. We have our 1960s; the early church had its Corinth. That didn’t mean that Christians shrank from challenging the social ills of Corinth, nor should we shrink from proclaiming the full spectrum of Christian teachings in order to shape our world now and in the future. We are sent out as sheep amidst the wolves, always — not to become wolves looking only for political power as an end to itself, but to spread love, joy, truth, and beauty so that our politics will follow the culture we can still shape and uplift.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

When Pope Francis warns about the poor being left behind in a global culture that idolizes money and capital, though, he ends up having to rebut the notion that he’s a communist for talking about poverty and exclusion:

Wrong wrong WRONG! He ends up having to rebut the notion that he’s a communist for imploring GOVERNMENTS to solve the problems that GOVERNMENTS create!

gryphon202 on April 6, 2014 at 11:04 AM

gryphon202 on April 6, 2014 at 11:04 AM

ALL nations have economic policies — tax policy, monetary policy, regulatory policy. Where those policies create poverty and marginalization, why should Francis not speak out against them? It doesn’t make him a communist any more than arguing for laissez-faire policies make conservatives anarchists.

Ed Morrissey on April 6, 2014 at 11:11 AM

…Thus argues the blog who supports (or is otherwise indifferent to) same-sex marriage and legalizing drugs.

BigGator5 on April 6, 2014 at 11:12 AM

It doesn’t matter. The Muslims will sort you all out, sooner or later.

OldEnglish on April 6, 2014 at 11:15 AM

Just as political parties wrestle with whether or not it’s better to be a big tent, or (to paraphrase Reagan) to fly “a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors,”

Politically, do not have a “big tent” where you promise certain things to certain groups. Instead, have an ideology, say Liberty, and explain why it’s good for everyone.

For example, why do so many Mexicans have no faith in their future in their home country that they illegally cross into the US? Could it be that, unlike our Dear Liar, they actually do want to built it themselves?

Christianity likewise needs not a rebranding but a better explanation of why it’s correct.

rbj on April 6, 2014 at 11:16 AM

…Thus argues the blog who supports (or is otherwise indifferent to) same-sex marriage and legalizing drugs.

BigGator5 on April 6, 2014 at 11:12 AM

Not entirely an unfair point, but my arguments on the former were a warning about using government to enforce a definition of marriage and the inevitable risk that it would get turned against people of faith in the end. On the latter, I don’t know if that’s really a faith-based issue, or more of a secular temperance impulse. Connection to Christian doctrine would be very indirect at best.

Ed Morrissey on April 6, 2014 at 11:18 AM

I understand throughout history Christians fought for their faith, but that’s well in the past, isn’t it?
There are a handful who stand up like Hobby Lobby but does anyone imagine an Onward Christian Soldiers type reaction to the current malaise? They just take down the manger scenes and the crosses. A few complain each time and then history marches over those individuals.

vityas on April 6, 2014 at 11:19 AM

Christianity likewise needs not a rebranding but a better explanation of why it’s correct.

rbj on April 6, 2014 at 11:16 AM

Yes.

Ed Morrissey on April 6, 2014 at 11:19 AM

…Thus argues the blog who supports (or is otherwise indifferent to) same-sex marriage and legalizing drugs.

BigGator5 on April 6, 2014 at 11:12 AM

My opinion is that Hot Air is a political blog. The sole aim of politics is the acquisition of power. When opposition to same sex marriage polled well for Republicans they were happy to get behind social conservatives. Now that it doesn’t they are planning their retreat. Republicans never truly cared about the issues of social conservatives. They only cared about their votes. What worries me now is the high support that same sex marriage has among evangelicals. I fear the Church is compromising on SSM so that they can remain relevant in US society and politics.

antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 11:20 AM

Here’s where Pope Francis advocated Statism, the use of Government to enforce social and economic “justice”:

“Growth in justice requires more than economic growth, while presupposing such growth: it requires decisions, programmes, mechanisms and processes specifically geared to a better distribution of income, the creation of sources of employment and an integral promotion of the poor which goes beyond a simple welfare mentality. I am far from proposing an irresponsible populism, but the economy can no longer turn to remedies that are a new poison, such as attempting to increase profits by reducing the work force and thereby adding to the ranks of the excluded.”

Pope Francis explicitly calls for “decisions, programmes, mechanisms and processes” to achieve social justice — which can *only* be created and managed by the State. This looks to me like Liberation Theology, which is essentially Marxism wearing Church vestments. THIS is why the Pope had a lot of explaining and back peddling to do because he crossed the line from advocating that *people* should to to this willingly, and that instead the State must do this. Where in the Bible do we see where God *forces* people to act the way he wants them to??

EasyEight on April 6, 2014 at 11:23 AM

Where those policies create poverty and marginalization, why should Francis not speak out against them? It doesn’t make him a communist any more than arguing for laissez-faire policies make conservatives anarchists.

Ed Morrissey on April 6, 2014 at 11:11 AM

Gryphon’s point is that he seeks a solution from the same organization that created the problem.

We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.

Albert Einstein

Government is only capable of one kind of thinking.

Grammar Nazi on April 6, 2014 at 11:25 AM

My sense is that governments are NOT mandated to care for the poor and the needy. That is the province of the church, and privately funded charities. That is precisely why we are commanded to tithe at a rate of 10%. Government has nothing to do with it.

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 11:27 AM

What worries me now is the high support that same sex marriage has among evangelicals. I fear the Church is compromising on SSM so that they can remain relevant in US society and politics.

antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 11:20 AM

Church members who compromise the Word of God are no longer evangelicals, by definition:

1.
pertaining to or in keeping with the gospel and its teachings.
2.
belonging to or designating the Christian churches that emphasize the teachings and authority of the Scriptures, especially of the New Testament, in opposition to the institutional authority of the church itself, and that stress as paramount the tenet that salvation is achieved by personal conversion to faith in the atonement of Christ.

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 11:31 AM

2009/2010?

Isn’t that when they passed that Obamacare thing?

And the answer is yes.

“God created Arakis to train the faithful”
– Maud’Dib

WryTrvllr on April 6, 2014 at 11:33 AM

christianity, like every religion before it (ancient aztec relgion, greek and roman mythology, etc), like every peer religion (islam, judaism, hinduism), and like every religion after it (mormonism, scientology) is a load of horse shit make believe fairy tales to qualm the masses for what science cannot YET explain

it has no place in society imo

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

My sense is that governments are NOT mandated to care for the poor and the needy. That is the province of the church, and privately funded charities. That is precisely why we are commanded to tithe at a rate of 10%. Government has nothing to do with it.

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 11:27 AM

Exactly.

BuckeyeSam on April 6, 2014 at 11:39 AM

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

I don’t dabble in hypotheticals.

nonpartisan on January 28, 2014 at 10:28 PM

nobar on April 6, 2014 at 11:41 AM

My sense is that governments are NOT mandated to care for the poor and the needy. That is the province of the church, and privately funded charities. That is precisely why we are commanded to tithe at a rate of 10%. Government has nothing to do with it.

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 11:27 AM

so the church is allowed to tax to help the needy? that’s fine because its the church doing it?

who sets the arbitrary 10%

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:41 AM

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

You’re without a doubt the most ignorant commenter on Hot Air. So your opinion is actually worth less than horse shit.

HumpBot Salvation on April 6, 2014 at 11:42 AM

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

Trolling for comments this morning, I see.

OK — What came before the Big Bang? Once you can tell us all that answer to your own personal liking, you can do away with Faith (you might also try for the slightly easier question of name a modern society which developed based on an atheistic sub-culture).

jon1979 on April 6, 2014 at 11:42 AM

so the church is allowed to tax to help the needy? that’s fine because its the church doing it?

who sets the arbitrary 10%

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:41 AM

And thanks for proving my point. LOL.

HumpBot Salvation on April 6, 2014 at 11:43 AM

***

to qualm the masses

***

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

Did you really just write that? When did qualm become a verb?

Want to try again?

BuckeyeSam on April 6, 2014 at 11:43 AM

christianity, like every religion before it (ancient aztec relgion, greek and roman mythology, etc), like every peer religion (islam, judaism, hinduism), and like every religion after it (mormonism, scientology) is a load of horse shit make believe fairy tales to qualm the masses for what science cannot YET explain

it has no place in society imo

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

It doesn’t matter. The Muslims will sort you all out, sooner or later.

OldEnglish on April 6, 2014 at 11:15 AM

For you, Me and mine will stand aside.

WryTrvllr on April 6, 2014 at 11:46 AM

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

Allahpundit, is that you?

22044 on April 6, 2014 at 11:47 AM

OK — What came before the Big Bang? Once you can tell us all that answer to your own personal liking, you can do away with Faith (you might also try for the slightly easier question of name a modern society which developed based on an atheistic sub-culture).

jon1979 on April 6, 2014 at 11:42 AM

I dont know…science doesn’t know, yet, or maybe ever

but because I don’t know something doesn’t mean I have to ascribe to a set of fairy tales for me to function as a human being

aztecs didn’t understand weather patterns and therefor ascribed rain to the will of gods….it was as logical an answer back then since our knowledge of weather was so ill-formed

the church thought the sun revolved around the earth centuries back…when astronomy was still in infancy

there will always be questions we don’t have an answer to…and men will always seek religion to answer what we don’t know

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:47 AM

it has no place in society imo

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

And your opinion on this subject is about as important as the wart on Barack Obama’s nose, Bosco.

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 11:48 AM

I really cant understand how the loss of the culture war is being spun into a plus for Christians. The more hostile the culture becomes to Christianity the more we will pay for practicing our faith and the greater the attempt to turn our Children against us.

This isnt a live and let live debate, the anti-Christian elements in the culture war are winning and the more influence they gain the more difficult they will make it to practice our faith.

In no way is this a plus.

DJ Rick on April 6, 2014 at 11:49 AM

Not entirely an unfair point, but my arguments on the former were a warning about using government to enforce a definition of marriage and the inevitable risk that it would get turned against people of faith in the end. On the latter, I don’t know if that’s really a faith-based issue, or more of a secular temperance impulse. Connection to Christian doctrine would be very indirect at best.

Ed Morrissey on April 6, 2014 at 11:18 AM

I am all for getting the government out of the marriage business. The the homosexual lobby will not leave it to private citizens to define marriage on their own terms. I you go against their worldview, you will likely find yourself destroyed. If you don’t bake their gay wedding cakes or in any way acknowledged their “marriage” you will find yourself in court or out of a job. We can’t simply walk away from this. You, I, and everyone else will be maid to care.

Example #1

A brave Catholic blogger, Caroline Farrow of Catholic Voices, also discovered this when she spoke up from the floor in a recent BBC Question Time debate. The Catholic Herald this week relates her experience with the headline, “Blogger “spat at” after debating same-sex marriage on television.” Having watched a Youtube clip of this event, the hostility directed at Caroline is palpable.

Example #2

It takes no particular courage to take an impassioned stand in favor of what corporate America wants, in other words; it takes some to stand against it, particularly if you have something to lose. I’m a stay-at-home mom, so I don’t have anything to lose at this point (though I do know a woman whose husband was threatened with firing over his *wife’s* Catholic, pro-traditional marriage writings on her own small blog–a gay co-worker of her husband’s found it and said it made him feel “unsafe” to be working with the husband of a woman who was against gay “marriage.” True story.).

How can we practice our faith after having been relegated to the fringes to the extent that any personal opposition to SSM will leave us destitute?

antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 11:51 AM

so the church is allowed to tax to help the needy? that’s fine because its the church doing it?

who sets the arbitrary 10%

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:41 AM

The ‘church’ are followers of Jesus Christ, you blithering idiot. The ‘church’ is NOT some building with a cross on top. And no one is taxed anything. According to the Bible, we are admonished to give ‘First Fruits’ to the Lord in the form of our tithe. And 10% was commanded. If you took the time to actually read the Bible instead of simply mocking it and those of us who believe in it as the Word of God, you might not be such a nasty, repulsive human being.

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 11:53 AM

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:41 AM

It may be a command, but Christianity holds that man has free will. There’s no compulsion.

That aside, I think Americans should be emphasizing the “concentric circles of charity.” Rather than allowing able-bodied people to walk to their mailbox to get a check or an EBT card or whatever, charity should first be sought from immediate family; extended family; friends; fellow members of churches, synagogues, other houses of worship; other membership organizations; and general community assistance organizations. The point is that when you have you look someone in the eye who you run into on a regular basis, you are far less likely to become a societal leech than when you have no contact with those who underwrite your very existence. I emphasize that this model would apply to able-bodied people. Those who are truly disabled would need the resources for extended, even lifetime, care.

BuckeyeSam on April 6, 2014 at 11:53 AM

And your opinion on this subject is about as important as the wart on Barack Obama’s nose, Bosco.

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 11:48 AM

real mature response there…keep your head in the sand

ignorance is bliss after all

parents tell children there is a santa claus and they believe it

churches tell men there is a god and they believe it

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:53 AM

but because I don’t know something doesn’t mean I have to ascribe to a set of fairy tales for me to function as a human being
nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:47 AM

from my understanding, a skeet gun would lack killing power as its not built to kill

nonpartisan on April 7, 2013 at 11:45 AM

I can do this all day, btw.

nobar on April 6, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Church members who compromise the Word of God are no longer evangelicals, by definition:
bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 11:31 AM

Tell that to these people:

Poll: Homosexuals are viewed more favorably than evangelical Christians

antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 11:54 AM

I can do this all day, btw.

nobar on April 6, 2014 at 11:54 AM

nice non-sequiter sir

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:55 AM

My sense is that governments are NOT mandated to care for the poor and the needy. That is the province of the church, and privately funded charities. That is precisely why we are commanded to tithe at a rate of 10%. Government has nothing to do with it.

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 11:27 AM

The Progressives would argue that government can handle the massive undertaking of charity (welfare) for the poor more efficiently, or at least more consistently, than churches. They take tithing in the form of taxes and argue that it is the best or easiest way to be more Christian in your charitable giving. You wouldn’t believe how many times I’ve heard Christian progressives make this argument. “Paying taxes helps the poor; it’s the Christian thing to do.”

Ultimately it eliminates the need for the church itself. An intentional move by progressives with a predictable result. I’d love to see the statistics on church attendance and tithing as compared to government taxation and welfare programs. I guarantee as the latter goes up, the former goes down. The reason is people can’t afford to give to their churches on top of massive taxation which already goes to the poor. Consequently, the poor do not attend church out of an obligation (in part) to give back what they once received from the community. Need proof? Look how many inner city churches have shuttered their doors in the last 30 years.

None of this will change until the government social welfare complex is broken, either by bankruptcy or by a shift in public opinion.

tommytom02 on April 6, 2014 at 11:57 AM

it requires decisions, programmes, mechanisms and processes specifically geared to a better distribution of income, the creation of sources of employment and an integral promotion of the poor which goes beyond a simple welfare mentality.

Ummm..income is to be distributed?? By whom? From what source?

Mimzey on April 6, 2014 at 11:59 AM

antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 11:54 AM

What does that have to do with it? There are fewer evangelicals each and every day, as more and more Christians kowtow to the masses and compromise the tenets of our faith. By definition, an evangelical supports the Word of God in total…not just the convenient stuff. Once you veer away, you become a pseudo Christian, and will be left behind when the rapture of the church occurs.

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 12:00 PM

The emergence of popular support for same-sex marriage and ever-loosening moral norms in the US have Christians backpedaling on their perceived mission to shape the culture with their faith.

Umm… no it’s not.

Whatever happened to being the salt of the earth? Oh that’s right… we can’t say gay marriage is bad because that makes us all hateful bigots… So let’s change our beliefs instead of them changing theirs?

Skywise on April 6, 2014 at 12:01 PM

it has no place in society imo

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

Just because you believe in Phrenology and tell your kids horror stories about Global Warming to get them to go to sleep at night and do good in school doesn’t make you a superior intellect… nor even a scientist OR a scientologist..

But thanks for showing us what true bigotry and hate look like.

Skywise on April 6, 2014 at 12:02 PM

How can we practice our faith after having been relegated to the fringes to the extent that any personal opposition to SSM will leave us destitute?
antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 11:51 AM

This is the big issue.

bluegill on April 6, 2014 at 12:03 PM

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Your vicious slandering and mockery of Christianity and those of us who are Christian is childish, rude, and boorish. And you have the gall to call me immature?? HumpBot Salvation was quite correct. You are the dumbest troll on HotAir. Bless your little heart…

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 12:04 PM

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Quit pretending you have any idea of how the Scientific Method works, you are a militant atheist, not a scientist or even remotely associated with anything scientific.

oscarwilde on April 6, 2014 at 12:04 PM

I really cant understand how the loss of the culture war is being spun into a plus for Christians. The more hostile the culture becomes to Christianity the more we will pay for practicing our faith and the greater the attempt to turn our Children against us.

This isnt a live and let live debate, the anti-Christian elements in the culture war are winning and the more influence they gain the more difficult they will make it to practice our faith.

In no way is this a plus.

DJ Rick on April 6, 2014 at 11:49 AM

Have to agree with that.

Any study of other countries that purged Christians from first cultural influence and then seized property and restricted religious practice culminated in a lot of death and misery for a lot of people…sometimes taking decades to begin recovery.

workingclass artist on April 6, 2014 at 12:04 PM

Tell that to these people:

Poll: Homosexuals are viewed more favorably than evangelical Christians

antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 11:54 AM

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 3, 2014 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Ned Flanders is considered one of the most likable characters on television. But according to a new poll, more people may have a positive view of Big Gay Al.

The polling firm and its funding have raised some eyebrows.

It was commissioned by its client, the homosexual lobbying group Human Rights Campaign.

GQRR has worked for a host of liberal-progressive, pro-abortion, or homosexual groups or individuals.

Funny.

Mimzey on April 6, 2014 at 12:06 PM

tommytom02 on April 6, 2014 at 11:57 AM

Spot on…

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 12:07 PM

This is the big issue.

bluegill on April 6, 2014 at 12:03 PM

And on this point libertarians and “conservative” supporters of SSM is silent. They may want to address after SSM has been imposed onto all 50 states by Federal courts but by then the horse would have already left the barn.

antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 12:08 PM

How can we practice our faith after having been relegated to the fringes to the extent that any personal opposition to SSM will leave us destitute?
antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 11:51 AM

By practicing your faith?

Mimzey on April 6, 2014 at 12:08 PM

You are the dumbest troll on HotAir.

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 12:04 PM

how unchristian of you to insult me like that!

snickers…

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 12:09 PM

By practicing your faith?

Mimzey on April 6, 2014 at 12:08 PM

Yeah, believing in one man/one woman marriage. See what happens when a person speaks out against SSM.

antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 12:10 PM

how unchristian of you to insult me like that!

snickers…

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 12:09 PM

There is nothing un-Christian about speaking the truth.

antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 12:11 PM

WryTrvllr on April 6, 2014 at 11:46 AM

At my age, it’s probably not a problem. The fact remains, that if you don’t eliminate Islam, it will eliminate you, eventually.

OldEnglish on April 6, 2014 at 12:13 PM

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

“qualm” : – Definition of qualm (n)
Bing Dictionary

qualm
[ kwaam ]

feeling of unease: a sudden feeling of uncertainty or apprehension, especially a misgiving about an action or conduct
sick feeling: a sudden pang of nausea

“qualm” – Merriam Webster Dictionary – qualm
noun \ˈkwäm also ˈkwȯm or ˈkwälm\

: a feeling of doubt or uncertainty about whether you are doing the right thing
Full Definition of QUALM
1
: a sudden attack of illness, faintness, or nausea
2
: a sudden access of usually disturbing emotion (as doubt or fear)
3
: a feeling of uneasiness about a point especially of conscience or propriety

Perhaps you were looking for ‘calm’.

thatsafactjack on April 6, 2014 at 12:14 PM

See what happens when a person speaks out against SSM.

antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 12:10 PM

Not sure what you’re getting at? Many people do. I do. Nothing much happens. If people don’t like it, I can’t honestly say I give a rats azz.

Are you saying that you don’t stand up for your beliefs? I don’t mean fight over it, just state it and let the pieces fall where they may.

Mimzey on April 6, 2014 at 12:14 PM

christianity, like every religion before it (ancient aztec relgion, greek and roman mythology, etc), like every peer religion (islam, judaism, hinduism), and like every religion after it (mormonism, scientology) is a load of horse shit make believe fairy tales to qualm the masses for what science cannot YET explain

it has no place in society imo

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

So who’s your hero: Stalin, Mao, Hitler or Pol Pot.

Because just like them you cannot stand diversity of viewpoint.

rbj on April 6, 2014 at 12:14 PM

how unchristian of you to insult me like that!

snickers…

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 12:09 PM

You are a comedy, Pea Brain. What is it with you idiot atheists that are always talking about how ‘unchristian’ we are when we speak the truth about you miscreants? In case you were not aware, Christians are sinners, and we always will be.Like most, I am weak to sin, and nitwits such as you cause me to sin much more than I normally would.

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 12:17 PM

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:47 AM

The fact that none of us knows exactly why we’re here is why I find it so funny that the angriest of the atheists basically treat non-belief as their own religion. Neither you nor I can say from a scientific perspective how the universe began, but the angry types are sure it’s not God, to the point that while they don’t know the source, they know in their bones the science is settled (just like global warming) that it’s not intelligent design of a Creator.

jon1979 on April 6, 2014 at 12:17 PM

how unchristian of you to insult me like that!

snickers…

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 12:09 PM

ah bless your heart. Sorry sweetie, that wasn’t an insult…it was a statement of fact. You know, using scientific methods like analyzing your comment history.

milky ways…

HumpBot Salvation on April 6, 2014 at 12:18 PM

In our long history, Christians have had many setbacks in addressing cultural decay and misdirection. We have our 1960s

Obama Dems are a culmination of the 1960′s. During subsequent decades the anti-liberal left has captured and ‘fundamentally transformed’ the popular culture. Politics is downstream of culture, and now we pay.

petefrt on April 6, 2014 at 12:31 PM

Anyone, of any religious faith, who retreats from the political world, is dooming themselves to persecution, if for no other reason than the oft-stated political rule that “the sqeaky wheel gets the grease”.

I believe that faith, prayer, introspection, and meditation have a necessary place in one’s religious life. But so do acts.

As Jesus once pointed out to his disciples as he talked about his upcoming death, they should carry swords. Within moments of saying that, several were produced. I can almost imagine Jesus waving his hands at this blatant disregard of his overall message of peace and yelling “No! Not so many!”

Luke 22:35-38:He said to them, “When I sent you forth without a money bag or a sack or sandals, were you in need of anything?” “No, nothing,” they replied.

He said to them, “But now one who has a money bag should take it, and likewise a sack, and one who does not have a sword should sell his cloak and buy one.

For I tell you that this scripture must be fulfilled in me, namely, ‘He was counted among the wicked’; and indeed what is written about me is coming to fulfillment.”

Then they said, “Lord, look, there are two swords here.” But he replied, “It is enough!”

unclesmrgol on April 6, 2014 at 12:32 PM

At my age, it’s probably not a problem. The fact remains, that if you don’t eliminate Islam, it will eliminate you, eventually.

OldEnglish on April 6, 2014 at 12:13 PM

Sorry OE. My Bad. That was definitely NOT directed at you.

WryTrvllr on April 6, 2014 at 12:35 PM

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

Spoken like a true progressive Jacobin.

The problem is, your ilk has clearly demonstrated the effects of your craven arrogance plus your moral, ethical, and intellectual bankruptcy so many times before….with the body count as the exclamation point.

Your own words say it so well…

it has no place in society imo

….time to learn from history and follow your own advice, Jacobin.

Athos on April 6, 2014 at 12:39 PM

In no way is this a plus.

DJ Rick on April 6, 2014 at 11:49 AM

Have to agree with that.

Any study of other countries that purged Christians from first cultural influence and then seized property and restricted religious practice culminated in a lot of death and misery for a lot of people…sometimes taking decades to begin recovery.

workingclass artist on April 6, 2014 at 12:04 PM

It seems, however, that most of the bad things that have happened to Christianity, the birth of Islam, The Great Schism, the captivity, Martin Luther and the policies of the preceding Popes that made him a necessity/certainty, have all occurred during times of relative non-persecution.

Maybe hardship and Martyrs bring out the best, in the long run.

WryTrvllr on April 6, 2014 at 12:39 PM

WryTrvllr on April 6, 2014 at 12:35 PM

No worries! Many is the time that the ‘net leads me astray. :)

OldEnglish on April 6, 2014 at 12:44 PM

Maybe hardship and Martyrs bring out the best, in the long run.

WryTrvllr on April 6, 2014 at 12:39 PM

Ever true – for both the religious and the secular, unfortunately.

OldEnglish on April 6, 2014 at 12:47 PM

Just because you believe in Phrenology and tell your kids horror stories about Global Warming…
Skywise on April 6, 2014 at 12:02 PM

Nonpartisan has no children, partly because he is very young; probably only somewhere around 17-20 years old (junior in high school, perhaps- maybe in junior college already) and also because he is apparently such a social pariah in his own peer group that girls aren’t something he has any experience with.

Some of the fiercely misogynistic remarks he’s made, particularly to RWM, make it pretty clear girls are NOT attracted to him, and his age is easily deduced when he makes remarks like

real mature response there…
nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Pro tip, nonp; Teens worry a lot about the perception of maturity; actual grown-ups, not so much.

He’s poorly educated and badly read, and his opinions are about what you’d expect from a kid who might be sort of bright, but lacks experience or judgment.

Were you around for the famous “I graduated Harvard Law” threads? Nonpartisan was actually trying to hump RWM at the time, and thought that inventing a cool curriculum vitae would put him in the magic RWM-likes-me circle.

Anyway, he’s kind of like an annoying ugly barking puppy- you would feel bad if you kicked him, but you’re not obligated to take the barking seriously.

Pless1foEngrish on April 6, 2014 at 12:48 PM

christianity, like every religion before it (ancient aztec relgion, greek and roman mythology, etc), like every peer religion (islam, judaism, hinduism), and like every religion after it (mormonism, scientology) is a load of horse shit make believe fairy tales to qualm the masses for what science cannot YET explain

it has no place in society imo

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

I’m an atheist. You’re attitude toward religion and religious institutions is as problematic as the religions you rail about.

You’re the other side of the same coin you rail against.

Which makes you a royal ass.

Walter L. Newton on April 6, 2014 at 12:48 PM

Atheists are just as religious as any Christian….only more annoying. Then again I’m a Christian so

sorrowen on April 6, 2014 at 12:53 PM

Walter L. Newton on April 6, 2014 at 12:48 PM

Clarity! well said!

OldEnglish on April 6, 2014 at 12:54 PM

I’m an atheist. Your attitude toward religion and religious institutions is as problematic as the religions you rail about.

You’re the other side of the same coin you rail against.
Walter L. Newton on April 6, 2014 at 12:48 PM

Well… as an agnostic and libertarian conservative, I agree with you 100% on that.

petefrt on April 6, 2014 at 12:56 PM

and the heart of the Gospel is the poor.”

No disrespect for the poor but that’s just flat out nonsense.

Cleombrotus on April 6, 2014 at 12:56 PM

Same sex marriage worked so well for the Romans…

sorrowen on April 6, 2014 at 12:56 PM

Maybe hardship and Martyrs bring out the best, in the long run.

WryTrvllr on April 6, 2014 at 12:39 PM

Ever true – for both the religious and the secular, unfortunately.

OldEnglish on April 6, 2014 at 12:47 PM

Indeed.

workingclass artist on April 6, 2014 at 12:57 PM

For me it’s not a problem reconciling my faith and science.
I try to live a decent life; use my faith as a moral compass to do what’s right. I see science explaining things I find exceptional every day. Let me give you an example…
Someone up thread asked what was before the “Big Bang”… I think it was the same as we have now. I was taught that the universe started as a big bang, and is now expanding. Eventually it will lose it’s momentum gravity will take over and the universe will begin to contract, slowly condensing back to the super condensed “singularity” until it’s energy is released and it explodes out into a new universe…sort of like the “heartbeat of life”, but on a much grander scale.
That to me is a miracle.

ChicagoBlues on April 6, 2014 at 1:06 PM

Same sex marriage worked so well for the Romans…

sorrowen on April 6, 2014 at 12:56 PM

The late-era Romans certainly liked their sexual perversions, but they NEVER had homosexual marriage.

No other society in all of history has ever tried to supplant or replace or equate natural marriage with homosexual coupling.

Took Old Scratch a looong time to get us here to “marriage equality”.

Pless1foEngrish on April 6, 2014 at 1:08 PM

imo

noforeskin on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

imo ?…is it just Harvard people who can’t figure out…that we don’t care about ‘their opinions’?…because their opinions are like stools…floating in the porcelain of their minds?

KOOLAID2 on April 6, 2014 at 1:13 PM

…to qualm the masses….

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

Damn! But you’re stupid.

Your parents should demand a refund from ol’ Hahvahd.

Solaratov on April 6, 2014 at 1:14 PM

The late-era Romans certainly liked their sexual perversions, but they NEVER had homosexual marriage.
No other society in all of history has ever tried to supplant or replace or equate natural marriage with homosexual coupling.
Took Old Scratch a looong time to get us here to “marriage equality”.
Pless1foEngrish on April 6, 2014 at 1:08 PM Well secular humanists like trying things that do not work like government run healthcare and the dehumanization of the unborn. To atheism is more or less illogical neither based on science or logic. I mean for all I care a atheist can scream there is no god to the Milky Way galaxy and never realize how small and insignificant he really is. On a little planet among billions of stars you say there is no god just seems absurd to me has very comical.

sorrowen on April 6, 2014 at 1:17 PM

Welcome to the leftist gulag.

Mr. Williamson is one of the best writers of today.

Schadenfreude on April 6, 2014 at 1:17 PM

it has no place in society imo

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

The religion of socialism and communism sure doesn’t, dummy.

Schadenfreude on April 6, 2014 at 1:19 PM

Not that secular humanism has a great track record Stalin was such a nice atheist chap….

sorrowen on April 6, 2014 at 1:21 PM

…to qualm the masses….

nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

Damn! But you’re stupid.

Your parents should demand a refund from ol’ Hahvahd.

Solaratov on April 6, 2014 at 1:14 PM

The Harvard School of Animal Husbandry in Kentucky does not issue refunds!

slickwillie2001 on April 6, 2014 at 1:25 PM

and the heart of the Gospel is the poor.”

No disrespect for the poor but that’s just flat out nonsense.

Cleombrotus on April 6, 2014 at 12:56 PM

Maybe he meant this?

The text of St. Matthew runs as follows:

Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (Verse 3)
Blessed are the meek: for they shall possess the land. (Verse 4)
Blessed are they who mourn: for they shall be comforted. (Verse 5)
Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice: for they shall have their fill. (Verse 6)
Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. (Verse 7)
Blessed are the clean of heart: for they shall see God. (Verse 8)
Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. (Verse 9)
Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (Verse 10)

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02371a.htm

workingclass artist on April 6, 2014 at 1:28 PM

Maybe hardship and Martyrs bring out the best, in the long run.

WryTrvllr on April 6, 2014 at 12:39 PM

Ever true – for both the religious and the secular, unfortunately.

OldEnglish on April 6, 2014 at 12:47 PM

Thanks for that…made me look to the beatitudes…which I posted.

workingclass artist on April 6, 2014 at 1:34 PM

Anyone, of any religious faith, who retreats from the political world, is dooming themselves to persecution, if for no other reason than the oft-stated political rule that “the sqeaky wheel gets the grease”.

I believe that faith, prayer, introspection, and meditation have a necessary place in one’s religious life. But so do acts.

As Jesus once pointed out to his disciples as he talked about his upcoming death, they should carry swords. Within moments of saying that, several were produced. I can almost imagine Jesus waving his hands at this blatant disregard of his overall message of peace and yelling “No! Not so many!”

Luke 22:35-38:He said to them, “When I sent you forth without a money bag or a sack or sandals, were you in need of anything?” “No, nothing,” they replied.

He said to them, “But now one who has a money bag should take it, and likewise a sack, and one who does not have a sword should sell his cloak and buy one.

For I tell you that this scripture must be fulfilled in me, namely, ‘He was counted among the wicked’; and indeed what is written about me is coming to fulfillment.”

Then they said, “Lord, look, there are two swords here.” But he replied, “It is enough!”

unclesmrgol on April 6, 2014 at 12:32 PM

Thanks for posting that.

workingclass artist on April 6, 2014 at 1:36 PM

ALL nations have economic policies — tax policy, monetary policy, regulatory policy. Where those policies create poverty and marginalization, why should Francis not speak out against them? It doesn’t make him a communist any more than arguing for laissez-faire policies make conservatives anarchists.

Ed Morrissey on April 6, 2014 at 11:11 AM

But Francis specifically used the term “trickle down”. I think everyone is in agreement with what that means — that every person, be they rich or poor, is able to keep all but a small portion of the work of their hands.

For liberals, that means that the rich are free to ignore the poor, and that, in their minds, simply cannot work. But the solution, for the liberal, is a type of government which takes money from the rich to care for the poor, and I believe that kind of activity is what Pope Francis was advocating.

He was certainly not talking about a government which rewards the well connected with the wealth of others — that is NOT what “trickle down” means. That’s “pay for play” or “corruption” or any of a number of other terms which describe confiscation or condemnation of private property for the use of government officials.

We can see the results in Venezuela, and to a lesser extent, here in the United States. What is happening to our healthcare now, and are the poor and destitute being better taken care of as we are forced to pay taxes for that which is abhorrant to any true Christian?

We throw money at schools, believing that to be the best way to improve education for the poor, and we find that even though we’ve doubled the outlay since 1970 in terms of 1970′s dollars, we’ve not seen a smidgen of commensurate improvement in graduation rates or test scores.

We feel that all children should be well cared for, so the government taxes the wealthy and then gives billions of dollars of the booty to single parents — and the result is far more single parents than ever before, with all of the problems single parenthood brings to said parent’s economic livelihood, and to their childrens’ prospects for graduating from high school and avoiding a life of crime. Indeed, young black female teenagers now view such pregnancies as a way out from under their parents’ restrictive rules. Then they discover that they have bound themselves to a servitude to the state — in which the state demands that no men be in their lives as a condition of continued payment of benefits…

We think everyone should have a home, so the government takes still more money and makes it available for 100% loans, which then drive up real estate values so much that the property taxes go hyperbolic and our children cannot afford to buy the same class of house that we were able to buy when we were their age.

Indeed, Pope Frances’ appeal to government, as opposed to individuals, is a real problem for me. I see two Commandments that are violated each time poor voters choose to tax their richer peers for their own gain, and I see Frances, whether he thinks so or not, as advocating their violation.

When you rely on a Caesar who is capable of fulfilling your every wish, don’t cry when he turns on you and denies you everything worthwhile you believe should be yours or allowed to you.

Pope Frances is now seeing that; I do not believe that the meeting between him and Mr. Obama went well.

unclesmrgol on April 6, 2014 at 1:39 PM

Thanks for posting that.

workingclass artist on April 6, 2014 at 1:36 PM

You are welcome, but I merely posted something in Scripture. What does make it significant is that this passage is definitely related to Easter.

unclesmrgol on April 6, 2014 at 1:42 PM

Maybe he meant this?

The text of St. Matthew runs as follows:

Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (Verse 3)

workingclass artist on April 6, 2014 at 1:28 PM

No. He (The Pope, not Jesus) meant the economically poor. That is clear from the context of his remarks and his other statements along these lines. How the leader of the world’s largest nominally Christian denomination can be so Biblically illiterate is astounding, He’s like the Barak Hussein Obama of Christendom, popular because he occupies a position and for no other reason.

Look, let me put it to you this way:

Take the rich young ruler in Mark 10 to whom Jesus says to “sell all that you have and give it to the poor” right? Sounds like what Francis is talking about, right?

Well, what’s he supposed to do for the poor now that HE’S ONE OF THEM?

The answer is what follows and is the REAL “heart of the Gospel”,

“and come, follow me”.

THAT is the heart of the Gospel.

This guy is diluting the real Gospel message with his class envy nonsense.

Cleombrotus on April 6, 2014 at 1:45 PM

Ed -

I had hopes reading the headline. Then, in the first paragraph you wrote MATT LEWIS and THE WEEK, two of the biggest jokes going, and my hopes were immediately dashed.

bw222 on April 6, 2014 at 1:48 PM

Main Session #1 – David Miller

See more: g3conference.com/?page_id=639

Murphy9 on April 6, 2014 at 1:51 PM

Same sex marriage worked so well for the Romans…

sorrowen on April 6, 2014 at 12:56 PM

The Romans did not have same sex marriage — not even in the later Empire.

The way Romans dealt with homosexuality was, by law, this:

a) No citizen was permitted to assume the inferior position in a homosexual coupling. To do so was punishable by death.
b) If a citizen were to assume the superior position in a homosexual coupling, the other partner must be either a slave or a non-citizen. Such liasons are permissable; they did not break the law.

Indeed, the citizen male was obligated to libertas — to keey his body healthy and free from abuse, including sexual abuse. Included in that concept was the use of one’s anus as a sexual receptical.

There were men who specialized in the procurement of female slaves for the heterosexual prostitution business, and others who specialized in the procurement of male slaves for the homosexual prostitution business. These were utilized by the lower classes who could not afford the purchase of a personal sexual slave.

c) No female citizen was permitted a sexual relationship other than with her male husband. The punishment for doing so was death — either at the hands of her father, or the state.

So it was the slave who bore the ignomy of forced sexuality in Rome.

unclesmrgol on April 6, 2014 at 2:00 PM

Take the rich young ruler in Mark 10 to whom Jesus says to “sell all that you have and give it to the poor” right? Sounds like what Francis is talking about, right?

Cleombrotus on April 6, 2014 at 1:45 PM

No, Francis is talking about living the Gospel — and Jesus is describing what must be done for that poor young man to achieve salvation. And the start is to make himself destitute, and the second is to trust in the Lord. Indeed, that is why many Catholics take vows of poverty and go live among the poor. My favorite parish priest, Monsignor Holland, died destitute — he had a cross on his wall and a bible on his table, and some bed linens on his bed, his priestly garb, and that was that with regard to what he owned.

Like you, I disagree with Frances’ statement of means for living scripture, which goes against everything Frances had to deal with as an archbishop in Argentina. Indeed, my suspicion was that had Frances remained a prelate in Argentina, he would now be being considered for martyr saint-dom. He opposed the Argentinian government in every way in which it attempted to deny the teachings of the Church.

Francis’ problem is that he believes government ultimately to be better than the most corrupt of the richest classes, when nothing could be further from the truth — again, witness Venezuela, in which the poor are showing all of the propensity of the richest bribers in terms of governance.

Francis was the bishop of the poor in his country, and witnessed which Argentinians profited from government. Unfortunately, he is poltically naive — he does not realize what Henry David Thoreau did — which is that a powerful government can be bent to the will of powerful men. That is why we conservatives want a weak government, if at all possible.

unclesmrgol on April 6, 2014 at 2:18 PM

SOME atheism is like that. Then there are the other atheists who seek to push all religious out of politics, the public square, and public life. Those are the religious atheists. Just because they don’t believe in any higher power doesn’t mean that they aren’t fanatics just the same.

melle1228 on April 6, 2014 at 12:35 PM

That is just silly. Seeking to keep religion a private matter and not having it imposed on others through the mechanism of government does not transform atheism in to a religion. Can one be fanatical about one purging faith from public life? Sure. But fanaticism is not religion.

MJBrutus on April 6, 2014 at 2:30 PM

gryphon202 on April 6, 2014 at 11:04 AM
ALL nations have economic policies — tax policy, monetary policy, regulatory policy. Where those policies create poverty and marginalization, why should Francis not speak out against them? It doesn’t make him a communist any more than arguing for laissez-faire policies make conservatives anarchists.

Ed Morrissey on April 6, 2014 at 11:11 AM

Ed, you utterly missed his point. If one observes that what Bergoglio is advocating is government intervention. In simple terms, he wants government to steal from some to give to others.

How can we practice our faith after having been relegated to the fringes to the extent that any personal opposition to SSM will leave us destitute?
antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 11:51 AM

Read Hebrews 11 sometime. The people that hate Christ certainly want to make sure we are destitute so we can’t support gospel outreach, and they don’t want us decrying societies sinful predilections.

According to the Bible, we are admonished to give ‘First Fruits’ to the Lord in the form of our tithe. And 10% was commanded. If you took the time to actually read the Bible instead of simply mocking it and those of us who believe in it as the Word of God, you might not be such a nasty, repulsive human being.
bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 11:53 AM

My sense is that governments are NOT mandated to care for the poor and the needy. That is the province of the church, and privately funded charities. That is precisely why we are commanded to tithe at a rate of 10%. Government has nothing to do with it.
bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 11:27 AM

The tithe was not for charity, nor was it “first fruits.” It was to support what was part of the government of Israel, the Temple the Priesthood and Temple Levites. In that regard, it was actually a form of tax. The NT does not teach tithing at all.

christianity, like every religion before it (ancient aztec relgion, greek and roman mythology, etc), like every peer religion (islam, judaism, hinduism), and like every religion after it (mormonism, scientology) is a load of horse shit make believe fairy tales to qualm the masses for what science cannot YET explain
it has no place in society imo
nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

real mature response there…keep your head in the sand
ignorance is bliss after all
parents tell children there is a santa claus and they believe it
churches tell men there is a god and they believe it
nonpartisan on April 6, 2014 at 11:53 AM

I guess every website frequented by Conservatives has to bear its trollish cross. The only question I have is why leftist idiots are so uniform in their talking points? Creativity is not one of their strong suits and they are all uniformly ignoramuses.

How can we practice our faith after having been relegated to the fringes to the extent that any personal opposition to SSM will leave us destitute?
antifederalist on April 6, 2014 at 11:51 AM

By practicing your faith?
Mimzey on April 6, 2014 at 12:08 PM

Gospel outreach is one of the ways we practice our faith and that includes warning people of the consequences of their sin. The satanic left (I know, I’m being redundant) wants to do all they can, up to and including, eventually, killing us, to prevent us from following Christ. It has always been thus.

Quartermaster on April 6, 2014 at 2:33 PM

The answer is what follows and is the REAL “heart of the Gospel”,

“and come, follow me”.

THAT is the heart of the Gospel.

Cleombrotus on April 6, 2014 at 1:45 PM

^ A thousand times this.

With regard to the original post, most of my fellow Christians that I know are not under any illusions that the world will become increasingly hostile to our presence and the Gospel. It’s pretty well established in the Word that we lose the culture war this side of eternity. The Great Commission was not to go out and establish Christian society and government so that all can live peacefully and righteously, it was to go and make disciples out of every nation.

It’s great that Christianity has had such a net profound, positive impact on the world, but we all need to be reminded that it is fleeting, and that our treasures are laid up in heaven. It is not surprising to me at all that society is starting to turn against Christian virtues. The only thing that surprises me is how fast it is happening.

Othniel on April 6, 2014 at 2:43 PM

It seems, however, that most of the bad things that have happened to Christianity, the birth of Islam, The Great Schism, the captivity, Martin Luther and the policies of the preceding Popes that made him a necessity/certainty, have all occurred during times of relative non-persecution.

You make a very good point and I agree with it. Times are different now however. What we are dealing with now isnt a conflict between people of faith its a a battle between people of faith and militant secularism.

DJ Rick on April 6, 2014 at 2:45 PM

The tithe was not for charity, nor was it “first fruits.” It was to support what was part of the government of Israel, the Temple the Priesthood and Temple Levites. In that regard, it was actually a form of tax. The NT does not teach tithing at all.

Quartermaster on April 6, 2014 at 2:33 PM

We are both correct, Quartermaster. The linked is a very brief read that explains tithing… Worth a read…

http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionaries/bakers-evangelical-dictionary/tithe-tithing.html

bimmcorp on April 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM

One of the many fundamental flaws of therapeutic progressivism is its certitude.

That young (generally unmarried and childless) people today support SSM is no indicator they will continue to do so. It is tantamount to saying the next president must be able to point to a high score on Guitar Hero as a qualification.

The chickens have already come home to roost on the marriage gap. Liberals — social liberals — will need to explain why wrenching the heart out of the moral universe was a good idea when all it does is breed poverty, stupidity, and failure.

StubbleSpark on April 6, 2014 at 2:57 PM

Not entirely an unfair point…

Ed Morrissey on April 6, 2014 at 11:18 AM

A point in which I don’t think you get. At all.

You trivialize Christian values (as you just did AGAIN in your comment), and then have the nerve to tell us to roll over and be ok to live in a immoral cess-pool of a nation. To add insult to injury, you use the Bible to tell us to roll over. Do you really want Russia to become the defenders of righteousness and morality?

If you get to throw Bible verses around, allow me a few as well:

“Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” -Galatians 5:19-21

“Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.” -Proverbs 14:34

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” -Isaiah 5:20

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” -John Adams

“[O]nly a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” -Benjamin Franklin

“Religion and morality are the essential pillars of civil society.” -George Washington

“Whereas true religion and good morals are the only solid foundations of public liberty and happiness… it is hereby earnestly recommended to the several States to take the most effectual measures for the encouragement thereof.” -Continental Congress, 1778

BigGator5 on April 6, 2014 at 3:06 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3