I have been having discussions lately that have caused me to wonder how to determine righteous actions. There are scriptures to back up the various elements of this struggle. I don't know how many people actually read my blog these days but I invite any and all comments and opinions. God has promised that if we serve Him, he will protect this country. He promised a similar thing to the children of Israel but they "went a-whoring" after "other gods". This country was established by men who believed in God and assumed that, although the government would never establish a religion, it would also not prohibit religion. Is that a fair statement? This country is not only a land of freedom because God wanted it so, but also by the laws of the land, written by men. At what point are we jeopardizing God's protection in allowing individual freedoms? There are people who say they don't believe a human being is a separate entity until they can survive outside of the womb. With medical intervention, that has gotten pretty early but certainly not as soon as conception. I believe abortion is wrong, except possibly in instances of serious endangerment to the mother or rape. I would not want to support a public policy to allow people who would have abortions as a method of "birth control". Is that infringing on an individual's right according to the laws of the land? I know for certain that God would not want any of His children to agree to it in that way. But how do we "separate" morality from worldly politics? Can I maintain my moral standards if I say something like, "I would never do that or feel that it is right for others to do it but I would not want a law prohibiting it"...? What about homosexuality? I believe God created two genders because they are supposed to be able to mate, create children, and support each other emotionally, financially, and morally. Do I have the "right" to prohibit someone else from making what I consider an immoral choice if it doesn't have a direct negative affect, other than offending my moral sense? If I try to take a stance in opposition to gay marriage, I am labelled a bigot. Do I not have a right to find something that is against my moral standards to be offensive? I would not want to find people having intercourse whenever or wherever they want, whether or not they are both "consenting adults". Do I have a right to believe in obscenity laws? I am grateful that someone several years ago set up a rating system for movies. The standards seem to be slipping a bit but there is still a warning available to those who would find elements of an R-rated movie offensive so they can avoid it. I guess people justify car seatbelt laws by the cost of insurance going up for everyone when people get more injured than they might have had they been wearing a seat belt. There isn't really anything like insurance costs for immoral behavior- using foul language, sexual behavior, lying to people if it doesn't happen to involve government issues or money. I would venture to say that the cost is there but not easily measured. I think the cost is the quality of society. I think that when people hold a higher moral standard, the society prospers in many ways. There is something deep inside human beings that answers to a higher call. When people avoid cursing, they not only seem more intelligent, but they act more pleasant to others. When people keep sex within boundaries of privacy between a married man and wife, society better comprehends and can embrace the relationship. The family is a stable element of the larger society. When people honor and respect others by having integrity, society benefits.
What do you think?
