I’ve pondered over this dilemma before. It goes something like this:
As a Christian, I firmly believe that homosexuality is not according to God’s will (for reasoning why, see this post). I also firmly believe that permitting it would be akin to promoting it, in that people will see it as permissibe and be influenced by those who practise it.
Yet if I were in charge of legislation, by outlawing homosexuality, wouldn’t I be imposing my beliefs on others who do not share my worldview? Compare if I were to make it compulsory to attend church or wear a cross. Wouldn’t that be forcing people to ‘convert’ against their will?
But then I thought deeper, and realized: If I believe firmly about a position, such as homosexuality, yet I do not press forward by translating my beliefs into action… What does that say about the strength of my convictions?
Compare if it were on matters of the economy. If I claim to be a proponent of free trade, but I don’t dare promote laws encouraging free trade because it would ‘infringe on the differing viewpoints of the socialists and protectionists’ – doesn’t this show me up as not truly believing that free trade is the best economic model for the nation?
If I really want what’s best for the nation and I really believe that free trade is what’s best for the nation, I ought to be promoting it as a strong leader. I ought to believe that my way is best, even if others do not agree with my views. I ought to strive to legislate against socialized and centralized economic models, believing them to be disastrous for the economy. To do anything less would be gross irresponsibility and might lead to the collapse of the nation.
Similarly, if I believe that homosexuality is detrimental to the moral fabric of the nation, shouldn’t I then be pushing against it no matter what others may think?
Tags: Christian law, Christianity, Christianity gay, Christianity homosexuality, separation of church and state, thoecracy
October 15, 08 at 10:40 pm
If a legislative leader pushes for legislation that abandons a Christian principle, is that leader no longer a Christian?
October 20, 08 at 3:32 pm
Interesting way of putting it with an economic analogy but I always believe in separation of church & state even as a christian. If a state becomes a theocracy like Iran those muppets can stay in power in the name of god but were not democratically elected by the people…..I have a problem with that.
October 27, 08 at 4:03 pm
It is definitely immoral to impose the laws.
December 28, 08 at 11:15 pm
what if everyone has their own opinions and beliefs?what would happen then if eveyone impose their own belief on everyone else?
or would u like it if Malaysia ‘forces’ u to believe in Islam since it’s the official religion in d country?
think about it..
December 29, 08 at 9:26 am
But you forget the second part of my post… We in Malaysia are currently being ‘forced’ to adopt capitalism, democracy, a parliamentary system, etc… What about all the socialists, communists, anarchists and so on? Our leaders are imposing their ‘opinions and beliefs’ that capitalism and democracy are the best system for the country’s citizens as a whole.