God is a preserver of life – not a restrictor

“But he that sins
against me, wrongs his own soul; all that hate me love
death” Proverbs 8:36.

I don’t know what’s
worse – a non-Christian view and attitude that says,
“I don’t won’t to be a Christian because God
will cramp my style,” OR the Christian half-tale that says,
“God is against everything - He doesn’t allow this
and doesn’t like that…” And so we draw
battle-lines in the sand and everyone loses – because
no-one listens.

In the light of recent global
debate around deregulating laws which ‘protect the nuclear
family’ (NZ law reforms, USA and Canadian law reforms,
United Nations Commission on Human Rights…), same-sex
couples seem to have been provided additional rights and
freedoms, but, without knowing it, Governments are assisting
homosexuals to step further away from real freedom - God’s
protection and blessing.

Enter the Christian lobby who mean
well, have the correct underlying principle but often the wrong
presentation – sometimes a result of hard-nosed misplaced
piety, often because the media portrays us in such a light.

I am a believer in fixing ones own
backyard before setting out to criticise the play-area of
another. I find it fascinating that sin continues to be
categorised and labelled into bad, worse and sick. The world does
it – and Institutionalised Christianity does it more.
Institutionalised Christians rate sin, and in so doing
unwittingly find absolution from their own personal ‘little
sins’, with an abundance of opportunities to point the
finger at those who are ‘committing the bigger
ones.’

Scripturally – sin
separates us from God, not select sins! Relationship Christians
understand this thought.

First and foremost, as a parent,
when I put seeming restrictions on my children eg. “No you
can’t have a third plate of ice cream”, my
restriction is not just for the fun of being a dictating force
over them, BUT serves to ‘preserve the right to enjoy food
intake long-term.’ I like to think that my older
mind provides a little more gravity and balance (wisdom) than a
child’s mind. Freedoms and liberties must be tied to
responsibility – but children think only of now,
and what they feel, rather than what will preserve and
protect long term. In much the same way, all of God’s
laws serve to preserve our ability to live successful and to
prosper long term (prosperity is a loaded term – I use it
in terms of ‘growth’ in every area of life). There
can be no freedom – without law! The law is the
establishment and acceptance of responsibility. Take away the
concept of God and introduce a myth called evolution and you have
the foundations of a society who can no longer apply any
‘laws of responsibility.’ We are seeing this at work
today in the law reforms around sexual orientation.

Dean Sherman (Christian speaker)
coined the phrase “God’s logical limits”, and
that’s exactly what they are: logical limits which
preserve the ability to enjoy long-term.

We teach our children
“Don’t have sex outside of a marriage
covenant.” Why? So that we can enjoy restricting them? No!
Because their small minds cannot even begin to comprehend the
pain that most often results (spiritually and emotionally) when
couples perform a spiritual/emotional/natural act outside of
God’s logical limits. Apparently we have matured
“beyond the need for God’s logical limits,”
I’m often told. The age of reason is fine with me –
but surely reason is screaming loudly enough for us to hear that
the most ‘liberated of all people in the history of
humanity’ – are certainly no happier! Research and
hard evidence shows that the most pampered people of all time in
terms of ‘freedom to choose’ are also the saddest.
The fact is we don’t even want reason.

US Supreme Court

In the USA, the Supreme Court has
dramatically reversed rulings made in 1986 around the legal
sexual conduct of homosexuals. The changes to the legislation
were brought about following a law suit by two Houston men who
were prosecuted for having sex in their home.

“The Supreme Court issued a
sweeping declaration of constitutional liberty for gay men and
lesbians today, overruling a Texas sodomy law in the broadest
possible terms and effectively apologizing for a contrary 1986
decision that the majority said ''demeans the lives of homosexual
persons.'' The vote was 6 to 3” New York Times
26.07.03.

As could be expected, following
the Supreme Court rulings celebrations swept across the Americas
as people who are ignorant of God’s law, set out to
establish their own – ‘everybody doing that which is
right in their own eyes.’ The problem as always: it
won’t stop here, those bent on living without boundaries or
restrictions are already vowing to push further – for same
sex marriages and much more, including the possibility of
criminalising any criticism of homosexuality.

I am not a fatalist – I
believe we can ‘impact change’ in accordance with
God’s purpose, but I’m also a realist! When I see
people following the course of this world – fulfilling the
lustful desires of their flesh and mind, how can I be shocked?
They do not know God; this is a career path according to
Ephesians 2:1-3. Jesus stood against sin because He loved –
and knew people were hurting themselves. Oh for the same heart
– maybe then our message would penetrate hard cynical
hearts.

When I see in Scripture ‘As
it was in the days of Noah, and Lot’ I add 1+2 and find
that what we are currently witnessing does not get better, it
gets worse. Imagine please the day it becomes a criminal act to
speak against homosexuality, or any other biblically-illogical
preference people may hold to. It will come! – And when it
does, our message will not be changed (if it is the correct one).
God loves, accepts and forgives all who come to Him with their
broken, tattered lives. God’s purpose is not that of
restriction, He actually encourages the exact opposite – He
is a fulfiller! Homosexuality whether sanctioned by local
Government laws or not - is unacceptable by God’s law and
that is the issue. For believers in God’s law to be shocked
or surprised by the lack of respect ‘others have for
God’s law’ is in my view very strange.

The social implications around
‘non-discrimination of sexual orientation’ are huge
as the Philadelphia chapter of the Boys Scouts of America has
discovered.

“After two years of
meetings, civic leaders and Boy Scout executives here drafted a
policy saying that the local scout council would not discriminate
against gays. The goal was to forge a quiet compromise that would
satisfy all parties: corporations and foundations that had
withdrawn their support because of the national organization's
ban on gays, gay rights advocates and the national scouting
leadership. But instead, the local scouting council, serving more
than 87,000 boys, is under siege. First its computers were jammed
by thousands of e-mail messages from religious conservatives
furious over the non-discrimination policy. Then, under pressure
from the national leadership, the local council withdrew the
policy…the organization is in turmoil over the question of
whether gay men are appropriate role models as scout leaders.
Supporters of the ban on gays say the Scouts need to stand up for
core values.”

“…Critics of the
policy say the Scouts, a long-cherished American institution, are
betraying their core values of tolerance and
inclusion.”

“With more than three
million young members, scouting is no longer just troops of
suburban boys building campfires in the woods under the watchful
eye of the parents who volunteer as scout leaders. For tens of
thousands of boys in the inner cities scouting offers not only
rare access to the outdoors, but an alternative to the gangs and
drugs that have devastated their neighbourhoods. Scouting
provides male guidance in neighbourhoods where men are often
absent. It is these scouts who are the biggest casualties in the
battle over gay rights, said Mr. Cohen. Suburban troops rely on
parents who volunteer their time and money. But in the inner
city, where volunteers and money are scarce, troops depend on
paid leaders and corporate donations.”

Not only did the scouts lose huge
amounts of corporate backing over the Scouts ban on gay’s
policy, at least one high profile member Steven Spielberg (an
Eagle scout) quit the Scout advisory board in protest.

“Critics of the ban on gays
say the national council holds to it in deference to the
religious conservatives, particularly those in the Mormon Church,
who dominate scouting. The Mormons charter more than 26,000 Boy
Scout and Cub Scout troops, Mr. Shields said — more than
any group in the country. They provide not only a guaranteed
supply of young members — more than 410,000 at last count
— but also enormous financial support. The position of the
Roman Catholic Church, which charters 17,000 troops with 345,000
members, is clear. Reversing the ban on gays could cost the
Scouts hundreds of thousands of members, by some estimates”
New York Times 03.07.03.

The President of the United States
has made it clear that he believes marriage is an institution
between a man and a woman but would not go so far as to agree to
make a constitutional amendment which would effectively ban same
sex marriages. The proposed amendment, promoted by a non-profit,
non-partisan group called the Alliance for Marriage defines
marriage as a union between a man and a woman and would "protect
the definition of marriage from judicial or legislative
redefinition," said Matt Daniels, the group's president.

“Republicans have not
forgotten that it was President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, who
signed the Defence of Marriage Act into law, which says the
federal government may not recognize a gay union that is
sanctioned by a state.”