As anyone should easily be able to tell from my writings, I think that marriage is defined by tradition, by history, and by Scripture and is, therefore, not inclusive of the concept of "same-sex". You should also be quite aware that I believe that sexual relations outside of marriage -- which would (based clearly on that first notion) necessarily include all sexual relations between people of the same gender -- are sinful. I believe that human life is of great value and terminating it just because it hasn't reached open air yet is evil. I believe, in other words, many things that today are unpopular and offensive.
A very common response to my beliefs is this simple question: "What difference is it to you?" You understand how that goes. "What difference would it make to you if we marry?" or "How does it hurt you if we have sex?" or "How does it affect you if women have a procedure you don't like?" That sort of thing.
The first response I would have, of course, is to try to answer the question, but there is, behind the question, something deeply disturbing to me. And, I think, something that gets to the very core of the problem. Here's the question: "How does it hurt you?" What is the inference of the question? It is plain. "The only concern you need to have is your own welfare. If the things that other people are doing hurt you, then you might be concerned. If not, don't be." It is, quite obviously, a form of "Mind your own business", I understand, but it is also an indication of a serious deficiency.
Here's the idea. "The only thing that should concern you is you." Why? "Because the only thing that concerns me is me." Right? Well, maybe not, but it isn't an irrational conclusion nor is it likely far off. It isn't likely concious, but it is likely the underlying mode of thinking. The notion that I might be concerned about your behavior, views, lifestyle, choices, and the like because I care about you seems completely foreign.
This doesn't work in other applications, does it? "Hey, I'm going to walk down this path that I don't know has a sudden cliff at the end but you do, but since it won't make any difference to you -- you're not walking down this path -- you shouldn't care." "Look, I'm planning on swallowing this tasty fluid that you know to be poison and I don't, but since you're not drinking it, it won't matter to you, right?" Worse, if I do care and do wish to warn my companion on the road of life that the path he's taking can kill him or the drink she's planning to take could kill her, I'm not only "nosey", I'm a "hater". "What difference is it to you?"
What difference is it to me? I care, that's what difference it is. I am commanded to love my neighbor. That requires that I want the very best for my neighbor. So if my neighbor suffers, so do I. If my neighbor suffers unawares, it doesn't make it any better for me. If I know there is delayed consequences, it hurts me. Because I care. What difference does it make to me? That's what difference. Not to my life. Not to my well-being. Not to my comfort. Not to my choices, lifestyle, decisions, views. But it hurts me to have the people I care about suffer, and if I know that's certain, I would like to help them to avoid it.
Ultimately, of course, avoiding this sin or that is only going to provide temporary remedies. Making a more moral neighbor only makes a briefly happier neighbor. The only way to really provide a permanent difference for my neighbor is to introduce him or her to Christ. In the former -- worldly morality -- there is a short term gain with ultimate loss. In the latter, there is eternal life. That, then, would be my ultimate aim. Of course, that still gets me labeled as "arrogant" and "offensive" for suggesting that they need Christ. "What difference is it to you?" I care, that's what. So Christians will continue to bear the epithets of "homophobe" and "hater" and "narrowminded" and "religious crackpot" not because it makes us feel better, but because we have God within us to will and to do His good pleasure, including loving our neighbors. That's the difference.
3 comments:
Exactly. I often hear the alternate question, "Who are you to tell me how to live/what to do/what's right or wrong?" My answer is, "I'm a fellow human being/fellow Christian/friend who cares enough to point out the problem/consequence/law of God."
Yes, indeed, to your answer.
Interestingly, while they're demanding "Who are you to tell me how to live/what to do/what's right or wrong?", they're requiring that you agree with them on what's right or wrong. I'm tempted to answer, "I'll tell you when you tell me who you are to tell me what's right or wrong."
That coincides with your newer post. Turning the tables is a good thing, as it forces the other side to defend their position for a change.
Post a Comment