Atheists, Agonstics And Christians, Oh My

In linking this bit about a D-list comedienne, Allah at Hot Air seems to enjoy an on going fencing match with some of that site's more religious readers. I don't have an opinion on that one way or the other, but as one of those Christians who is sometimes insulted by other Christians when they ask if I'm a "real Christian" - read evangelical, I've been thinking about this topic because of some email I recently received - in part:

I am now a full-time representative of the Lighted Candle Society.

Founded by Ed Meese and John Harmer, the Lighted Candle Society has one focus: to support civil litigation against the pornography industry. 

We recently launched our own blog: FamilyFragments.com to discuss these issues that are destroying the family.  Ed Meese and Judith Reisman, both veteran warriors of the culture wars, will be ongoing contributors to the website.

Today we are launching a special website to capture the stories, the successes and tragedies, that women experience across the country and around the world battling the forces of pornography in their own homes.

At HerStoryLives.com, individuals can read the stories of women who have been overwrought (and sometimes have overcome) the challenges of pornography in their lives.

You can also submit your own story to the website anonymously to demonstrate to other women that they are not alone.

There's plenty of tension on the Right when it comes to religion and values, etc. Christian or not, many with more libertarian leanings are wary of the so-called Christian Right. For me, religion is a private issue. I don't inject it into my politics, nor do I want people making purely religious-based laws, but at the same time I can respect the works of good people, as per above, who are actively fighting the culture war in this country. Lord knows we need it if we're to preserve any sense of common decency at all.

And as for this related bit, which I also just happened to read today - hell, maybe church-goin' ain't such a bad idea! ; )

For evangelicals who want to pair up with others of the same faith but don't manage to do so in their early 20s, trouble lies ahead, particularly for women. Evangelical churches now typically have a 60-40 split between women and men, which means that there are many more single evangelical women out there than their male counterparts. As Ms. Cockrel explains, "I have friends who wanted to marry a Christian guy, are still single, and are more and more open to dating non-Christians as they get older. They're tired of waiting."

Comments

[Phoenix]

"tired of waiting" by the Kinks. haw haw..

[bud]

Although I agree that popular culture has "gone too far", I can't support anything that Ed Meese is involved in. Remember, he's the guy who set up a scientific panel to tell him how bad porn was, and then fired the researchers and suppressed the findings when it didn't come out the way he wanted. He's the poster child for the meme that "Republicans supress real science at the behest of the Religious Right" and this meme costs support for even reasonable proposals, from "Global Warming" to WOT Psych-ops.

[Phoenix]

What is the 'challenge of pornography'?

Isn't it sort of 'yes' or 'no'?

I have my porn listed under "Bank stuff" on my computer. I check my balance occasionally but not often. Boring junk.

[Phoenix]

How did Meese suppress WOT psych-ops? hunh?

What's reasonable about support for global warming?

[bloodrage bob]

so, bud - if you're all anti-meese because he tried to suppress information he didn't like ....

would you care to comment on how the global-warming goons did exactly that to bjorn lomborg when he reported honestly on *their* various scams? after all, lomborg is the poster child for the meme that "liberals suppress real science at the behest of their statist masters", is he not?

[steve poling]

I don't think it is appropriate to question whether you are a "real Christian" on the basis of your public policy positions. One's Christianity is really decided by whether God thinks you are one or not. Everything follows from that. (Why, yes. I am a Calvinist, thank you.)

Some public policy positions such as abortion seem to have very clear direction from Scripture. If you think the fetus is a child, there's a commandment about killing. Similarly, one can link pornography and the commandment about adultery.

However, in both cases, I think it is important to remember that the 10 Commandments are Special Revelation that many citizens of our nation do not believe in. I think it is more proper to argue one's public policy positions upon more-general ideas. E.g. I'm pro-life because it is a civil rights issue, protecting the civil rights of the unborn. I have a friend who served in the Michigan state house and he was a cobelligerant with radical feminists where pornography was concerned.

I believe that the Bible should serve to define my character and tell me what I can and cannot do. But when debating political policy issues, I keep my Bible closed. Six years ago, I was listening to an evangelical theologian on WJR radio. He was asked about Jerry Falwell & Pat Robertson's statements about 9/11 being God's judgment on the USA. His reply did not quote the Bible, but it did quote Abraham Lincoln's 2nd Inaugural Address.

In 21st century America, it is wiser to goto the appendix of C.S. Lewis "The Abolition Of Man" and find in what he called the Tao those trans-cultural moral precepts which agree with our own, then argue a sort of "moral realism" those laws that govern society much like F=ma governs Newtonian Mechanics.

[Bill]

Hi:

It's completely ridiculous to say that 'For me, religion is a private issue. I don't inject it into my politics, nor do I want people making purely religious-based laws', and to infer that you therefore are free of religious-based thinking. Don't you see that to pursue such a course, IS religious thinking? People on both sides of the aisle are constantly making decisions based on their beliefs. Whether your beliefs are secular, agnostic, atheist - you are making decisions based on them. The folly is when politicians single out people of faith and suggest that their views are not allowed because they are informed by faith. This is one of the last intolerances tolerated.

[Dan Riehl]

"to infer that you therefore are free of religious-based thinking"

I didn't claim to be so. One's religious beliefs can inform one's opinions without those beliefs being directly injected into the political discussion and subsequent argument. I can be against abortion and take that stand without basing my reasoning on religious grounds.