Thursday, March 19, 2009

God and Government, part 2

Last week, I examined two political philosophies that have influenced my thinking. I discussed both the merits and deficiencies libertarianism and theonomism. Now I will critique modern conservatism in light of the conclusions that I arrived at in my last post.

Polygamy, Homosexuality, and Adultery

The combination of three positions which most mainstream conservatives hold to on these issues seems to fly in the face of the Scriptures. In the Old Testament, adulterers and homosexuals were stoned to death. But men could marry as many women as they wanted to. But our entire culture (not just mainstream conservatives) seems to have the opposite view. We think that adultery (except prostitution) and homosexuality should not be criminalized at all, but it should be illegal for a man to marry more than one wife. Think about it. A man can commit adultery with 100 married women and receive absolutely no punishment by civil government at all. A man can legally have homosexual relationships without limit. But a man can’t have loving, responsible, marriage relationships with two women at the same time even though Abraham, Jacob, and David were allowed to.

Some talk show hosts’ arguments against homosexual marriage just don’t make any sense. They say, “If we have (government sanctioned) homosexual marriage today, then tomorrow we will have polygamy.” I can’t believe that anyone is actually persuaded by such an argument. I am against government sanctioned gay “marriage” because homosexuality is sinful. It has nothing to do with this straw-man argument about polygamy. Any serious student of the Bible can easily see that gay “marriage” is much worse than polygamy. If you are going to argue against something, argue the REAL reason that you’re against it, not some argument that you think would appeal someone else with lower moral standards. It seems unlikely that polygamy would catch on in this country even if it were legalized. But even if it did, who cares?

Did God change his mind about what is acceptable, or is this only cultural change?

When is Theft Theft?

There is some confusion about the commandment “Do Not Steal” in modern western culture. If take something that belongs to someone else on your own, you are often prosecuted for it. But if you support legislation which requires someone to give up their property so that you can have it, then that’s just politics. Governing authorities are entitled to just compensation for their services. We should “give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”. But we should not have to give to AIG what they have no right to. But it’s not just the financial institutions that are stealing and bailouts are the only way that money is being stolen from the taxpayer. Any corporate subsidy, any mandatory government program (social security, healthcare, welfare, public schooling, or whatever), or any devaluing of currency is theft. Taxpayer’s money should only be used for that which is necessary to apprehend, prosecute, and sentence those who commit acts of wickedness as per Romans 13:1-6 and 1 Peter 2:14 or for services which the taxpayer voluntarily pays taxes for only if they freely choose to receive those services.


We need a new paradigm for Christian statesmanship. The needed paradigm is to actually follow what the Bible says and take on a more Christ-like mindset. We need to unlearn what our culture has taught us.

1 comment:

John Lofton, Recovering Republican said...

Forget, please, "conservatism." It has been, operationally, de facto, Godless and therefore irrelevant. Secular conservatism will not defeat secular liberalism because to God both are two atheistic peas-in-a-pod and thus predestined to failure. As Stonewall Jackson's Chief of Staff R.L. Dabney said of such a humanistic belief more than 100 years ago:

"[Secular conservatism] is a party which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today .one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution; to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. This pretended salt bath utterly lost its savor: wherewith shall it be salted? Its impotency is not hard, indeed, to explain. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It intends to risk nothing serious for the sake of the truth."

Our country is collapsing because we have turned our back on God (Psalm 9:17) and refused to kiss His Son (Psalm 2).

John Lofton, Editor,
Recovering Republican

PS – And “Mr. Worldly Wiseman” Rush Limbaugh never made a bigger ass of himself than at CPAC where he told that blasphemous “joke” about himself and God.