|
Newbie
Total Posts: 4
Joined 2007-01-15
|
Copy of a response sent to Melanie Phillips today on her article on this subject. I circulated the following to some Christian friends and groups such as the Christian Institute, Christian Voice etc.
How interesting that Melanie Phillips who does not profess to be a Christian (she is in fact Jewish), has written (Daily Mail Article) such a clear expose of the current debate on SOR and their implications for liberal values and Christian freedom!
Dear Melanie. Thank you for e mailed information on your article about the destruction of liberal, and particularly Christian values in the UK through the so called ‘gay rights’ and adoption isssue. As a practising Christian, but not Roman Catholic, I agree with every word, and think you are to be congratulated on the clearest expose and clarification of the issues I have yet seen. You have summarised the sad state of the topsy turvy morality being enforced upon the majority by an ideologically driven and anti-God minority, and your statement quoted below brilliantly sums up the tragedy being unrolled before us.
“ So oppressed homosexuality turned into gay rights. Having made permissible what was once illegal, we are now making it compulsory. A society which made it illegal to discriminate against a minority is now making it legal to discriminate against the majority. “
Christians and others in the liberal tradition will agree with your view that our values stem from our historic Judeo-Christian position, and that the eradication of of these will indeed mean the destruction of individual freedom and in a wider sense the added destruction of civil society. I agree too, and have long argued that the deification of ‘The State’ will be always at the expense of individual freedom, and particularly of Christian liberty. This we are now seeing at an accelerate pace.
Whilst I believe that Christians are bidden to obey the State as Paul argues in Romans 13, nevertheless it is when the State exceeds its God given role by intruding into matters of conscience and fundamental issues of Christian belief that the prospect of civil disobedience arises. Whilst I found the whole of the SOR proposals repugnant, the government could have simply included a conscience clause for ‘faith communities’. But of course the objective is to systematically subvert and if possible to destroy those very communities under the guise of ‘equal right’ and ‘equality’.
I think that day is fast approaching. Thank you again for your valuable contribution to the debate.
Graham Wood (York UK)
|
