Watching the nightly news has formulated these questions and thoughts:
I am decidedly concerned for equal and unilateral freedoms for all people everywhere. We say we feel that every person should have the right to speak what is on their mind; that all persons should, and do, have the right to make their choices about life and religious faith, and the color of their hair, and well, the list goes on and on. We say that Laws should equally apply to all of us. However...
1. I am concerned that while we talk this thought as "the reasonable objective" we engage to silence the thoughts of some, so that, it is said, others may speak their minds; in so doing, we have then embraced a so called "reasonable objective" that is not equitable to everyone.
"Tolerance Demanded," (by the Intolerant!)
Christians can't pray in many public places, but the non-Christians can say and do what they feel they need to, or want to, even though it is offensive to the Christian faith. This equation is really lop-sided, unequal and unreasonable.
Conclusion: If the Christian is offended by non Christian folks, what of it? On the other hand, if the non-Christian is offended by the Christian, what of it? That is equal. Let it alone. Equal is good.
2. I am likewise exhausted with hearing about the sexual preferences of some but not of all. I really don't want to know about any ones sex life, or lack thereof.
So, why is it that we only hear about the 'gays' and their sexuality? In fact, why do we ever mention any thing about any persons private and personal life?
What if I stood before a gathering of people and said, "I want to know is who is straight, raise your hand?" "Will all who are celibate please stand up?" What if we announced that, "This person right here practices incest, or bestiality?"
It would be outrageous! Who wants to know about anyone's sexual preferences? Who wants a visual of how they practice sex? Is this really a subject for public discussion? No, it is a private, a personal matter. Why isn't it asked on work applications? Why don't we wear signs on our backs announcing our sexual bent?
Why? Because it would be a note of personal insensitivity and intrusiveness both to the individual and those who do not want to know. Who needs to know and who cares to know, except for purposes of gossip?
I prefer that everyone does what they decide to do, and keep the private and personal information about themselves to themselves! It is strictly between God and the individual. That means all of it, whatever their sexual preferences are, straight, gay, or celibate, or somebody else's wife. (However, we all know that when we take our sexual preferences and force them onto another in a physical way, we are in deep trouble.)
If an individual wants to announce their sexual preferences okay, that's you. Just don't demand that I approve you. I will likewise not demand that you approve me. Do we need each other's approval?
The problem with sexual permissiveness is that sexuality in America has been exploited for the cause of, 1. acquisition of money and 2. for the purpose of decaying our culture, from the core outward.
Those who give themselves without restraint to their sexual desires, eventually force themselves on others resulting in rapes, murders and child abuse.
But then, IF all this sex and religion and racial conversation was regarded as personal and private and held in respect by everyone, THEN the news providers would have to go out and get some real news and they could not run 24 hours every day of
Maybe the real culprit for many of our social absurdities and inequalities lays at the door step of the News Media and the Retail Marketing Engineers. It's the money; follow the money! Look objectively at what they report on and try to sell.
Consider this for instance; why do those financial groups want to take your worthless fallen green money and give you their precious gold in return? Charity at its finest! I haven't yet figured out why they are willing to take my fast falling dollar so that I might own their precious and stable gold.
Equality means, =, means 1 for you, and 1 for me. Not, 0 for me, and 2 for you because my accepting your thing is necessary for you to feel okay about you.
Conclusion: You are not comfortable with your decision about yourself, IF I must validate you, whoever you are, and whatever your persuasion about any subject.
3. I also am exhausted with the atheist in the "?news." I don't need to validate, defend, excoriate, nor appreciate the atheist. I don't need to agree with the atheist.
Atheists are capable of being an atheist without me, so please, help yourself, but leave me alone; don't try to establish what I can and cannot do, because you are offended by what I believe.
Your poking around activities are offensive to me!" There, that is equal.
However, I won't try to stop you from atheism. You do your thing and I will do my thing. The world is big enough for all of us. You be happy in your atheist faith, and I will be happy with my Christian faith.
Oh yes, atheist's have faith! In fact I promise you that a real atheist has more "blind faith" than I do.
I can never get an answer from the atheist community as to why they are offended and contort about the Cross, and about God, and about prayer?
IF there is nothing to my faith, THEN could they just be kind enough to let me live my life and then go the nothingness that they are sure follows death?
Here is the appropriate time to ask, "What possible difference does it make to you?" Are you concerned for my present happiness? Are you afraid that if I believe in God that I may suffer after death. No! Of course not. So what gets your dander up?
According to the atheist there are no consequences for believing in Jesus because He doesn't exist, and death is the last of it, it's over! Kaput! Why does an atheist care what anyone believes, or does to express it?
If there is nothing, no God, and nothing to the Christian faith, what possible difference can it make to the atheist if Christians just play their little game? Is there no compassion? Why do they care?
Nothing = nothing, when the total is summed by the atheist. Can they not leave my "nothing" alone?
Has the atheist ever asked himself or herself the question about why they are so busy trying to bring down a 'nothing,' to deliver the world from 'nothing'? Really? Surely, it is a waste of time.
But me thinks that is not what they think. I watch their behaviors and they are overtly intense about it, and that when absolutely no one is forcing them to believe in God or Jesus. It's the confrontational "thought," of God isn't it?
Perhaps, just maybe, they are not really sure about their faith, and they would like to have popular consensus.
One more question for the atheist: "Why do you never contort and speak against other religions?" Why only at Judeo-Christianity?
Why? Is it because you feel you are safe, because Christians won't make you pay for words spoken against them and their faith?
There are other religions who believe in their forms of "God," and religions who believe in many gods, do you with vengeance try to bring them to silence and control what they can and cannot do? Do you? Other religions believe in some form of after-life as well.
Conclusion: I mean, religious practice is religious practice. It seems the atheist views Judeo-Christianity, and specifically Christian practice and beliefs, as the only "religion" on earth, when it isn't the only religion.
Of course I believe Jesus to be the true way to God, but the atheist sees it only as a religion among religions; it is however the one they get intensely adverse about.