tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post927765556526589084..comments2023-10-25T09:45:40.318-04:00Comments on The Politics of the Cross Resurrected: I'll Stop Going on About Marriage If You Shut Up About the PoorCraig Carterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10209954891388905090noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-57745224566623045272009-03-21T03:18:00.000-04:002009-03-21T03:18:00.000-04:00It would be a grave error for government to get ou...It would be a grave error for government to get out of the marriage business. Marriage is more than just a religious sacrament. It is a legal institution that exists primarily to provide a stable environment for the rearing of children. The state clearly has an interest in the stability of marriage especially when minor children are involved.RightDemocrathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03612704627184425765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-41647948154294056952009-03-20T02:32:00.000-04:002009-03-20T02:32:00.000-04:00It just seems more and more obvious that the only ...It just seems more and more obvious that the only thing that can be "public" in your imagination is stuff the nation state does. Insofar as I reject that notion, you continue to talk past what I am actually saying.<BR/><BR/>You continue to duck my question about baptism. What you're presenting here clearly implies that baptism, being a reflection of God's will for all humanity, should be regulated and managed by the state. You don't want to admit that such is the outcome of your view, hence you keep obfuscating. Your proclaimed desire for consistency is a doubled edged sword, I'm afraid.<BR/><BR/>The issue of poverty (which is not one I've ever gone on about regarding the government's role) is really a pretty silly comparison to marriage. Marriage is a sacrament of Christ's relationship to the church. What does that have to do with whether or not a nation should take care of its impoverished citizenry or not?<BR/><BR/>Besides, your view of marriage vis a vis the state is historically naive. The state did not regulate marriage in any legal sense until the early modern period, specifically beginning with Calvin's Geneva. See John Witte's <I>From Sacrament to Contract</I> for a thorough historical analysis of marriage. If anyone is adopting a sacralized view of the modern nation state and its role in marriage it is you, not I.<BR/><BR/>Adultery should not be a mater of lawbreaking because Jesus' own witness specifically contradicts this (John 8).Haldenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03936185959033443640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-23281318547245741832009-03-19T23:03:00.000-04:002009-03-19T23:03:00.000-04:00Halden,Since you think the state should not impose...Halden,<BR/>Since you think the state should not impose anyone's religious beliefs on the marriage issue, I assume that you think the same goes for poverty reduction? Right? Capitalism, socialism, welfare state - since the church is the real thing and the state is not, what difference does it make what the state does, right?Craig Carterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10209954891388905090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-61373228851032548872009-03-19T22:55:00.000-04:002009-03-19T22:55:00.000-04:00Baptism is reflective of God's creational intent a...Baptism is reflective of God's creational intent and that is why <BR/>Christians rightly supported Martin Luther King and civil rights. Or do you think that should be a private matter too - if you are religious then don't put up a "Whites Only" sign? Yoder's Body Politics made this point quite clear. <BR/><BR/>You just keep coming with examples that prove my point. <BR/><BR/>Why shouldn't adultery be a matter of law breaking? That is essentially what we had 30 years ago before no-fault divorce. Why should someone get off the hook for being unfaithful? A promise is an obligation, especially when other human beings are depending on you. A just society would not let a man walk out on his family and get away with it. Even pagans know that when they are honest. Christians have better reasons for why it is important, but it is still wrong for everybody.<BR/><BR/>Halden, you seem to think that the way things are here and now has some sort of sacralized inevitibility to it, as if this messed up excuse for a culture is the only way it can be and the way it has to be. Is it some lingering Dispensationalist pessimism in your theology? It is tough to figure out. <BR/><BR/>BTW, do you think murder should be illegal? All murder? Or should there be exceptions for legalized private killing?Craig Carterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10209954891388905090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-4156406824007187362009-03-19T20:36:00.000-04:002009-03-19T20:36:00.000-04:00The logic cuts both ways. Is not baptism reflectiv...The logic cuts both ways. Is not baptism reflective of God's creation of the human race as one body? As such then, shouldn't the state regulate this public social reality that bears witness to God's creatonal intent?<BR/><BR/>Not taking the Lord's name in vain is in the Ten Commandments too, should the government be sending people to jail for that? Or criminalizing adultery.<BR/><BR/>You're spiraling here, Craig.Haldenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03936185959033443640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-88692499331641877832009-03-19T20:10:00.000-04:002009-03-19T20:10:00.000-04:00Halden,Do you really think that a sacrament of the...Halden,<BR/>Do you really think that a sacrament of the church is not reflective of the real creation God made? Do you really think it is just a social construction of the group of people called Christians? Do you not believe in any sort of natural order in the universe that is knowable by anyone who is humble enough to acknowledge it? Or is your view of sin so extreme that you think pagans know absolutely nothing of natural law? <BR/><BR/>Murder is one of the Ten Commandments. Does that mean we can't expect the government to police it? Would you privatize enforcement of murder too?Craig Carterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10209954891388905090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-35585013499906362012009-03-19T16:39:00.000-04:002009-03-19T16:39:00.000-04:00If marriage is a sacarament of the church I see no...If marriage is a sacarament of the church I see no reason why any government should be entrusted with policing it.<BR/><BR/>Should the government be handing out baptism certificates too?<BR/><BR/>This is only privatizing if you believe the church is a private club. I don't. I think it's a real thing.Haldenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03936185959033443640noreply@blogger.com