Wednesday, March 27, 2013

Setting Hyper-Libertarians Straight on Objectivism: What's at Stake in the so-called Gay Marriage Debate?

(This post is a response to my friend and Christian brother Jacob at his blog here)

I do not intend to address every point that Jacob brought up in his post, just a few that I think are the most critical ones.  I entitled this post as I did because I see a movement among passionate libertarians who are seeking to correct the abhorrent and fascist views of this current government.(As well as heretical views in the church)  And for that I applaud them!  However, it is often the tendency of human beings to over react to a certain error to the extent where they produce their own.  For example:  hyper-calvinists refuse to preach the gospel to people unless those people are showing signs of being elect.  They reason that it wouldn’t be a genuine offer to them because unless God chose them they are incapable of believing.  Do you see what they have done?  They have turned out to be full blown Pelagians because of their over-reaction and non-objectivist thinking when it comes to the gospel.  In seeking to distinguish themselves from all theological error, they adopted the very thing they opposed.(By the way, Jacob is the first one who showed this to me:) Thank you my friend.)  This is the very thing that is happening amongst many in the libertarian movement.(I distinguish them as hyper-libertarians, because I’m actually not sure if all of them think this way).  In seeking to limit the government’s power, they are actually giving them more power.  In seeking to keep the government out of our personal lives, they open the door wider. 

I believe this is what is happening in Jacob’s post.  In his first paragraph under the heading “The Abomination of Outlawing Gay Marriage--Correcting the Church,” he argues that initiating force is an abomination.  For this issue at hand, I couldn’t agree more!!  Unfortunately...that is the very thing that is being defended: the right for the government to initiate force.   They are initiating force against “thing-ness.”  They are attempting to re-define a thing, and in doing so are initiating force against all the laws of logic.  A no longer equals A and in fact can contradict it whenever it pleases.  Before force is initiated in the physical realm, it must first be initiated in the meta-physical realm.  Marriage means something, just like every other “thing” means something.  All “things” that exist have an essence(logically) before they have an expression in the material world.  This is what objectivism sets forth.  The government is filled with people that are anti-objectivists.   It was forty years ago this year, that the government was allowed to change the definition of another “thing,” and that was human life.  70 million abortions later we have still not learned our lesson.  Christian non-objectivists were arguing similar things back then as well.  Although they personally thought abortion was wrong, they argued that the government had no right to tell them what to do with their body.  That is an equivocation to the matter at hand.  First of all, the government(justly) tells us many things that we can and can’t do with our body.  We can’t use our body to hurt other people. So the argument fails before it gets out of the gates.  But pressing on, the argument doesn’t address the other body that is being dismissed as a non-person.  Is that “thing” in the womb a person? ‘Well no..’  Really?  Who determined that?  The government.  The government did when they were allowed(by the people) to initiate force against “thing-ness”.  This is the irony that belongs to hyper-libertarians.  In seeking to re-establish order and bring back the power to the people, they often concede more power to the government.  Unfortunately this will come at great cost.  This is already being tested out in so called “transgender” cases.  In Massachusetts, the state school board initiated force against human sexuality(metaphysically) so that people can define themselves, sexually, however they want.  What’s the fallout?  Initiation of force in the physical realm by those same school officials who force normal girls to share locker rooms and bathrooms with boys who identify themselves as a girls.  Who are the victims?  The real little girls who will be treated as the bullies by school officials if they do not adhere to these newly re-defined transgender persons.   

Mark my words...the government will initiate force against anyone who will not accept their (soon to be) re-defined view of marriage.  So called “gay marriage” IS an initiation of force.  It is an initiation of force against “thing-ness,” and this will translate to an initiation of force against people who disagree with them.  It will enforce this new definition and press it to the point where we lose our freedom of speech.  Our neighbors to the north have already tasted this bitter fruit.  It will initiate force so that we are penalized through creative civil fines, as seen in the Hobby Lobby case.  In the end those who disagree with their initiation of force against marriage will be deemed dangerous to society and incarcerated.  One only needs to do a google search to see that this is not hyperbole. 

When the government is allowed to initiate force against the definition of thing-ness, it will initiate force physically against those who disagree. 

Friday, March 22, 2013

Who's Really Surprised By Bell's Stance on Homosexuality?

I know that many of you have seen this already, but just wanted to point out that there is a logical and necessary connection between theological liberalism and sexual confusion. Bell's stance shouldn't surprise really anyone, because he has already has, by necessary implication, taught that God is not righteous. What I mean by that, is that especially in Love Wins with all of its questions and not very many answers(I read the book), it is postulated that all will be saved. And that at the center of this salvation is not the righteousness of God expressed in punishing sin upon His only Son, but a different gospel. A gospel of horizontal "love." A gospel of the goodness of man and the triumph of the human spirit. A gospel of 'give man enough time and they will do the right thing...eventually.' This type of gospel does not uphold the righteousness of a holy and loving God. For God to be loving to us, He must hate sin. If you love African Americans, you will hate slavery. If you love Jews, you will hate the holocaust. If you love babies, you will hate abortion. If you love God, you will hate sin. If God is going to love us, he must take care of that very thing in us that puts us at odds with His holy love. He must take all of our sin, whether it be adultery, or gossip, or gluttony or homosexuality and he must nail it to the cross upon His only Son, if we are going to be saved. If we are going to be reconciled to Him. The irony about Rob Bell is that he actually hates homosexuals. He hates them because his teaching is that there is nothing for them to repent of. God loves them just the way they are according to him. Friends, God did not punish His Son upon Calvary because he loved us just the way we are. He punished His Son upon Calvary so that He could make us a new creation and conform us to the image of His beloved Son. Any other gospel is anti-christian, and it hates the people that it claims to love.