Published on -3/12/2014, 2:03 PM
In reference to the letter submitted by Gary Brinker, sociology professor at Fort Hays State University:
I am a married woman of nearly 30 years, a mother of three and grandmother to one. I have tried my best to spend my life loving God and my family, and to use my talents to bring healing and hope to those who are hurting -- to leave a legacy of Christ's love when I pass away.
Yet, in your recent letter, you have, in essence, called me a hater.
You also have accused me of judging others simply because I believe in standing up for the holy precepts of my God and my faith. (Isn't that judging?) The legislation you referred to was not something that would keep food out of hungry mouths or deny health care -- it was a bill to protect a wedding cake maker or photographer or other such business from being forced to actively participate in a ceremony to which they are morally opposed. (I hardly believe in this diverse country we live in there are no bakers or photographers willing to be of service to homosexual couples. Could it be there is another agenda involved here?)
Mr. Brinker, you bring up biblical teaching, but apparently you don't understand the sin of adultery encompasses much more than being unfaithful to one's spouse -- it encompasses all sexual sin. In fact, Jesus' words, "Every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart," would indicate He takes sexual immorality seriously -- especially when He goes on to give extreme examples as a way to illustrate how important it is for us to rid ourselves of sin: "If your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. ... If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. ... It is better to lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell." (Matthew 5:28-30)
Notice, our Lord never mentioned a woman looking at another woman, or a man looking at a man with lust -- because that was a given. (Perhaps you remember the reason for the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah -- after which our society derived the word "sodomy" to describe criminal sexual acts.) Furthermore, in Matthew 5:17, Jesus declared, "I did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it."
As an educated man, you should realize our society's moral laws, though they have become largely secularized, stem from God's laws. Am I judgmental because I believe God created a man and a woman's love -- that He made their bodies to come together to procreate? My faith teaches me any sexual activity outside of marriage, which was meant to be a holy covenant, is sinful. I did not make God's laws. I cannot and will not change them. Does this make me judgmental?
Still, like many who argue in favor of tossing God's marriage laws into the dumpster, (kind of like how our society tosses away our murdered, unwanted babies. ... Oh yes, that is another law of God we have conveniently discarded -- Thou shall not kill.) you left out the "rest of the story" regarding sin and the adulterous woman. Are you suggesting Jesus was a hater or judgmental when he told the adulterous woman to "go and sin no more?" Or is it more likely He told her this because of His compassionate love for her?
I believe most people won't care about losing their freedoms until it creates a problem for them. You have heard the phrase, "Be careful what you wish for." Well, imagine this scenario: Jane Doe has run a thriving day care for 20 years -- lovingly caring for many children of her town's workforce. One day, a little boy shows up at her day care in a shirt with an image of the devil on the front -- a winged, dark creature with red eyes. The boy's mother then declares, as Satanists, the shirt will henceforth be part of the 4-year-old's wardrobe. If Jane Doe has no rights where her business is concerned, she might have to shut down. Most parents would be devastated to have their child exposed to this type of imagery. So, Mr. Brinker, would you also oppose legislation that would protect Jane Doe's right to refuse this type of display in her business? What if your grandchild attended the day care? Shouldn't Jane Doe have the right to reject an image in direct opposition of her beliefs? Why would the beliefs of the Satanists be more important than the beliefs of Jane Doe and the other parents? Speaking of which, why do so many who advocate tolerance of the gay lifestyle refuse to be tolerant of the Christian's belief?
For those who believe it is judgmental and hateful to believe in traditional marriage, I would ask you to ponder, if only for a moment, the concept of love, itself -- where it came from, or better still, who gave it to us. Could it be Jesus, who loved us enough to die for us, actually is asking us to surrender our will, our lives and even our sexuality to Him in exchange for something far greater? Could it be true Jesus, the Lord of Love, who healed the blind, lame, deaf and the leper, could work a miracle just as wondrous in us and give us joy and peace if we live chastely, despite a same-sex attraction or any sexual attraction for that matter?
If we don't believe this, then all the miracles we have told ourselves we believe in are just "stories." But if they are real -- and I believe they are -- then there also will be the judgment of which Jesus spoke. For the repentant, there will be mercy. For the unrepentant -- the obstinate -- there will be eternal suffering.
Would it be loving for me to tell you otherwise? To tell you only what you want to hear, even if the price is your soul? If my God, the author and finisher of our faith, clearly has called the act of homosexuality an abomination, then I would rather stand up for Him and His ways -- even if I am called judgmental, even if I am despised. Why? Because I love my God and my fellow man enough to speak up and share what I believe: God's grace is sufficient -- His love more than enough to satisfy each and every soul who puts their trust in Him.
May we set our heart and sights on the true joy that is made available to all who do God's will. "Return to me with your whole heart." (Joel 2:12)
In closing, no matter what side of the fence you sit on this issue, the fact business owners are having their religious liberties taken away should greatly bother you because you can be sure, your own liberties will be jeopardized at some point, too. It's only a matter of time.