Is it wrong to get my life together so aspects of my life I'm really enjoying aren't screwed up?
I don't know that that makes sense. Let me explain.
If I'm reading my bible, simply because I don't want to reap the consequences of not reading it. I'm worried that something bad could happen in the good stuff in my life that I really like, so I'm reading my bible on a regular basis. I dont want, in a sense, bad karma.
Is that a sin? Or a problem?
I know when I was a jr. high leader, we would encourage students to read the Bible just to read it, so it would be habit forming. But I wonder if a good habit formed for a bad reason is still a good habit.
There is the idea that good things done for the wrong reasons are wrong, which worries me. But I'm not sure what the correct answer is. Obviously, I shouldn't just stop reading my Bible because I'm worried about my motives. And if my motives are bad, then it's a problem.
Typing this out has helped me. What I need to do is get my motive's right. It's not an action/behavior problem. It's a motive problem.
Showing posts with label morality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label morality. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Random Thoughts - 1
I'm decidedly against abortion, to clarify.
However, I don't think our government should be legislating morality. It doesn't work. I've reached a point where I'm pro-life, but not anti Roe vs Wade.
Does that make sense?
The fight to stop abortion cannot be won on a legal level. The main problem with abortion is decidedly an ethical decision, and ethical decisions are based on worldview questions, which the government should remain silent on.
When we, as the church, try to fight abortion on a legal level, we too often give up on the personal level. People can make ethical decisions, people can choose to abide by morality, a government cannnot.
And that is where I think it is flawed to try to overturn Roe vs Wade. The consequences would be radically different than most evangelical churches would like to admit - it wouldnt end abortion, just put it in the states hands. As evidenced by the massive amount of people who flocked to California for a legal gay marriage, people would still just go where abortions would be legal - in the majority of more liberal states.
And that's only the people who would attempt to abide by the law; that doesnt include those who would simply have illegal abortions.
So... I think it would be unwise to overturn Roe vs Wade. I would argue that you shouldn't allow it to be expanded - Partial Birth abortions should be outlawed.
My basic understanding is that overturning the law would not fix the problem. It would compound it. The solution is not the law - the solution is the effect that the church has in people's lives. If the church has so little effect on their members lives that they cannot stop their members from having sex willy nilly and abortions to cover it up, then how can we think the government can stop it?
However, I don't think our government should be legislating morality. It doesn't work. I've reached a point where I'm pro-life, but not anti Roe vs Wade.
Does that make sense?
The fight to stop abortion cannot be won on a legal level. The main problem with abortion is decidedly an ethical decision, and ethical decisions are based on worldview questions, which the government should remain silent on.
When we, as the church, try to fight abortion on a legal level, we too often give up on the personal level. People can make ethical decisions, people can choose to abide by morality, a government cannnot.
And that is where I think it is flawed to try to overturn Roe vs Wade. The consequences would be radically different than most evangelical churches would like to admit - it wouldnt end abortion, just put it in the states hands. As evidenced by the massive amount of people who flocked to California for a legal gay marriage, people would still just go where abortions would be legal - in the majority of more liberal states.
And that's only the people who would attempt to abide by the law; that doesnt include those who would simply have illegal abortions.
So... I think it would be unwise to overturn Roe vs Wade. I would argue that you shouldn't allow it to be expanded - Partial Birth abortions should be outlawed.
My basic understanding is that overturning the law would not fix the problem. It would compound it. The solution is not the law - the solution is the effect that the church has in people's lives. If the church has so little effect on their members lives that they cannot stop their members from having sex willy nilly and abortions to cover it up, then how can we think the government can stop it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)