Quicksilver Commentary

Oh No... Libertarianism! Run!

In light of my most recent post, I feel that I should open up a broader topic for discussion.  In that post, I spoke of homosexual marriage, civil unions, and the like, and wondered just what the Christian reaction should be to such things.  Do we have a duty to make sure everyone conforms to the Christian view of marriage, or do we not have that authority? 

But I'd like to ask a broader question:  To what extent should Christians legislate Christian morality?  I ask this because I'm quite confused by the question of just how much we can expect non-Christians to act like Christians.  If we try to ban any type of sin, will it do anyone any good?  How would it affect the non-Christians' views of Christianity and the Church? 

I ask this because it seems to me that we as Christians should be most concerned with the spiritual state of those around us, and since the actions of any given sinner will not change his spiritual state, it's hard to say that laws restricting sin actually further "the Good" (if we view good as being the salvation of non-believers).  On the flip side, most actions that are illegal are sins of some sort, and I don't really think I'd appreciate the legalization of murder, theft, rape, and other such crimes.  So where does the truth lie?

Perhaps the government and its laws exist to protect the right to life of all citizens.  Undoubtedly, it exists to ensure that we do not harm one another.  But can this be all?  Perhaps the government also exists to protect our property from theft and vandalism.  Perhaps it also exists to ensure that we all may worship as we see fit.  So then, would it be fair to say that the government exists (or should exist) as a referee, protecting the individual's autonomy, or his right to do as he pleases, provided that he does not infringe on the rights of another individual? 

I dunno.  But if this is the case, then we would lose the right to impress Christian morality upon non-Christians, in the same way that Muslims may not force our women to wear yards of cloth.  Would this rather libertarian view of government be proper?  It's too soon for me to say, but it seems at present that it would be, since as I've said before, Christians should be less concerned with what non-believers do, and more concerned with their spiritual state.

So to clarify what I am asking:  Would a more libertarian view of government be more conducive to bringing non-Christians to salvation than a view of government in which we attempt to legislate morality beyond the simple protection of an individuals autonomy?

Please, by all means, let me know what you think.  I'm certain I haven't thought through every aspect of this issue, so I need input to let me know what I'm missing. 

Marriage? Sin? Non-Christians? Legislation? What a Jumbled Mess...

As many of my beloved readers probably know, I used to blog about politics and current events.  Doing so was great fun for me, and for the two-and-a-quarter years that I wrote about such things, I placed myself solidly in the Conservative/Republican camp.  Good times, eh?

Well, upon beating that particular dead horse to a pulp, I started to grow a bit disgusted with politics and current events (and perhaps my inability to affect them), and began to get outraged by other subjects.  Thus theology and apologetics became my poison, and while I didn't write much about them, I did think about them a great deal.  In fact, I still do, though I'm afraid that I haven't yet figured out a great deal about them.  But I digress...

As I began to spend less time typing out Republican sound bites and more time thinking about Christianity, I started to wonder exactly how it fits into our culture and politics.  Of course, my views on the subject are only just beginning to form, so I thought I'd pose a couple of questions to get some input from others whose opinions I value.  Hence my (thus far question-less) post.

Earlier today, I read a Yahoo! News article about research that claims there are more unmarried households in America than traditionally married households.  Rather surprising, I thought; but only briefly.  Why, really, would any Christian be surprised when non-Christians neglect to take part in certain ceremonies that are often associated with Christianity?  Don't answer that one, it's a rhetorical question.

The fact that Biblically, marriage was the act of consummating a relationship rather than having a clergyman say "I pronounce you man and wife" notwithstanding, what right have we to impose the Christian (and I use that term loosely) ceremony of marriage on non-Christians?  That's the question I need you to answer.  Can we really expect those who don't recognize our God to accept ceremonies (correctly or incorrectly) associated with Him?  I'm not sure I believe so. 

So then, what should the Christian attitude toward gay marriage be?  If the ceremony of marriage is at best a requirement in Christianity, and at worst completely unnecessary in God's eyes, then what should become of two men who want to be recognized as a couple by the state?  At this point, I'm inclined to agree with C. S. Lewis, who wrote in Mere Christianity that there should be two types of marriages;  one for Christians, administered and recognized by the church, and one for non-Christians, administered and recognized by the State.  Of course, it is also my opinion that marriage in God's eyes has nothing to do with ceremonies performed by man. 

By now, anyone who has read my blogs for any length of time has begun to worry that I have been kidnapped, or that my blog has been hacked by some resentful Leftist who is fed up with my old rants.  The "Neo" that they know and love or love to hate would never advocate the concept of civil unions in addition to traditional marriage.  Indeed, if reading this seems foreign to you, imagine how it feels for me... I myself don't know if that's really where I should stand on the issue, but it currently seems rather logical to stand there, so my mind is left to wage war with the force of habit (which would compel me to take a more "Conservative" stance), to the ends that I have no earthly idea where I stand.  So that's why I ask you now:  In light of the nature of marriage, the irrelevance of ceremonies, and the silliness of expecting a non-Christian to observe Christian ceremonies, is it right to refuse non-Christians the ability to "marry" however they may choose, given that their marriage will not be valid in God's eyes?  For if it is not valid in God's eyes, then it is not valid at all, and if it is not valid at all, then what are we so worried about?