Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: marlatt@spot.Colorado.EDU (MARLATT STUART WARREN) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Imposing Christian morality on nonbelievers Message-ID: Date: 11 Feb 91 01:14:02 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder Lines: 47 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article DOUG@ysub.ysu.edu (Doug Sewell) writes: >It's becoming more common for Christians to attempt (through boycotts >or legislation) to impose their moral standards on nonbelievers. > >What are we trying to say: > >(1) If they won't repent, then at least we won't allow them to sin. > (this is the way many non-believers take it) > >(2) I detest xxxxx particular sin(s), so I don't want anyone sinning that > way around me (this sounds like bigotry, not Christianity, and > gives the impression that some sins are "worse" than others). > >(3) I don't like to be tempted with this sin, nor do I want my family > to face this temptation, so I'm going to put it out-of-sight (it's > not a sin to be tempted). > >(4) something else ? > >Whenever I see this happening, I wonder if the Christianity they practice >has any real power or virtue of its own, or whether it's just a form of >making rules rather than living by faith and trust. > >Doug I will not argue that the motivations behind may of these efforts are those you have listed above - and I agree, these are poor motivations for attempting to institute social change. I am of the persuasion that a heirarchy of sin is more or less a human invention (ie, if we break the law at one point, we are guilt of breaking the whole law). Also, avoidance of a group of sinful behavior does not equate with salvation - cleaning up the outside of the vessel does not make it a new vessel. Having said that, let me change side and argue for morality-based social change. That being that such actions may be profitable not because they lead individuals to salvation (indeed, they may not), but because openly accepted immoral practices may be destructive to a society at large. Thus I may, for example, work to limit the traffic of pornography not because I find it offensive and therefore feel that you should not have access to it, but rather because I feel that it has a cause-effect relationship with say violence toward women. Hence the issue of whether or not I am living by faith vs. by rules is not relevant. -- s.w. marlatt <>< and *(:-)