How Can elected
politics leaders at the head of great leading Nations of the World
call forth their christian's convictions to justify discriminatory
policies leading to crucifixion treatment and suffering against 40%
of the World's human population, our Gay Brethren, Gay not by any
choice of their Own but by the secret of God's providential doings?
If we believe in the
virtue of Jesus Christ Crucifixion, then we cannot continue to
overlook in all consciousness of our christian's conviction the
suffering of our brethren, of all those who because of their human
nature, gays, or social status, or community or ethnicity or Nation
of origin, religion etc... all not because of any choice or will of their own but by
fate or providence of which only God knows the secret, are condemned
in the name of our christian's conviction or morals to suffering and crucifixion spiritually and physically in the same manner as Jesus Christ,
Being a worthy
politic leader is to have the capacity and courage to conciliate our
christian's convictions with the reality of facts in society life here on earth, that is primary human beyond being Christian.
Conciliation of our
christian's convictions with the politics of the States comes through
the entering into our morals, as a fundamental obligation as citizens of a democratic republic, the necessary virtue in all true democracy to observe the separation of the State's politics from the Church's
sacraments.
If with the separation between the State and the Church, the distinction between the term “Marriage” heritage of the Church and the terms “Civil Union” prerogative of the State, was unequivocally explicit the war against gay marriage would have not been.
As an example in our French Republic we will not be subject to a double marriage first within the formalities of the State and a second aleatory marriage in the Church.
By so doing the Church Authority in matters of marriage will be unequivocal, one is either married or not.
Under the present concept of "Marriage" the church only claim is upon the fact that "Your marriage is not bless" which is only from the church point of view and not from the couple belief in their union.
With the revolution that is taking place today in the concept of "MARRIAGE"
The big question is : SHOULD THE LAWS OF THE STATE PRECEDE THE CUSTOMS AND MORALS OF THE NATION OR SHOULD IT BE THE OTHER WAY AROUND?
And this leads compulsory the a second question: HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE FOR THE LAWS OF THE STATE TO ENTER INTO THE MORALS OF THE NATION AND CONDITIONS OUR BEHAVIORS IN SOCIETY LIFE, ONE IN REGARDS OF THE OTHER?
If with the separation between the State and the Church, the distinction between the term “Marriage” heritage of the Church and the terms “Civil Union” prerogative of the State, was unequivocally explicit the war against gay marriage would have not been.
As an example in our French Republic we will not be subject to a double marriage first within the formalities of the State and a second aleatory marriage in the Church.
By so doing the Church Authority in matters of marriage will be unequivocal, one is either married or not.
Under the present concept of "Marriage" the church only claim is upon the fact that "Your marriage is not bless" which is only from the church point of view and not from the couple belief in their union.
With the revolution that is taking place today in the concept of "MARRIAGE"
The big question is : SHOULD THE LAWS OF THE STATE PRECEDE THE CUSTOMS AND MORALS OF THE NATION OR SHOULD IT BE THE OTHER WAY AROUND?
And this leads compulsory the a second question: HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE FOR THE LAWS OF THE STATE TO ENTER INTO THE MORALS OF THE NATION AND CONDITIONS OUR BEHAVIORS IN SOCIETY LIFE, ONE IN REGARDS OF THE OTHER?
No comments:
Post a Comment