Though it is not necessarily a noble claim, I freely admit that I am as much a conservative Christian as there can be. For my simple way of thinking, some things that have always been wrong will always be as wrong as they are presently wrong. In other words, as biblical teachings and moral guidance can go, there are fundamental standards based on centuries of teachings and traditions. Lately, however, evangelical and/or conservative Christians have taken quite a beating in the media for being narrow-minded, bigoted, ignorant, judgmental, etc. Sadly, however, we seem to have come by such accusations honestly; we’ve earned them. We’ve earned them by demanding that others live according to what we believe to be best. Oddly, we resist a government which sometimes seems to demand the same of us while we demand of this same government to force “them” to tow “our” line. Wow.
Still, being conservative means that I don’t have to keep up with the latest fads, and I don’t have to worry about whether my preaching is “hip” or “with it” (it probably isn’t, anyway, considering my dated word choices). I need only be thorough, sufficiently convinced that what I offer from the pulpit is something useful for the congregation, and relevant. I pray and hope that I’ve done at least this much. Sadly, the fruits of my efforts may not be apparent for generations, if at all.
Being conservative is not as simple, however, as merely rejecting everything I happen to disagree with (though guilty, I’m sure). Every situation, perhaps especially those of a social nature, requires that I think through it within the context of what I happen to believe because more often than not, things are not what they seem and the line between “liberal” and “conservative” becomes blurred. We are then challenged to think beyond the surface issue and consider a particular issue’s more profound implications.
This is what we face with the Arkansas Family Council’s stated intent to submit a ballot proposal to the state’s attorney general which, if approved, would ask Arkansas residents to vote directly on whether we will ban adoptions and foster parent applications by homosexuals. While we’re at it, let’s vote on whether unmarried, cohabitating couples could also be considered less fit to serve as parents, foster or otherwise, to this state’s 3,000 children who currently have no home to call their own. After all, are we talking about sin in general or just one particular sin?
Whether one advocates for or against homosexual rights is, I think, irrelevant. The primary matter at hand should be that which concerns the children who belong to this state. And by “state”, I do not mean some nameless, faceless, unidentifiable entity with no soul and no sense of moral direction. Rather, the “state” is comprised of us citizens who elect others to conduct the state’s business in our behalf. And since we cannot seem to agree about the whole homosexual thing, let’s at least agree that these children belong to us and require our attention.
The purpose of the proposal to be put before us is whether we believe innocent children will be emotionally or mentally or morally harmed, perhaps irreparably, by exposure to a lifestyle some consider to be immoral. The question is whether or not a child can be properly nurtured in such an environment. The problem, however, is that heterosexual married couples are not exactly beating down the door of state services offering to open up their “normal” homes to these children, which brings us back to where we started: making a demand without knowing exactly what we seek to accomplish. Are we trying to put homosexual citizens in their place, or are we seeking a remedy to a problem that involves children?
The problem with this whole scenario is that we have yet to truly identify the real problem. Is the problem centered on homosexuals who want to provide homes to children who need them (or maybe “recruit” them?), or is it children who need nurturing, stable, and permanent homes? It seems to me that up to this point, we are seeking a solution to a problem we have yet to isolate. These two issues, homosexual rights and foster children, are mutually exclusive. One has nothing to do with the other.
If there is any harm to be done, it is being done now while we use innocent children as political and/or moral leverage. There truly is a moral issue at stake; I’m just not sure that it is religious or doctrinal in nature.
No comments:
Post a Comment