Big We Care

Heard yet another host on a supposedly conservative radio show just now insisting that he doesn't care what people do with their lives, what they do in their bedrooms, if two men or two women want to get married, or whatever. Go ahead! Go for it! Enjoy! All he was asking is that others who disagree are allowed to live out their deeply-held religious convictions and freedoms at the same time, without being harassed or punished or forced to approve or support those actions. 

Hello. There are several things wrong with this thinking.

For one, no man is an island. What people do both in private and in public has a ripple effect on everyone. Aren't our taxes funding the killing of  innocent unborn babies because people privately participated in the reproductive act and don't want the consequences? Isn't a huge amount of our money and effort going toward research and medicine for people who engage in risky homosexual sex? Aren't sexual revolutionaries teaching unlimited sex and sexuality in our education system today to innocent children and the children spreading and experimenting with these ideas among themselves? Don't activist gays publicly push their beliefs and behaviors on the rest of us by every means possible through journalism, entertainment, and government? Isn't the proliferation of pornography/sex addiction a huge, destructive societal problem?  Yes, yes, yes, tons of yeses.

For two, we're talking about two diametrically opposed worldviews. As Robert Bork said, the two cannot peacefully co-exist. In every aspect of society, one will end up being preferred and the other harmed.Whereas in the past, the view of allowing unlimited sex and sexuality was frowned upon, even punished, now the view of traditional, Biblical morality is the one being frowned upon, even punished. We've experienced a complete turn-around, which is nothing new in the history of the world. In The Book of Mormon, peoples repeatedly turned from righteousness like a dog from his vomit, choosing full-on wickedness instead in less than a decade which ultimately led to their destruction. So, yes, we ought to care which worldview is being preferred and which is being harmed. This determines the mind and heart and destiny of the rising generation. 

For three, the above view of the radio host is immoral. Not care about what other people do? If they are hurting themselves? If they are hurting others? If they are hurting everyone?  What? Of course we care. BIG we care. That phrase is actually from my husband's careless, carefree youth. He and his friends would sarcastically wiggle their thumbs in circles and remark, "Big we care," when they actually couldn't care less about something. Sounds like the radio guy, who in so many words wiggled his thumbs and said, "Who cares." How clueless can you get? When it comes to the health and well-being and progress and happiness of our fellow man, we should all care in a very big way. C. S. Lewis said that concern for the continuance, health, and well-being of one's posterity is a quintessential moral value. What kind of people don't care about their children, their posterity, the future of their civilization? Only a very base, selfish, and barbaric kind.

Time was when all such wicked shenanigans were run out of town. Not anymore. Oh no. Just about everybody's allowed to do just about everything. Some say we're more tolerant, more accepting, more diverse, more enlightened, more civilized nowadays. But are we? What is the definition of civilized anyway? Does it mean we all just do what we want and turn the other way if people are harming themselves and others? I think not. It means we have ideals and laws for the safety, security, and responsible freedoms of all, ideals and laws that we adhere to, respect, and enforce. It means the public sentiment embraces certain standards we all agree on that keep us civil as a people. So, now that we have tossed out several of these time-tested sorts of standards, are we more, or less, civilized? Obviously less when you look at the big picture. Problems only exponentially proliferate in such a permissive, chaotic, harmful environment.

Not that we can or should force our own beliefs on anybody. No. And we can't force people to behave. We all make mistakes, make bad choices, get off on the wrong track sometimes. That's how we learn. But we ought to have standards, rules, laws and consequences.  We can and should support and share the wisdom of the ages, our own experience, principles of health, goodness, sanity, and common sense with each other. This is a moral obligation we have as members of the human race, especially if we claim to be followers of Christ. Are we not our brother's keeper?

For four, this radio man has to a degree given in to fear, intimidation, and misinformation. As a result he has made great concessions. He has given away a large portion of his safety and freedom. He has given an inch to those who won't stop at a mile. Is this naivete, ignorance, complacency, hubris? Does he think the legal and societal embrace of gay marriage will stop this movement? Most gays aren't even the slightest bit interested in any sort of marriage. A family lifestyle is not compatible with theirs. They are just being exploited. Same-sex "marriage" is just a ruse, a means to an end. When gay marriage is in the bag activists will want more, things decent people haven't even imagined. As we've said before, it's not about wanting marriage. It's about wanting wickedness. It's about thumbing one's nose at God and His goodness. And that's what causes the fall of all great civilizations.

Mr. Radio, you are wrong not to care, wrong on all fronts. Here at SoL we care big.