It must be more than just a little aggravating to hear from people only when they disagree, but I would like to voice an alternative view to the Comment page titled “Church Teaching Versus Law of the Land,” which ran on page 2 in the June 10 issue of The Alabama Baptist. This is certainly a debatable issue, and as I write this, I can think of many legitimate arguments for each side.
First, I am making the assumption that by “Church Teaching” we are talking about God’s teaching or God’s law. If that is the case the debate becomes God’s law versus man’s law. It is easy to see how the system would break down if our legal system is not enforced, but when the system starts interpreting and enforcing laws that are morally wrong, the system is broken already.
It is now very conceivable that a federal judge could make homosexual “marriage” the law of the land. If that happens, would we want our attorney general to comply and force this on us or would we want him to fight it?
And if our local judges, justices of the peace or ministers decide they do not want to marry homosexual couples, do we require them to comply or resign? To resign is to simply give up that position to someone who is willing to do what you believe is wrong.
Right is right and wrong is wrong regardless of the position to which one serves.
Enforcing an immoral law just because the job requires it is wrong and to resign your position to someone who is willing to enforce the same immoral law, I believe is also wrong. At some point we all have to be willing to stand up for our beliefs and we need public officials who are willing to stake their careers on this.
David Clinkscales
Vincent, Ala.
Share with others: