Well of course issues like homosexuality are not limited to Christianity but my political context is the United States which has only a small minority of Muslims. That said, the way Muslims in other countries treat minorities including homosexuals is appalling.
I've never heard of Sustainable Traditions until you linked it here, it's kind of refreshing to read about something like that. Also apparently is Christian Libertarianism is a thing, that's also pretty exciting though that sounds like a .01% kind of minority.
Political context is understood - I was speaking in regards to the U.S as well. Muslims really aren't a minority within the U.S since they have substantial power and influence in many places when it comes to democratic influence - seeing that there're already Muslims involved in politics within American culture as well as grassroots organizations and they work with Non-Muslims often (more
here,
here,
here,
here ,
here,
here ,
here and
here/
here), it's bananas to see the ways others react to Muslims/assuming they're all out to conquer you and take over. I truly
do feel sorry for the many Muslims who feel very isolated within the U.S and
living in fear, but I am glad for others working on their behalf (just as with other groups) to ensure that they're well connected.
And on the ways that Muslims treat homosexuals in some countries or others not agreeing, it can be appalling. Of course, many times Muslims have been stereotyped as treating homosexuals in horrible ways even though they do the same as others - disagreeing strongly but not forcing others outside of their communities to not walk in it.
On Sustainable Traditions and Christian Libertarianism, I am glad those kinds of organizations exist and are doing a lot - just as it is with other things similar. It's not a minority, of course, in what they do - it just so happens to be the case that you rarely hear about it in many circles because they don't have the platform that all others may have.
I think this the idea of homosexuality bringing down Rome is a popular political trope in the United States as well. If the United States is anything like Rome, its probably going to collapse for loads of other reasons before homosexuality. I'm not homosexual myself but I tend towards libertarianism, 'do what you will' and what not.
I do think that the idea of homosexuality being the reason for Rome coming down is inconsistent - it may have been a factor but it wasn't the ONLY factor in why Rome went through a lot of problems......just as it Is the case with the U.S
My mindset is that some things may be wrong - but that doesn't mean they are the sole reason as to why things may or may not break down ...nor does it mean that I don't find value in any of the things done by others who are for homosexuality (more on that shared here in
http://www.christianforums.com/t7760985-6/#post63727530 and
http://www.christianforums.com/t7760985-8/#post63777079 and
http://www.christianforums.com/t7733775-6/#post62733514 and
http://www.christianforums.com/t7707102-3/#post61929332). Some things can be allowable and people learn to live alongside with.
Prostitution was legal and widespread within the Byzantine Empire except for a period of a couple of years when an ambitious Emperor/Empress would close the brothels and force the prostitutes into convents. Of course the Church spoke out heavily against fornication and prostitution, but it all remained legal.
And What the Empress sought to do was very noteworthy to consider when it comes to the times we live in and wondering how to go about things.
The Roman Empire was plagued from within by excessive lust for violence/perversion and sexual immorality (be it of the heterosexual kind or homosexual kind) - and yet later on, it slide into gross immorality and yet
those faithful evolved into the Byzantine Empire - with other men leading the way in
aggressive campaign against sexual immorality like Theodosius I a
nd Justinian ..
or Empress Flaccilla ,
Empress Theodora and many others. I say that in light of how often people compare the U.S.A to the Roman Empire and say it'll be destroyed and is unable to reform based on Rome's history - and yet the other side of history with the empire is left out.
Granted, with the Byzantine Empire, it was just that...an
empire, with an
emperor. And a morality based on Christ....and that's something which should be considered when seeing how the U.S is based on a Democratic model - a model that is really a Plutocratic model with Democratic Republic ideas similar to what Rome had. And as long as people are not educated properly and aware of the ramifications of actions, the government will represent the state of life that the people lean toward.
The Byzantine Empire at least had something close to an ethos of godliness that the Roman Empire never had. Granted, the East Romans were far from flawless -
but they seemed far more successful than Rome ever was....and perhaps the U.S can experience the same if allowing for some serious consideration. Some serious struggles may also need to occur in order to get us to that point. But we can get there I think - and although we'll never be a place without flaws or any level of sexual immorality, it may be possible to at least bring the nation to a point of containment/quarantine where things do not progress. Understanding choice differently than how it's interpreted in today's context with democracy may be a starting point - for so many think that choice/free will means having just basis to do whatever one wishes....rather than seeing what one chooses to do as being either wise/productive or detrimental to others. And so long as the focus stays on respecting the right to choose rather than setting limits for how far choices can go, things will go as they go...
I've heard of Tertullian but never read him. I know pretty little about the Early Church Fathers. I'd like to read them sometime but I don't really have the time given my large backlog of reading material. If I could find a decent summary of what various ECFs wrote about and their positions, that would be grand, then I could investigate further in depth.
I'm not sure I agree with the bolded part simply on principle. A quick pursuing of Christian Forums as well as other Christian message boards online seems to indicate a lot of subtle distrust maybe bordering on hatred. We could probably spend some time arguing about what "disagreeing with a lifestyle" constitutes. While I think most Christians say 'well I don't like that but you can do what you want', I do think that certain groups are automatically looked down upon on principle because it seems certain things are more offensive than other things.
Young people are even worse about this generally, once you find you don't agree with someone on a big issue like homosexuality, you tend not to hang out with that person again. At least, that's basically what Youth Group was always like for me.
Everyone disagrees with something to one extent or another - and of course, people learn to either get along to get along or other things go down. Be it with Muslims or Christians or Atheists and any other group....
And even people who are involved in same-sex relationships do the same - as it concerns people who look down on others for not thinking you have to be involved in same-sex relationships or that you have to see them as things you were born with....and this has occurred with others who were formerly involved in same-sex relationships and yet walked away from it, noting how they weren't forced to do so and not seeing it as something they had to do/couldn't escape from (in the same way one cannot escape being born Black). They get a lot of flack from others simply for disagreeing...(as said elsewhere in
http://www.christianforums.com/t7760985-2/#post63637680 ).
And that's not even a matter of "Well, you became a Christian - now you disagree with homosexuality" - for even atheists or other non-theistic groups have noted how they don't agree with same-sex relationships as being natural/a part of biological development that was supposed to happen and they note where they used to be involved in those types of relationships but changed ....and they get flack.
And when it seems to get to the point where you're punished for disagreeing on the matter, that's where you get into trouble. But again, this isn't new...
Christians are at a marked disadvantage here because the political shenanigans of the Republicans augment the perception that Christians hate everyone that isn't them. There's a lot of damage control to be done, young Christians are also good at this and in my opinion represent a great willingness to engage with people "of the world" (a generally derogatory term) in order to build bridges and make things better for everyone (#69 )
Unfortunately, for Christians who have had to do a lot of addressing where others were always blasting people disagreeing with them, it has led to a lot of angst that isn't necessary. But as long as there's actual discussion going on, things can continue on......