For my fellow conservative believers:
The Manhattan Declaration
Do you like it? Dislike it? Discuss.
The Manhattan Declaration
Do you like it? Dislike it? Discuss.
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
The Manhattan Declaration
- Thread starter Sketcher
- Start date
I mean there is nothing particularly Christian about those declarations. They are nice, but there really more foundational things that are lacking that would be needed to spur at least me on to action in joining together.
Upvote
0
Izdaari Eristikon
Well-Known Member
- Mar 12, 2007
- 6,174
- 448
- 71
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Episcopalian
- Marital Status
- Married
I'll pass on signing it. It's well intentioned, and I don't mind the ecumenism (I'm pretty ecumenical myself), but it's too socially conservative for my libertarian tastes.
Upvote
0
Albion
Facilitator
- Dec 8, 2004
- 111,127
- 33,265
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
I'm wondering if the writer of the OP knows that there's another thread devoted to this exact subject.
For myself, I won't sign because:
1. The wording is sufficiently vague as to include some POVs that I don't approve of (although I do approve of much of what is stated).
2. I'd have put some other items up there as more important than some of what the Manhattan Declaration people chose to highlight. That's important, I think, because signing this suggests that these are the only, or the most important, matters in the thinking of the signer.
3. It won't do any good anyway. The Tea Parties might do some good. Third Parties and candidates might do some good. Other actions taken by concerned citizens, Christian or not, might do some good. But signing a petition like this one is of only mild and passing interest to both the media and the politicians. It doesn't bring any particular ressure upon anyone.
For myself, I won't sign because:
1. The wording is sufficiently vague as to include some POVs that I don't approve of (although I do approve of much of what is stated).
2. I'd have put some other items up there as more important than some of what the Manhattan Declaration people chose to highlight. That's important, I think, because signing this suggests that these are the only, or the most important, matters in the thinking of the signer.
3. It won't do any good anyway. The Tea Parties might do some good. Third Parties and candidates might do some good. Other actions taken by concerned citizens, Christian or not, might do some good. But signing a petition like this one is of only mild and passing interest to both the media and the politicians. It doesn't bring any particular ressure upon anyone.
Upvote
0
heymikey80
Quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur
The problem aptly described by Sproul is that words mean different things to different people.
If we can get two people to mean different things but accept the same wording, is that agreement?
If we can get two people to mean different things but accept the same wording, is that agreement?
Upvote
0
But it has a lot more to do with practice in people's personal lives rather than legislation of their personal lives.
Upvote
0
Subdood
Well-Known Member
We have problems enough agreeing on what the bible says, let alone which translation is better than another, or which church teaches what without arguing over or debating another man-made creed that only creates yet one more line of distinction within the greater church of Christ. Until I heard about this I was neither a signator nor non-signatore. Now I guess you can compare me against those who have signed as a "non-signator."
Upvote
0
Izdaari Eristikon
Well-Known Member
- Mar 12, 2007
- 6,174
- 448
- 71
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Episcopalian
- Marital Status
- Married
True enough, but it still seems to imply a social conservative politics, and I'm not comfortable with it.
Upvote
0
But I thought the rub with libertarians was regulation of personal lives, rather than social norms. And the Declaration the way I see it is very pro-liberty. It is against the state telling your kids what's right and wrong, in an attempt to supersede your moral code with its own. It is against forcing religious organizations and individuals to do things which exist outside their moral code, such as supporting illicit relationships, hiring unbelievers for certain tasks, or performing abortions. It is against prosecuting those who preach their values, including but not limited to speaking against homosexuality. It is also against punitive taxation for churches who refuse to bless immoral relationships. Plenty for a libertarian to like in there.
Upvote
0
Albion
Facilitator
- Dec 8, 2004
- 111,127
- 33,265
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
There is...except (and I think this is what Izdaari was saying) the agenda is one that a social conservative would push. There is in the Manhattan Declaration a limited number of issues that the framers and signers chose to make their cause, the "line drawn in the sand." A Christain Libertarian would probably make different selections. That doesn't make the M.D. contrary to Libertarianism, but neither does it represent where we'd draw that line in the sand, saying these are the issues most important to assert at this time.
If I am to sign something like this, I want it to be stating those issues which I agree are the several most important ones facing our country.
FWIW, I think that you are correct that the best way for any Christian Conservative to fight the fight against creeping Secular Humanism is to fight for the preservation of religious freedom rather than fight against gay unions, abortions, etc. even if those policies are counter to the beliefs of those churches.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Izdaari Eristikon
Well-Known Member
- Mar 12, 2007
- 6,174
- 448
- 71
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Episcopalian
- Marital Status
- Married
I would say pretty much what Albion just said. It isn't anti-libertarian, and I could see a libertarian who's more traditional and conservative than me supporting it. But it just isn't where I would draw the line in the sand on the "culture war". Those aren't the issues I'd want to emphasize, and I'm not even on the same side on all of them. For example, I support Washington State's new "everything but the name" domestic partnership law.
Upvote
0
Secundulus
Well-Known Member
Interesting that many here consider other Christians as their enemy. Satan has done his Job well dividing the elect against themselves.
Upvote
0
Izdaari Eristikon
Well-Known Member
- Mar 12, 2007
- 6,174
- 448
- 71
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Episcopalian
- Marital Status
- Married
There's nobody here who's my enemy, and certainly the distinguished Christian leaders who made up the MD aren't my enemy. We just don't agree on everything, but that's normal for families, even happy ones.
Upvote
0
Secundulus
Well-Known Member
Not you. I was referring to the one who said, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend, but sometimes, it doesn't automatically mean that I'll go have a drink or break bread with them."There's nobody here who's my enemy, and certainly the distinguished Christian leaders who made up the MD aren't my enemy. We just don't agree on everything, but that's normal for families, even happy ones.
Your position is intellectually honest even if I think it is mistaken.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
