Ever since I read about it, I’ve felt there was a something wrong with the Manhattan Manifesto. It reminded me of a political creed with talking points of a political part being turned into a religious document. Today I read a post from the end of November on Crunchy Con which I think really highlights the problem: the declaration really is wanting to keep in place the structures of sin which lead to the problems the authors complain about. I think it goes well as an example of what I was discussing in my post on liberalism.
The post can be read here in the full. In it, Rod is showing how an Orthodox writer (Ochlophobist) has found the declaration to be erroneous; the most telling quote I think is this:
Christians who actively support this culture of constant, gratuitous, decadent choosing and at the same time actively oppose the choice for abortion or the choice for a homosexual marriage, only achieve a seeking to rob a Peter they happen to find distasteful, while they continue to pay the Paul to whom they happen to be addicted.
That is exactly the point I was trying to make earlier this week. As long as we fight to keep the liberal foundations of the culture of death in place, we will find it difficult to argue against the ramifications of that culture as they come up all around us.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In