How should Christians engage the culture?

Christians should unashamedly join forces to defeat Amendments 1 and 2 to the Virginia Constitution. Both proposed amendments violate God’s clear commands and thereby threaten to harm Virginians. Amendment 1 threatens harm to children (both pre-born and born) and women by expanding access to abortion. Amendment 2 threatens to harm Virginia’s families and churches through redefining marriage. One undermines the sanctity of life and the other the sanctity of marriage. Both should be opposed this November.

Gospel and Politics?

Admittedly, the Christian’s foremost mission remains the proclamation of the gospel. But this mission does not negate the Christian’s calling to be the salt of the earth (Matt. 5:13). Jesus commissioned his followers to preach and to preserve their culture from the rot of sin. To quote the prominent 20th century British Theologian John Stott, “We who are Christians should be more courageous, more out spoken in condemning evil.”

Consequently, the Christian should advocate for good laws and oppose unjust laws. As Jeremiah 29:7 notes, God’s people should “seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you.”

When a constitutional amendment promises to institutionalize laws that violate the clear commands of Scripture and that will thereby harm his neighbors, the Christian has an obligation to step into the public square and advocate for justice. Stott notes, “However small our part my be, we cannot opt out of seeking to create better social structures, which guarantee justice in legislation.” In other words, love demands that Virginia’s Christians raise the flag of biblical warning and advocate for the defeat Amendments 1 and 2 to the Virginia Constitution.

Oppose Amendment 1

Christians should oppose Amendment 1 because it threatens to harm children (both pre-born and born) and women.

The amendment eliminates all restrictions on abortion, allowing women to murder their children through the third trimester if a physician has determined that the child’s death is needed “to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual.” If a woman feels that her baby will cause her stress or anxiety or prove disadvantageous to her life in any way however small, she can have an abortion up to the moment of birth. And if the child somehow survives the process of being pulled apart and crushed, doctors do not have to care for the child and can let it die. Amendment 1 threatens harm to future generations of pre-born Virginians and should be opposed.

Amendment 1 also threatens harm to the state’s current population of children. Because Amendment 1 declares that “every individual has the fundamental right to reproductive freedom,” it will grant minors who cannot choose a bank account without parental oversight the right to choose whether their pre-born baby lives or dies without parental consent or even knowledge.

Moreover, by using broad and sweeping language such as “every individual,” “pregnant people,” and “reproductive freedom” Amendment 1 has been positioned to permit the legalization of transgender ideology. Just as the Virginia courts expanded “reproductive freedom” to include IVF procedures without legislative action, the Virginia courts could, on the basis of Amendment 1, expand the term “reproductive freedom” to include sex-change operations and hormone blockers. And if the courts made such a decision, men, women and children of all ages (and without parental consent or even knowledge) would have a constitutional right to transgender health care. In other words, the state could override a parent’s objection to puberty blockers and start giving a fifth-grade girl puberty blockers. Amendment 1 possesses the potential to harm Virginia’s children and should be opposed.

Lastly, this amendment threatens to harm the very women it seeks to empower – those getting an abortion. By increasing access to abortion, the state of Virginia is exposing more women to mental health challenges. Studies have shown that women who murder their children in the womb are 3.4 times more likely than women who give birth to their children to need mental health services. Women who have abortions are more likely to suffer depression and anxiety and to be addicted to drugs or alcohol than women who give birth.

Moreover, Amendment 1 promises that the Commonwealth of Virginia will not “prosecute…any individual for aiding or assisting” in the murder of a baby as long as the mother had given “voluntary assent.” In other words, the pimp who forces a woman to murder her baby so she can return to the streets or the back-alley doctor who performs a shoddy abortion that leaves the mother with lasting physical pain would both be excused from prosecution if the mother signed a consent form…a form that could be easily forged. Amendment 1 will not empower but harm the women of Virginia and should be opposed.

Oppose Amendment 2

The Christians should oppose Amendment 2 because it threatens the well-being of Virginia’s families and churches.

The evangelical church believes that God established marriage between a man and a woman (“male and female he created them – Gen. 1:27”) to express God’s love for his people. Marriage also blesses society with a structure that facilitates the human flourishing of the husband, the wife, and their resulting children. According to a recent study, 39% of women who are married with children reported being very happy while only 24.7% of single women with no children claimed they were very happy. Similarly, 35% of men who are married with children reported being very happy while only 13.8% of single men with no children reported being very happy. And of those married couples, the happiest and most stable marriages were those that affirmed the traditional Catholic or Protestant view of marriage. While 79% of Catholics and 73% of Protestants who affirmed their church’s view of marriage had happy marriages, only 38% of Catholics and 18% of Protestants who disagreed with their church’s teaching on marriage had happy marriages. God’s marriage directives produce human flourishing.

Moreover, while more than one out of every two heterosexual married couples have children, only slightly more than 3 out of every 10 female same-sex couples have children and only 1 out of every 10 male same-sex couples have children. In short, the biblical or traditional view of marriage offers Virginians the best chance to have children, to have a happy marriage, and to have their best life.

By working against God’s good design, Amendment 2 will push Virginians away from the very path that promises them happiness to the path of gender confusion that has been shown to produce unhappy and anxious adults. Love of neighbor compels Christians to vote no on Amendment 2.

Moreover, Amendment 2 makes no allowances for the pastor who rejects the state’s redefinition of marriage. If a pastor refuses to perform a wedding of “two adult persons…on the basis of sex, gender,” he will be in violation of Amendment 2 and subject to the punishment of the state. In other words, Amendment 2 will empower Virginia to tell pastors who they can and cannot marry and then to fine or imprison those pastors who refuse to abide by the law.

Admittedly, the Supreme Court of the United States will most likely override any changes to the Virginia Constitution that run contrary to the U.S. Bill of Rights and will come to the aid of Virginia’s pastors. But the writers of Virginia’s Amendment 2 also understood that the legal process and its corresponding fees will prove more than punishment enough for countless churches in Virginia as Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado discovered. The legal process is punishment. Amendment 2 should be opposed because it threatens the well-being of Virginia’s families and churches.

Vote No

On most issues, Christians should hold their political positions humbly, recognizing that Christian principles can be worked out in a host of diverse ways. For example, Christians can in good faith argue for raising taxes to pay the dogcatcher more or for cutting taxes to pay the dogcatcher less. Neither position is essentially the Christian position.

But when a law – or in Virginia’s case two amendments – violates God’s commands against murder and for marriage, a Christian position does emerge…and should be defended. In other words, Christians should seek the glory of the Lord and the the well-being of their neighbors and vote no on Virginia Amendments 1 & 2 this November.

For the love of neighbor oppose Amendments 1 and 2.

Grade-schoolers wearing cross necklaces, sleep-deprived college students witnessing to their coeds over a carb loaded lunch, and a flip-flop wearing forty something telling her neighbor that she believes marriage is between a man a women are not usual images that Christians associate with extremism. We picture guys with long beards blown themselves up and crazy white dudes driving cars into monuments.

But most Americans are just as likely to associate the first group of images with ‘extremism’ as they are later ones. According to the Barna Group, most Americans label their neighbors who uphold traditional marriage, believe Jesus is the only way to heaven, and who publicly share their faith to be extreme. (p.11, 42). Now while we may not like the term ‘extremist,’ most Christians would agree that America’s culture has shifted away from its Christian heritage. Sixty-five percent of evangelicals feel misunderstood, and sixty percent believe they are already being persecuted for their faith. What happened and why are Christians viewed as extremist?

Seeking to answer these questions and to chart a way forward through Babylon, David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons published the book, Good Faith back in 2016. After combing through ridiculous amounts of data, the authors discovered that most Americans view people like you an me who sit in a church-pew most Sundays to be irrelevant and extreme.

The modern stance towards Christendom in some instances is the result of poor education. People simply do not know what the church does for society. Almost half of Americans believe that a majority of charitable work happens outside the church (p.29).

However in many cases the perception that Christianity is dangerous can be traced back to a new religion, the religion of self. Americans today find Christianity extreme because the new moral code declares you to be the source of all truth. Eighty-nine percent of Americans believe people should not criticize other’s life choices (p.58). “And according to that moral code, any competing morality – say, a religion – that seeks to constrain someone’s pursuit of personal fulfilment must itself be constrained” (p.59). Christians are no longer interacting with a secular world. They are interacting with the world of Ireligion.

After showing their readers the current dispositions of our American culture, the authors turn their attention to helping Christians navigate their way through the new culture landscape. They show that Christians can meaningfully engage those who disagree with them by affirming the truth of the Bible.

While the culture believes the Bible is outdated, the book is actually the very thing are culture needs. And if we are willing to humbly step forward and love our neighbors, the gospel can and will still go forward as we tackle issues ranging from homosexuality to racism. And as the authors tackle these various topics, they bring many insightful stats and personal stories that help everyone better understand the Biblical solutions to today’s problems.

In an encouraging note, the authors also promote the local church and expository preaching. Instead of encouraging people to abandon the church to save the gospel, they are encouraging people to dive back into the church so that the gospel can go forward.

If you have a heart to better understand your neighbors, to reach the lost, and to influence the world for Christ, you will want to grab a copy of Good Faith. To date, Good Faith is the best resource for understanding how the world outside our churches thinks. If you have a couple of hours and heart for seeing the gospel expand in the United States, read Good Faith.