http://disqus.com/by/dgdosey/enWed, 24 Jun 2009 10:57:41 -0000http://www.chrisheuertz.com/post/129370149#comment-11682787<p>Good stuff, Chris. As with other "hot button" issues, there is always a way of discussing this stuff without getting ugly &amp; your post is a good example of how to do so.</p><p>Not to get too far off subject, but as it relates to your justified recognition of our inconsistencies when it comes to issues of morality/sexuality, I always find it interesting that when it comes to the general issue of "principles-held" versus "actual lives-lived," many Evangelical Christians like to have it both ways...here's what I mean:</p><p>Ronald Reagan is the "god" of modern conservatism, but I rarely hear meaningful recognition of the ramifications of Reagan's decision as California governor to legalize no-fault divorce - the first state to do so.</p><p>In addition, the "founding fathers" certainly seemed to have a well-informed Christian/biblical world view, yet they crafted a nation that also viewed black men as 2/3 human, allowed legalized, systematic slavery for over a century, mistreated indigenous people on a number of levels, etc., etc., etc.</p><p>In these cases, their over-arching "principles" get championed, while little attention seems to be given to some of the actual decisions they made &amp; the impact those decisions had on the lives of real people. When it comes to those on the other side of the proverbial aisle, however, such grace is rarely - if ever - granted, &amp; that needs to change.</p><p>When it comes to issues of sexuality - &amp; other sensitive social issues - we'd all do well (myself included) to maintain the Apostle Paul's attitude of considering ourselves "the chief of sinners," I think we'd get a lot further along in meaningful dialogue, understanding each others' perspectives, etc.</p><p>Random thoughts, maybe, but that's what your piece stirred up in me, so there you have it...</p><p>Thanks again.</p>dgodseyWed, 24 Jun 2009 10:57:41 -0000http://www.chrisheuertz.com/post/119862865#comment-10753424<p>Great stuff, Chris. Very concise way to put it. Mike Ballard actually spoke last Sunday &amp; talked about the danger of making someone you're trying to share Jesus with a "target" instead of simply being their "friend." I also remember, years ago, @ a Willow Conference, a guy using the phrase "spiritual RBI" to express what his friend didn't want to become. Each totally different scenarios, but all great reminders of the basic truth that people aren't projects, targets, RBIs or any other such nonsense.</p><p>Thanks for posting this...</p>dgodseyThu, 11 Jun 2009 15:02:57 -0000http://www.chrisheuertz.com/post/105880096#comment-9184522<p>Good call Chris...thanks for laying out the guidelines with such clarity.</p><p>Signed,<br>Anonymous...I mean...Deacon</p>dgodseySun, 10 May 2009 14:00:14 -0000