Anthony Bradley starts it off, and some dude named tusc0n goes deep. I try to pull them up for air with this rant.
Nations are irrelevant. If we are Christians, then we have no other allegiance. We do not attach ourselves to any pagan institution. It is not wrong to contract or covenant with a group of individuals, for the purpose of lower transactions costs in trade, or mutual protection. It is wrong to make unprovoked use of force.
The Constitution is a nice piece of paper. It is not perfect. Either debate political philosophy from what is obvious about human nature and revealed truth or worship a document that makes no claim to inerrancy. Sure, there were a lot of Christians involved. A lot of Christians helped build the George Washington Bridge. I don’t worship the structure (except in my especially Objectivist moments!).
Gay marriage. Christians ought not to apply to a pagan institution for sanctioning of a Christian and monotheistic sacrament. If the pagans want to apply there, let them.
Tusc0n raider wants to introduce Mill, Rawls, and Kuyper to the argument. Why not invite Nozick, Hayek, Marx, and Cohen while we’re at it. (Are you in my political philosophy course?)
Mill wants utilitarianism, but he wants it under and imposed by a state with many attachments to collectivism.
Rawls wants a Democratic Equality which is neither Democratic, nor Equal. Discuss amongst yourselves. G.A. Cohen puts him in his place.
Kuyper, if I’ve got the right guy, opens the door for Rushdoony and Gary North (whose economics and commentary I admire greatly), but their Theonomy is out of place.
Jesus calls us to give up use of political mechanisms in achieving the gospel. He calls us away from the pagan institution which is the state. The state seeks to do the regenerating work of Christ, to change human nature, by force. It has been, so far, unsuccessful.
If one is truly an advocate of natural law they would do well to consider advocating a government which is limited to the judicial, which adheres to a common law process of legal discovery, and denies access to legal reform by the legislature. This law must be limited to protection of rights, and enforcement of contracts. There ought to be no positive laws, and no laws which establish privilege in any way.
Then, as Christians, we must assume full and exclusive responsibility for looking after all of the least of these.
Sorry for the GYOB