维护家庭联盟等不满南华早报扭曲教会立场（2月28日消息）

维护家庭联盟等不满南华早报扭曲教会立场
（2月28日消息）

时代论坛 / 2005年2月28日

维护家庭联盟以及一群关注性倾向歧视立法的教牧信徒，联合发表一封「致各教会函」，题为「性倾向歧视立法迫在眉睫　南华早报扭曲教会立场　教会还能闭口不言吗？」，就1月27日《南华早报》提到「没有一间代表了香港大多数基督徒群体的主流教会，是反对性倾向歧视法这意念的。」 "None of the mainstream churches, representing most of Hong Kong's Christian community, oppose the idea of a Sexual Orientation Discrimination Ordinance." （Tim Cribb's "Justice for All"）表示不满，他们呼吁教会要尽快表态。

联署牧函的教牧信徒包括：从心会社社长吴思源、香港教会更新运动总干事胡志伟牧师、陈黔开牧师、曾锡华牧师、基督徒学生福音团契总干事刘国伟、明光社总干事蔡志森、中国神学研究院副教授郑顺佳博士、浸会大学宗教及哲学系副教授关启文博士及性倾向歧视立法关注组召集人麦沛泉等。

该函件内容如下：

民政事务局正积极部署为性倾向歧视立法。先在第二季进行问卷调查，後在立法会讨论。若法例得以通过，莫说教牧传道难以鼓励同性恋信徒接受圣经教导或辅导，会友在聚会中发表支持同性恋言论也难以阻止，更遑论执行纪律了；不然可能被当作歧视，对簿公堂。若然入罪，更可招致牢狱之灾 (外国已有类似案例) 。而因着法例，政府会为对方缴付一切诉讼费，但教会需一力承担诉讼过程时中的一切损失。那麽如何有心力牧养群羊？

再者，虽然现时政府对性倾向定义只包括异性恋、同性恋和双性恋，但在学术定义上也可包括多个性伴侣、多男多女组合、娈童、偷窥…，甚至性虐待、恋尸等，是个可任意填上内容的符号，故这是一条十分危险的法例，将来有机会在诠释法例时被扩阔其定义。届时教牧传道因法例所限，无法向这些说「不」，否则会触犯性倾向歧视条例，那麽如何按圣经真理牧养被性困扰的信徒？

性倾向歧视法肯定会对教会的宗教自由和办学自由等带来严重冲击，我们深信很多堂会都是反对的，但社会需要听到你们公开表达声音。

不要以为教会可以自动得到豁免，一些同志团体和议员并不会轻易让教会获得「特权」。就算比较温和的邵国华(性权会主席)也清楚在论坛说：就算教会聘请牧师可获豁免，但若聘请与宗教活动无关的员工（如会计、堂役）则不能，教会办的青年中心和学校等当然更不能豁免，福音机构和神学院也难免受冲击。某前卫人仕甚至指出，教会崇拜属提供服务，必须受法例规管。

今天不为我们自己的权利争取，法例一旦通过了则後悔莫及了！

请贵教会／机构今天就行动：
写信给《南华早报》抗议它无理的说法；
在执事会正式通过反对性倾向歧视立法的立场，并找专人关注此事件；
向政府（如民政事务局）和传媒表达你们的意见。
参与我们最近成立的「性倾向歧视立法关注组」。

南华早报全文，性倾向歧视法对教会冲击的例子，和我们反对这法例的理由，以及「性倾向歧视立法关注组」的资料都可到www.sexculture.org.hk , www.truth-light.org.hk网页查看。

南华早报电邮： [email protected]    传真：(852)2811-1048
民政事务局电邮：[email protected]   传真：(852)2591-6002
行政长官办公室：[email protected]    传真：(852)2509-0577

如有任何查询，请与香港性文化学会的干事黄小姐 3165-1858或明光社的余先生 2768-4204联络。

（www.christiantimes.org.hk，时代论坛每日快拍，2005.2.28）

舊回應18則

虞瑋倩 / 2005-03-02 23:08:58

To 翱長空

性文化學會和明光社幾個不 Biblical 的做法
1) 把同性戀和其他侵犯性的性罪行掛鉤﹐其實兩者沒有關係
2) 對性傾向歧視立法一味反對﹐而忽視同性戀者也有面對其他不同的歧視
3) 使用江湖騙子的資料 (Paul Cameron)

Liberal / 2005-03-02 22:40:37

Names

names = names given to stereotyped roles

翱長空 / 2005-03-02 22:06:28

一點評論

Liberal君說：Love, not names (father, mother, husband, wife) nor duties specifiec to either gender...

因他認為names and duties are culturally-conditioned and are not absolute truths

但他接著道：as far as love is upheld, the core of mariage is maintained... LOVE your spouse as yourself, this IS marriage!

問題：他立論中的marriage和spouse已是一些names，已是culturally-conditioned clothes，自打咀巴。

至於虞君說：「性文化學會既做法唔見得好Biblical」，但全文只是提出過「我暫時仍然對他們的策略和方法並不滿意和信任」，策略和方法未被認同，與做法唔見得好Biblical，應是沒有甚麼關係的。

Liberal / 2005-03-02 13:41:47

MATTHEW 7:21-23

MATTHEW 7:21-23 "21 Not everyone who says to Me, `Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 Many will say to Me on that day, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' 23 And then I will declare to them, ` I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'"

"who says to Me, `Lord, Lord,'" = those people who think who to believe in is more important than practicing love

"who does the will of My Father" = those who practice love to the marginalized and oppressed, which is exactly THE example demonstrated by Jesus, the God-incarnate; they are not necessarily religous people, they are not necessarily christians

虞瑋倩 / 2005-03-02 13:37:44

To Kar Yan NG: 性文化學會既做法唔見得好Biblical

我暫時仍然對他們的策略和方法並不滿意和信任。你成日話邊D人 liberal 咩野咩野﹐我就真擔心性文化學會﹑明光社等好學唔學﹐學美國那套所謂基督教價值。

Liberal / 2005-03-02 13:28:48

God is living.

God is living and reveals to the human race continuously. Bible is but one way through which God reveals to mankind. We cannot assume God's revelation cannot be found in Nature, science, philosopy, and sacred scriptures of world religions. Many biblical ideas are culturally-conditioned and "biblical truth" can only be distilled through radical interpretation of biblical text in the light of modern human knowledge.

Be very careful when your attempt to protect your traditional belief undermines love, or else you may be surprised by the Lord's response when you meet him face to face someday!!

Kar Yan Ng / 2005-03-02 13:11:41

To liberal and others who have liberal inclination

Biblical love is grounded in biblical truth.Be very careful about what you believe, or else you may be surprised by the Lord's response when you meet him face to face someday!!

http://www.afcministry.com/Does_it_really_matter.htm

Liberal / 2005-03-02 11:02:09

To Kar Yan Ng: LOVE is the essence of marriage

love, not names (father, mother, husband, wife) nor duties specific to either gender (male should be the bread winner? can female win the bread? female should cook? can male cook? only male can lead the family? why not female?...), is the essence of marriage

names and duties are culturally-conditioned and are not absolute truths

as far as LOVE is upheld, the core of marriage is maintained

by removing unimportant culturally-conditioned clothes of marriage such as names and gender-specific duties, love can be emphasized

LOVE your spouse as yourself, this IS marriage!

Kar Yan Ng / 2005-03-01 00:21:35

Man as wife and woman as Husband in Canada

The following is an interesting quote from http://www.nationalreview.com/frum/frum-diary.asp.

(David Frum is a conservative Canadian political comentator who had been a speech writer for President G. W. Bush)

(Andrew Sullivan is an Harvard-educated economist. He is a gay activist currently residing in Britian)

Seven years ago, Andrew Sullivan and I [David Frum] conducted a fierce debate in Slate about same-sex marriage. Along the way, I hazarded this prediction:

"Andrew, three years after we permit gay marriage, it will be illegal for schools to send home printed forms with one blank for the mother's name and one blank for the father's."

Did I say three years? In Canada, it's taken barely one.

In the province of Ontario, the words "wife," "husband," "widow," and "widower" are now all to be stricken from the law. The words "mother" and "father" cannot be far behind.

If this is true for Canada, it will not be surprising if the gay activists will press for the same in Hong Kong eventually. As David Frum pointed out:

Ontario's action is a reminder that same-sex marriage is not just the extension of an existing legal status to previously excluded persons. Same-sex marriage is a revolution in the definition of marriage for everyone - a revolution not just in law, but in consciousnessness.

And one effect of this revolution - and for many proponents, one of the revolution's aims - is to make forever unthinkable the idea that husbands and wives each have special duties to one another, and that a husband's duties to his wife - while equally binding and equally supreme - are not the same as a wife's duties to her husband.

Once we lose that knowledge, we lose the basic grammar of marriage. It is one more reminder that in the same-sex marriage debate, we are debating not marriage's change - but marriage's overthrow.

Hong Kong Christians should know that the stake of this battle is very high.

佚名Anonymous / 2005-02-28 22:53:56

其實有冇人睇過南華早報篇文？

除左維護家庭聯盟個句，有冇上文下理？個南早記者係咪真係作到咁大，吹水唔抺嘴？

路人甲 / 2005-02-28 22:05:39

屬靈爭戰？

其實甚麼事都可以說成屬靈爭戰的：今天要早起身，明天要忠心在公司工作，對人要誠實．．．．．．．甚至Ken_S要在這裡寫他的言論。當我們尊重別人的領受，也就不會對他們的靈爭戰言論指手劃腳，但是若要別人認同自己所領受的屬靈爭戰，發起行動去抵抗一些事情，那就是另一回事。別人可質疑究竟有沒有這必要，言論是否過於煽情，理由是否充份。

虞瑋倩 / 2005-02-28 18:19:13

Ken_S ﹕ 立法根本未必會造成逼迫

不過﹐基督教今次回應立法﹐策略太差。

虞瑋倩 / 2005-02-28 18:08:42

反性傾向歧視也可以修訂到容納基督教教會的

1) 例如現有性別歧視法例有很多場所和業務是得到豁免的﹐基督教應該詳細研究他們不同機構﹑教會運作裡面如何可以取得豁免
2) 如果佛教場所不容許人們宣揚吃葷﹑殺生等等﹐基督教同樣可以得到豁免
3) 防止 hate crime 條文引入﹐因為條文含糊﹐不但基督教會入法網﹐連不少機構也會墮入去

最重要﹐基督教不要再用一刀切的方法抗拒立法。一來﹐基督教在實際上面並不鼓吹歧視同性戀者 (我相信 Ken_S等人肯定也認同這點罷﹖)﹐而是在理解﹑實踐上面和同性戀者﹑一般人有極大分歧。現在基督教自己在對法例缺乏研究下﹐只靠一個策略(反對任何立法)﹐是很難保證同一議題不會重現。
你今日打得低咨詢﹐日後可能不會做得到。任何議員隨時可以提出草案 (除非永遠冇立法會普選)。
今日﹐你以為投票可以把議員趕走﹐其實今次是拜一個有“缺憾”的選舉投票方法才可以得手。過得一些年日﹐立法會不再使用比例代表制/名單投票制﹐基督教界的票數是根本無足左右大局的。
相反﹐如果立法方向是保護了同性戀的合理權益 (例如就業﹑居住等)而同時不干犯家庭制度﹐也容許宗教團體繼續宣揚其教義﹐其實才對教會最有利的策略。

因信稱義 / 2005-02-28 16:58:39

明刀明槍來可過溫水煮蛙

基督教似乎被當作傳[統道德守護者],說真的中國傳統文化一樣掘抗拒同性戀,其他宗教亦不見得容忍同性戀,可是撒旦真懂得找對頭人!
上次立法會選舉,不少民主派支持者就是因為某民主派參選人支持同性戀而改投左派一票,始果大家都知道了,既然有制度可以制衡不合民意的法案,何不要求民選議員在同性戀問題上表態?如果不等符民意的大家要將之記錄在案,美國總統選舉給大家的教訓很清楚,政客敢逆民意而行的都沒有好下埸,沒有人可以向我們硬銷他們那一套今是而作非的所謂"普世價值"要我們屈膝!
當然成就事情的是保守我們的上帝,作為基督徒最重要的是藉著禱告向上帝支取力量,起來吧基督徒!這是一場戰爭,為了自己的下一代不被世俗荼毒與沾污,為了上帝的榮耀,站起來捍衛自己的信仰和價值觀吧!基督徒是可以說[不]的!

Ken_S / 2005-02-28 16:15:33

教牧應儘早教會眾在立法後如何繼續作鹽作光忠心見證

立法﹖ 基督徒不怕﹗ 跟家庭教會的處境相比﹐反性取向歧視法帶來的逼迫根本不是一回事﹐最多坐牢數月、罰款數千而已﹐沒有人可以向基督徒施以酷刑﹐只會有精神逼迫﹐不會有實質肉體逼迫﹐即使有﹐也只是坐牢而已。基督徒不要太怕﹐千萬別忘記基督徒在逼迫中才能體現更強的屬靈生命力。在逼迫中教會才能成長﹐才能比以前健康。

我覺得牧者必須儘早給會眾上一堂逼迫試煉的預備班﹐惡補逼迫的功課﹐這樣會眾就能做好充足準備﹐迎接立法後所有潛在的精神逼迫。要他們知道立法絕不是終結﹐世界的律法不能阻止基督徒堅持真理﹐基督徒不會向世界的律法妥協。罪就是罪﹐聖經的律法基督徒絕不會曲解。反歧視法不能迫使我們違背聖經。在歧視法面前﹐基督徒仍然會叫同志悔改﹐真牧師仍然會拒絕為同志伴侶祝福﹐主日學老師仍然會告訴初信徒同性戀是罪﹐不悔改的同志信徒仍然不會得到按立做牧師﹐高中生仍然會在倫理堂表明反對同性戀罪。

教牧真要先知先覺﹐好好將“立法非終結”的信息教導會眾。立法不是終結﹐只是另一個開始﹐另一個堅守正道的新開始﹐只是多了一些實質的逼迫罷了。

各位弟兄姐妹﹐大家一定要剛強起來﹐積極起來﹗

佚名Anonymous / 2005-02-28 14:02:17

『萬軍之耶和華說、不是倚靠勢力、不是倚靠才能、乃是倚靠我的靈、方能成事。』 (撒迦利亞書四章六節下).

『不是倚靠勢力、不是倚靠才能、不是靠異端異教、乃是倚靠神的靈、方能成事。』

虞瑋倩 / 2005-02-28 13:41:01

基督教不要單打獨鬥 -- 應該聚合其他宗教界出來

看來看去﹐我不相信這條法案會單單對基督教有衝擊﹐難道佛教贊成同性戀嗎﹖難道孔教﹑回教﹑天主教等會不受影響嗎﹖
單單基督教的聲音是太單薄了﹐為何那麼愚蠢學外國的手法只靠基督教呢﹖如果基督教無法聚合其他宗教界﹐就應該反省了。

佚名Anonymous / 2005-02-28 12:49:53

戰雲密佈!

我們基督徒該多禱告和全力反對同性戀.才能打敗魔鬼的詭計!

资料库

昔日新闻