Are legal standards limited to the determination and interpretation of each individual? Why or why not?

No, legal standards are not, and should not be limited to interpretation and determination of each individual! If it were, our society and government would be in a state of utter chaos. Laws were not created by God to be subject to the irrational and selfish whims of human beings; instead, he meant them to be subject to his will, which is unchanging! Steadfast! No matter the time nor the culture! Leaving legal standards up to individual interpretation risks immense consequences for the result is a loss in the respect for the law by its citizens. If someone murdered a rival in cold blood yet thought it was okay or shouldn’t receive all of the intended sentence because the victim first mistreated him, that would be ridiculous! The law then would be so reduced that we would no longer consider it sacred but also fail to consider it binding as well. It would no longer hold any significant weight. If law, originally intended to be steadfast in its implementation was continually revised, pacified or even ignored because of this postmodern/relativist point of view, then there is no law. Simply chaos. We need laws that are worthy of our obedience, but we cannot discover a consistent moral code within ourselves or how we feel and such. If an absolute legal standard does not exist, then all things are permissible. Granted, some interpretation does lend itself to be used because of man's fallen nature and also to the world's situation; for although murder is wholly against the law and will be punished, its consequence is subject to some legal interpretation. For example, in relation to the hypothetical premeditated murder case above, it a drunk driver inadvertently killed a car full of people, the punishments of these murder cases, although severe and recognizing the obstruction of the law in both, would vary in their focus and "specific severity". The consequences of each case must fit the crime; however, some will be different than others yet in keeping with the absolute standards of the law.

In conclusion, there is no room for relative personal interpretation in relation to legal standards. It's not flexible or subject to whims. However, the only flexibility is in specific cases where the punishment differs in severity and such.

Sarah thinks that laws are created only by societies. Are governments the ultimate authority for creating laws?

Governments are most definitely NOT the ultimate authority for creating laws. God rather, gave us divine laws and the means of discovering them and implementing them in specific societal “laws” or rules. It’s these discoveries and implementations that are the government’s actions and if I daresay, only real purpose. However, as we see in every country on the globe and in our history (Stalin, Hitler, Castro, India, capitalism in the Western world, countless examples) governments tragically fail in creating laws as the ultimate authority because they recognize neither our dignity as God’s image-bearers nor our fallen nature. With this ignorance, people like Sarah who believe that laws are only created by society, most likely come from the Secular Humanist perspective that all humans are inherently good but evil comes from traditional institutions and then government has the responsibility to evolve with our growing society and therefore has ultimate authority to change laws, rules and what is good and moral and so on. This mindset is a dangerous one. For if this was to be the case (not that it isn’t present and reigning today) our world would be a dark, chaotic and horrific place to live (as seen in the examples given above).

However, as already mentioned above, God did create an absolute moral order that is literally hardwired into every human being. This “mankind- wide” understanding of what is right and wrong and what is obey God’s will and what is rebellion against it, leaves no excuse for humanistic selfish world views that desire to eradicate any  personal responsibility given by a supernatural God. In keeping with this inherent moral law, God also gave to man the responsibility to establish this law on earth with the help or organization of government and legislation. However, man, in his selfish tendencies, can’t help but rebel and deny his wonderful divine plan.

God is the ultimate authority for creating laws and we are ultimately responsible to him for our actions. Although the government necessitates a certain amount of authority in order to establish a certain amount of order, God is our law giver and divine authority that supersedes all that man can attempt to establish here on earth.

:)

What is the Christian view of feminity?

The Christian view of feminity is clearly outlined in the very first few chapters of the Bible. Firstly, in Genesis, God makes it clear that both male and female equally bear the image of God, HOWEVER they bear it differently and uniquely. Society today have horridly morphed and degraded the wonderful system that God originally intended for his "gendered" children. Radical feminists, and unfortunately now society in general, focuses on the "differently and uniquely" part of creation and removes the whole basis for the difference. That first God did make both man and female equal and that our uniqueness in bearing His image is in fact a wonderful blessing! How boring and incredibly inefficient for God to make two different genders with the same make up, roles, and purpose? This is similar to a CEO of a baking company only hiring employees that can gather buy and produce the ingredients for the baked goods he wants to sell! Yes, they are great employees and are talented in what they do but that business will ultimately fail if the CEO doesn’t hire other employees to fulfill a different purpose of mixing, baking and decorating the baked goods. Though these other employees serve a unique purpose, they are equal and just as important as the others. Just as God's creation of man and women. Additionally, God outlines general tasks for men and women to do, but he also assigns to the genders to more specific tasks. God intends for the women the sacred and vitally important role of nurturing, helping, giving life (not just literally/physically) and also being a warrior for her family. Although can be primarily seen in raising children and caring for her husband, feminism defies this ideal and instead labels it as stifling and oppressive! When for these roles and purposes (not just in the home mind you but in fulfilling these special roles in every place and relationship) was women created! Going back to my baked- goods company analogy, this rebellion is similar to if the employees who only baked all of a sudden decided to stop baking and now only gather and buy ingredients. Although relationships and raising a family should not be a women's only occupation this beautiful balance between male and female and their equality in bearing the image of God should be celebrated and enjoyed! Unfortunately however, feminism (the prominent radical generalization), just like any other man- made ideal, twists his divine balance into a selfish battle for the self.

Sexists and Homophobes

The primary adjectives that describe societal groups often generalize the ideas of those who are the loudest, or are the most radical, thus labeling them according to views of the lesser number of members. Whether referring to Islamic groups, business corporations, green campaigns and Christianity, all suffer the consequences of being pinpointed and known for these adjectives. As already mentioned, Christians are frequently made out to be sexist and homophobic while this is just not the case (though sadly some are and this is a different can of worms). Despite the fact that these attempt to smother and distract the voice or productivity of Christians in society, the Bible does really outline specifically how Christians are to approach "sexual orientation" issues and the relation between men and women. However, merely having a stance that doesn’t either completely follow in line with the cultural feel or that simply "doesn’t make a wave" alone causes Christians the most trouble. Also, because the things outlined in the Bible are and can be offensive! Shocker! I don’t get a warm feeling reading in the first chapters of Genesis that I am a damned sinner, yes there is redemption but I am inherently evil because of my nature! Additionally, the Bible says that homosexuality is a sin and therefore must not be committed, let alone condoned and given a golf clap of relativity silent approval. However, just like every other sin that the human race incessantly, NEVER ceasing-ly commits, there is redemption, there is hope and there is forgiveness and his name is Jesus. He, when approaching these confusing and "controversial" topics, should be the focus. The cause and the behavior should be address and condemned, not the person. In keeping with the rest of Scripture, we are simultaneously called to love our neighbor, called to treat others with respect, kindness, humility patience and love. We are called to hate the sin, just as God hates and despises it BUT we are also called to love the person just as God loves us for our other sins. As for the sexist remarks, the Bible also clearly outlines these roles and Christianity/ God's standard doesn’t align itself with society, so their will be friction and argument and name calling, hence the "sexists" and the "homophobes".

In conclusion, I would respond to these names as I outlines above, all remembering that ultimately we are to hate the sin, love the person and lead them to the complete redemption Jesus offers.