Kip the Dip said: You say you're an anarchist, but I believe Paul (the apostle, not Ron) fundamentally disagreed with your political views:"Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves." - Romans 13:2-3
CodewordConduit said: Should this apply if a woman is married to a wife-beater? A child molester?
From the essay Ethical Choices: A Case For Non-Conflicting Absolutism by Robert V. Rakestraw:
In this regard, it is helpful to recognize two categories or kinds (not "levels") of absolutes with regard to the locus of authority. Some absolutes require obedience directly to God, without human intermediaries, while other absolutes involve obedience to human beings whose authority has been delegated to them by God. Examples of the first category include prohibitions against lying, murder, adultery, and the commands to be patient and kind to others. The second category includes such matters as obedience to parents, governmental officials, and local church leaders.
Moral dilemmas often arise when an absolute from one category appears to clash with an absolute from the other category. When a child is told by her father to lie on the telephone, or, far worse, to submit to his advances, the resulting sense of conflict can be intense. In such cases the human authority must be disobeyed, but this is not an exception or an exemption to an absolute, for the absolute is defined in such a way that obedience is to be rendered only when human commands do not violate clear scriptural prohibitions and instructions.
God's moral absolutes never truly conflict, and that all of them are binding in any given situation, with the power of God present for their fulfillment.
bit.ly/AbAuth