I'm going to try to write myself into an understanding of an opinion I'm beginning to loathe. I'll begin with a quote from my history teacher.

"Wouldn't it be nice if Christians could form culture?
(pause)
Now, on to the Crusades."

I thought he gave us a wonderful rant. Going on about how culture is influencing Christianity, and instead it should be Christians who form the culture. It was appropriate that he taught us about the Crusades right after. I've heard lots of debate over whether or not there should be a Christian culture at all. Should we be a sub-culture, or a counter-culture? Should Christians be so diverse that there's no such thing as a Christian culture? These are good, appropriate questions. However, this paricular old man seems bent on the "glory days" when Christians formed the dominant culture. Today marks the second time he's mentioned how horrible it is that homosexuals no longer feel shame. "At least in the Victorian days they'd cover it up" he said. "I once watched a gameshow with a gay and a lesbian on it. They proudly proclaimed it without an ounce of shame."

He clearly stated that Christians should be the ones forming culture, and that non-Christians should feel shameful about their sin. Logically, he's suggesting that if Christianity were back to being the cultural norm, we could shame sinners into smartening up.

BULLSHIT!!!

*Ahem* sorry. I'm not even going to bother going through the countless Biblical commands for us not to judge anyone outside of the church. There's too many of them in any one book of the new Testament for me to fit them in one blog. I'm going to try to reason his point for a second here.
If Christians were living the way we are suppose to, the world would look at us and feel shameful for their sin.
That's probably his line of thought, but it's still a no go. What reason does a same-sex attracted man have to refrain from homosexuality if he's not Christian? Seeing a bunch of straight guys is not going to make him feel shame. When it boils down to it, there is no reason for people outside the church to feel shame, and shame is not the answer. I'm fully aware of what shame feels like, and it burns. One can argue that trace amounts of guilt are a positive aspect of having a conscience, but shame is not guilt.

Shame–noun
1. the painful feeling arising from the consciousness of something dishonorable, improper, ridiculous, etc., done by oneself or another: She was overcome with shame.

No matter what the method of causing shame, it is still exactly what the above states it is. Pain. It's not even constructive pain. It has no positive end. Guilt causes repentance. Shame causes suicide. Guilt is when an individual comes to a place of sorrow over one's own actions. It involves only one person. Shame is when an individual comes to a place of pain, due to other people's opinions.

Guilt–noun
2. a feeling of responsibility or remorse for some offense, crime, wrong, etc., whether real or imagined.

In both of the above definitions, I have selected the definition referencing the emotion, as oppose to the states of being shamed or guilty. Both were taken from dictionary.com, without permission.

Usually I can argue the other side pretty well, but I can't think of a good reason why non-Christians should feel shame about things they don't even think are wrong. Nor do I see any reason for non-Christians to think that something is wrong, when Christian morality is usually the only reason Christians think it is wrong.
The Christian attitude toward EVERYONE OUTSIDE and INSIDE the church is LOVE. LOVE can cause GUILT, but not SHAME. The ONLY way Christians should come close to shaping culture is by pouring so much LOVE into it that people want to know what makes us different. That is the full extent of our influence on culture. We love, and when people ask, we share why we love. Jesus loves me, I love you.