The latest CatholicVote video might ruffle a few feathers. So be it. Somebody has to tell the truth. Every day we grow more and more quiet — afraid of the bullying and attacks. That’s got to change.
The latest CatholicVote video might ruffle a few feathers. So be it. Somebody has to tell the truth. Every day we grow more and more quiet — afraid of the bullying and attacks. That’s got to change.
This Post Has 4 Comments
What do (parent consented, voluntary) drag queen story telling hours at libraries and including mile stone events involving LGBT people in history classes have to do with the legalization of same gender marriage? And those who would support a right for businesses to deny serving LGBT couples services on moral grounds, would say what about extending those rights to bakers who are morally opposed to interracial marriages or remarriages of divorced people or any number of other weddings they might object to? At no level have people who oppose same gender marriages (or mixed racial marriages, for that matter) suffered any consequences of significance.
STEVE RAY HERE: I am approving the posting of this comment even though I completely disagree. This is spoken from someone who seems to have an agenda and looks through their own spectacles and doesn’t see the bigger picture nor have an understanding of history. Even though I’m tempted to argue line-by-line, I’m hoping somebody else has the time to do so.
“At no level have people who oppose same gender marriages…suffered any consequences of significance.”
Except for those who have been sued and/or fined out of business by anti-Christian bigots for practicing their religion.
Congratulations, john; your anti-Christian bigotry came through loud and clear.
Something I’ve been curious about for awhile, how are we to deal with second marriages?
John:
” same gender marriages”
That would be same sex. Gender is matter of grammar.
“What do (parent consented, voluntary) drag queen story telling hours at libraries and including mile stone events involving LGBT people in history classes have to do with the legalization of same gender marriage?”
It is an attempt to indoctrinate children with the idea that perversion is normal and acceptable, and “gosh, it’s just like everybody else!”
Race is irrelevant to marriage, and therefore there can be no moral objections to interracial marriage. As to divorce and remarriage, while if the original marriage was valid the second one isn’t, even the second marriage is not a denial of nature. It is a good that is being misused by two people who have no right to it, rather than being intrinsically evil. It’s like the difference between someone who spends all of his time eating, planning to eat, stuffing himself to the exclusion of all else. He is misusing a natural good (eating) and the pleasure that accompanies it (appetite, taste). That would be like the divorced-and-remarried. The same-sex mockery of marriage, on the other hand, would be like someone who goes out and deliberately eats dirt and poison and filth because it gives him pleasure. He is seeking the pleasures of eating while denying the reason for eating.
Comments are closed.