E-mail this story
Letter: Arguments deflect from facts of Civil Marriage Protection Act
I have reached a point where I no longer think that those who oppose the Civil Marriage Protection Act are confused or misled about bringing their, dubious, theological points into what is a debate over, well, a civil marriage. Knowing that they have no legitimate leg to stand on from a secular position, these people seek to frighten and bully people into voting against the act through a combination of casuistry, and Biblical obfuscation. There is no mandate forcing the Rev. Dr. Emmett Burns, the Rev. Harry Jackson, his Eminence Rev. Cardoma; Donald Wuerl, nor the Most Rev. William E. Lorito to preform, or even countenance a same sex union. There is no force of law to prevent them from preaching or teaching their moral theology. However, we are continually faced with arguments, based not upon arguments from the point of view of civil law, or even from the Constitution. Rather, we have repeated arguments that are of a theological nature, and then theology that is contestable. This is for a simple reason: unable to win on the actual facts, they change the subject.
October 12, 2012