This is a warning against putting one’s trust in any child of man–particularly in Caesar. If the Church is to continue her campaign against lust, she must do so on her own–that is, on sacramental–grounds; and she will have to do it, if not in defiance of Caesar, at least without his assistance.
Tag: gay marriage
In Part 5, I concluded that something very significant has happened over the last three decades: ‘politics’ has become all-encompassing. In short: everything has become political. And if everything has become political, and Christians are supposed to butt out, that means that the Christian is being asked (or told) that he can have absolutely no …
That’s really what you have going on here… you know, the old “A rose by any other name is still a rose” thing… a boy is still a boy by any other name, and likewise a girl… but you have some people who think that by throwing off definitions you can obliterate, change, or deny the underlying reality. Are there sometimes when definitions can be unhelpful? Sure, I can buy that. But there are limits to that observation. This is secularism: taking an observation into account but jettisoning the limits or notion of limits.
I saw a couple of hits on a blog entry I wrote in March of 2010. The gist of it is that I mocked the notion that the state has no business deciding who should marry. I just looked at the entry again and have found my facetious arguments compelling. * A little toaster love …
I think that this blog entry might be useful as a beginning of a series. I should just post examples as I come across them. It’s the kind of thing that you’ll notice more once you see a few examples. What I’ve noticed is that there are quite a few areas out there where arguments …
This story is a perfect illustration of scientism and its dangers to our society. The idea that something is intrinsically morally correct by virtue of being ‘scientific’ is a non sequitur, certainly, but nonetheless coming to be quite common. Science gave us the atom bomb, too, but it is self-evident that the decision to use it should be political. But can the decision to use it ever be scientific? (The movie IRobot comes to mind, here).
Is there any way to get from an observation of reality or increase in technology to “And you ought…” ?
Of course not. In short, just because the morning after pill is effective and it is only ‘unlikely’ to have the result that conservatives fear, it doesn’t follow that it should be used at all, or that it should be made available to people who are not yet legal adults. Cars are effective, too, but that doesn’t mean parents shouldn’t be in the loop as to whether or not their underage children should be allowed to drive them.
In the first part of this discussion I explained that I believe that Christians need to distinguish between how we feel about homosexuality as a matter of our faith and religion and how we feel about it as citizens of this country. I had recently issued a call to Christians to do that on the …
More than 60% of Californian voters affirmed that marriage meant what it has traditionally meant in virtually all places at all times. Judges came in discovered somehow that this determination was unconstitutional. If words mean anything at all, if you are a homosexual activist and you are honest you must admit that there is absolutely no basis for that determination.