“…their Catholic faith inspired them to support same-sex marriage, despite clear pronouncements against it from Pope John Paul II and Boston Archbishop Sean P. O’Malley.”
So says two MA lawmakers, state Rep. Marie P. St. Fleur and state Sen. Marian Walsh… Talk about being more Catholic than the Pope!
“There were people whom I have known since I walked into that parish at 7 years of age, who could not understand how at this age I was moving away from all that I was born and raised [to believe],” St. Fleur said, according to the Globe. “But I came to understand that I was not moving away, but was in fact affirming all that I had learned in all those CCD classes, and that it is one thing to read it in the Bible, one thing to go through the sacraments, but it is another thing to stand up and really support and demonstrate that the Bible too is a living word, just as the Constitution.”
Really? The Bible is like the Constitution? Interesting. Score another one for the post-Vatican II CCD classes. And apparently all that stuff about sacraments is just something you “go through,” it’s not real life.
*St. Fleur said “I absolutely see myself as a faithful Catholic, but all that I’ve been taught as a Catholic suggests I am supposed to embrace people who are different, and particularly those who are marginalized.” *
There’s a difference, Ms. St. Fleur, between loving all people as being children of God, and embracing all that people profess and do. Love the sinner, hate the sin. Your Catholic education seems to have missed the second part… But, hey, “Theology is Anthropology” right?
*Walsh said that when she considered the same-sex marriage issue, “it was obvious to me that morally, this is the right thing to do, not as a legislator, but as a person, because all people are created equal, and God didn’t make any mistakes. … We are all made in God’s image and likeness.” *
“Obvious” huh? Let’s see what her argument is:
- We are all made in God’s image and likeness
- All people are created equal
- God didn’t make any mistakes
- Therefore, it is moral to support same-sex “marriage.”
Anyone else see a problem with this argument? (Well, multiple problems, really.)
Each of those three premises might be accepted as sound (if, of course, the theological understanding behind each premise is sound), but the argument itself certainly isn’t valid – as any 1st year logic student will tell you. There is absolutely no connection between the premises and the conclusion.
Fundamentally, there is at least one premise missing (this also seems to be the one that Sen Walsh thinks is “obvious”) – that homosexual attraction is “natural” to us; that SSA is a part of our nature that is made in the image and likeness of God.
Really Senator? Is that “obvious?”
Read the rest at WorldNetDaily: Homosexuals honor Catholic lawmakers