samedi, octobre 21, 2006

It Can't Be Much Clearer Than This

Dad29 opines on local Catholic "leadership" The Milwaukee Priests' Alliance, who are leaning towards support of gay marriage. The whole gay marriage debate, like many issues, gets oversimplified into a bumper sticker. And just like the telephone game, the real issue, the real message, the actual intent gets stripped away until it's distilled into a bite-sized statement designed to roil and ire as many people as possible. So like Telephone, we get a lot of people believing something very distorted and hot damn, are they angry about it.

So Dad29 quotes Fr, Massingale's opinion of the second amendment clause:

Fr. Massingale: "The amendment's second clause is: '. . .and a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state.' ...This is the part which makes many Catholics pause, for it raises troubling concerns. Many fear that this clause could endanger laws and other arrangements which extend medical coverage (among other benefits) to unmarried households"

And Dad29 writes thusly:

"Actually, 'Father,' the clause does NOT 'endanger' such arrangements when they are voluntarily provided by an employer. Informed legal opinion attests to this. And your circle of friends is not 'many' Catholics. It is, in reality, 'many' dissidents.' "

Well said.

However Massingale is attempting to distort God's law in favor of what he thinks should be legal mandate. Either Massingale doesn't understand how little the law has to do with the right to healthcare or anything else for that matter - or he thinks everyone is too stupid to get it. I'll err on the latter. Or he's started to believe the distillation of the telephone game or the lies he's telling himself. Besides, anyone who attests to be close to God knows that the law cannot take away what God has given, or the community gives, or what one can do to provide for oneself...

Overall, this is yet another example of attempts to associate conservatism with the denial of rights. Nobody would deny anyone the right to vote, the right to healthcare, the right to anything (except a gun, y'know). The assumption that a law must be changed in order to force a voluntary decision is about as short-sighted as it gets. And it shows how little the law-pushers actually know about how things work in America or how to make life work for the individual.

I think Massingale's been locked up in the Tower Of Marquette for too long.


Blogger Dad29 said...

You got the idea quite well.

9:26 AM, octobre 22, 2006  
Blogger Peter said...

I would deny there is a right to healthcare in that healthcare is a commodity, not a right. Any more than there is a right to affordable housing, meals, etc.

My rights end when they start costing you money. Then they become commodities.

I have the right to free speech; does that obligate you to build me an auditorium and provide an audience and a microphone? No.

I have the right to freedom of religion. Does that obligate you to build me a church? No.

And so on.

3:53 PM, octobre 22, 2006  

Enregistrer un commentaire

Links to this post:

Créer un lien

<< Home