Audio: Show 100% based on personal *faith* attempts to define 'real'
Same-sex marriages are not real marriages? Gays can marry, just not each other? Anti-equality voices are the ones playing defense? If gays, why not two brother marriage?
Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse of the Ruth Institute (an official NOM affiliate) and her friends at "Catholic Answers Live" are hauling out all of the nuggets:
Yea, and I have a deeply spiritual connection to the love and embrace of the full natural spectrum -- where's my key to the dictionary of acceptability?
**SEE ALSO: Check out even more "lock solid" analogy from the Ruth Institute's blog:
An analogy: a square has four equal sides and four right angles. That’s what MAKES it a square. Society can try to say, “Oh, that’s not fair! What about this shape over here with only three sides? Why can’t it be a square, too? Let’s pass a law and say that a three-sided figure is now a square.” But it would still be a triangle."
Redefining marriage doesn’t change the truth [Ruth]
The obvious problem in this "logic": Gays aren't trying to change the shape of things. Our rings are just as round and our deserved piece of the pie is just as triangular. Social conservatives like Morse and Co. want the freedom to set one historically malleable civil template in stone so that it leaves out anyone whose configuration they personally find unsavory, almost always using their chosen faith views as the primary basis. And that's just not a view that should fly within this odd and irregular shape:
comments powered by Disqus