Skip to main content

On Being A "Bigot"

Forgive me if this sounds defiant, but you may call me whatever name you wish, owing to my unwillingness to smile and tell you that of course you can re-define marriage, or that homosexual conduct is right and good. I don't care. Because the only thing that matters to me is my conscience. If 99 percent of the public believed it was acceptable to put cute household pets in blenders, (pardon the example) I still wouldn't do it, because it's wrong. But you, homosexuality advocate, seem to think it matters that half or almost half of people don't seem to mind. The morality under which I operate doesn't shift based on what most people say. Most people can't be trusted to find Missouri on a map; I'm not getting life advice from most people.

And part of your mistake may be due to the fact that great movements for true justice made use of democratic means. But don't mistake it; we do not make justice by our majoritarian consensus; the best we can say is that we have conformed the workings of our polity to the demands of justice. Indeed, that is what we should say.

I think down deep, you know that the "equality" you fight for is a lie, a shadow. You press on, because being disapproved is far worse to you than telling someone they are advocating the absurd. You need those people to say hard words. Hard words can be loving words, and soft words can be words of hidden hate.

I'm perfectly happy being scorned, because I know when I'm right. This is one of those times.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...