Dear Eamon, Seriously? You’re are missing my point. However, I’ll explain it as an example.
Why is “For blacks, women, and gays, there were no 'good old days” controversial? Two things. First, on the face of it, it dismisses myriad success and contributions and lives of blacks and women throughout history, therefore statement itself is absurd and while an exageration to make a point, only focuses on victimhood within realitively recent history based on values from within the bubble imposed upon that history. Many Saints throughout Church history were black and other races, as well as women, and I suspect all of they would speak of delightful days of wild wonder and abundance. Jesus was Palestinian, as were Holy Mary and Joseph. Second, it creates a yet to be agreed upon equivelancy between rights of a lifestyle seen as sinful by many (it’s not sinful to be gay, but to act on it is), and race, gender and religious rights. Hard to claim ignorance on this one, for the baker and florist cases recently heard by the Supreme Court make them currently known. These two people gave very good, millenia old religious reasons for refusing to participate in creating works of expression for what their relegion and beliefs tell them is not possible: a wedding between anyone other than one man and one woman. They offered referrals to other businesses that could care for them. They were respectful and upheld their human dignity in how they interacted with them. That is, through the eyes of my faith, a very different thing from not providing a cake or flowers because of the race(s) of the man and woman getting married (that is discrimination). For most people, it is not a sin to be black and get married, but for many people it is not possible to be man and man or woman and woman and get married. To do so is a farce and a sin. Is this understanding and belief of marriage hateful? Hateful of sin, yes. Hateful of the persons? No. Believe it or not, it loves (and challenges) the persons involved, as God’s revealed truth always does. Marriage is foundational to society. How we define it matters. To act as if it has been redefined by all “enlightened” people is disingenuious. You needn’t agree with anything I’ve said above to see that statements such as these presume or reference things that are not actually settled outside the “bubble,” and are thus controversial. However, many here are in the “bubble” and thus can’t even see it, and see anyone outside is as unenlightened, or intolerant. That’s part of the problem with the “bubble”: it’s so tolerant that it’s intolerant. This thread is an excellent example of that. Unless a new topic comes up, I am out of this thread. Celebrate as you see fit. With abandon, Patrick "There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church. ....As a matter of fact, if we Catholics believed all of the untruths and lies which were said against the Church, we probably would hate the Church a thousand times more than they do." Archbishop Fulton Sheen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
