Political jujitsu: Anti-Catholic bigotry...

A frequent jujitsu maneuver those on the political left engage in when confronted by a principled argument is to introduce into discussion a story about an individual or group who is currently suffering because as a result of that principle.  They know that empathy on the part of people to a tragic narrative will almost always trump principle in the public forum.

For example, take the principle that long-term unemployed persons should dip into their savings and IRA/401k plans before receiving extended unemployment benefits.  It's a reasonable principle, no?  Try arguing for the principle and stories soon abound, contorting the individual asserting that principled argument into an uncaring miser, if not monster.  To watch a recent example of this jujitsu maneuver unfold, read the comments to The Motley Monk's post advancing this principle.

So, taking a page from the political left's handbook, The Motley Monk would like to share a story he read in the New York Times:

Three years ago, a teacher in Marion, Illinois, Tim Kee, was turned away by Catholic Charities when Kee and his longtime partner, Rick Wade, tried to adopt a child.  Kee said: "We're both Catholic, we love our church, but Catholic Charities closed the door to us.  To add insult to injury, my tax dollars went to provide discrimination against me."

Isn't this horrible?  Two loving, homosexual citizens whose taxes are being used to support a non-profit charitable organization of the Church they love are being discriminated against by that very organization because of their sexual orientation.

That's outrageous, no?

"Opening doors to help and hope"?  Balderdash.

Catholic Charities: Helping the poor and downtrodden,
but not Catholic homosexual partners

Where's that "strict wall of separation" between Church and State?  Receiving federal and state funding as Catholic Charities does, how is it possible for the government to allow the organization to engage in clearly discriminatory behavior?  Either cut the funding right now or shut the organization down no matter what good it may be doing because, when it comes to Church teaching about homosexuality, the Church is intolerant of homosexual persons.

The Motley Monk is wondering about the principle of "tolerance" that so many on the political left espouse, as if it is the Eleventh Commandment God handed down to Moses on Mount Sinai. Should those who oppose Church teaching not be respectfully tolerant of it?

That's the question the Bishop of the Diocese of Springfield, Illinois, Thomas J. Paprocki, raised when he recently observed: "In the name of tolerance, we're not being tolerated."

Due to intolerance of Church teaching in the State of Illinois, Catholic Charities is no longer receiving state contracts because the organization refuses to consider homosexual couples as foster and adoptive parents.  In response, the Roman Catholic bishops of Illinois have shuttered most Catholic Charities affiliates rather than comply with the new regulation that requires the organization to consider homosexual couples as potential foster care and adoptive parents if Catholic Charities is to qualify for and receive state funding.  That's after more than 40 years of serving as one of the state’s most important social service networks for poor and neglected children!

So what about that principle of tolerance?  Is it a true principle that applies in all cases or only in those cases in which the political left has a self-interest?


Let the discussion begin...




To read the article in the New York Times, click on the following link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/29/us/for-bishops-a-battle-over-whose-rights-prevail.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&adxnnl=1&emc=tha2&adxnnlx=1325165217-nyfG/tpSjfDAe+Ph/eno5g