Change happens

Love—don’t judge—neighbors Guest writer

At the risk of incurring anger even from friends, I oppose Bishop Anthony Taylor’s amicus brief accepted by the Arkansas Supreme Court recently reported in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. I do not think the acceptance of the brief by the court offends the separation of church and state. In my opinion, our liberties allow a church-based argument in a lawsuit.

Before continuing, let the reader understand that this essay is entirely my opinion. From this point forward I will no longer use the phrase “in my opinion,” as it would become tedious and overused.

—————— My objection to Bishop Taylor’s brief is the use of non-existent ”natural law” to intertwine church belief with the court decision approving same-sex marriage.

There are laws of nature. For example, when you throw a rock into the air, it will fall back down to earth. There is no such thing as a codified, written natural law. Such a concept is pure bunk and has no place in a courtroom.

When the bishop uses natural law as an actual functioning system of codified law, he is essentially using church doctrine. Using church doctrine to oppose a ruling is not proper. At that point, one crosses the boundary of church-state separation. In addition, when you make the step of inserting a purely religious argument into a court decision, it is unconstitutional.

Although the bishop would deny he is making a moral analysis, his actions speak otherwise. Recently, please recall the treatment of the Mount Saint Mary’s teacher for a “contractual” violation.

People with staunch beliefs have great difficulty separating those beliefs from reality. Even though at least 26 states allow some form of same-sex unions, strong beliefs forbidding them often blind people to the fact that they are legal. Those people will hold that marriage can only take place between one man and one woman regardless of a court decision.

Churches have always used the term “natural law” to convey false authority to their doctrinal pronouncements and prejudices, and this may have escaped notice when we were more ignorant of nature. The Internet remedied that by providing us with extraordinary access to knowledge and information. Do a Google search for “natural law,” and you will see what I mean.

No amount of lipstick can make the natural-law pig glamorous. The actual study of nature appears to have confirmed that homosexual connections are indeed natural.

Change is one of the basic laws of nature. It happens. Somewhat disturbing is the fact that even “changes” change in nature.

As difficult as it might be for them, the good bishop and his minions must face reality. They should discard their fantasy notions of nature and embrace those of the world that many attribute to God. It is time to spend their energy and efforts on understanding.

Perhaps loving their neighbors as themselves might be a good starting point.