Questionable Motives

June 27, 2011

What is that smell?

Filed under: Catholic Church,Criticism,Religion,Roman Catholic — tildeb @ 10:09 am
You didn’t think a state could pass a gay marriage bill without the rc church passing its loud and windy response in public did you? That’s not the catholic way.
Sure enough, New York passes such a bill and here come the bishops with their odious and odoriferous theology to add their stink of piousness contrary as it always is to this necessary and inevitable social advancement in legal equality.
Note what one bishop says:
“This is a further erosion of the real understanding of marriage,” DiMarzio told the Daily News. “The state should not be concerned about regulating affection.”
It is absolutely astounding how chauvinistic is the underlying assumption here: that they can pronounce with a straight face that the state should have no such concerns for legal equality but that the church should be entitled to enforce their bigotry through secular law. What arrogance is put on display in the public domain! And to then try to justify this interference in the public domain by pretending marriage is only about creating the next generation is a slap in the face of every childless couple or those beyond the age of reproduction… that their marriages must be shams if no new good little catholic sheep are being produced! But two of the main hurdles for same-sex couples to have children are a) unmarried status, and b) all kinds of unsubstantiated claims of being unfit parents that cause their children harm, and the main proponents of maintaining these hurdles are those who do so for – you guessed  it – religious reasons alone!
And to hear the complaint from a church official that lack of sufficient public debate about the legal establishment for same sex marriages is ‘disgraceful’ is laughable coming as it does from a representative – and a high ranking one – from the same organization that does everything in its power to impose absolute obedience by its authority alone… supposedly derived from private revelations gifted by god!
And public officials keep lending these proudly deluded bigots and misogynists and tyranny seekers their ears!
Incredible.  Incredibly stupid.
Let me be perfectly clear: the roman catholic church and EVERY SINGLE MEMBER of its organization who claims any kind of practicing or non practicing affiliation with it – but who fails to condemn in the strongest possible terms this unwanted and unwarranted religiously inspired intrusion into public policy and the passing of its laws – are hypocrites of the worst kind.
On the one hand they undermine secular law (that attempts legal equality for all) by freely associating with an organization that advocates for the legal imposition of catholic bigotry and misogyny over everyone to sustain and enforce legal inequalities. Of course, we’re not supposed to notice the man behind the curtain (or under the pointy hat) claiming without good evidence divine guidance for the church’s authority to do so. We are to assume catholic authority comes to us from a real god even if we don’t believe that lunacy for one second. And submit.
Well, that’s not going to happen.
On the other hand, the church attempt to enforce this anti-democratic authority they claim for themselves over everyone by use of democratic secular law.
This stinks of hypocrisy hiding as it so often does behind the critically unwashed veil of religious piety and ignorance. But piety alone cannot bring about social justice and legal equality and ignorance is no ally in this fight for what’s fair. For that we need the protection of secular law… the same law that allows us to believe different theologies without legal sanction or state interference. Yet leaders from many different religions seem to agree that they share common cause to undermine and vilify secularism at every turn as if it were some great evil thwarting moral goodness. Don’t be fooled. What it is really thwarting is the political and legal imposition of theocracy. That’s hardly a bad thing if we care about freedom and equality. Religious authority in this sense is a ruse meant to empower worldly tyranny under the guise of theology and we smell it for what it is when we note the religious call for the intrusion of its assumptions and chauvinism into our laws to impede the legal establishment of equal rights and freedoms and dignity of personhood for all.


  1. A most excellent rant! What I always point out to homophobes and haters is that in the US constitution it says “all men are created equal…” In Canada, in the 1930s, the Supreme Court, as part of a ruling said ‘all citizens are equal before and under the law…”
    ‘Nuff said. The religious among us should sit down and shut up. They have NO right to impose their beliefs on the larger body politic. Further, they should all be treated for mental illness for continuing to believe in things that have been shown to have no basis in reality.

    Comment by Gordon — June 27, 2011 @ 8:10 pm | Reply

    • Well, theology certainly isn’t constrained by reality and seems immune from it. For those who believe in attributing anything real to the unreal, then, I see no qualitative difference between such faith-based beliefs about what is claimed to be real and delusion… with no means to tell the two apart once reality is left behind. Foisting such unrestrained beliefs on the rest of us by the use of law cannot help but have negative and abusive consequences, and this is exactly what we see with the fallout from the faithful’s delusional attack on abortion services to their blinding intransigence over end of life issues like assisted suicide, attributing ownership of our very lives to that of their god. It’s despicable. What’s real and true and attributable to the consequences of such faith-based beliefs unhinged from reality is shuffled off into some lower ranking than the overwhelming importance and primacy of the the assumed and sanctified position of piety…. with the result of promoting faith over fact in reality causing a maintenance if not an actual increase of very real and sometimes unbearable suffering. That is a very real effect from unreal thinking.

      The detachment of religious belief from the judgement of reality is not without harm. If a rant or two can get a single person to begin to doubt their righteous certainty of their faith-based beliefs (and I know for sure that some of them have), then it is time well spent if it helps to bring about even an iota less of unnecessary human suffering.

      In the meantime, I’m glad you enjoyed it.

      Comment by tildeb — June 27, 2011 @ 9:12 pm | Reply

  2. Thank you tildeb for this post; you have articulated my sentiments exactly.

    “Let me be perfectly clear: the roman catholic church and EVERY SINGLE MEMBER of its organization who claims any kind of practicing or non practicing affiliation with it – but who fails to condemn in the strongest possible terms this unwanted and unwarranted religiously inspired intrusion into public policy and the passing of its laws – are hypocrites of the worst kind.”

    Here is a letter from a man who is “still a practicing Catholic” but has taken legal steps to condemn its behaviour:

    Members of the Catholic Church continue to betray Catholics. Here is my latest post on a convicted Bishop:

    Comment by Veronica Abbass — June 28, 2011 @ 9:45 am | Reply


    (And ignoring your comments for now… 😛 )

    Comment by FreeFox — June 28, 2011 @ 12:14 pm | Reply

  4. The biggest hypocrites are often those who point the finger in the first place…and that’s you.

    The notion of absolute equality doesn’t exist, even in your deranged world you have your own exceptions and special cases otherwise you will have many unworkable situations which do not serve the best interests of the people we aim to help in society. If you go to Wal Mart you can’t park ten feet from the door because those are the handicapped spaces, That’s not equality but its fair. So what about same sex relationships being equal to heterosexual ones? Well in the eyes of New York state they clearly are but to society at large its an absurd notion. Both things are not equal primarily because our existence as a species does not depend on the success or failure of same sex relationships and no amount of social engineering can change that fact.

    “Religious authority in this sense is a ruse meant to empower worldly tyranny under the guise of theology”…did you mean worldly or global?

    Comment by Stephen O'Donnell — June 28, 2011 @ 2:16 pm | Reply

    • Veronica addresses your charge of hypocrisy admirably, I think.

      As to your final question, I meant worldly in the sense of imposed obedience demanded from all to a set of tyrannical behavioural rules and regulations about how to live according to its theology and interpreted dogma.

      Comment by tildeb — June 28, 2011 @ 7:16 pm | Reply

  5. Stephen O’Donnell

    You are certainly entitled to comment and disagree; however, please read the article carefully. Tildeb never says “absolute” equality exists. He says secular law “attempts legal equality for all.” The word absolute is used to describe what the RCC expects of its members: the RCC is an “organization that does everything in its power to impose absolute obedience by its authority alone.”

    Comment by Veronica Abbass — June 28, 2011 @ 6:56 pm | Reply

  6. Stephen O’Donnell

    The gays are not asking asking to park closer to the door; they just want to be allowed to park where everyone else parks.

    Comment by Veronica Abbass — June 28, 2011 @ 7:09 pm | Reply

  7. Ahh those men in funny hats, they really are pathetic – what do they think could possibly happen by allowing same sex couples the legal right to marry? Will the end of the world come? Will Jesus beam himself into the Blue Oyster bar and kick ass? Will Satan crawl out of a hole in the ground and eat children?

    Comment by misunderstoodranter — June 30, 2011 @ 5:17 pm | Reply

    • MUR! Long time, no hear. Hope all is well.

      Comment by tildeb — June 30, 2011 @ 6:46 pm | Reply

      • Indeed it is my friend – I have been itching to get back on here… just been crazy busy at work and at home lately… I did have a sneaky peak at your recent posts – but I just didn’t have time to comment…

        Comment by misunderstoodranter — July 1, 2011 @ 3:15 pm

      • Ditto for me. Not enough hours in the day, plus I’ve been using what little time I do have for commenting. Sorry for the lack of new posts.

        Comment by tildeb — July 3, 2011 @ 5:29 pm

  8. People, people, PEOPLE!

    What about the institution of marriage? Can’t you see it’s under threat?
    If gay people are legally allowed to marry then…well…that’s going to harm marriage between hetrosexual couples.
    The connection has not been spelt out in any detail but it’s there. We need to trust the priests on this.

    Lewis Black – Gay Bandidos

    Comment by Cedric Katesby — July 2, 2011 @ 10:17 pm | Reply

  9. And there’s this interesting article called If You Believe Marriage is 1 Man & 1 Woman – You’re Wrong.

    Comment by tildeb — July 3, 2011 @ 5:28 pm | Reply

  10. big supporter of LGBTQ rights here.. although it appears your buddy Dawkins could use a few classes in Feminism after his attack on Skepchick. We all have our growing edges it seems.

    Comment by zero1ghost — July 13, 2011 @ 3:31 pm | Reply

    • Quite true, Z1G. I was truly surprised and disappointed at Dawkins’ comment. He doesn’t often miss the point but he seemed to here.

      Comment by tildeb — July 13, 2011 @ 4:25 pm | Reply

      • I wasn’t. He’s a crusader in missing the point. In the same week he also missed the boat about pain and suffering.

        Comment by zero1ghost — July 13, 2011 @ 5:57 pm

      • No, he didn’t miss the boat at all. The article that spawned the silly blog post you referred to was about vivisection entitled “But can they suffer?” and his response was, yes they probablycan because many critters have much the same nervous system we do and we know that we suffer (in this sense of the word being discussed). The blog reference misses this point entirely and equates Dawkins’ notion of suffering to mere nerve pain as if the guy knows of no other. This a very typical misrepresentation offered by many about those with whom they fundamentally disagree, but we shouldn’t lose sight that it is a misrepresentation. Often, I have found the misrepresentation to be intentional, which shows a willingness to embrace belief over what is true in fact.

        I have read much of Dawkins’ works and listened to many of his public offerings. My take on his presentations is that usually he is quite polite and to the point with refreshing honesty in the vein of addressing some question in evolutionary terms because he is a renowned evolutionary biologist. In my opinion he is rather a big brained fellow and quite erudite. It’s a good starting assumption that when I disagree with him, it’s usually because I’ve missed something. As for the SkepChick comment, realize that all he is saying is to get a tougher skin to do the convention biz, that there are much bigger issues than how a guy comes on to her at such a convention. Still, I think he misses the point she was making in her later commentary even though his own point is quite valid coming as it does from someone who has been to many such events.

        Please note, however, how the PZ’s Horde takes him to task for his comment. It is just as refreshing to be reminded that there are no sacred cows in the atheist camp… including Dawkins.

        Comment by tildeb — July 13, 2011 @ 9:21 pm

  11. I think there are sacred cows in every group, atheists included. There are also group expectations, tribalism, and group-think as well. It is just rationalized a little better and easier to deny since y’all don’t have weekly meetings.

    Comment by zero1ghost — July 14, 2011 @ 2:26 pm | Reply

    • What a strange, strange notion: group-think by non-boat building people, tribalism by non-gardeners, expectations shared by non-bubble gum chewers, and the sacred cows of the non-ambidextrous.

      Comment by tildeb — July 14, 2011 @ 3:18 pm | Reply

      • You just proved my point. Well done!

        Comment by zero1ghost — July 14, 2011 @ 6:35 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: