Immorality and Supporting It

Letter to editor,

The newspaper declares that “Mayor Rahm Emanuel Tuesday ranked legalizing gay marriage as his No. 3 legislative priority in Springfield — behind pension reform and a Chicago casino — and said he plans to get ‘very involved’ in passing a gay marriage bill” (Chicago Sun-Times).

There are those who maintain that the support of a particular candidate does not mean that they support the moral vision of that candidate. Perhaps this has an aspect of truth; on the other hand, those who voted for such people have directly contributed to the moral failings of our society as they support those who have promoted legislation that is contrary to an objective moral standard.

An set of arguments positioning homosexual marriage as evil.

Argument 1: 1) Objective morality is beneficial to man; 2) God’s will is objective morality; 3) Thus, God’s will is beneficial to man.

Argument 2: 1) That which is opposed to God’s will is immoral; 2) Homosexuality is opposed to God’s will; 3) Thus, homosexuality is immoral.

Argument 3: 1) That which is immoral is evil; 2) Homosexuality is immoral; 3) Thus, homosexuality is evil.

Those who support that which is immoral also support that which is evil. The formal logical arguments can be sustained in the crucible of debate.

People have convinced themselves that they are not guilty of making a direct contribution to evil, but try telling that to the Lord.